A DEMONSTRATION
LOCAL/FEDERAL	I
OF THE EPA SHALLOW INJECTION
WELL PROG
IN MISSOULA COUNTY, MONTANA
INVENTORY, INSPECTION, CLOSURE
OF
CLASS	V INJECTION
Healthy
Missoula

-------
£3>2>
t
00$%
A DEMONSTRATION OF LOCAL/FEDERAL IMPLEMENTATION
OF THE EPA SHALLOW INJECTION WELL PROGRAM
IN MISSOULA COUNTY, MONTANA
INVENTORY, INSPECTION, AND CLOSURE
OF
CLASS V INJECTION WELLS
Final Report
Prepared for
Tom Pike, Chief
UIC Implementation Section
U.S. EPA, Region VIII
999 18th Street-Suite 500 (8WM-DW)
Denver, Colorado 80202
U.S EPA Region 8 Library
80C-L
999 18!h SI , Suite 500
Denver, CO 80?02-2h66
By
Alan English
Missoula City-County Health Department
Missoula Valley Water Quality District
301 West Alder
Missoula, Montana 59802
December, 1993

-------
CONTENTS
LIST OF ACRONYMS
LIST OF APPENDICES
LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF TABLES
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY	1
1.0 INTRODUCTION	2
1.1	Background
1.2	Purpose
2.0 PREVIOUS WORK	4
2.1	Missoula County Weed Control Class V Injection Well
2.2	Missoula Valley Sole Source Aquifer Petition
2.3	Class V Injection Wells For Storm Water Disposal
2.4	Mountain Water Company VOC Sampling
2.5	Health Department Sampling of Type 5X28 Injection Wells
3.0 PROJECT SETTING	7
3.1	Physiographic Setting
3.2	Geology
3.3	Hydrology
4.0 INJECTION WELL CLASSIFICATION	12
4.1	EPA Underground Injection Control Well Classes
4.2	EPA UIC Class V Well Codes
4.3	Multiple Well Uses
5.0 DEMONSTRATION PROJECT ORGANIZATION	18
Project Area Boundaries
Types of Facilities Covered
Project Goals
Project Objectives
Problems Encountered with Goals and Objectives
Planned Coordination Approach

-------
6.0 INTEGRATION WITH OTHER WATER QUALITY PROGRAMS 25
Programs Associated With Water Quality
Cross-Training of Inspectors
Aquifer Protection Ordinance
Missoula Valley Water Quality District
7.0 INVENTORIES AND INSPECTIONS	31
Inventories of Possible Class V facilities
Cross-Training of Inspectors
Initial Facility Inspections
Dye Testing
Follow-up and Closure Inspections
Compliance Verification Inspections
8.0 DATA BASE MANAGEMENT	39
Data Base Structure
Data Base Summary
9.0 ASSISTANCE TO LOCAL BUSINESSES	39
Compliance with EPA UIC Requirements
Education
10.0 ABANDONMENT OF 5X28 SHALLOW INJECTION WELLS 42
Assessment and Remediation
Remediation and Disposal of Contaminated Soils
11.0 ALTERNATIVE DISPOSAL OPTIONS FOR WASTEWATER 48
Connection to Public Sewer
Holding Tanks
Waste Water Recycling
UIC Permitting
Other Methods Developed
12.0 ALTERNATIVE DISPOSAL OPTIONS FOR OTHER WASTES 57
Sludge Disposal
Used Oil and Transmission Fluid
Antifreeze
Body Shop Wastes
Degreasing Solvents
13.0 DEVELOPMENT OF LOCAL REGULATIONS	60
14.0
REFERENCES
62

-------
LIST OF ACRONYMS
CFR:
Code of Federal Regulations
EPA:
United States Environmental Protection Agency
GIS:
Geographical Information System
HAZMAT:
Hazardous Materials Response Team
HDP:
High Density Polyethylene
MCL:
Maximum Contaminant Level
MDHES:
Montana Department of Health and Environmental Sciences
MSDS:
Material Safety Data Sheet
OSHA:
Occupational Health and Safety Administration
MG/L:
Milligrams Per Liter
PWS:
Public Water Supply
RCRA:
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
SHWB:
Montana Solid and Hazardous Waste Bureau
SIC:
Standard Industrial Code
TCLP:
Toxicity Characteristics Leaching Procedure
TDS:
Total Dissolved Solids
TPH:
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons
UIC:
EPA Underground Injection Control Program
USDW:
Underground Sources of Drinking Water
USGS:
United States Geological Survey
UST:
Underground Storage Tank
VOC:
Volatile Organic Compound
WWTF:
Waste Water Treatment Facility

-------
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX A. Health Department 5X28 Sampling Report
APPENDIX B. Geologic Map and Cross Section of Missoula Valley.
APPENDIX C. EPA Fact Sheet of Class V Injection Well Codes
APPENDIX D. SIC Codes for 5X28 and 5W20 Facilities
APPENDIX E. Draft Missoula Aquifer Protection Ordinance
APPENDIX F. Documents for Local Water Quality Districts
APPENDIX G. EPA Letter of Credentials for Inspectors
APPENDIX H. Missoula County Integrated Inspection Forms
APPENDIX I. EPA Inspection Forms and Inventory Request Form
APPENDIX J. Data Base Printout for Facilities Inspected
APPENDIX K. Letters to Local Businesses
APPENDIX L. Educational Handouts for Local Businesses
APPENDIX M. Sludge Sampling Data
ii

-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
1.
Location of Missoula County in Western Montana
8
Figure
2.
Missoula County, Montana
9
Figure
3.
Generalized Cross-Section of the Missoula Aquifer
11
Figure
4.
High-tech and Low-tech Injection Wells
16
Figure
5.
Public Notice on Restriction of 5X28 Injection Wells
24
Figure
6.
Capture Zones for Mountain Water Company Wellheads
29
Figure
7.
Boundary of Missoula Valley Water Quality District
30
Figure
8.
Demonstration Project Data Base Structure
40
Figure
9.
Sand and Oil Interceptor Tank
50
Figure
10. Closed Loop Recycling System
52
LIST OF TABLES
Table
1.
Constituents Regulated under the TC Rule
14
Table
2.
Types of Businesses That May Use 5X28 Injection Wells
19
Table
3.
Common Businesses That May Utilize 5W20 Injection Wells
19
Table
4.
Programs Considered During Facility Inspections
26
Table
5.
Options Available for Facilities With 5X28 and 5W20 Wells
48
Table
6.
Analysis Required for UIC Permit
53
iii

-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This demonstration project was made possible through a grant from the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA ) Region VIII Underground Injection Control (UIC)
program. Assistance with implementation of the project was provided by Mr. Arnold
Boettcher of the EPA Region VIII Montana Field Office in Helena, Montana. Mr. Boettcher
coordinated the efforts of the Missoula City-County Health Department with the UIC
program. The demonstration project required the cooperation of several state and local
agencies. At the State level the Montana Department of Health and Environmental Sciences
(MDHES) was helpful with review of alternative disposal options. Within MDHES both the
Water Quality Bureau and the Solid and Hazardous Waste Bureau provided valuable
assistance. Locally the City of Missoula Public Works Department was very helpful.
Within the Public Works Department, the Engineering, Street, Building, and Waste Water
Treatment Divisions all helped with implementation of the project. Special thanks to Mr.
Craig Hodgson at the Waste Water Treatment Division. Without his assistance many of the
alternative disposal options developed for local businesses would not have been possible.
The staff members of the Health Department that assisted with completion of the project also
deserve thanks. Completion of the large number of facility inspections that were required
would not have been possible without them. Special thanks to Ellen Porter for her diligent
work on the educational materials developed for local businesses, and all her help with
completing the facility inspections.
iv

-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Missoula City-County Health Department (Health Department) worked cooperatively
with the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Underground Injection
Control (UIC) Program to inventory and inspect shallow Class V injection wells within
Missoula County. Most of the Class V wells were found in the City of Missoula urban area,
which contains approximately 90% of the population of Missoula County. The urban area is
located within the Missoula Valley, which is underlain by the Missoula Valley Aquifer. The
aquifer is a shallow, unconfined, coarse grained alluvial aquifer which is highly susceptible
to contamination from shallow Class V injection wells. It was the first aquifer in EPA
Region VIII to receive Sole Source Aquifer designation. Shallow injection wells have been
identified as possible or probable sources of volatile organic compounds, pesticides, metals
and gross cations and anions in the Missoula Valley Aquifer.
The Missoula Demonstration project was implemented to show how a local governmental
unit could work directly with EPA to regulate shallow Class V injection wells in a State such
as Montana that does not have an approved UIC Program. An integrated approach was used
during the demonstration project to combine the UIC Program with other existing local, state
and federal programs dealing with water quality. The UIC demonstration project was
integrated with programs dealing with public water supplies, hazardous waste, solid waste,
individual septic systems, sewer pretreatment, underground storage tanks, employee right to
know, community right to know, well head protection and storm water. The integration
efforts also included the creation of a Local Water Quality District and development of a
draft Aquifer Protection Ordinance by the Health Department.
In order to integrate these programs, inspectors for the project underwent cross-training.
This cross-training was designed to provide the inspectors with basic knowledge of the
requirements and objectives of the regulatory programs considered. This knowledge was
used to evaluate compliance with the regulatory programs considered, during a single facility
inspection. The integrated inspections included conducting a UIC Class V injection well
inspection at each facility. In addition to the inspections, the Health Department developed
educational materials for local businesses, and assisted local businesses with developing
alternative disposal options for waste streams that were previously disposed of into Class V
injection wells.
During the demonstration project a total of 550 facilities were inventoried and inspected.
The inspections documented the presence of 359 code 5X28 injection wells, 455 code
5D2/5D4 injection wells, 44 code 5W20 injection wells, 9 code 5F1 injection wells and 57
injection wells for sanitary sewage disposal (codes 5W10, 5W11, 5W31 and 5W32). In
addition related inventory information collected by the Health Department documented the
existence of approximately 3000 code 5D2 injection wells used for storm water disposal in
public right of ways.
1

-------
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Congress passed the Safe Drinking Water Act in 1974 to help assure safe drinking water
supplies for the public. Provisions of the act included protecting existing and future
Underground Sources of Drinking Water (USDW). The unregulated disposal of waste fluids
into underground injection wells threatens existing and future USDW. To address the
problems associated with underground injection wells, EPA created the Underground
Injection Control (UIC) program. Each of the ten regional offices of EPA has a UIC
program. The regional UIC programs are overseen by the UIC program at EPA
Headquarters. States may also develop UIC programs and obtain primacy from EPA.
EPA developed a classification system for all types of underground injection wells. This
classification system places all types of injection wells into one of five classes (Classes I, II,
III, IV and V). Definitions of the five classes of underground injection wells are contained
in section 4.1 of this report. EPA has promulgated regulations, specified minimum
standards, and technical requirements for wells included in Classes I through IV. Class IV
injection wells are prohibited by current EPA regulations. Most of the injection wells
included in Classes I through III inject waste fluids deep into the ground, and are complex in
design. Class V injection wells comprise a group of injection wells that are used to inject
waste fluids into or above a USDW. Due to this broad definition, Class V injection wells
vary widely in design, and are used to dispose of a wide variety of waste fluids. Many of
the Class V injection wells are very simple in design and inject waste fluids at shallow
depths. These wells may be used to dispose of waste fluids ranging from industrial process
wastewater to storm water. Shallow Class V injection wells are the focus of this
demonstration project.
1.1 Background
During the early development of the UIC program there was very little information available
on the number of Class V injection wells in use nationwide. There was also limited
information available on the types of waste fluids that were being disposed of into Class V
injection wells. In response to this lack of information EPA required that states that had
approved UIC programs collect inventory information and assess the impacts from Class V
injection wells. The states were required to file a report with EPA within three years of
approval of their UIC programs. After receipt of the state reports, EPA filed a summary
report with Congress in 1987. Based on this report EPA developed a strategy to implement
controls on the use of Class V injection wells. One of the objectives of EPA's strategy was
to identify, fund and track demonstration projects utilizing innovative ways of controlling
Class V injection wells. This objective was also established to collect additional data on
Class V injection wells in order to assist EPA with development of regulations for Class V
injection wells. In the April 26, 1993 Federal Register EPA announced proposed
management rules for Class V injection wells, with a proposed final action date of June,
1994. The current UIC regulations can be found in the Code of Federal Regulations (40
CFR 144, 145, 146).
2

-------
In response to the objective to identify, fund and track demonstration projects, the Health
Department in Missoula, Montana, received a demonstration project grant from EPA in
1990. The project was entitled A Demonstration of Local/Federal Implementation of the
Shallow Injection Well Program in Missoula. Montana: Inventory. Inspection and Closure of
5X28 Injection Wells in the Greater Missoula Urban Area. The demonstration project began
on November 1, 1990 and ended on October 30, 1991. It was funded by the UIC program
at EPA Headquarters through assistance number G1008692-01-1. The project focused on
Class V injection wells used by the automotive service industry (type 5X28) in the Missoula
urban area. The final report for this demonstration project is available from the Missoula
City-County Health Department and the UIC program in EPA Region VIII.
Due to the success of the first demonstration project, the need to continue similar efforts
throughout Missoula County, and the need to consider other types of Class V injection wells,
the project was continued. A second grant was obtained for a demonstration project entitled
A Demonstration of Local/Federal Implementation of the Shallow Injection Well Program In
Missoula. Montana: Inventory. Inspection and Closure of Class V Wells in Missoula County.
This second demonstration project began on November 1, 1991, and ended on September 30,
1993. It was funded through a grant from the UIC program in EPA Region VIII under
assistance number G1008692-01-2. This report summarizes the work completed by the
Health Department during the second demonstration project. Because the two demonstration
projects are very similar, and part of a continuing effort, a significant amount of information
contained in the first report is also contained in this report.
1.2 Purpose
As the title suggests, one of the primary purposes of this demonstration project was to
demonstrate the idea of "Local/Federal Implementation". The state of Montana does not
have an approved UIC program. The Missoula urban area and other smaller communities
within Missoula County are situated over shallow, unconfined alluvial aquifers which are
very sensitive to contamination from shallow Class V injection wells. Efforts to control the
use of shallow Class V injection wells in communities within Missoula County could
traditionally only be carried out by EPA. Local governmental agencies typically do not have
the authority to regulate activities like the use of Class V injection wells. By working
cooperatively, and under the auspices of EPA, the Health Department was able to greatly
reduce the impacts to ground water from Class V injection wells.
Another purpose of this demonstration project was to integrate the UIC Program with other
local, state, and federal regulatory programs pertaining to water quality. The focus was on
completion of integrated inspections at facilities that were inspected for underground
injection wells. In order to collect information on the various regulatory programs that were
integrated, the Health Department inspectors underwent cross-training. The purpose of the
3

-------
cross-training was to provide the inspectors with knowledge of the basic requirements of
programs dealing with public water supplies, well head protection, storm water management,
solid waste disposal, hazardous waste handling and disposal, community and employee right
to know, underground storage tanks, subsurface sewage disposal and underground injection
wells.
Because the regulation of Class V injection wells was new to businesses in Missoula County,
the demonstration project also included efforts to educate local businesses operators
regarding UIC requirements and requirements under other regulatory programs. This effort
included assisting local businesses with developing alternatives for disposal of wastes that
had traditionally been disposed of into Class V injection wells.
2.0 PREVIOUS WORK
Due to the coarse nature of the alluvial sediments in the Missoula Valley and other developed
alluvial valleys in Missoula County, subsurface disposal of waste fluids using shallow Class
V injection wells has been a common practice. This practice has also been perpetuated by
the rural nature of the County. The only two communities that have sewage treatment plants
within the County are Missoula and Lolo. Even though both Cities have sewer systems,
approximately half of the homes and many of the businesses within the two communities use
individual septic systems for sewage disposal.
Disposal of storm water runoff into Class V injection wells has also been common in
Missoula County. Most of the injection wells are found within the Missoula urban area.
Based on the most current inventory information collected by the Health Department, over
3000 Class V injection wells have been installed in the Missoula area for disposal of storm
water runoff. A study completed by Woessner and Wogsland (1987) evaluated the effects of
storm water disposal into Class V injection wells on the Missoula Valley Aquifer. A
summary of the findings of their work is presented in section 2.3.
In addition to sewage and storm water disposal into Class V injection wells, the first
demonstration project completed by the Health Department documented that hundreds of
businesses in the Missoula urban area have relied on Class V injection wells for disposal of
commercial and industrial waste water. The following historical events and the known wide
spread use of Class V injection wells in Missoula lead up to this demonstration project:
*	Discovery of picloram and 2,4-D in public water supply wells in 1984, and
later determination that the source was a Class V injection well.
*	Filing of an EPA Sole Source Aquifer Petition for the Missoula Valley
Aquifer in 1987, and designation by EPA in 1988.
*	Documentation in 1987 of aquifer contamination in Missoula from Class V
injection wells used for disposal of storm water.
4

-------
*	Discovery of tetrachloroethene (PERC) contamination in the Missoula Valley
Aquifer in 1988.
*	Documentation in 1990 of PERC and other halogenated and non-halogenated
hydrocarbon contamination in sludges and liquids entering Class V injection
wells in Missoula.
*	A nationwide effort by EPA to reduce the impacts to underground sources of
drinking water (USDW) from disposal of waste fluids into Class V wells.
2.1	Missoula County Weed Control Class V Injection Well
In the fall of 1984 trace levels of the herbicides picloram (the active ingredient in TORDON)
and 2,4-D were detected in the water supply well for the Missoula County Weed Control
facility. The herbicides were also found in two public water supply wells at a commercial
campground and trailer court. The levels detected were below the drinking water standard of
0.1 mg/1 for 2,4-D, and no drinking water standard was established for picloram.
A Masters Thesis was completed by Pottinger (1988) to determine the source of the
herbicides. It was determined that a Class V injection well used by the County Weed
Control facility was the most probable source. The Class V injection well was used for eight
years to dispose of waste water from the rinsing of herbicide application equipment. Use of
the well was discontinued based on the findings of the study.
2.2	Missoula Valley Sole Source Aquifer Petition
Residents of the Missoula Valley historically used both surface water and ground water for
drinking water. The main surface water supply was Rattlesnake Creek. Giardia was
discovered in Rattlesnake Creek in 1983, after several hundred people became infected. At
that time Rattlesnake Creek was supplying approximately 50% of the drinking water to
Missoula. The giardia contamination prompted Mountain Water Company, which operates
the municipal supply, to abandon the use of Rattlesnake Creek. To avoid future surface
water contamination problems the water company switched to the sole use of ground water
from the Missoula Valley Aquifer in 1983.
The Health Department filed a Sole Source Aquifer Petition with EPA Region VIII on
November 23, 1987. EPA granted Sole Source designation on June 7, 1988, making the
Missoula Valley Aquifer the first sole source aquifer in Region VIII.
The designation was in response to numerous contamination events that had occurred prior to
Sole Source designation. A copy of the petition, entitled Sole Source Aquifer Petition For
The Missoula Vallev Aquifer, is available from the Health Department.
5

-------
2.3	Class V Injection Wells For Storm Water Disposal
In order to determine the impacts to ground water from using Class V injection wells for
disposal of storm water, Woessner and Wogsland (1987) inventoried Class V injection wells
and sampled storm water entering Class V injection wells. They also instrumented two Class
V	injection well sites with lysimeters and ground water monitoring wells to monitor the
interactions between the storm water entering the wells, and the vadose zone. Their report,
entitled Study Of The Effects Of Storm Water Injection By Class V Wells On A Potable
Ground Water System, documented that there were at least 2,669 Class V storm water
injection wells within the City of Missoula. Of these, 82% were in residential areas, 16%
were in commercial areas, and 2% were in industrial areas.
They estimated that 119 million gallons of storm water were injected annually into the Class
V	injection wells, with a total dissolved solids (TDS) loading of 4,400 tons annually. Water
quality data collected from the aquifer indicated that bicarbonate, calcium, magnesium,
sodium, chloride and iron levels increased locally in ground water due to the disposal of
storm water via the Class V injection wells.
2.4	Mountain Water Company VOC Sampling
Most of the drinking water supplied to residents in the Missoula Urban area is supplied by
Mountain Water Company. The water company is a privately owned utility. Water is
supplied from 35 large production wells located throughout the urban area. In June of 1988
they began sampling their wells for volatile organic compounds (VOC). This initial testing
showed that several wells had detectable quantities of VOC. The most commonly detected
compounds were chlorinated hydrocarbons, with tetrachloroethene (PERC) being the most
frequently detected. Discovery of PERC in the wells led to the abandonment of two wells
and restricted use of a third well. Continued monitoring of the wells has shown that this
contamination problem is wide spread and persistent. As of the writing of this report, 19 of
the 35 production wells in the water company network have tested positive at least once for
PERC. PERC has also been detected in numerous private wells.
2.5	Health Department Sampling of Type 5X28 Injection Wells
In an effort to identify possible sources of PERC contamination in the Missoula Valley
Aquifer, the Health Department collected samples of sludge and liquids from shop floor
drains connected to Class V injection wells at automotive servicing and repair facilities. This
type of Class V injection well is coded by EPA as a "type 5X28" injection well. The
sampling was conducted in the Spring of 1990. The samples were analyzed for VOC using
EPA standard method 524.2 (regulated and unregulated VOC by GC/MS).
6

-------
A total of 25 samples of sludge, wastewater, and soils were collected from 20 sites. Of the
25 samples, 2 samples of wastewater and 16 samples of sludge were collected from Class V
injection well sites. Of these 18 samples, both wastewater samples and 14 of the 16 sludge
samples were collected from vehicle maintenance and service facilities (5X28 injection well
sites). One sludge sample was collected from a Class V storm water disposal well in a
residential area. The results of this sampling project revealed that 5X28 injection wells
typically contained high concentrations of VOC, including both halogenated and non-
halogenated compounds. Most importantly, PERC was frequently detected. For the 5X28
sites, the average concentration of PERC was 32.4 milligrams per liter (mg/1). The current
drinking water standard for PERC is 0.005 mg/1. 1,2-Dichlorobenzene was present at the
highest concentration among the halogenated compounds, with an average concentration of
64.1 mg/1. Compounds associated with gasoline were also common in the samples. In
addition, visual inspection of the facilities indicated that significant amounts of oils,
antifreeze, and other automotive fluids were being discharged to the 5X28 injection wells.
The sampling documented that 5X28 injection wells were a source of VOC contamination,
including PERC and other halogenated hydrocarbons. An abbreviated report on the sampling
project is included in Appendix A.
3.0	PROJECT SETTING
The area covered in this demonstration project includes all of Missoula County, Montana.
Figure 1 shows the location of Missoula County within western Montana. Figure 2 shows a
more detailed view of Missoula County, showing the locations of major rivers, tributaries
and population centers. Most of the work completed during the project was focused in the
Missoula Valley, which is located approximately in the center of the County (see Figure 2).
The City of Missoula is located in the eastern portion of the Missoula Valley. Based on the
1990 census, the population of Missoula County was 78,687 and the population of the City
of Missoula was 42,918. Of the 78,687 people living within Missoula County,
approximately 68,000 (86%) live within the Missoula Valley.
3.1	Physiography
Most of Missoula County consists of forested, mountainous terrain. The mountainous areas
are separated by large valleys, with the largest valley being the Missoula Valley. Elevations
range from around 3000 feet to over 9000 feet. The valley floors are typically not forested.
The climate in the Missoula Valleys is semi-arid. The summers are typically sunny and dry.
Winters are moderate, with damp cloudy conditions and short periods of extreme cold. In
the Missoula Valley, the average annual precipitation is 13.29 inches, and the average
temperature is 44 degrees Fahrenheit. The entire County is within the Columbia River
basin. The County is drained by the Clark Fork of the Columbia River, Blackfoot,
Clearwater and Flathead Rivers. The Clark Fork is the main river draining the County, and
it flows through the Missoula Valley.
7

-------
Figure 1: Location of Missoula County in Western Montana
8

-------
Figure 2: Map of Missoula County, Montana
9

-------
3.2 Geology
Bedrock within Missoula County varies in age from Precambrian to Tertiary. Most of the
high mountains are composed of Precambrian shallow marine metasediments of the Belt
Supergroup. The Precambrian rocks range in age from 0.8 to 1.6 billion years. The lower
foothills surrounding the Missoula Valley and other valleys along the Clark Fork are
composed mainly of poorly consolidated Tertiary valley fill deposits that are between 20 and
50 million years old. The valley bottoms in the northern portion of the County in the Seeley
Lake area are covered with a thin mantel of Quaternary glacial sediments and reworked
alluvial sediments. The valleys along the Clark Fork, including the Missoula Valley are
covered by a thin mantel of Quaternary alluvial sediments. In portions of the Missoula
Valley and other areas within the County, a thin cover of glacial Lake Missoula silt is also
present. These lake sediments are approximately 15,000 years old.
McMurtrey et. al. (1965) completed the first detailed report on the geology and ground water
resources of the Missoula area. Included in this report was a geologic map of the Missoula
Valley. This geologic map and a generalized geologic cross section of the valley are
included in Appendix B. The map also shows the approximate location of the boundary of
the Missoula Valley Aquifer. The Missoula Valley sits within the Missoula Basin, which is a
fault bounded intermontane basin surrounded and underlain by Precambrian bedrock. Up to
3000 feet of Tertiary age sediments fill the valley. This Tertiary valley fill is capped with
100 to 200 feet of Quaternary age alluvium.
For purposes of this report the important aspect of the geology of the Missoula Valley is that
the Quaternary sediments that sit on top of the valley fill deposits are in general very coarse
grained. The Missoula Valley Aquifer is formed within these coarse Quaternary sediments.
Figure 3 shows a simplified cross section of the Missoula Valley Aquifer.
The City of Missoula has developed directly over the aquifer. A hydrogeologic description
of the aquifer is provided by Woessner (1988). Based on his report, the average thickness of
the aquifer is 110 to 140 feet, with an average saturated thickness of 50 to 120 feet.
Gravels, cobbles and sands dominate the aquifer sediments. The coarse nature of the
sediments has lead to the wide spread use of shallow Class V injection wells for waste fluid
disposal due to the rapid infiltration rates associated with the sediments.
10

-------
Figure 3: Generalized Cross-Section of the Missoula Aquifer
3.3 Hydrology
The eastern portion of the aquifer where the City of Missoula is located is generally
composed of three stratigraphic units (Woessner, 1988). These stratigraphic units are as
follows:
Unit One: Interbedded boulders, cobbles and gravel with sand, silt and
some clay. Thickness ranges from 10 to 30 feet. Found at land
surface.
Unit Two: Tan to yellow, silty sandy clay with local layers of coarse sand
and gravel. Thickness averages 40 feet in the center of the
basin to 130 feet in the northwest section of the aquifer. Absent
in some areas.
Unit Three: Interbedded gravel, sand, silt and clay. Unit seems to be
coarser at the bottom. Thickness varies from 50 feet to 100
feet.
11

-------
The surface of the valley floor defines the areal extent of the Missoula Valley Aquifer, with
the valley side slopes along the surrounding foothills and mountains forming the boundaries.
The hydraulic conductivity ranges from 1,100 to 18,000 ft/day, and the transmissivity ranges
from 150,000 to 1,000,000 ft2/day (Miller, 1990). The specific yield is around 10%. The
porosity is estimated to be 19.7% (Clark, 1986). The aquifer is unconfmed, and the water
table is generally within 50 feet of the surface. Most of the recharge to the aquifer is
believed to come from leakage out of the Clark Fork within the first few miles after it enters
the Missoula Valley. It is estimated that as much as 80% of the recharge occurs through this
leakage (Clark, 1986). The general direction of ground water flow in the valley is west and
southwest.
Three main factors combine to make the aquifer highly susceptible to contamination from
shallow injection wells and other forms of waste disposal at or near the surface. First, the
aquifer is shallow and unconfined. There is no protective impermeable layer between the
ground surface and the water table in most areas. Second, the materials that make up the
aquifer and the vadose zone above are very coarse grained. This allows for fast migration of
contaminants from the surface to the water table. Finally, the City has been built directly
over the unprotected aquifer in the area were most recharge occurs. Adding to these
problems is the fact that over 6,200 homes and businesses in the Missoula Valley use
individual septic systems for sewage disposal.
Surprisingly, water quality in the aquifer is generally good, and is well within EPA Drinking
Water Standards, except for localized areas where the aquifer has been impacted by leaks,
spills, and other releases. Calcium and bicarbonate dominate the ground water chemistry, so
the water is moderately hard. Total dissolved solids (TDS) are usually less than 350 mg/1.
Chloride concentrations are less than 10 mg/1, and sulfate is less than 30 mg/1. The pH
ranges from 6.8 to 8.5. Nitrate levels are generally less than 0.1 mg/1, except in areas were
individual septic systems are used.
4.0	INJECTION WELL CLASSIFICATION
Injection wells are classified by EPA based on the types of waste fluids that are injected, the
purpose of the fluid injection, and the location of the zone of injection relative to any present
or future underground sources of drinking water (USDW). This demonstration project
considered only shallow injection wells that typically inject waste fluids 2'to 20' below the
surface.
4.1	EPA Underground Injection Control Well Classes
The EPA UIC program has placed all injection wells into one of five classes. These five
classes are defined by EPA as follows:
12

-------
CLASS I WELLS; Wells used to inject hazardous or non-hazardous wastes
beneath the lowermost geologic formation containing a USDW within one-
quarter mile.
CLASS II WELLS; Wells used to inject fluids in conjunction with the
production of oil and gas (e.g. salt water disposal, enhanced recovery).
CLASS in WELLS; Wells used to inject fluids in conjunction with solution
mining activities (e.g. stopes leaching, salt recovery).
CLASS IV WELLS; Wells used to inject hazardous or radioactive waste into
or above an area with a USDW within one-quarter mile.
CLASS V WELLS; All injection wells that are not included in Classes I
through IV, and wells specifically named as Class V wells.
The Missoula demonstration project focused on controlling the use of shallow Class V
injection wells to dispose of automotive and industrial waste waters into or above
underground drinking water supplies. Class IV injection wells are strictly prohibited by
EPA. Based on these definitions, some injection wells that were previously considered Class
V injection wells may now be Class IV injection wells. This is due to a change in the testing
method used to characterize hazardous waste. Under the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) wastes that are not listed wastes must be tested to determine if they
are characteristic wastes.
In the past, the test method required by RCRA was the Extraction Procedure (EP) leach test.
This testing only detected 14 metals and pesticides. In March of 1990, EPA issued a new
Toxicity Characteristics (TC) rule which changed the test for toxicity. This new testing
method, referred to as the Toxicity Characteristics Leaching Procedure (TCLP) tests for the
14 metals and pesticides included in the EP leach test, plus 25 organic compounds. The
TCLP method is also more aggressive than the EP leach test. Due to this change, waste
streams that passed the EP test may fail the TCLP test. These waste streams would then be
considered hazardous wastes. If this waste was previously being disposed of into a Class V
well, the well would now be considered a Class IV well. Small businesses were required to
comply with the TCLP testing method by March 29, 1991. Table 1 lists the elements and
compounds included in the old EP test method and the new TCLP test method.
13

-------
Table 1
Constituents Regulated under the TC Rule
Old EP Constituents
Arsenic	Barium
Cadmium	Chromium
Lead	Mercury
Selenium	Silver
Endrin	Lindane
Methoxychlor	Toxaphene
2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid
2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxypropionic acid
Plus New TCLP
Benzene
Chlordane
Chloroform
o-Cresol
Cresol
1,2-Dichloroethane
2,4-Dinitrotoluene
Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene
Hexachloroe thane
Nitrobenzene
Pyridine
T richloroethy lene
2,4,6-T richlorophenol
Organics
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
m-Cresol
p-Cresol
1,4-Dichlorobenzene
1,1 -Dichloroethy lene
Heptachlor.and its hydroxide
Hexachlorobenzene
Methyl ethyl ketone
Pentachlorophenol
Tetrachloroethylene
2,4,5-T richlorophenol
Vinyl chloride
Improper disposal practices may also cause a Class V injection well to be reclassified as a
Class IV injection well. Several injection wells in Missoula County that were constructed as
Class V injection wells for disposal of fluids associated with vehicle maintenance and service
may have actually been used to dispose of solvents, waste oils, wastes contaminated with
heavy metals or other waste fluids that may fail the TCLP method, or contain listed wastes.
If these wastes meet the definition of hazardous waste under RCRA, disposal of the waste
fluids into the injection well would mean that the injection well was being used as Class IV
injection well. Two examples of Class V injection wells in Missoula that were used to
dispose of hazardous waste are described in section 10.2.3 and 10.2.4.
A good overview of Class V injection wells is provided in a document entitled UIC Inspector
Training Manual Class V Addendum. This manual was written by Council and Fryberg
(1987) of Engineering Enterprises Inc. (EEI), under EPA contract numbers 68-10-7011 and
68-03-3416. The manual contains information that was prepared by EEI for a report to
Congress on Class V wells. Based on this document EPA defines the following:
14

-------
Well: A bored, drilled, or driven shaft, or dug hole, whose depth is greater
than its largest surface dimension.
Well Injection: The subsurface emplacement of fluids through a bored,
drilled, or driven well, or through a dug well where the depth of the dug well
is greater than its largest surface dimension.
Fluid: Any material or substance which flows or moves, whether in semisolid,
liquid, sludge, gas or any other form or state.
It is important to note that nation-wide, some septic systems with drain fields that receive
waste fluids from maintenance of vehicles, or other potentially hazardous waste are also
considered injection wells even though they do not meet the definition of a well as stated
above. In addition, septic systems that receive solely sanitary waste from facilities that serve
over 20 persons per day are also considered injection wells.
4.2 EPA UIC Class V Well Codes
Class V injection wells are generally categorized as either "high-tech" wells or "low-tech"
wells. High-tech wells generally have multiple casing strings, sophisticated equipment to
control pressure and volume of injected fluids, and usually inject large volumes of fluid into
deep formations. Low-tech wells usually have simple concrete rings for casing, and inject
waste fluids into the shallow subsurface using gravity flow. There were no high-tech wells
documented in the Missoula project area with the possible exception of one cooling water
return well that is currently abandoned. All Class V injection wells considered for this
demonstration project were shallow low-tech wells. Figure 4 shows diagrams of typical
high-tech and low-tech wells.
The EPA UIC program has defined 32 types of class V injection wells based on the types of
waste fluids that are injected. Each type of Class V injection well is given a well code. An
EPA Fact Sheet developed by EPA Region VIII defines the codes for the 32 Class V
injection well types. This Fact Sheet is included in Appendix C, and this coding system was
used by the Health Department during the demonstration project. The most common Class V
injection wells found in Missoula county are listed below along with the EPA UIC
definitions.
5D2: (Storm Water Drainage Wells), receive storm water runoff from paved
areas, including parking lots, streets, residential subdivisions, building roofs,
highways, etc.
5D4: (Industrial Drainage Wells), include wells located in industrial areas
which primarily receive storm water runoff but are susceptible to spills, leaks,
or other chemical discharges.
15

-------
5W11: (Septic Systems-Undifferentiated Disposal Method), used to inject
the waste or effluent from a multiple dwelling, business establishment,
community, or regional business establishment septic tank. Must serve greater
than 20 persons per day if receiving solely sanitary wastes.
5X28: (Automotive Service Station Disposal Wells), inject wastes from
repair bay drains at service stations, garages, car dealerships, car washes, etc.
5W20: (Industrial Process Water and Waste Disposal Wells), used to
dispose of a wide variety of wastes and waste waters from industrial,
commercial, or utility processes. Industries include refineries, chemical plants,
smelters, pharmaceutical plants, laundromats and dry cleaners, tanneries,
laboratories, petroleum storage facilities, electrical power generation plants,
electroplating industries, etc.
Figure 4: High-tech and Low-tech Injection Wells.
16

-------
This demonstration project focused on the documentation of 5W20 and 5X28 injection wells.
However, during the inventory and inspection of these well types the Health Department
documented all other Class V wells that were located within the study area, including over
3500 5D2 and 5D4 injection wells.
For purposes of this demonstration project, type 5W20 and 5X28 Class V injection wells
were defined as any sump, dry well, cesspool, or septic system that utilized a drain field or
seepage pit for disposal of commercial or industrial waste fluids. The definition of a 5X28
Class V injection well was expanded by the Health Department to include any structure(s)
that received waste fluids from the servicing of equipment, or equipment components that
were associated with an internal combustion engine. This included any injection well used
by businesses that service such things as automobiles, motor boats, chain saws, heavy
equipment, tractor trailers, or equipment ancillary to internal combustion engines such as
hydraulic and pneumatics repair. Car washes and equipment washing pads were also
included.
The actual construction of 5W20 and 5X28 injection wells varies. In Missoula, the Health
Department found that in almost all automotive repair facilities where a type 5X28 injection
well was located, one or more floor drains would serve as the collection point(s) to access
the well. The floor drains were typically either connected to a septic tank or directly to a
shallow injection well. The injection well structure was usually a concrete ring structure or a
drain field. The construction of 5W20 well structures was found to be the same as for 5X28
structures, but the fixtures used to convey waste fluids from the facility to the well were
more varied. In some cases fluids were channeled through floor drains, but often they were
discharged via sinks, or process equipment that was directly connected to the well structure.
4.3 Multiple Injection Well Uses
The Health Department found that many of the shallow Class V injection wells installed in
Missoula County were receiving wastes from multiple sources. The most common multiple
use was for disposal of sanitary waste fluids into a shallow injection well that was classified
as a 5W20 or 5X28 injection well. Another common multiple use was a shallow Class V
injection well installed for storm water disposal (5D2, 5D4) that was also connected to a
shop floor drain and receiving waste fluids associated with a 5W20 or 5X28. In these cases,
the shallow injection well was built as a 5D2 or 5D4 storm water disposal well, but was
being used as a 5W20 or 5X28.
The approach used by the Health Department was to classify the injection well using the code
for the waste fluid(s) that had the highest probability of contaminating ground water. In the
case of an automotive repair shop with floor drains that discharged to a storm drain, the
storm drain was coded as a type 5X28 injection well.
17

-------
5.0 DEMONSTRATION PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND IMPLEMENTATION
The demonstration project was based on goals and objectives that were established at the
beginning of the project. Not all of the objectives could be fully realized due to the large
area to be covered, and the large number of facilities that required inspection. The project
was completed using a planned coordination approach to integrate the UIC Program with
other water quality programs.
5.1	Project Area Boundary
The demonstration project covered all of Missoula County (see Figure 2). The County
covers approximately 2300 square miles. Most of this area is undeveloped mountainous
terrain. The areas considered for inventory and inspection of Class V injection wells were
the developed valleys within the County. These valleys include the Missoula Valley,
Bitterroot Valley, Evaro Valley, Seeley-Swan Valley, Clearwater Valley, and the Potomac
Valley. Because almost 90% of the population in Missoula County lives in the Missoula
Valley, and the Missoula Valley is underlain by the Missoula Valley Sole Source Aquifer,
most of the work completed on the project was within the Missoula Valley.
5.2	Types of Facilities Covered
Due to the broad definitions used to define both 5W20 and 5X28 wells, a wide variety of
businesses were inventoried and inspected for possible Class V wells. For purposes of
locating type 5X28 Class V injection wells, initially only automotive repair businesses and
car washes were considered for inspections. However, it soon became apparent that many
types of businesses other than automotive repair businesses also were utilizing 5X28 injection
wells for disposal of fluids from vehicle washing, repair, and storage. Any type of business
that maintains a fleet of vehicles may use a 5X28 injection well. Table 2 shows the different
types of facilities that were documented to be using 5X28 injection wells in Missoula County.
Most government agencies within Missoula County that maintained vehicle fleets were found
to be utilizing type 5X28 Class V injection wells. The City agencies included the Street
Department, the Parks and Recreation Department, the Sign Shop, the City Cemetery and the
Fire Department. Other local agencies included the County Road Department, three Rural
Fire Departments and the Airport Authority. State agencies that were found to be using
5X28 injection wells included the Highway Department, the Department of State Lands, and
the Department of Fish Wildlife and Parks. Federal agencies included the National Forest
Service, and the Bureau of Land Management.
Due to the broad definition of a type 5W20 Class V injection well, almost any type of
business that uses chemicals and produces waste fluids may use a 5W20 injection well.
Table 3 lists some of the types of businesses that may use 5W20 injection wells.
18

-------
Table 2
Types of Businesses That May Use 5X28 Injection Wells
Automotive Repair
Truck Repair
Auto/Truck Body Shops
Automotive Recyclers
Tire Sales and Service
Bus Services
Landfill Operators
Trucking Firms
Power Companies
Welding Shops
Beverage Distributors
Rental Car Services
Petroleum Distributors
RV Sales and Service
Auto Detail Shops
Chain Saw Repair
Machine Shops
Transmission and Clutch Repair
Heavy Equip. Sales and Service
Phone Companies
Well Drillers
Hydraulic and Pneumatic Repair
Auto Sales
Parts Stores
Windshield Repair
Radiator Repair
Muffler Repair
High Schools/Votechs
Boat Sales and Service
Motorcycle, ATV Repair
Aviation Repair Facilities
Government Motor Pools
Table 3
Common Businesses That May Utilize 5W20 Injection Wells
Pesticide Applicators
Electronics Repair
Electronics Manufacturing
Veterinarians
Beauty Salons
Print Shops
Carpet Cleaning
Photography Laboratories
Dry Cleaners
Lumber Mills/Treating
Hospitals
Metal Plating
Metal Fabrication
Laundromats
Bottling Plants
Cabinet Makers
Dental Tool Manufacturing
Funeral Homes
Welding Shops
Screen Printers
There are many other possible businesses that may utilize 5X28 and 5W20 Class V injection
wells. Appendix D contains a much more complete list of business types and Standard
Industrial Classification (SIC) codes for businesses that may use 5X28 or 5W20 injection
wells.
19

-------
5.3 Project Goals
The Missoula demonstration project was developed based on the following eight goals:
*	1. Identify, locate and document the status of all 5W20 injection
wells in Missoula County.
*	2. Identify, locate and document the status of all 5X28 injection
wells within Missoula County, outside the study area of the
previous demonstration project.
*	3. Identify, locate and document 5D2 and 5D4 storm water
injection wells.
*	4. Sample and document current and alternative waste streams
associated with 5W20 injection well facilities.
*	5. Sample sludges in selected 5D2 and 5D4 storm water
injection wells in the Missoula Urban area.
*	6. Use the information collected under goals 1 through 5 to
develop regulations for the long term local management of
certain Class V shallow injection wells in Missoula County.
*	7. Increase the role of the local Health Department in
implementing the EPA UIC Program in Missoula County.
*	8. Develop educational materials for other local governments to
show how local\federal implementation of the UIC shallow
injection well program can be accomplished.
5.4 Project Objectives
Based on the goals established for the project, the following fourteen specific objectives were
established to help implement the demonstration project:
*	1. Inventory and inspect all possible 5W20 injection well
facilities in Missoula County.
*	2. Inventory and inspect all possible 5X28 injection well
facilities in the remainder of Missoula County, that were not
covered under the previous demonstration project.
20

-------
3.	Distribute information concerning disposal regulations and
disposal options for wastes currently being injected into 5W20
and 5X28 injection wells.
4.	Inventory 5D2 and 5D4 injection wells in the remainder of
Missoula County, not covered under the previous demonstration
project.
5.	Act as a liaison and information conduit between the EPA
and Missoula County businesses.
6.	Provide technical assistance to current injection well users in
employing other acceptable options for waste disposal.
7.	Provide final inspections of 5W20 and 5X28 injection well
closures, including photographic and written documentation.
8.	Provide requested services to EPA including photographic
documentation, dye testing, compliance verification, sampling,
and other services related to the project.
9.	Store relevant information collected, in a computer data base,
for future incorporation into the local Health Departments GIS
system.
10.	Characterize and classify existing and alternative waste
streams produced by 5W20 facilities.
11.	Develop rules and regulations to control Class V injection
wells in Missoula County
12.	Increase the role of the local Health Department in
implementing the EPA UIC Program in Missoula County.
13.	Keep EPA Region VIII informed of the status of the project
by providing quarterly reports and a final report.
14.	Provide information on development and implementation of
the project to interested local government agencies, and other
public organizations.
21

-------
5.5	Problems With Project Goals and Objectives
Some problems were encountered in trying to meet the goals established for the
demonstration project. Goals 1 and 2 were not 100% achievable due to the large number of
businesses within Missoula County that required inspection. Under this demonstration
project and the first demonstration project, over 550 facilities have been inventoried and
inspected. While the approach of completing integrated facility inspections greatly increased
the effectiveness of the inspection, it required considerably more time than if the facility was
only inspected to determine if Class V injection wells were present.
The Health Department found that a good integrated facility inspection took approximately
two hours to complete. In addition, most of these inspections documented problems, since
several regulatory programs were considered during the inspection. In some cases, an
additional one to two hours may be spent following up on the inspection back at the office.
The positive side to this problem is that a lot of problems were found and corrected as a
result of a single facility inspection. While two to four hours seems like a long time, it is
more efficient than completing four or five separate inspections on different days. Also, in
order to properly complete the integrated inspections, the inspectors had to undergo cross-
training to learn more about the regulations being addressed. Inspectors attended work shops
on underground storage tanks, storm water permitting, hazardous waste requirements, and
other workshops. This also required a significant amount of time.
Due to the diverse nature of waste streams associated with 5W20 type facilities, it was
difficult to determine the most effective way to collect data short of sampling numerous
wells. At facilities in Missoula that were identified as good candidates for sampling, no
sampling access was available to the injection well. Because the waste streams from most
facilities listed in Table 2 are sporadic and highly variable, random sampling of waste fluids
from a sink or floor drain was not considered appropriate.
5.6	Planned Coordination Approach
The demonstration project was implemented based on the idea of a Planned Coordination
Approach. Because the project was based on integration of water quality programs, many
agencies at the local and state levels were involved in the project. The planned coordination
approach was used to assure that the project complied with existing local, state and federal
regulations. The Health Department was the primary participant in the project, but the
assistance of other agencies was required to successfully implement the UIC program at the
local level.
The Health Department, which is a City-County agency, worked with the City of Missoula
Public Works Department. Within the Public Works Department, the Engineering, Building,
and Waste Water Treatment Divisions were involved in the project. The Engineering
Division was responsible for extension of sewer service lines, tapping of all connections to
the municipal sewer system and inspecting the installation of the on site sewer service lines
22

-------
connected to the sewer system. For automotive repair and maintenance facilities that
connected to the sewer system, the Engineering Division required that a sand and oil
interceptor tank be installed to pretreat the waste water from the facility. To keep track of
the installation of sand and oil interceptors, the connection card files are color coded. Green
connection cards are now used to indicate a facility that has an interceptor tank. The City's
computer data base was modified to identify facilities have interceptor tanks.
The Engineering Division was very aggressive with expansion efforts to increase the area
served by the treatment plant during the period of the demonstration project. In the last
three years over twelve million dollars worth of public sewer construction has been
completed in Missoula. A sewer construction project in the West Broadway area of Missoula
was critical to the demonstration project. This area is a commercial and industrial area
where historically there has been no sewer service. Sewer mains were installed to service
the businesses in the summer of 1992, allowing business in the West Broadway area to
connect to the sewer system as an alternative to using Class V injection wells. Also, two
large projects in residential areas connected over 1000 individual homes to the sewer system.
The sewer extension efforts completed over the last three years constitute the largest
expansion to the municipal sewer system in more then 20 years.
The Waste Water Treatment Facility (WWTF) was also very involved in the project since
most of the alternative waste disposal methods included treatment of liquids and sludges at
the WWTF. At the same time that the demonstration project was being conducted, the
WWTF began a Pretreatment Program. A Pretreatment Coordinator was hired to develop
the program. The Coordinator worked very closely with the Health Department in
development of alternative disposal methods and connection of businesses to the treatment
plant. Details on the disposal methods used at the WWTF are discussed in section 11.
As the project progressed it became apparent that even as the Health Department was
inventorying and inspecting facilities for injection wells, new construction was incorporating
the use of injection wells. To help eliminate this problem the Health Department released a
public notice. The public notice was specific to 5X28 injection wells, and was mailed to
local firms involved with new construction. These included surveyors, construction
contractors, engineering firms, private building inspectors, and real estate agents. It was
also published in the local newspaper. Figure 5 is a copy of this public notice. It is
important to note that the public notice as released included the word "ban". This was an
error on the part of the Health Department since the use of 5X28 injection wells may be
allowed if a UIC permit is obtained.
The notice was effective at eliminating construction of new 5X28 injection wells. The
Health Department also supplied the Building Inspector's office with a list of business types
that the Health Department needed to review plans for. These included automotive
businesses, drycleaners, paint shops, photographic laboratories, furniture refmishers, and
manufacturing facilities. The building plans for these businesses now go through the Health
Department for review.
23

-------
The Building Department has jurisdiction within the City Limits, and within 4.5 miles of the
City Limits. Outside of this area, a building permit is not required. The only mechanism
developed to restrict installation of new 5X28 injection wells outside of the 4.5 mile limit has
been to inform the Health Department sanitarians of the UIC requirements, and have them
watch for new construction.
EPA BAN ON INSTALLATION AND USE OF
5X28 INJECTION WELLS
WHAT IS A 5X28 INJECTION WELL?
There are many common names for injection wells. Sumps, dry wells, and septic systems which utilize drain fields,
cesspools, or seepage pits are all considered injection wells. A 5x28 injection well is any of the above systems
which receives waste fluids from the servicing of any equipment, or equipment components that are associated with
an internal combustion engine. Injection wells used by any businesses that service automobiles, motor boats, chain
saws, heavy equipment, tractor trailers, or equipment ancillary to internal combustion engines are classified as 5x28
injection wells. Car washes, and equipment washing pads are also included under the 5x28 category.
WHAT ACTION HAS THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY TAKEN?
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region VIII office in Denver, Colorado regulates shallow injection
wells in Montana under the Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program. EPA has determined that waste
generated and injected into the ground from the automotive industry is harmful to the environment, and threatens
groundwater supplies.
On November 30, 1990 the EPA Region VOT office banned the installation and use of 5x28 injection wells
in all of Montana. EPA is requiring all facilities that use a 5x28 injection well to discontinue injection of wastes
into the wells, and use an alternate method of disposal for the wastes.
WHAT DOES THE EPA BAN MEAN TO ME?
Existing 5X28 injection wells in Missoula County are being inventoried by the Missoula City-County Health
Department. Once the inventory is completed the owner will be required to discontinue use or treat the discharge
in a specified period of time.
If you are in the construction design or building trades business, make sure that new 5X28 injection wells are not
included in your plans.
If you are in real estate or are involved in property transactions keep in mind that property with an existing 5X28
or other industrial sump may represent an environmental liability to the property. If the sump is located in Missoula
County, the Missoula Citv-County Health Department will be happy to arrange an inspection to verify the
classification of on property sumps.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
This notice is intended to clarify the extent of the ban on 5x28 injection wells, and to prevent the installation of any
future 5x28 injection wells. If there are any questions, please contact Dan Corti or Alan English at the Missoula
City-County Health Department, Environmental Health Division. Phone: 523-4755.
Figure 5: Public Notice on Restriction of 5X28 Injection Wells
24

-------
At the State level the Health Department coordinated with the Montana Department of Health
and Environmental Sciences (MDHES). Within MDHES the Water Quality Bureau (WQB)
and the Solid and Hazardous Waste Bureau (SHWB) were consulted on a regular basis.
Coordination with SHWB was very important to the project because this bureau regulates
landfills, hazardous waste, and underground storage tanks. During the first demonstration
project, the Health Department worked closely with the Solid Waste Section of SHWB in
development of a disposal site for liquid and sludge from injection wells, floor drains,
interceptor tanks and holding tanks. Coordination was also important with the Underground
Storage Tank (UST) section of SHWB. This agency was invaluable in providing cross
training and licensing to Health Department inspectors. The WQB also provided cross
training on stormwater regulations to Health Department Inspectors.
At the Federal level the Health Department coordinated with UIC programs at the Montana
and Denver offices of the EPA Region VIII. Most of the communication was with the
Montana office. The procedure established was for originals of inspection forms and other
paper work to be forwarded to the Montana EPA office. Both the Health Department and
the Montana EPA office established files on the businesses that were inspected. A closure
letter to have a facility discontinue the use of their 5X28 or 5W20 injection well(s), or apply
for a UIC permit was mailed by EPA to Missoula area business owners or operators. After
a business closed its injection well the Health Department completed a closure inspection and
forwarded the originals of the inspection reports to the Montana EPA office. A compliance
letter was then sent to the business by EPA.
One problem the Health Department encountered was that when businesses received a closure
letter from EPA, they were instructed to respond directly to EPA. This made it difficult for
the Health Department to keep track of the status of businesses after they were inspected.
This also made it hard for the Health Department to make sure that the alternative disposal
options chosen by the businesses complied with local and state regulations, in addition to
EPA requirements. This problem was solved under an agreement where the Montana EPA
office forwarded copies of EPA and local business correspondence to the Health Department
on a regular basis. This made it easier to keep track of the status of businesses.
6.0 INTEGRATION WITH OTHER WATER QUALITY PROGRAMS
One of the main purposes of the demonstration project was to show how various regulatory
programs related to water quality could be integrated during implementation of the UIC
shallow injection well program in Missoula County. To accomplish this, the Health
Department focused integration efforts in three main areas. First, integrated inspections were
completed at all facilities. This allowed the inspector to collect information relevant to a
wide variety of water quality related programs during a single inspection. Integration
streamlined inspections and enforcement of existing regulations.
25

-------
Second, inspectors received cross-training in each of the regulatory programs so that the
proper information was collected during a facility inspection. This approach to training is
described as cross-training because traditionally inspectors are highly trained in only one or
two regulatory programs. Cross-training introduces the inspectors to numerous regulatory
programs. Third, the demonstration project was integrated with other local efforts being
developed to protect water quality. The two local programs considered during the
demonstration project were the creation of the Missoula Valley Water Quality District, and
the development of an Aquifer Protection Ordinance. Efforts towards integration in each of
the three areas is described below.
6.1 Programs Associated With Water Quality
Numerous water quality regulatory programs currently exist. In most cases, even though
these regulations are in place, facility operators are often unaware of the requirements. Most
of these programs do not have a mechanism for conducting routine compliance inspections.
Under most existing regulations, facility inspections are often only completed if a complaint
is received. To help solve these problems, the Health Department conducted integrated
facility inspections to collect information on water quality related programs while conducting
a UIC Class V injection well inspection. The information gathered during the inspection was
used to determine which regulations applied to a particular facility and which regulations
were not being complied with. Conducting facility inspections this way also allows a
regulator the opportunity to provide educational information to facility operators. Because
there are a large number of rules and regulations governing most businesses, the business
operators usually welcomed the opportunity to learn which regulations applied to them, and
where there were compliance problems that needed correcting. Most businesses were very
cooperative with the inspector once they realized that the information being collected during
the inspection would be used to help them comply with the regulations rather than being used
to take enforcement actions against them. During the initial facility inspections, information
was collected to evaluate compliance with the programs listed in Table 4.
Table 4
Programs Considered During Facility Inspections
1.	Public Water Supply Program (SDWA)
2.	Subsurface Sewage Disposal (Missoula County)
3.	City Sewer Pretreatment Program (CWA)
4.	Shallow Injection Well Program (UIC)
5.	Underground Storage Tank Program (RCRA)
6.	Montana Hazardous Waste Program (RCRA)
7.	Employee and Community Right to Know (SARA)
8.	Montana Well Head Protection Program (SDWA)
9.	Montana Solid Waste Management Program (RCRA)
10.	Storm Water Runoff (MPDES)
26

-------
6.2 Cross-Training of Inspectors
Local governmental officials typically are well versed in one or two regulatory programs that
are directly related to their job duties. Traditionally, these officials would collect
information specific to the regulatory program they were working under during a facility
inspection. For example, a facility that handles hazardous waste may be inspected by a State
inspector, who only looked at hazardous waste issues. This inspector would document any
problems with hazardous waste handling, storage, or disposal. The inspector may not notice
that there was an unregistered underground storage tank at the same facility. Two months
later a State inspector with the underground storage tank program may show up and discover
the unregistered tank. Three months later, a local sanitarian may show up to inspect the
facility because it is on a well which serves over 25 employees, and is considered a public
water supply. At this point the local business operator has undergone three inspections, and
each time was found to have problems. The combined time spent by the three inspectors
may approximate 4 to 6 hours. This time does not include travel time, which for most State
inspectors requires a 240 mile round trip from Helena Montana.
To reduce this problem, inspectors for the Health Department's demonstration project
underwent cross-training. In Missoula, each employee in the Environmental Health Division
of the Health Department is required to be a Registered Sanitarian. The background
requirements to become a Registered Sanitarian includes training related to solid waste
regulations, public water supply regulations and rules and regulations related to water
quality. The sanitarian still specializes in water quality, air quality, food service, or solid
waste, but also receives basic training in the other programs listed in Table 4.
Health Department employees completing the integrated inspections routinely attend work
shops on underground storage tanks, storm water runoff, hazardous waste regulations,
pollution prevention, and other topics. Some inspectors have OSHA 40 hour training, all are
licensed inspectors for the Montana Underground Storage Tank program, and two are also
members of the Hazardous Materials Response (HAZMAT) team for Missoula County.
Cross-training provides the facility inspectors with a fundamental background on each
regulatory program. This cross-training is ongoing.
Throughout implementation of the demonstration project, integration efforts were increased
as the inspectors received additional training. The possibilities for cross-training and
conducting integrated facility inspections are numerous, and this approach does not have to
be related only to water quality programs. For example, a Registered Sanitarian in Missoula
may conduct an integrated inspection at a convenience store. The store may have
underground storage tanks, serve food, and have a well used to supply water to the public.
Because he/she is now a licensed inspector for the underground tank program, he/she can
complete a food service, underground tank and public water supply inspection during a single
visit.
27

-------
6.3 Aquifer Protection
During the demonstration project, a great deal of work was completed by the Health
Department and Mountain Water Company (MWC) towards developing a well head
protection (WHP) ordinance. The efforts to date have led to the conclusion that simply
protecting a fixed surface area around a well head is not sufficient to protect the ground
water resource due to the local hydrogeology. The draft ordinance has been renamed to
reflect a broader resource protection approach, and is now referred to as the Aquifer
Protection Ordinance. A copy of the most recent draft of the ordinance is included as
Appendix E. The work completed during the demonstration project has been integrated with
the ordinance. Information collected during integrated facility inspections will be used to
help determine which facilities will be regulated under the ordinance. The files and data
base developed as part of the demonstration project will continue to be maintained and
expanded so that compliance with the ordinance can be verified.
The process of developing the ordinance began in September, 1990 when Mountain Water
Company, which operates the main municipal water supply, contracted with Hydrometrics
Inc. of Helena, Montana. Hydrometrics was hired to prepare a wellhead protection
ordinance for all Mountain Water Company wells. The area initially considered was a 22
square mile area covering the core Missoula urban area. The area included under the current
draft ordinance covers 140 square miles, and includes all of the City plus a radius of 5 miles
from the City Limits, except in areas where the five mile limit is outside of the boundaries of
the Water Quality District.
During the early development of the ordinance, inventories of contamination sources,
modeling of capture zones for wellheads, and review of existing regulations for protection of
water quality were completed. Hydrometrics subcontracted with the Health Department to
complete the contaminant source inventories for the project area.
In December, 1990 Hydrometrics subcontracted with Mountain States Engineering in
Missoula, Montana, to complete computer modeling of the capture zones for Mountain Water
Company wells. The capture zones were modeled using a two dimensional, transient,
advective flow model of the Missoula Valley Aquifer developed by Miller (1990). This
model was combined with the USGS MODPATH advective particle tracking model to
calculate the capture zones for the wells. Seventy four wells were modeled. Figure 6 shows
an example of the results of this capture zone modeling for a portion of the City. The
mapping of the capture zones shows why simply protecting an area around a wellhead would
not protect the ground water resource. The capture zones overlap and merge in the urban
area.
28

-------
d _ii
Figure 6: Capture Zones for Mountain Water Company
Wellheads
29

-------
6.4 Missoula Valley Water Quality District
In April, 1991 the Montana Legislature enacted a new law allowing creation of local water
quality districts. The authority is established in Title 7, Chapter 13, Part 45 Montana Code
Annotated. It allows the County Commissioners to create a local water quality district in an
area established with definite boundaries for the purpose of preserving and improving surface
water and ground water quality. The process established under state law was followed in
Missoula, and the Missoula Valley Water Quality District was officially created on January
13, 1993. Appendix F contains important documents related to the creation of the Missoula
Valley Water Quality District. Included in Appendix F is a copy of the state law, a copy of
the state rules for creation of a local water quality district, a copy of the Resolution of Intent
to Create the Missoula Valley Water Quality District, and a copy of the Interlocal Agreement
between the City and County of Missoula to cooperate in the creation of the district. Figure
7 shows the boundary of the Missoula Valley Water Quality District as adopted.
Figure 7: Boundary of Missoula Valley Water Quality District
30

-------
The formal resolution of intent to create the district was drafted and distributed to property
owners within the proposed district during the fifth quarter of the demonstration project. A
total of 1,865 protests were recorded, equaling 8% of the property owners within the district.
The legislation allows for creation of a district without a popular vote if the number of
protests do not exceed 20% of the eligible property owners. Based on the lack of protest,
the Missoula Board of County Commissioners signed a Resolution to Create the Missoula
Valley Water Quality District on January 13, 1993. The Missoula Valley Water Quality
District is an important step towards protection of the aquifer. Improved properties and
mobile homes within the district are assessed a fee based on water usage or withdrawal. The
district supplies a funding source and staff for the Health Department to continue to enforce
the UIC requirements, and other regulations that are designed to protect water quality.
7.0 INVENTORIES AND INSPECTIONS
Completion of inventories and inspections of local businesses were the most time consuming
aspects of the demonstration project. These activities covered project objectives 1,2,4,7,8
and 9. Due to the large number of possible Class V injection well facilities throughout
Missoula County, not all facilities could be inspected within the time frame of the project.
Initial inspections were prioritized based on location and business type. Businesses in the
Missoula Valley were inventoried and inspected first for two reasons. First, almost 90% of
the population in Missoula County lives in the Missoula Valley. Second, this area covers the
entire Missoula Valley Sole Source Aquifer. Businesses that had a high probability of
causing ground water contamination were targeted first. Vehicle repair facilities,
underground fuel tank sites, and dry cleaners were given the highest priority for initial
inspections.
The first step was to inventory areas to determine the locations of facilities that needed
inspections. Once an area had been inventoried, the initial facility inspections were started.
These initial inspections were completed as integrated inspections. The integrated inspections
also served as a general site assessment. Once the initial inspections were completed, any
follow up work that was required was completed. Follow up work included dye testing of
some floor drains, obtaining copies of sewer connection cards, or septic system permits,
verifying UST records, providing educational information and writing follow up letters
addressing compliance problems noted during the initial inspections. If a facility had a type
5X28 Class V injection well, a letter was sent to the operator by EPA, giving the operator
five months to close the 5X28 well or obtain an EPA permit. At a later date the Health
Department conducted a closure inspection to verify that the 5X28 had been abandoned or
permitted. As a follow up to closure inspections, several facilities were reinspected to verify
continued compliance with closure requirements. The following sections describe in more
detail the process used to conduct inventories and inspections.
31

-------
7.1 Inventories of Possible Class V facilities
Inventories of businesses were done in phases. The objective of the inventories was to locate
possible Class V injection well facilities for future inspection, and to document other
potential contamination sources such as underground storage tank sites and hazardous
materials storage and handling areas. The original idea was to complete an inventory of the
entire project area prior to starting the integrated facility inspections. This approach was
later abandoned in favor of completing inventories area by area. It was discovered that the
inventory information collected during the earlier demonstration project was already out of
date when this demonstration project began. This was attributed to the transient nature of
local businesses and rapid growth within Missoula County. To reduce this problem, a
specified area was inventoried and then inspections were completed in that area prior to
moving on to the next area. High density commercial and industrial areas were inventoried
first.
Another problem encountered during the inventory process was that the project area included
high density commercial areas within the City, isolated high density commercial areas outside
the City, and rural areas with isolated facilities. No single inventory method would work
well for all three types of areas. To solve this problem different base maps and different
techniques were used in each area.
Overall, the inventory process was completed in three phases. During the first phase a 22
square mile area of high density development within the core urban area of Missoula was
inventoried. The area covered under this phase was completed first because it covered the
area being considered by Mountain Water Company (MWC) and the Health Department for
the Aquifer Protection Ordinance. Inventories within this area were completed by obtaining
existing aerial photographs taken in 1989. These photographs were obtained at a scale of
1:12,000 (1" = 1000'). From these each square mile section was delineated and blown up to
a scale of 1:2,400 (1"=200'). At this scale buildings and other features were easy to
identify. These blown up sections were then transferred to mylar so that blue line copies
could be made for use in the field. Copies of these maps are also available for future use by
the Health Department, and other agencies.
Field copies of the mylars were used to complete "windshield surveys". All streets and
alleys were driven and the maps were annotated to show any possible contaminant sources.
This information included possible Class V injection well facilities, public and private water
wells, fuel storage tanks, chemical storage sites, irrigation ditches, landfills, and other
possible sources of contamination. Each business that was either a possible source of
contamination or suspected of having an injection well was coded with a number. The field
maps were then used to develop a list of facilities to inspect.
32

-------
In addition to inventorying the core Missoula Urban area first to document contaminant
sources for the aquifer protection ordinance, this area was also inventoried first for two other
reasons. First, this area had the highest potential for impacts from Class V injection wells
because it covers the eastern portion of the Missoula Valley Sole Source Aquifer. Based on
work completed by Clark (1986) and Miller (1990)(A), 60% to 90% of the recharge to the
aquifer occurs in this area. Second, this area included the sewered portions of Missoula.
Many businesses in this area had the immediate option to connect to city sewer. The
outlying areas were inventoried and inspected after this area was completed to allow the
Health Department time to work on other alternatives for businesses that did not have sewer
available.
The second phase of the inventory process consisted of completing windshield surveys within
the area covered by the Missoula Valley Aquifer, outside the core urban area completed
during the first phase. This area covered 116 square miles. The area included a mixture of
high density commercial areas and low density rural areas. For most of this area United
States Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5 minute topographic maps were used as field maps to
locate facilities that needed inspections.
USGS topographic maps were used due to the high cost of obtaining aerial photo coverage
over such a large area, and the lower density of businesses. Within this area there were two
high density commercial areas, one was the area near the Missoula County Airport, the other
was the Missoula Industrial Park located two miles west of the airport. For these areas
aerial photographs were obtained and blown up to a scale of 1:4,800 (1"=400'). Mylar
masters were made of the photographs and blueline copies were made for use in the field.
The third and final phase of the inventory process was to complete surveys within the
outlying communities and transportation corridors outside of the Missoula Valley. Due to
the large number of facilities that had already been identified during the first two phases of
inventory, and the large number of facility inspections that were completed, this phase was
only partially completed during the project. The area between Clinton and Missoula was
completed, and a partial inventory was completed in Seeley Lake.
Once the inventories were completed, the locations of possible Class V injection well
facilities were plotted on tracking maps using color coding to track the status of each
location. Business locations were coded with a red dot if an inspection was required. Once
the business was inspected the color was changed to yellow if a 5W20 or 5X28 injection well
was found, or green if no injection well was found. Later, as injection wells were closed or
permitted at facilities, the location was changed from yellow to green. These tracking maps
proved very useful for planing inspections, and keeping track of the progress of the project.
33

-------
7.2 Initial Facility Inspections
Completion of the initial facility inspections was an important aspect of the demonstration
project. It was during this inspection that initial contacts were made, facility grounds were
inspected for the first time, the business operator was informed of the UIC program, the
intent of the integrated inspection was discussed and the EPA Shallow Injection Well
Inventory Request form was completed. The information collected was used to determine
compliance with the regulatory programs considered and could be used later for enforcement.
Because of this enforcement potential, emphasis was placed on following proper procedures
for gaining access and inspecting the facility.
The facility inspections were completed in three steps. The first step included obtaining
consent, giving the owner/operator the Notice of Inspection and conducting an entry
interview. The second step consisted of a physical inspection of the facility inside and out
and completion of a sketch of the facility. The final step consisted of an exit interview with
the facility operator. At this time any problems noted were discussed with the business
operator, and the EPA UIC Inventory Request Form was filled out.
In Missoula County, the Health Department has the broad authority to inspect businesses for
public health and safety concerns. This same general authority is granted to most
government agencies. In order to inspect a facility, it is common practice to obtain consent
from the business operator. Even though an inspector may technically have authority to
enter a facility, a business operator may not allow entry. If entry is denied by the operator,
the standard practice is to leave, and obtain a search warrant prior to returning to the facility
to complete the inspection. In Missoula, a search warrant was only required once. At
another facility access was denied at first, but later granted after the Missoula County
Attorneys office spoke with the attorney representing the facility. In a few other cases the
inspection was denied because the proper contact was not available, or the business operator
was busy. In these cases the Health Department honored all requests to reschedule the
inspections.
Once legal consent was obtained to complete the inspection, additional-steps were taken to
make sure that the inspections were completed properly so that they could not be challenged
in court later. Since the inspections were being conducted as part of the EPA UIC
demonstration project, the Health Department inspectors obtained letters of credentials from
EPA. Appendix G contains a copy of one of these letters. The letters gave the name and
physical description of the inspector, and a brief description of the contract agreement
between the Health Department and EPA. These letters were laminated and carried in the
field to present to the business operator during the inspection.
34

-------
During the first step of the inspection the inspector identified him/herself by showing a
Health Department photo identification card and requesting access to complete the inspection.
The purpose of the inspection was stated, the operator was requested to read the letter of
credentials from EPA, and a completed copy of an EPA UIC Notice of Inspection form was
presented. Once this was done, the entry interview was completed.
The interview was designed to answer any specific questions the operator had and to obtain
site information. This information included property ownership, contacts, phone numbers,
site history, location information, number of employees, sewer services, water supply
information, and other information.
The second step of the inspection consisted of a visual inspection of the facility grounds. A
sketch of the facility was completed, photographs were taken, and the Missoula County
Comprehensive Environmental Site Assessment form was completed. Any problems such as
stained soils, improper storage of waste fluids and unregistered underground storage tanks
were noted. The locations of all Class V injection wells, septic systems, and water supply
wells were documented on the site sketch;
The site assessment form was modified several times during the project. The most recent
modification was completed once the Missoula Valley Water Quality District was formed.
The modification was made to allow for better integration of the inspections with other
developing programs such as the Aquifer Protection Ordinance, and the name of the form
was changed. A copy of the last version of the Comprehensive Environmental Site
Assessment form, and the new form which is titled Aquifer Protection Inspection Form are
included in Appendix H.
The site assessment forms were designed to facilitate integration of programs. Information
collected on the form includes site location, property ownership, land use history, site
characteristics, chemical storage areas, waste disposal practices, underground storage tanks,
and other concerns for use in the demonstration project and the aquifer protection program.
In addition to the site assessment forms, an EPA Class V Field Inspection Report was filled
out after the inspection was completed. This form documents additional information specific
to the use of Class V injection wells. During the inspection, the Health Department
inspector also assisted the business operator in filling out an EPA Shallow Injection Well
Inventory Request Form. This form supplies documentation of the types of Class V injection
wells used, and the wastes being disposed of into the injection wells. The EPA Notice of
Inspection form, EPA Class V Field Inspection Report form, and the EPA Shallow Injection
Well Inventory Request form are included in Appendix I. The Shallow Injection Well
Inventory Request form was modified by the Health Department during the demonstration
project to simplify filling out the form and to shorten the form from four pages to one page
double sided. Both versions are included in Appendix I.
35

-------
7.3 Dye Testing
Throughout the project dye testing of floor drains, sinks, and other discharge points at
inspected facilities were completed to verify connection to the City sewer system. The
Health Department discovered that relying solely on City sewer connection records for
facilities was not sufficient to determine if there was a discharge to a Class V injection well.
The Engineering Division of the Missoula Public Works Department maintains the sewer
connection records. The records include a sewer connection card file which shows a sketch
of the service line between the sewer main and the outside of the building. During the
previous demonstration project, if a connection card was found, the business was taken off
the list of possible Class V injection well facilities. However, the connection cards do not
show the plumbing inside the business.
As a result of completing numerous dye tests, the Health Department found that at
approximately 50% of the facilities that were connected to City sewer, only the bathrooms
were connected. Floor drains and shop sinks were in many cases connected directly to a
Class V injection well. The main reason for this appears to be that up until approximately
1986, the City discouraged the connection of floor drains to the sewer system. In fact,
during the 1970s the treatment plant conducted dye tests of some floor drains, and required
disconnection of floor drains from the sewer system if they were connected.
To reduce the possibility of errors, the Health Department completed dye tests at all
businesses that reported to be connected to sewer, unless other reliable information was
obtained. The Health Department coordinated with the Waste Water Treatment Facility
(WWTF) to conduct the dye testing since they routinely do dye tests for other reasons, and
had accurate maps of the sewer system. Two line maintenance workers from the WWTF and
one Health Department inspector were used to conduct the dye tests. One line maintenance
worker would monitor the nearest down stream manhole in the sewer main using a mirror to
reflect sunlight into the manhole, or a halogen spot light. The other WWTF worker would
place dye in the floor drain or other inlet to be tested, and run water down the drain. Hand
held radios were used to communicate. The treatment plant personnel carried maps with
them in the field to determine where the closest manholes were. In some cases, several
manholes were monitored. The Health Department inspector would oversee the dye tests to
make sure the proper drains were tested, and to assist in monitoring when more than one
manhole needed to be observed.
Approximately 65 dye tests were conducted during the project. A typical dye test took 30
minutes to complete. In general if the business was connected to the sewer, the dye showed
up within 15 minutes of being placed in the floor drain. If no dye was detected after the first
application the drain would be dye tested again and the sewer main would be monitored for
up to 30 additional minutes to avoid mistakes. Fluorescent yellow/green dye seemed to be
the easiest color to detect in the sewer lines. Dye tablets were used due to the ease of
handling. The tablets were first mixed with water in a one liter plastic bottle, and then the
36

-------
solution was placed into the drain. A garden hose was typically used to supply a constant
source of water to flush the dye through the system. In most cases, fluorescent yellow/green
dye was used in floor drains, and fluorescent red dye was used for bathroom connections, or
other test sites if more than one dye test was conducted at the same time.
The normal procedure was to test the floor drains first. If the yellow/green dye did not show
up, more dye was placed in the floor drain and water flow was increased if possible. If dye
still was not detected, red dye was placed in a bathroom toilet or sink and flushed with
water. If this dye showed up, it was assumed that the proper line was being monitored and
the floor drain was not connected to the same line. To avoid costly mistakes, if a floor drain
failed the dye test, it was still not assumed that an injection well was being used. In these
cases the business operator was informed to contact a local contractor who could map out the
discharge line from the floor drain. Only one contractor in Missoula was known to have the
equipment needed to do this type of mapping.
The contractors equipment consisted of a modified high pressure washer with over 100 feet
of hose. The tip of the hose had jets that pointed backwards. Under high pressure the force
of the water jets pulls the hose through the line. Attached to the tip of the hose was an
electronic transmitter that sent out directional signals. The transmitter was followed on the
surface with a receiver. Because the transmitter sent out several directional signals, the
contractor could determine the depth and angle of the pipe. If a Class V injection well or
septic tank was encountered, the transmitter stopped moving and the location of the injection
well could be determined. This process of mapping the lines ensures mistakes are not made
when dye testing the drain, such as monitoring the wrong sewer line. In addition, it helps in
locating the injection well and the plumbing for the facility, which is often unknown.
Based on the dye tests conducted by the Health Department, the following tips are provided:
1) The dye test should be scheduled in advance to avoid busy times at the facility, 2) If the
monitoring manhole is in a busy street, the test should be done during low traffic periods, 3)
Verify that a water supply such as a faucet with a hose is available, if not, a tank truck may
be used to supply water, 4) Prior to placing dye in the floor drain, fill the floor drain with
clean water to make sure that flow is not restricted, if water backs up, the drain line must be
cleaned first, 5) If there is a lot of sediment and oil in the floor drain a stronger dose of dye
should be used because the sediment and oils inhibit the dye.
7.4 Follow-up and Closure Inspections
Facilities in Missoula County that had 5X28 injection wells were notified by EPA that the
well must be abandoned or permitted. In most cases the wells were abandoned. As part of
the demonstration project the Health Department conducted closure inspections at the
facilities that had been notified by EPA. These inspections were completed to document that
the facility was in compliance with the UIC requirements, and that the alternative disposal
option chosen was in compliance with other local, state, and federal regulations.
37

-------
As with the initial inspection, the Health Department inspector presented an identification
card with a photograph, the letter of credentials from EPA, and a copy of a completed EPA
Notice of Inspection form prior to conducting the inspection. The closure inspection
consisted of meeting with the facility operator and reviewing the modifications that had been
made to comply with the UIC requirements. Photographs were taken of physical
modifications to document compliance. The photographs were usually taken of plugged floor
drains, newly installed interceptor tanks, holding tanks, or floor drains filled with cement.
The photographs were taken to provide verification that the modifications had been made as
reported to EPA. Double prints were made of all photographs taken during initial
inspections and closure inspections. One copy was kept in the Health Department files, and
the other was sent to the Montana EPA office for their files. After the inspection was
completed, an EPA Class V Field Inspection Report form was filled out. Originals of the
Notice of Inspection and Class V Inspection Report forms were sent to EPA and a copy was
maintained at the Health Department.
7.5 Compliance Verification Inspections
Unless a UIC permit was obtained, all facilities that were found to be using a 5X28 injection
well, and some facilities that were found to be using 5W20 injection wells were required to
abandon the well. Most of the facilities either connected to the municipal sewer system, or
plugged the inlet to the injection well and operated as a dry shop. In most cases die inlet to
the well was plugged with cement. Most of the inlets to 5X28 injection wells consisted of
floor drains that were connected to an exterior well structure via a pipe.
In some cases the well was abandoned by simply capping the inlet pipe within the floor
drain. This type of closure was allowed as long as the cap was welded or glued on. As a
special project, the Health Department reviewed files for facilities that had abandoned their
injection well, and determined that 23 facilities had closed the well by capping the inlet. A
special follow up compliance inspection was completed at each of these 23 facilities to verify
continued compliance to the EPA UIC requirements.
The results of these inspections showed that of the 23 facilities reinspected, 5 had reopened
their floor drains and were again using their 5X28 injection wells. Surprisingly, of the 23
facilities reinspected, 15 were private facilities and only 2 (13%) of the private facilities had
reopened their floor drains. The remaining 7 facilities were public facilities, and of those, 3
(43%) had reopened their floor drains. These special follow up compliance inspections were
completed using the standard procedures established for normal closure inspections. The
results indicate that simply capping an inlet to an injection well is not sufficient due to the
ease of reopening the inlet at a later date.
38

-------
8.0 DATA BASE MANAGEMENT
Throughout the demonstration project a computer data base was maintained. The data base
was structured so that it could be incorporated into a Geographical Information System (GIS)
computer format. The data was entered into the GIS system at the end of the project. A
GIS map showing the locations of facilities inspected, facilities with open 5X28 injection
wells and facilities with closed 5X28 injection wells in the Missoula urban area is included as
Attachment A (not included in all copies of the report).
8.1	Data Base Structure
To assist with integration of the demonstration project with other regulatory programs, the
data base was structured to parallel the Comprehensive Site Assessment form used to
complete the integrated facility inspections. It was also structured to include fields for
tracking closure of Class V injection wells, and other follow up inspections. The data base
currently (1994) contains 550 records on facilities in Missoula County. It contains 3 date
fields, 4 numeric fields, 19 logical fields, and 40 character fields., for a total of 66 fields.
Figure 8 shows the data base structure.
8.2	Data Base Summary
During the demonstration project, a total of 550 facilities were inspected. At these 550
facilities, a total of 359 5X28 injection wells were documented at 267 facilities. In addition,
44 facilities were found to be using 5W20 injection wells. A total of 655 on site storm water
disposal wells coded as 5D2 and 5D4 wells were documented at the facilities inspected (see
section 4.2 for definitions). This includes approximately 200 5D2 wells located at Southgate
Mall, which was inspected but has not been entered into the data base yet. Approximately
3000 additional 5D2 wells have been inventoried within the Missoula Urban area. These
injection wells are located along streets, alleys, and in parking areas at facilities that have not
been inspected. A total of 57 Class V injection wells used for disposal of domestic waste
water (5W11) were also documented at the facilities that were inspected (see section 4.2 for
definitions). Over 20 unregistered underground storage tanks were found while doing the
facility inspections. A printout from the data base, showing the wells codes for facilities
inspected is included as Appendix J.
9.0 ASSISTANCE TO LOCAL BUSINESSES
Technical and educational assistance was provided to local businesses affected by the UIC
regulations. Technical assistance was provided for compliance with the UIC requirements,
and requirements for other regulatory programs. Educational materials were developed to
help local businesses understand various regulations that may affect them.
39

-------
9.1 Compliance with EPA UIC Requirements
Throughout the demonstration project, the Health Department found that efforts to assist
local businesses comply with UIC requirements were well received. Because the regulations
for Class V injection wells in Missoula were new, most businesses were unaware of what a
Class V injection well was, or what the UIC requirements were. During the initial
inspection the UIC regulations were discussed with the operator. The Health Department
also explained the rationale for the regulations.
Structure for database: C:\WQD\WHP3
Number of data records:	550
Date of last update : 12/16/93
Field
Field Name
l
DATE
2
TIME
3
REF NO
4
CODE
5
NAME
6
LBL
7
STREETNUM
8
'STREET
9
SUBD
10
LOT
11
BLOCK
12
SUID NO
13
GEOCODE
14
QTR QTR
15
OWNER
16
CONTACT
17
MAILADD
18
MAILADD2
19
TELE
20
SIC
21
ZONING
22
LANDUSE
23
HISTORY
24
SOIL
25
DEPTHH20
26
SURFACEH2 0
27
WELL
28
WELLUSE
29
WELLOG
30
PUBWATER
31
SYSTEM
32
WELLCOMNTS
33
INDSEWER
Type
Width
Dat§
8
Character
4
Numeric
3
Numeric
4
Character
30
Logical
1
Numeric
5
Character
15
Character
10
Character
3
Character
3
Numeric
. 7
Character
18
Character
4
Character
20
Character
20
Character
20
Character
20
Character
7
Character
7
Character
8
Character
100
Character
100
Character
8
Character
7
Logical
1
Logical
1
Character
10
Logical
1
Logical
1
Character
10
Character
100
Logical
1
34
PERMITNO
35
SEWRSYSTEM
36
PUBSEWER
37
SEWCONECTS
38
DYETEST
39
DYEWHAT
40
DYERESULTS
41
SEWRCOMNTS
42
CLASS5
43
X28
44
CLAS5TYPES
45
CLS5CLOSIN
46
CLOSE DATE
47
SEWR CNCTN
48
UST
49
UNCLASS
50
VOCS
51
VOCVOLUME
52
METALS
53
PESTICIDES
54
FUELS
55
OTHERCHEMS
56
OTHRCHEMVO
57
DISPOSAL
58
RCRA
59
WASTECOMNT
60
BADDIPOSAL
61
SAMPLELOC
62
SAMPLRESLT
63
CODE60
64
VOCCODE
65
UPDATE
66
UDATCOMENT
** Total **
Character
6
Character
6
Logical
1
Character
50
Logical
1
Character
10
Character
15
Character
100
Logical
1
Logical
1
Character
30
Logical
1
Date
8
Logical
1
Logical
1
Character
12
Logical
1
Character
50
Logical
1
Logical
1
Logical
1
Character
20
Character
50
Character
250
Logical
1
Character
250
Character
250
Character
10
Logical
1
Character
6
Character
12
Date
8
Character
25

1739
Figure 8: Demonstration Project Data Base Structure
40

-------
Most business operators fully agreed that 5X28 injection wells posed a threat to the
environment. A few felt that they were no worse than "the storm drains on the corner" (5D2
and 5D4 wells). A few others claimed that nothing but water went down the drains. The
most common complaint was that there was no funding support to assist them with
compliance even though the regulations were new. Many businesses also felt that the five
months typically allowed for compliance was too short.
To assist the businesses with compliance, the Health Department met with any business
operator that requested assistance. Many businesses did not contact the Health Department.
Some contacted EPA directly and others were small businesses which could simply plug their
floor drains inlets to the injection well to comply. To help save the businesses money, the
Health Department went over all the options available to the business, and explained the
relative costs and benefits for each.
9.2 Education
Using the information collected during the initial site inspections, the Health Department
discussed proper waste disposal, hazardous waste laws, ways to reduce or eliminate
hazardous wastes, and regulatory requirements to local business operators. Businesses were
encouraged to change improper waste disposal practices, and correct existing problems that
were documented at the site. In general the Health Department worked with the various
businesses to assist them with development of best management practices to help prevent
pollution. A follow up letter was written to each business that had significant problems.
The letters varied depending on the severity of the problems, but they were all written to
document the problems noted and recommend corrective actions. Appendix K contains
samples of actual letters that were sent to local businesses. The names and addresses have
been changed to protect confidentiality.
Throughout the project the Health Department researched available equipment and alternative
products for local businesses. This information was organized by topic and placed in the
Water Quality District library for reference by local businesses. Information was collected
on waste water pretreatment systems, waste water recycling systems, solvent recycling
systems, antifreeze recycling systems, secondary containment equipment, above ground
vaulted fuel storage tanks, underground fuel storage tanks, emergency response equipment,
alternative (less hazardous) products, and other information. This information is not included
in the report to avoid representing specific brand names. It is available for review at the
Water Quality District office.
In addition to educational information on products and supplies for local businesses, the
Health Department also developed and distributed educational materials describing various
regulatory programs. Information developed during the previous demonstration project was
updated, and additional information was prepared. The informational handouts were
developed as a packet entitled What You Need To Know: Regulations That Pertain To
Missoula Area Businesses. The packet includes a brief description of regulations governing
41

-------
chloroflourocarbons, employee right to know laws, hazardous waste, junk vehicles,
pretreatment systems, public water supplies, shallow injection wells, solid waste disposal,
underground storage tanks and used motor oil. The handouts, on various colors of paper,
were designed to provide basic information and references for more detailed information.
The approach was to summarize each topic on one page that was easy to read and
understand. A copy of the What You Need To Know packet is included in Appendix L.
A special handout was also developed for local businesses that connected their shop floor
drains to the City sewer system as an alternative to using a Class V injection well. To
connect to the sewer system, a sand and oil interceptor tank was required for pretreatment.
During follow up inspections at these businesses, the Health Department found that the tanks
were not being maintained properly. The handout was developed to help business operators
properly maintain the interceptors. This handout is also included in Appendix L.
During all phases of the facility inspections, the inspectors also noted the types of solvents
and other products being used at the facility. Particular attention was given to products that
contained chlorinated solvents. Chlorinated solvents were documented to be present in
numerous types of products. Depending on the brand, these products may include carburetor
cleaners, brake cleaners, engine degreasers, gasket removers, rubber cleaners, electrical
contact cleaners, upholstery cleaners, instant tire repair and inflation products, and general
parts cleaners. When these products were found during an inspection they were checked to
determine if chlorinated solvents were listed on the container. If they were, this was pointed
out to the business operator. If the product did not state the ingredients, the owner was
advised to obtain a material safety data sheet (MSDS) and review it for chlorinated solvents.
The business operator was informed that even small amounts of some chlorinated solvents
could make normal waste streams such as used motor oil dangerous to groundwater and
potentially a hazardous waste if cross contamination occurred.
10.0 ABANDONMENT OF 5X28 SHALLOW INJECTION WELLS
When the EPA shallow injection well demonstration project began in Missoula the emphasis
was placed on trying to discontinue the injection of contaminants into the Missoula Valley
Aquifer. After the initial closure of the shallow injection wells, which in most cases are type
5X28 injection wells, the next step is to assess and remediate the injection well site.
EPA is interested in proper abandonment of Class V injection wells. During the
demonstration project, the Health Department developed recommended procedures for
abandonment of these wells for facilities that chose to proceed with abandonment at the same
time that an alternative disposal method was implemented. These recommended procedures
are also being used at facilities that abandoned their injection well(s) in the past and later
chose to assess and remediate the well site voluntarily.
42

-------
The process of assessment and remediation of the wells must be flexible for several reasons.
First, some injection wells are located under buildings. This makes excavation and cleanup
difficult and costly. Secondly, the disposal option used for sludge and contaminated soils
excavated from the site depends on the types and levels of contaminants present. Finally, the
types of contaminants depends not only on the current business type, but also on past
businesses that may have used the injection well.
During the demonstration project EPA's priority was in locating and closing or permitting
5X28 injection wells. Assessment and remediation of 5X28 injection wells has been done on
a voluntary basis in Missoula County. The Health Department had a hard time tracking the
wells that were remediated. This is due to the fact that in most cases the business owner
hired a private consultant to do the assessment and remediation, and the Health Department
was not provided with information on the work completed.
10.1 Assessment And Remediation
For businesses that chose to remediate their type 5X28 Class V injection well, the Health
Department provided the following guidelines:
The first step required to properly abandon an injection well is to assess the extent of the
contamination. The Health Department recommended the following procedure to local
businesses for assessing a 5X28 injection well prior to final closure:
1.	Testing:
(a)	Remove any liquid and/or sludge from the well structure and have a TCLP
analysis run. The types of contaminants screened for must be based on the
type of business, and the type(s) of businesses that were present in the past.
Auto body shops, engine rebuilders, machine shops, radiator repair shops, and
others that may have waste streams containing metals should have TCLP run
for metals. These facilities should also run TCLP for VOCs. Shops that
service agricultural equipment should analyze for pesticides in addition to
VOCs and metals.
(b)	If the well structure is dry, collect a soil sample from one foot below the bottom
center of the well by core sampling and testing for the appropriate contaminants as
listed in (a) above.
2.	Waste Disposal:
(a) If sample results from steps (a) or (b) in #1 above, indicate that the liquids or
sludges from the structure or the soil around the structure are hazardous waste under
RCRA or Montana Hazardous Waste laws, the material must be disposed of as
hazardous waste.
43

-------
(b) If the testing indicates that the liquids, sludges, or soils around the structure
contain significant contamination, but do not qualify as hazardous waste, contact the
Health Department to determine the best disposal options.
3.	Site Assessment:
In all cases the injection well must be sampled as outlined above, and the site must be
assessed to determine the appropriate level of remediation. Even if the testing shows
that there is no significant contamination, a site characterization should be completed,
which includes the following information:
(a)	Soil type
(b)	Depth to seasonal high ground water
(c)	Detailed description of past and present land use, including types of businesses,
types of chemicals used, volumes of chemicals used, and past disposal practices.
(d)	Proximity of adjacent wells and surface waters
(e)	Direction of ground water flow.
(f)	Assessment of the potential of the site to be a source of contamination currently or
in the future.
(g)	Either a rationale for closure without remediation based on the above information,
or a site remediation plan for the site.
4.	Closure:
Once the site is assessed, closure can be completed. For wells with low levels of
contamination, that do not require excavation, simply fill the structure with a non-
compacting material and cap with an impervious material such as clay, asphalt, or
concrete. If the site requires excavation, fill the remaining hole with a non-
compacting material and then cap the area with an impervious cap.
5.	Other Related Structures:
(a)	Other structures associated with the injection well must also be addressed. If the
5X28 system consists of a septic tank connected to a seepage pit or drain field, the
material in the septic tank must be sampled and run using TCLP analysis. Materials
should be disposed of as outlined in sections 1 and 2 above.
(b)	If the system consisted of a septic tank and drain field, a portion of the drain field
should be exposed, and soil samples should be collected from under the lines. The
samples must be collected from near the distribution box to assure that a used portion
of the line was sampled. If sludge or liquid is present, the TCLP analysis should be
completed. If soils are sampled from below the drain line, direct analysis should be
run.
44

-------
(c) If the system utilized a seepage pit, or cesspool, these structures should be
assessed and remediated.
10.2 Remediation And Disposal Of Contaminated Soils
Due to the high cost of proper cleanup, and the lack of enforcement to require remediation,
many business operators chose not to address proper cleanup of their injection wells.
However, during this demonstration project and the previous demonstration project, the
Health Department did document the assessment and remediation of several 5X28 injection
wells that were voluntarily cleaned up.
To provide some background into the problems encountered during remediation, and to
demonstrate the need to continue to remediate 5X28 injection wells, the information provided
below summarizes remediation at four sites where 5X28 injection wells were found. In the
descriptions below, the names of the facilities have been changed, but all information is
factual.
The Health Department found significant contamination in the soils around all four of the
well sites. Within the well structure, 10 to 200 gallons of sludge was typically present. The
amount of contaminated soil excavated was approximately 500 cubic yards. Contamination
of the soil around the structure resulted from long term use, where waste water, oils, and
solvents and other wastes had infiltrated through the sediments.
10.2.1 Brett's Automotive
The injection well at this site received a mixture of waste fluids from the shop floor drains,
and the sanitary waste from the bathrooms. This shop did all types of automotive repair,
including engine rebuilding and transmission repair. The 5X28 injection well was assessed
and remediated as part of a property transaction. The floor drains were connected to City
sewer at the same time. The work was performed by a private consultant. The consulting
firm collected a water sample, and two sludge samples from the injection well prior to
excavation. The water sample and one sludge sample were analyzed for VOCs using a direct
analysis. The second sludge sample was analyzed using the TCLP method.
Based on direct analysis of the sludge using EPA standard method 8260, eight chlorinated
compounds and four non-chlorinated compounds were detected. The compounds detected
and the concentrations in parts per million (ppm) were as follows: chlorobenzene (3.1), 2-
chlorotoluene (35), 4-chlorobenzene (12), 1,2-dichlorobenzene (140), 1,3-dichlorobenzene
(18), 1,4-dichlorobenzene (170), tetrachloroethene (12), trichloroethane (1.2), benzene (1.6),
ethylbenzene (18), toluene (32) and total xylenes (11). The main point of interest in these
samples is the comparison of the direct analysis for VOCs with the TCLP analysis. For the
same compounds detected using the TCLP VOC test method, only 0.3% to 4.2% of the total
volatile contaminants detected were leached out of the sediments during the TCLP test. This
means that even though the contaminated materials associated with 5X28 injection wells may
45

-------
have high levels of VOCs associated with gasoline and solvents, in many cases the material
may not qualify as hazardous waste under RCRA if the TCLP method is used.
All contaminated soils were removed from the area of the injection well at Brett's
Automotive. A total of 12 cubic yards of contaminated material was excavated. This
material was hauled to a lined drying bed at the Missoula Waste Water Treatment Plant. It
was spread out to increase volatilization and to aid in bacterial degradation. Eventually it
was hauled to the local landfill.
10.2.2 Southside Tire
This facility is a combined light automotive repair, service station and tire shop. The 5X28
injection well only received waste fluids from the service bay floor drains. The well was
excavated during connection to City sewer. The visual appearance of the contamination
found here was similar to other sites. Sediments consisted of interbedded silts, sands, and
gravels. It appeared that the waste fluids injected into the well preferentially migrated
through the coarser layers. Material from the most contaminated portion of the excavation
was sampled and a direct analysis was run for VOC only.
The laboratory results indicated that no chlorinated compounds were present. The only
volatiles detected were xylene compounds at 69 ppm. The total petroleum hydrocarbon
(TPH) content was not measured, but based on other samples run by the Health Department
levels for TPH in these waste materials range from 3,000 to 40,000 ug/g (ppm). High TPH
values are expected due to the high oil content of the contaminated sediments and sludges.
Approximately 20 cubic yards of contaminated soil was excavated from the well site. Lenses
of contaminated sediments were still present in the side walls of the excavation. Future
excavation was not completed, with the approval of the Health Department. This decision
was based on the sample results, the fact that excavation would undermine the building
foundation, the fact that most of the highly contaminated sludges and soils had been
excavated, and that the area would be capped with asphalt after the hole was back filled.
The contaminated material that was excavated was not hauled to the waste water treatment
plant drying beds because it did not need to be dewatered. The option of disposing of the
waste material at the local landfill was evaluated and ruled out due to the high cost of
sampling and landfarming the waste at the landfill. The waste was eventually recycled into
asphalt.
The landfill in Missoula required independent TCLP testing prior to acceptance. This testing
was to include pesticides and other possible hazardous chemicals. Even though direct
analysis results were available showing that no hazardous levels of VOC were present, the
landfill still required a TCLP test for VOC. In this case, the additional testing would cost
approximately $1,000, in addition to a landfarming cost of $20/cubic yard.
46

-------
To avoid these high costs, and to evaluate other alternatives, the Health Department assisted
the business operator with finding an alternative disposal option. The Health Department
worked with a local asphalt plant operator who agreed to run the waste material through his
processing equipment and recycle it into asphalt. This was determined to be a sound practice
because the VOC content was very low, no chlorinated compounds were present and the shop
had no waste streams containing high levels of heavy metals, The current shop owner was
the only one to ever occupy the site, and the only contaminant of concern appeared to be
used motor oil.
10.2.3	Import Auto Repair
The 5X28 injection well at this facility was one of the most highly contaminated injection
wells documented by the Health Department. Based on the levels of contaminants found,
this injection well appears to have been used as a Class IV injection well. Five floor drains
in the shop area discharged the waste fluids to a 5X28 well structure that consisted of five
concrete rings that were 6 feet in diameter. The rings were stacked on top of each other
with open space between each ring. The total depth of the well was 16 feet. Over 1,600
gallons of sludge was removed from the injection well and floor drains. The sludge was
contaminated with lead and 1,2-dichlorobenzene. The highest lead level measured in the
sludge was 2880 parts per million (ppm). 1,2-dichlorobenzene levels were as high as
14,000 ppm. This material was disposed of at a RCRA permitted facility.
An additional 500 cubic yards of contaminated soil was removed from around the injection
well site, and later disposed of at the local landfill after testing revealed it was not
hazardous. Contamination still existed in the excavation but the excavation threatened the
building. A vapor extraction system was installed to remove the remaining 1,2-
dichlorobenzene contamination.
10.2.4	BM Machine Shop
The 5X28 injection well at this facility was used to dispose of caustic parts cleaning solution
from a hot tank. The hot tank was plumbed directly to the injection well. Sludge collected
from the bottom of the injection well contained up to 3180 ppm lead. A total of 275 gallons
of contaminated sludge was removed from the well and disposed of at a RCRA permitted
disposal site. An additional 36 cubic yards of contaminated soil was removed from around
the injection well. This material was also contaminated with lead, but at levels below the
regulatory limit for hazardous waste.
47

-------
11.0 ALTERNATIVE DISPOSAL OPTIONS FOR WASTE WATER
Discontinuing the use of 5X28 and 5W20 injection wells requires that alternatives be
developed for disposal of the waste fluids that were previously placed in the injection wells.
As part of the demonstration project, the Health Department assisted local businesses with
developing alternative disposal options. Work on development of alternatives in Missoula
was focused on facilities that had been using 5X28 injection wells. The same options
developed for 5X28 injection wells are also useful for facilities that have been using 5W20
injection wells. However, due to the variability in the types of waste fluids that may be
disposed of into 5W20 injection wells, any option chosen must be evaluated based on the
type of waste fluid(s). All of the options may not necessarily be applicable to each facility.
Table 5 lists the options that were developed in Missoula for businesses that were inspected
and found to be utilizing 5X28 and 5W20 injection wells:
Table 5
Options For Facilities With 5X28 and 5W20 Wells
1.	Discharge waste fluids to a municipal sewer system.
2.	Discharge waste fluids to a holding tank.
3.	Recycle the waste fluids in a closed loop system.
4.	Plug all discharge points and operate a dry shop.
5.	Pretreatment and Discharge to Public Sewer.
6.	Apply for a UIC permit to inject waste water treated or untreated.
7.	Dispose of waste fluids into a lined evaporation pond or evapotranspiration bed.
11.1 Discharge waste fluids to a municipal sewer system
This option was the best available alternative for most businesses in Missoula that had sewer
services available. As previously discussed, many businesses in Missoula were already
connected to the sewer system, but had floor drains or shop sinks that were connected to a
Class V injection well. For these businesses only on site modifications to their sewer system
were required. Other businesses had sewer reasonably available, but had never been
connected. An added benefit of the project was that most of the businesses that connected
their floor drains to the public sewer system also connected their sanitary sewer system to the
public sewer. In many cases this was not required to comply with the UIC requirements or
local regulations, but resulted in a significant number of septic systems being eliminated.
48

-------
For facilities that chose to connect to the municipal sewer, often the first step in the process
was to have the plumbing from the floor drain to the injection well mapped. In most cases
the location of the injection well was unknown. The plumbing was mapped out using the
same methods described in the section on dye testing. The main requirement for a shop that
chose to connect to the sewer system was installation of an approved sand and oil interceptor
tank. The tank was required to be installed on the service line between the floor drains and
the sewer main, up stream of any sanitary sewer connections.
During the previous demonstration project the Health Department worked with the
Engineering Division of the Public Works Department to review the existing design of the
sand and oil interceptor tank. The Health Department conducted field inspections of
operating interceptor tanks to determine how well the tanks were working. The field study
involved inspecting several tanks that were in use and meeting with local tank manufacturers.
As a result of this work, the standard design was modified by the Engineering Division. The
Health Department also made recommendations on how the tanks should be maintained. The
new design developed during the demonstration project is shown in Figure 9.
The main changes in the tank design were elimination of a partition, modification of the inlet
and outlet, and installation of a pipe to allow water to pass from the first chamber to the
second chamber under the standing water line. Manholes were required for both chambers to
make it easier to maintain. Oil absorbent pillows were required in the second chamber. The
pillows are filled with polypropylene foam and can hold up to two gallons of oil. The
minimum size for the modified interceptor tank was set at 1000 gallons to assure good
separation of oils and solids. Most design changes were implemented to reduce turbulence in
the tank.
Two concrete companies in Missoula had existing designs for interceptor tanks that could
meet the standard design requirements of the City. Because these tanks rely solely on
gravity separation for treatment, they do not represent the best available technology for
separation of oils and solids. If they are not properly maintained their effectiveness is lost.
The Health Department also researched other types of premanufactured separators that were
available. Most of the premanufactured units were much smaller then the standard 1000
gallon concrete tanks available locally, and were based on a combination of coalescing plates,
multimedia filters, and oil skimmers. These were also approved for connection to the sewer
system since they were much more efficient. An advantage to these units is that they can be
installed above ground inside the shop area.
11.2 Discharge waste fluids to a holding tank
For businesses that did not have public sewer available, an alternative option was to
disconnect any floor drains, sinks or other devices from the injection well and connect them
to a waste water holding tank. This option is similar to connection to public sewer because
the waste fluids are pumped from the holding tank periodically and hauled to a waste water
49

-------
treatment plant. Because the waste fluids are hauled to a treatment plant, the use of a sand
and oil interceptor tank or other pretreatment device is still required in most cases.
The same waste streams are produced as with direct connection to public sewer. However,
the wastes discharged directly into a public sewer system are exempt from RCRA
regulations, whereas wastes stored in holding tanks and hauled to a public sewer system are
not. This means that if the material is hazardous under the RCRA definitions, it can not be
hauled to the treatment plant for disposal. Although discharge of hazardous waste directly
into a public sewer would not be in violation of RCRA regulations, it would be a violation of
the Clean Water Act and the Missoula Municipal Code.
MANHOLES MUST
OUTFLOW
OIL SORBENT PILLOWS.
3M-T-240 OR
EQUIVALENT, MUST HAVE
HOOKS FOR REPLACEMENT
OF PILLOWS.
Figure 9: Sand and Oil Interceptor Tank
50

-------
A local protocol for accepting waste fluids from holding tanks was established for the
Missoula Waste Water Treatment Facility (WWTF). Normally waste fluids are not accepted
at the Missoula WWTF from facilities that are not within the service area of the plant. The
WWTF Pretreatment Coordinator worked with the Health Department to allow commercial
or industrial waste water from holding tanks at previous Class V injection well facilities to be
hauled to the plant from outside the service area. Loads that are hauled to the WWTF are
hauled by a licensed liquid waste hauler, and all loads are pre-approved. A manifest form
was developed by the Pretreatment Coordinator to track any loads that are hauled to the
WWTF.
Only a few facilities in Missoula County chose this option due to the high cost of hauling the
waste water, and the high cost of sampling the waste water prior to hauling it. An
alternative that was developed for several rural fire departments in Missoula County was to
allow for reuse of waste water from holding tanks. At these fire stations, the waste water
entering the holding tanks is derived from washing the fire equipment, and from leaks in the
packings within the pump systems on the engines. This waste water was sampled several
times during the demonstration project, and found to be non hazardous, and relatively clean.
It is now used to water lawns in the spring summer and fall, and to fill water tanks for fire
suppression in the winter.
11.3	Recycle the waste fluids in a closed loop system
This option requires that all discharge lines from the floor drain(s), sinks or other points that
discharged to a Class V injection well be rerouted to a sealed sump. Waste water collected
in the sump is then run through a recycling unit that has several components that are
designed to remove specific contaminants. For facilities that produce large amounts of waste
water and do not have access to public sewer, this option may be the best alternative since
there is no discharge. The disadvantage is the high cost of the recycling systems. The
savings from reduced water consumption may offset some of the cost if the price of water is
high.
Depending on the needs of the facility, the estimated cost of the equipment can range from
$2,000 to over $50,000. If the facility has several buildings more than one system may be
required. The systems work well, but require a high level of maintenance. Figure 10
shows a typical set up for a closed loop system. Only a few businesses in Missoula chose
this option to comply with the UIC requirements due to the high cost.
11.4	Plug all discharge points and operate a dry shop
Approximately 50% of the businesses in Missoula County chose to operate as a dry shop to
comply with the UIC requirements. This option is only feasible for small shops, and some
larger shops that do not wash equipment or vehicles. In order to implement this option,
facilities were required to permanently plug all discharge points to their Class V injection
51

-------
well. As mentioned earlier in the section on special follow up inspections, the Health
Department found some problems at facilities that simply capped pipes that discharged to
Class V injection wells due to the ease of going back later and removing the caps. There
fore, to comply with the UIC requirements, the drain must be permanently sealed.
¦ CLEAN WATER RETURN


Coalescing
04/waef/SoWs
Separator
Errutsined
OtVWaieffSokJs
Separator
Treated Water
Storage Tar*
Wttfi Return Pump
Figure 10: Closed Loop Recycling System:
Because most discharge points to the injection wells were floor drains, most businesses
simply filled all the floor drains in the facility with cement. Others filled the discharge line
with cement. In some cases the businesses wanted to preserve the floor drains so that they
could be connected to public sewer at a later date. In these cases the facilities were allowed
to cap the discharge lines from the floor drains temporarily. The facility was required to cap
the floor drain in a way that would not allow for easy opening until the floor drains were
connected to public sewer. For example, if the discharge pipe from the floor drain was
made of PVC pipe, the business was required to glue a cap onto the pipe. A screw on plug
that could later be removed was not allowed. In general businesses that hoped to connect to
City sewer in the future chose not to fill the floor drain structure with cement, while
businesses that had no future plans for sewer connection filled the entire floor drain structure
with cement.
11.5 Pretreatment and Discharge to Public Sewer or a Class V Well
This option was available to all facilities in Missoula County that had public sewer available.
Pretreatment and discharge to public sewer was the preferred alternative if sewer service was
available. The type of pretreatment equipment required depends on the waste streams
produced by the facility. Most of the businesses that connected to public sewer in Missoula
were automotive repair facilities, and they were required to pretreat their waste water to
52

-------
remove solids and oils. There are several companies that sell pretreatment equipment
specifically designed for discharge into a municipal sewer system. If public sewer is not
available, waste fluids may be pretreated and then disposed of into a Class V injection well.
If this option is used, a UIC permit is required. More specific information on permit
requirements is given below in the section on permitting. No facilities in Missoula chose the
option of pretreating and then discharging to a Class V well. Several facilities installed
pretreatment systems and connected to public sewer.
11.6 Apply for a UIC permit to inject waste water untreated
Under the UIC regulations, all businesses had the option of sampling their waste water and
applying for a UIC Class V discharge permit. Each closure notification order sent to
Missoula businesses contained the required permit application forms and instructions for
sampling. Businesses that chose to sample their waste water and apply for a permit had the
option of hiring a consultant to collect the sample, or collecting the sample on their own.
The sampling protocol was supplied to each business by EPA. To receive a UIC permit the
business was required to sample their waste water for the compounds and elements listed in
Table 6. The cost for the analysis is approximately $150. An analysis of the fluid is
required quarterly or semiannually depending on the permit conditions.
Table 6
Analysis Required for UIC Permit
Metals; Lead and Chromium.
Organics; benzene, toluene, xylene, ethylbenzene, vinyl chloride, carbon
tetrachloride, 1,2-dichloroethane, trichloroethylene, 1,1,1-trichloroethane,
para-dichlorobenzene, polynuclear aromatics (liquid and solid), ethylene
glycol, and tetrachloroethylene.
Trihalomethanes; chloroform, bromoform, dibromochloromethane,
bromodichloromethane.
11.7 Evaporation Ponds
For large repair facilities such as truck and heavy equipment repair shops there is no
effective way to run a dry shop. In Missoula, many of these businesses also did not have
public sewer available. The Health Department worked on development of a local ordinance
which would allow facilities to install lined evaporation ponds to dispose of waste water.
53

-------
The Health Department worked with EPA, the State Water Quality Bureau, and the State
Solid and Hazardous Waste Bureau in developing the requirements for installation and
operation of the evaporation ponds. A proposed ordinance that describes how these ponds
would be constructed, operated, and permitted was drafted by the Health Department. Due
to the high cost of constructing evaporation ponds, this option was not utilized by any
businesses in Missoula County. The following draft ordinance was however developed:
1.	Design: The pond must be designed by a licensed professional engineer.
The pond must be lined with a 60 mil high density polyethylene (HDP) liner.
This type of liner is thick enough to withstand the temperature extremes of the
Missoula area, is non-reactive with most hydrocarbons, and is resistant to
photodegradation. For smaller ponds the liner can be purchased as a single
sheet.
The business must submit design plans to the Missoula Health Department for
review and approval prior to construction of the system. The design plans
must include calculations for sizing the pond, taking into account monthly
waste water discharges, monthly average precipitation, and monthly
evaporation rates for the Missoula Valley.
Before the pond is operated, the disposal system including the installed liner
must be inspected and approved for use by the Health Department. The
design must include a berm so that no runoff can enter the pond. The pond
must also be fenced so that debris, people, and animals can not enter the pond.
2.	Allowed Discharges: Only wash water and snow melt off equipment is
allowed to enter the pond. The business must collect all other chemical waste
fluids such as oil, solvents, contaminated fuels, antifreeze, thinners, and other
hazardous waste fluids which could contaminate ground water if the pond
leaked.
3.	Pretreatment: The sand and oil interceptor tank specified by the City of
Missoula for shops connected to the sewer system must be installed between
the floor drains in the shop and the evaporation pond. A diagram of the
currently approved interceptor tank is shown in Figure 9. This kind of tank
has been installed in over 50 facilities connected to city sewer in Missoula.
The tank must be maintained so that no oil or solids pass through the tank to
the pond.
Sludge which builds up in the interceptor must be pumped and hauled to the
waste water treatment plant for dewatering. The sludge in the tank must be
analyzed per requirements of the treatment plant prior to pumping to assure
that it is not hazardous. If the testing shows that the sludge is hazardous, it
must be disposed of in accordance with Montana Hazardous Waste laws.
54

-------
4.	Documentation: The shop must maintain a permanent log book with
numbered pages, which documents routine inspection and maintenance of the
floor drain, interceptor tank and evaporation pond. This log book must be
available at all times during regular business hours for review by Missoula
Health Department, Missoula Sewage Treatment Plant and Montana Solid and
Hazardous Waste Bureau personnel.
5.	Permits: The pond system must be permitted by the Missoula City-County
Health Department. This permit will be conditional on proper operation of the
system, and may be revoked at any time if any conditions of the permit are
violated. The permit will be similar to permits currently issued by the
Missoula Health Department for individual sanitary sewer systems. The
permit will include an agreement to allow random inspection of the facility
during normal business hours, without prior notice. These inspections may be
conducted by employees of the Missoula City-County Health Department,
Missoula Waste Water Treatment Facility, Montana Solid and Hazardous
Waste Bureau, and EPA. The inspection may include the collection of samples
from the floor drain, interceptor, pond, or ground surface.
Since sludge from the interceptor tank will go to the Waste Water Treatment
Facility, the tank may have to be permitted by the Waste Water Treatment
Facility. A $100 annual permit fee is being considered. This permit fee will
help support the pre-treatment program at the Waste Water Treatment Facility.
6.	Additional Stipulations: If the pond capacity is reached and overflow is a
potential problem, the business must have excess waste water hauled to the
sewage treatment plant for disposal until the water level in the pond drops to a
safe operating level.
The use of an evaporation pond will only be allowed if sewer services are not
available and would not be allowed in well head sensitive areas. If at a later
date sewer services become available, the Health Department reserves the
authority to require that the use of the pond be discontinued, and that the floor
drains be connected to the sewer system.
11.8 Evapotranspiration Beds
This option was used at one Missoula business under a special agreement with the Health
Department. This business had an existing experimental sewer system constructed using a
lined evapotranspiration bed for treatment of sanitary sewage. The facility is located far
from public sewer in an area underlain by clay soils. When the system was originally
constructed, floor drains in the repair shop were not connected to the system. Instead, the
floor drains were routed to a 5X28 injection well.
55

-------
This evapotranspiration bed was installed by digging a pit in the clay. The bottom was lined
with a PVC liner, a drain field was installed on top of the liner, and the pit was filled with
fine sand and planted with native vegetation. The bed relies on capillary action, evaporation
and transpiration to wick waste water to the surface and evaporate it. Stand pipes for
monitoring the saturation level within the bed were installed when the system was built.
The Health Department worked with the business to allow them to connect the floor drains to
the evapotranspiration system on an experimental basis. The following stipulations were
established:
1.	A sand and oil interceptor that meets the standard requirements of the City of
Missoula must be installed in line between the floor drain and the disposal system.
The sand oil interceptor must be maintained so that no oil reaches the disposal bed.
Discharge of oil into the evapotranspiration bed may plug up the pores in the sand
and cause the system to fail.
2.	No hazardous or toxic chemicals may be disposed of in the floor drain,
interceptor, or evapotranspiration bed. All waste fluids such as solvents, paints,
thinners, and oils must be collected and properly disposed of off site. Disposal of
hazardous or toxic substances in the system may cause the system to fail.
3.	If the system fails (backs up to the surface), the floor drain must be disconnected,
and another alternative such as a holding tank, or closed loop recycling system must
be used instead.
4.	Water levels in monitoring wells which are already installed in the
evapotranspiration bed must be measured once a month for one year to see how the
system responds. Water level readings must be taken on approximately the same date
each month and recorded in a logbook. Measurements must be submitted to the
Health Department on a quarterly basis
5.	A water meter must be installed on the water supply line for the shop. The meter
must be installed in line, on a line that is separate from the shop bathroom. The
meter should be installed so that the quantity of water entering the evapotranspiration
system from the shop floor drain can be measured. A water meter reading must be
taken once a month on the same day as the water level readings are taken in the
evapotranspiration bed, and recorded in the same log book. Monthly meter readings
must also be reported quarterly to the Health Department.
6.	All statements and stipulations in this letter will become part of the existing sewer
permit that was issued by the Missoula City-County Health Department on April 13,
1976 (permit # 76-584). No new permits are required.
7.	The existing sewer permit and this agreement are legally bound to the property
and must be transferred to any subsequent owners.
56

-------
12.0 ALTERNATIVE DISPOSAL OPTIONS FOR OTHER WASTES
Along with developing alternative disposal options for waste water which was being disposed
of into Class V injection wells, the Health Department also reviewed existing business
practices for handling and disposing of other types of wastes. The following information was
obtained on current and alternative disposal options for local businesses:
12.1	Used oil
In Missoula, several businesses have purchased waste oil space heaters as an alternative to
off site disposal. Waste oil heaters specifically designed for burning used oil burn very
clean. In cold climates the heat supplied from the used oil makes this option very attractive
to automotive repair businesses. This practice is not being encouraged in Missoula due to
existing problems with air quality in the Missoula Valley during the winter.
Most of the businesses have established contracts with a local waste oil hauler. In the past,
several haulers would collect used oil for use as a dust suppressant on roads. Current (1994)
local policy does not allow the use of used motor oil for dust suppression. Missoula
currently has one EPA registered waste oil hauler who is collecting used oil for recycling.
The used oil is collected and hauled to Great Falls, Montana, where it is tested and processed
into boiler fuel. This same waste oil hauler is also starting to offer additional services to
automotive repair businesses. He offers a maintenance service for the sand and oil
interceptor tanks and will dispose of the used, oil soaked pillows for the tanks. These
pillows are also being sent to Great Falls, Montana, where they are incinerated.
12.2	Waste Thinner
Disposal of waste lacquer thinner and waste paint is a problem for most auto body shops.
Waste lacquer thinner is a listed hazardous waste under Montana and Federal hazardous
waste laws. Most of the larger body shops properly collect and dispose of their waste
thinner as required. Many of the smaller shops don't do this due to the high cost. They
often burn it, mix it with used oil, dump it on the ground, or place it in the garbage.
The automotive paint industry is currently developing less hazardous aqueous based paints.
Most body shop operators do not believe that these new paints do as good a job as the
traditional petroleum solvent based paints. This will hopefully change in the future.
Several body shops in Missoula have solved their waste disposal problem by purchasing a
waste thinner still which is designed to recover the thinner, while leaving a non-hazardous
waste behind. Typically, waste thinner contains a significant volume of paint. When this
mixture is placed in the still all the volatile thinner compounds are recovered, and all the
solids and paint pigments are left in the bottom of the still. During the demonstration project
the Health Department investigated one of these stills.
57

-------
solids and paint pigments are left in the bottom of the still. During the demonstration project
the Health Department investigated one of these stills.
The Department collected a sample of the still bottoms left behind after a run. In this case
the still was allowed to operate for 24 hours. After this amount of time, the still bottoms left
behind come out as a single rubbery disc. A piece of this disc was collected, and analyzed
for metals using the TCLP testing method. The results showed that no metals were detected
in the leachate from the waste. The detection limits were 10 to .02 mg/1 (ppm). This same
body shop also uses the still bottoms for undercoating vehicles. If the still is allowed to run
for a shorter time period, the still bottoms remain in a semi-liquid state. This material is
then mixed with undercoating tar and sprayed on the vehicles.
12.3	Parts Washer Fluids
Many businesses in Missoula have now established parts washer maintenance contracts with
hazardous waste disposal companies. These companies supply the parts washer and the
solvents. On a regular basis the company visits the shop, replaces the spent solvent, and
removes the solvent sludge. These contracts eliminate hazardous waste disposal problems for
the shop.
Currently there are several alternative products being developed for use in parts washers.
These products are safer to use, and are less of a threat to the environment. Several
companies are now marketing citric based solvents, and organic, non-petroleum based parts
cleaning fluids. During the demonstration project the Health Department collected
information on the products and services available to Missoula area businesses. This
information has been placed in a library, for access by interested businesses.
12.4	Sludge From Floor Drains and Interceptor Tanks
The single biggest disposal problem which the Health Department encountered during the
project was improper disposal of sludge from floor drains and sand and oil interceptor tanks.
In the past most businesses cleaned the sludge out of their floor drains and either put it in the
garbage or threw it on the ground.
During the demonstration project the Health Department worked with the local landfill
company, the WWTF, and the State to try and develop a long term solution to this problem.
The solution developed in Missoula for disposal of sludge from automotive related businesses
was to have the material pumped out of the floor drains or interceptor tanks and hauled to
the WWTF. At the WWTF the sludge is placed on drying beds where it is dewatered. The
bottom of the drying beds at the WWTF are lined with asphalt. A trench drain runs down
the middle of the bed, and drains back to the headworks of the plant. Up to 100 loads of
this sludge are placed in the drying beds and composite samples are taken after the material
has been dried. Once dried, the material is tested and then hauled to the landfill for final
disposal.
58

-------
The drying beds were chosen as an alternative disposal method for several reasons. First,
the Missoula landfill could not accept liquid wastes or wastes with a moisture content above
30%. Disposal at the drying beds allows for the material to be de-watered. Second, the
VOC content of the sludge is variable, but known to contain significant quantities of oils,
solvents, and fuels. The belief was that by allowing the sludge to sit in the drying beds for
several weeks or months, volatilization, bacterial degradation, and photodegradation would
reduce the level of contamination. The final reason for using the drying beds was that they
were already built. Developing a new disposal site was expected to take at least two years.
It was apparent from the start that there were two distinct types of sludge produced by
facilities; sludge from vehicle washing operations, and sludge from vehicle repair and
maintenance operations. The physical and chemical nature of these two types of sludge are
distinct, even though the same types of contaminants may be found in either one. Car
washing sludge generally contains more sand and silt and less oil, grease and other
contaminants. Another distinction is that facilities which wash vehicles generate much higher
volumes of sludge. The WWTF has set aside one drying bed for sludge from floor drains
and interceptor tanks at automotive repair facilities, and two beds for sludge from washing
facilities.
Testing of the sludge was completed during the project to determine if the process was
acceptable. Two important tests were completed on sludge at the WWTF. First, the Health
Department made arrangements with the WWTF and a local automotive repair facility to
determine what levels of treatment were achieved by allowing sludge to dry out and sit in the
drying beds. A pumper was hired to pump sludge out of the shop floor drains, and haul it to
the WWTF drying beds. Immediately after the load was dumped, the Health Department
collected a composite sample of the material for VOC, TPH, and ethylene glycol analysis.
The composite sample was collected from ten spots within the sludge. Each spot was
marked with a pin flag so that it could be revisited at a later date. After 45 days, a second
composite sample was collected from as close to the same sample spots as possible, using the
pin flags to locate previous sampling points. The results from these two samples are
included in Appendix M.
Significant decreases were noted for all VOCs detected in the original sample. Ethylene
glycol decreased from 150 mg/1 to 20 mg/1. The TPH analysis, however, indicated that the
levels went from 3,000 mg/1 to 40.000 mg/1. This is probably due to variability in the
samples. The Health Department is confident that the decrease in VOCs is real, and can be
counted on in the future.
The second important test was completed by the WWTF. They mixed sludge from carwash
pumpings, and collected a composite sample. The approach was to test the material and then
haul it to the landfill for disposal. The landfill agreed to this if the sample was analyzed
using the TCLP testing method. The testing was completed and the sludge passed the TCLP
test. The results of this analysis are also included in Appendix M.
59

-------
13.0 DEVELOPMENT OF LOCAL REGULATIONS
Development of local regulations to control the use of Class V injection wells in the City of
Missoula and the County of Missoula was started during the project, and will be completed
with adoption of a new Missoula City-County Health Code and a new Aquifer Protection
Ordinance. Regulation of 5X28 injection wells will be accomplished through the following
language that is in the Health Code:
Regulation 1: Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Systems
I. General.
(A) Prohibited activities and exceptions
(5) Unless an Underground Injection Control (UIC) permit is obtained from
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, it shall be unlawful for any person
to install or use any sump, dry well, or septic system for disposal of waste
fluids from the washing, servicing, maintenance, or storage of any vehicle,
equipment or components that are associated with an internal combustion
engine.
The Health Code will apply throughout Missoula County and will effectively limit the
installation and operation of 5X28 injection wells without an EPA permit. In addition the
new Health Code will also limit the installation of 5W20 injection wells by not allowing the
installation or replacement of an onsite disposal system if public sewer is available. This is
accomplished through the following language that is also included in the new Health Code:
Regulation 1: Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Systems
I. General.
(C) Connection to public system. All new and replacement sewage disposal
facilities shall be in compliance with the Uniform Plumbing Code, Section
1101, requiring connection to publicly owned sewage treatment plants. Any
structure that generates sewage shall not be issued a permit to install or replace
a subsurface wastewater disposal system when public sewer abuts the property,
and is within 200 feet of the structure served or is within 200 feet of any part
of the subsurface disposal system. Existing cesspool or septic tank systems
may remain in service until ordered disconnected by the Health Board, or until
the system fails. A system shall be deemed to be a failed system whenever a
subsurface treatment and disposal system fails to accept waste at the rate of
application or whenever a system violates section 1(A) of this regulation. This
section (C) shall not apply when the public entity owning the public system
refuses to allow connection.
60

-------
The Health Department plans on exploring the option of issuing permits for injection wells at
the local level in the future. The Health Code will probably be adopted in the Summer of
1994.
The draft Aquifer Protection Ordinance for the City of Missoula will also limit the use of
Class V injection wells. This ordinance (included in Appendix E) will be applicable to all
lands within the City limits, and within 5 miles of the City limits that are also within the
Water Quality District. The following language is included in the current draft of the
Aquifer Protection Ordinance:
Section 13.26.040 Pollution Prevention Requirements
(H) After the effective date of this Ordinance, no person shall construct or
operate an industrial process injection well at a new or existing facility unless
said person obtains an Underground Injection Control (UIC) permit from the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), or the Department. A person
may be granted a permit from the Department or EPA if the owner, operator
or controller demonstrates to the Department of EPA that the process
wastewater does not contain a Regulated Substance at a concentration equal to
or above its EPA primary maximum contaminant level for drinking water,
EPA health advisory level, or the standard proposed in the Montana Numeric
Water Quality Standards (Circular WQB-7), whichever is lower, and the
potential for water contamination is reduced by such other measures as the
Department may require.
61

-------
14.0 REFERENCES
Clark, K.W., 1986. Interactions Between The Clark Fork River And The Missoula
Aquifer, Missoula County, Montana. M.S. Thesis, Univ. of Montana Dept. of Geol.
Council, L.C., and Fryberger, J.S., 1987. An Overview Of Class V Injection Wells. In
UIC Inspector Training Manual, Class V Addendum. (Contact UIC program for availability)
McMurtrey, R.G., Konizeksi, R.L., and Brietkrietz, A., 1965. Geology And Ground-
Water Resources Of The Missoula Basin, Montana. Mont. Bureau of Mines and Geol., Bull.
47.
Miller, R.D., 1990. A Single Layer Transient Flow Model Of The Missoula Aquifer. M.S.
Thesis, Univ. of Montana Dept. of Geol.
Miller, R.D., 1990. Groundwater Flow Path Modeling, Mountain Water Company Wells
Missoula, Montana. Unpublished report to Mountain Water Company, Missoula Montana.
Missoula City-County Health Dept., 1987. Sole Source Aquifer Petition For The Missoula
Valley Aquifer. MCCHD, Missoula Mont.
Missoula City-County Health Dept., 1990. An Investigation Of The Volatile Organic
Content Of Sludges, Soils, And Liquids Entering The Missoula Aquifer From Selected
Sources. MCCHD, Missoula, Mont.
Pottinger, M.H., 1988. The Source, Fate And Movement Of Herbicides In An Unconfined
Sand And Gravel Aquifer In Missoula, Montana. M.S. Thesis, Univ. of Montana Dept. of
Geol.
Woessner, W.W. and K.L. Wogsland, 1987. Study Of The Effects Of Storm Water
Injection By Class V Wells On A Potable Water System. M.S. Thesis, Univ. of Montana
Dept. of Geol.
Woessner, W.W., 1988. Missoula Valley Aquifer Study: Hydrogeology of the Eastern
Portion of the Missoula Aquifer, Missoula County, Montana. Univ. of Montana Dept. of
Geol.
62

-------
APPENDIX A
AN INVESTIGATION OF THE
VOLATILE ORGANIC CONTENT
OF SLUDGES, SOILS AND LIQUIDS
ENTERING THE MISSOULA AQUIFER
FROM SELECTED SOURCES
PREPARED BY
THE MISSOULA CITY-COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION
JULY 27, 1990
CONTRIBUTORS:
TOM BARGER
ALAN ENGLISH

-------
AN INVESTIGATION OF THE
VOLATILE ORGANIC CONTENT
OF SLUDGES, SOILS AND LIQUIDS
ENTERING THE MISSOULA AQUIFER
FROM SELECTED SOURCES
I. INTRODUCTION
During late April and early May of 1990 the Missoula City-County
Health Department (MCCHD) collected 25 samples to be analyzed for
volatile organic compounds (VOC's). The samples were collected
from sites that had been identified as probable sources of VOC
contamination during phase I of Missoula's wellhead ' protection
program. This project was funded by the Mountain Water Company
(MWC), Montana Water Quality Bureau (MWQB), and the Missoula City
County Health Department (MCCHD).
II. PURPOSE
The objective of this project was to better characterize effluent
discharged through Class V injection wells by businesses designated
as probable sources of VOC contamination. Sites that showed
apparent surface contamination were also sampled. Samples were
collected to determine the levels of VOC's in sludges at.the bottom
of injection wells, and -to determine VOC levels for sites that
showed surface contamination. An attempt was made to sample at the
bottom of the injection well, but in many cases the injection well
was buried, and no access was available. In these cases sludge was
sampled from the closest point to the actual injection well. This
was usually a sediment trap in line before the injection well.
The information from this round of sampling has provided the MCCHD
with evidence to verify sources of contamination in order to
recommend corrective measures for the clean up of individual sites.
In addition the information has allowed the department to
characterize the chemical make up of the sludges that accumulate
in the injection wells, and the separators that are in line before
the injection well. Due to the limited number of samples taken,
only sumps that received waste from .automotive repair facilities
have been well characterized. Sumps that receive waste from car
washes are poorly characterized due to the fact that only three
samples were collected from two carwashes and one of those was from
a storm drain in the driveway, that received waste from a car wash.
1

-------
III. SAMPLING SITES
Sampling sites were selected by finding businesses that were
defined as being "probable" sources of contamination in the Phase
I investigation, and having accessibility for sample collection.
A total of 25 samples were collected from 20 sites. Of these 25
samples, 16 were sludge samples, 2 were liquid samples, 5 were soil
samples, and 2 were samples of still bottom sludge from a dry
cleaner.
Of the 16 sludge samples, 11 were "from automotive repair
facilities, 3 were from car washes, 1 was from a storm drain that
was used by a mobil carpet cleaner, and 1 was from a city storm
drain in a residential area. The two liquid samples were collected
from automotive repair facilities, and were collected along with
sludge samples. Of the 5 soil samples, 1 was from an automotive
repair facility, two were from dry cleaners, 1 was from a dental
tool manufacturing shop, and 1 was from a vacant lot that had been
used as an illegal dumping site for unidentified sludges, and
liquids. Table 1 is a key listing all of the sites sampled.
IV. SAMPLING PROCEDURE
The recovery of sludge from the sumps posed many sampling problems.
A stainless steel sludge core sampler was used on some of the
sites. The sludge sampler head was equipped with a butterfly valve
so that the sludge would remain in the sampler while it was pulled
up to the surface. The sludge sampler worked well in sumps that
had a thick buildup of sludge with very little gravel or grit. In
cases where the sump bottom had only a thin layer of sludge, and/
or there was gravel or cobbles present, the sludge sampler aid not
work well. In these cases the butterfly valve would not properly
close, and the sample would fall out while being lifted to the
surface.
To overcome this problem, a "western spoon" was used to recover
the sludge from the bottom of the sump. The western spoon
consisted of an 8 foot long steel handle with a 4 inch scoop on the
end. This tool was designed to clean out the bottom of power pole
holes before installing the pole. The western spoon worked very
well, and was much easier to decontaminate. The residential storm
drain (WHP 204) and the still bottom sludge samples (WHP 143W A&B)
were sampled using a disposable plastic hand held scoop.
The liquid samples were also collected using the sludge sampler,
or the western spoon. The soil samples were obtained using a soil
core sampler with an auger bit. A core was dug to approximately
10 inches, and then a disposable plastic scoop was used to obtain
a sample from the bottom of the hole.
•>

-------
The sludge samples were obtained by raking a composite of three
to five arabs from different corners of the sump. Most of The
sumps had standing water in them, so that the bottom vas net
visible. The sludge was obtained from 6 to 12 inches down, as aucr.
as possible. Most of the soil samples except one from the vacant
lot (WHP-203), and WHP-003 were obtained by taking a composite cf
three or four cores.
Each sample was immediately placed in a glass jar with an air tight
teflon seal, labeled, and placed in a cooler for transport to the
lab. Upon returning to the MCCHD lab., the samples were all sealed
with chain of custody seals. Samples were then refrigerated until
they were shipped to the Montana Water Quality Bureau chemistry lab
in Helena in a cooler packed with ice.
Between samples the sampling tools were decontaminated. The
samplers were first washed with warm soapy water, then triple
rinsed. The equipment was first rinsed three times with tap water,
then three times with pesticide grade acetone, and finally three
times with deionized water. The samplers were then wrapped in
aluminum foil with the shiny side out, ana stored until the next
sample was taken.
IV. ANALYSIS and RESULTS
Samples were shipped to the Montana Water Quality Bureau Chemistry
Lab in Helena for analysis. Sludge samples were originally going
to be sampled for purgeable halocarbons using EPA standard method
3010, and for purgeable aromatics using EPA standard method 8020.
The chemistry lab ran into some technical problems running these
tests due to the high VOC levels and the method was changed to EPA
standard method 524.2 (regulated and unregulated VOC's by GC/MS).
Note that the units and detection limits for the concentrations are
three orders of magnitude greater in the sludge and soil samples
verses the water samples. Of 56 VOC's tested for, thirty of them
were detected in one or more of the sample sites.
Results for each individual site are depicted graphically in
appendix A. The graphs are separated into chlorinated compounds,
gasoline components, and brominated compounds. The left side of
the graphs shows the common solvents tested for, while the right
side of the graph shows the common gasoline components detected in
the samples (with the exception of naphthalene). Copies of the
actual VOC lab analysis reports are identified as appendix B (same
data as appendix A with different format). A copy of the site map
showing the sampling site location, and a copy of the "sludge
sampling data sheet" are identified as appendix C. Due to possible
litigation, appendix C, which identifies the establishments, is
confidential. Appendices B and C are included only in copies
supplied to the funding agencies.
3

-------
Table 2 depicts the average VOC levels found in sludges from 11
automotive repair facilities. One of the 12 automotive repair
facilities is excluded from Table 2 because it was a soil sample
(WHP 3). Table 3 shows the frequency of detection for the listed
VOC's in the same 11 sludge samples.
Trip blanks were included with the samples during transport, and
run along with the samples (WHP 200&202). One duplicate sample was
taken of the distiller sludge (WHP 143W B) . In addition an
equipment blank was collected and—analyzed by - running distilled
water over and through the samplers after cleaning (WHP 201). One
of the sites sampled was a random city street sump in an area where
we expected to find very little if any evidence of VOC
contamination (WHP 203). This site did show .9 micrograms/gram of
perchloroethylene.
Of the 20 sites sampled, 12 of them were automotive repair and
maintenance businesses. Of these 12 businesses, 11 of them showed
perchloroethylene at some level. Perchloroethylene levels for
these businesses ranged from below detection to 168
micrograms/gram. The one automotive business which did not show
any detectable perchloroethylene was an auto detailing shop that
did no engine repair. This shop did clean engines using a
petroleum distillate product called "Brawn Concentrate". They also
used small amounts of "Duracryl Lacquer Thinner" that contains
toluene. No toluene was found in their sample but a small amount
(1.1 micrograms /gram) of chlorotoluene was detected. All other
automotive shops showed detectable levels of perchloroethylene in
their sample.
Tables 2 and 3 characterize the types and concentrations of VOC's
that are typically found in auto repair facility sump and injection
well sludges. Although many of the same VOC's were found in
products used at the businesses some of the shops had higher levels
indicating a higher volume of business or poor disposal and
recycling practices. Perchloroethylene and chlorotoluene were the
most common halogenated compounds found in the sludge samples.
Both of these are ingredients in carburetor cleaners and cleaning
solvents. In addition perchloroethylene is a common solvent used
in the dry cleaning business. 1 Benzene, toluene, and xylene
compounds were found in almost all of the samples. These compounds
are common gasoline components and often referred to as BTX.
Naphthalene was also found in 100% of the automotive business
samples.
Two carwash businesses were sampled. At one of the carwashes (WHP-
138) a 5D2 storm drain, and two sediment traps were sampled. One
of these businesses showed no detectable levels of halogenated
VOC's. The other carwash showed 1.6 micrograms/gram of
chlorotoluene in it's sump wastes sampled and .9 micrograms/gram
perchloroethylene, 1.4 micrograms/gram dichlorobenzene and .2
4

-------
micrograms/gram trichloroethvlene in a 5D2 in the driveway of tr.e
carwash that was sampled.
Each site that was sampled is identified below with 2 sr.crt
statement about the results of the sample(s) collected. It was
hoped that the samples could be taken at the point of injection but
in many instances we had to sample from some form of preliminary
treatment device. Consequently one should be careful in
interpreting the raw data and be sure to note what was sampled.
The sites are categorized into automotive, dry cleaners, carwashes,
and miscellaneous.
AUTOMOTIVE BUSINESSES
WHP-0 0 3
WHP-003 is an engine rebuilding facility. A soil sample was
collected at this site, in an area of stained soil where drums of
hot tank waste and solvents had been stored. The soil sample was
collected from a single core hole dug to approximately 8 inches.
Only two compounds were detected in the sample. Perchloroethylene
was detected at 1 micrograms/gram and toluene was detected at .6
micrograms/gram. This indicates that the stained soil is from
storage problems rather than waste being dumped onto the ground.
The sump at this business was not accessible for testing. This
business is on the State superfund list due to possible heavy metal
contamination in and below the sump, from hot tank wastes.
WHP-02 3
WHP-023 is a governmental vehicle repair facility. This was the
first site sampled. Two samples were collected from the bottom of
an injection well connected to the shop floor drains. During the
first attempt the sludge core sampler was used. The sampler didn't
work well due to the amount of sand and gravel in the sump, which
caused the butterfly valve to stay open. The first sample was
approximately half water, and half sludge. The lab only analyzed
the liguid fraction in this sample. The liquid fraction showed 8.3
micrograms/liter perchloroethylene. For the second sample the
western spoon was used, and it worked very well. This sludge
showed levels of 1.1.1-trichloroethane at 2.3 micrograms/gram.
Xylene was the most prevalent compound found in both of the samples
with approximately 380 micrograms/gram (ppm) for the sludge and
112.4 micrograms/liter (ppb) for the liquid.
5

-------
WHP-02 4
WHP-024 is a governmental vehicle repair facility, and sign shop.
This sample was collected from a parking lot sump that was
connected to the floor drains in the shop. The results showed low
levels of VOC's. Perchloroethylene and 2-chlorotoluene were both
detected at low levels. Both compounds were detected at 1.2
micrograms/gram. Gasoline components were present at relatively
low levels, with one spike of p-isopropyltoluene at 35.3
micrograms/gram.
WHP-055
WHP-055 is a commercial vehicle detailing and body shop. No major
or minor repairs are conducted, however engine aegreasing is
commonly done at the facility. This sample was collected from a
sediment trap inside the shop. The actual injection well was
located outside, and was not accessible. A mild septic odor was
noted during sample collection. This sample was the only one that
did not show a detectable level of perchloroethylene. One
halogenated VOC was detected, 2-chlorotoluene at 1.1
micrograms/gram. Ten non-halogenated compounds, representing
gasoline components were detected ranging from 1.7 micrograms/gram
to 31.7^ micrograms/gram.
WHP-058
WHP-058 is a commercial towing business that repairs fleet tow
trucks. This sample was collected from a settling basin in front
of a holding tank or injection well. At the time of sampling there
were six empty oil pans noted next to the drain and several inches
of oil was noted floating on top of the water in the settling
basin. Levels of halogenated VOC's were 4.3 micrograms/gram for
perchloroethylene, 12.5 micrograms/gram for 2-chlorotoluene, 3.2
micrograms/gram for 4-chlorotoluene and 0.6 micrograms/gram for
1,2-dichlorobenzene. Again, gasoline components (BTX) were
detected in the ten to hundred micrograms/gram range.
WHP-0 64
WHP-064 is a commercial transmission repair facility. This sample
site is a 5D2 (parking lot storm sump) located behind the business.
During the initial Phase I investigation the investigator stated
that used solvent was poured into this sump. The sample was taken
from the bottom of the sump. Oil was noted floating on the top of
the water in this sump at the time of sampling, and free grease,
and trash were also visible. Levels of halogenated VOC's detected
were 2.9 micrograms/gram for perchloroethylene, .4 micrograms/gram
6

-------
for 1,4-aichlorobenzene, 4.1 micrograms/gram for 2-chlorctcluene,
ana 1.2 micrograms/gram for 4-ciilorotoluene. BTX constituents were
noted from one to 28.9 micrograms/gram.
WHP-07 5
WHP-075 is a tire shop that also does minor vehicle maintenance
such as tune ups and brake work. This sample was collected from
a very small sediment trap located in the basement of the business.
The sludge in the sediment trap had a strong septic odor when
sampled. The levels found in the sample were the second highest
levels found of all of the automotive sites sampled.
Perchloroethylene was detected at 163 micrograms/gram and non-
halogenated compounds ranged as high as 228 micrograms/gram.
WHP-083
WHP-083 is a commercial vehicle sales and service facility. This
sample was collected from an injection well that was approximately
16 feet deep. The injection well consists of a six ring seepage
pit, with a 300 gallon settling tank in line before•the seepage
pit. This site had the highest levels of any site sampled. Levels
of halogenated VOC's were in the hundreds of parts per million
range as were the levels of BTX (gasoline constituents).
Fortunately this site has recently been connected to city sewer.
Education of this business and others should be emphasised to
reduce the levels of VOC's in the pretreatment device to minimize
the levels found in the sludge that will need to be- disposed of in
a landfill or hazardous waste disposal site.
WHP-096
WHP-096 is a commercial automotive repair facility. This sample
was collected from a cesspool which received wastes from the floor
drain in the shop as well as toilet wastes. Halogenated solvents
were present, with 2-chlorotoluene being the most prevalent at 151
micrograms/gram.	Perchloroethylene was noted at 0.6
micrograms/gram. Results also showed high levels of gasoline
constituents and breakdown products.
WHP-097
WHP-097 is a commercial vehicle repair facility. This sample was
a composite collected from two different separator sumps in front
of an injection well. A large amount of oil (transmission fluid)
had been dispos'ed of and was floating in the separator sumps. In
addition antifreeze was also present in the sump. Six different
halogenated compounds were detected including perchloroethylene at
7

-------
14.7 micrograms/gram. Only two of fifteen non-halogenated
compounds listed in Tables 2 and 3 were absent in the sample.
WHP-12 4
WHP-124 is an automotive repair facility associated with a retail
sales business. These samples were collected from a separator tank
in front of an assumed injection well. Both a liquid and a sludge
sample were collected from this site. Later dye testing of this
separator showed it to be connected, to city sewer. The results of
this sample showed it to contain a similar profile of constituents
found in the majority of automotive sites. VOC levels ranged from
.6 micrograms/gram of 1,2,4 trichlorobenzene to 2 0.5
micrograms/gram of 1,2,4 trimethylbenzene in the sludge sample.
Similar compounds were found in the liquid sample at levels 100 to.
1000 times less.
WHP-141
WHP-141 is a commercial vehicle maintenance facility that does
minor repairs. This business has a single bay car wash. The
injection well is located in the car wash bay, and serves as a sump
for the car wash. This sump is also connected to the floor drains
in the shop. The sample was taken directly from the injection
well. On the day of sampling the car wash was being heavily used,
and had just been used before sampling. The levels of VOC's noted
were relatively low being similar to the levels found in other
carwash sumps.	Perchloroethylene was detected at .9
micrograms/gram , 2-chlorotoluene at 1.1 micrograms/gram and 1,2-
dichlorobenzene at 1 micrograms/gram. This could be due to the
dilution caused by the carwash waste washing the contaminants into
the vadose zone.
CARWASHES
WHP-0 61
WHP-061 is a commercial self-serve carwash. This sample was
collected from a sump in front of the injection well. The
collection point also had a previous settling tank in front of it.
Sludge from the car wash was noted adjacent to the facility.
During sample collection an individual was noted using engine
degreasing foam in the carwash. Levels in this sample were low for
all VOC's tested. 2-chlorotoluene was the only halogenated
compound detected at 2 micrograms/gram and the highest non-
halogenated compound was 1,2,4, trimethylbenzene at 6.8
micrograms/gram.
o

-------
WHP-138
WHP-138 is also a commercial self-serve carwasn. Two samples were
collected from this business. One sample was collected from a 5G2
(driveway sump) in the drive up area, and another sample was a
composite sample from the two sediment traps in line before the
injection wells.
The sample from the driveup area showed low levels of chlorinated
hydrocarbons (.9 . micrograms/gram perchloroethylene, 1.4
micrograms/gram dichlorobenzene and 0.2 micrograms/gram
trichloroethylene). The sludge from the separators that are
connected to the car wash drains only had 1.6 micrograms/gram
chlorotoluene and no detectable level of perchloroethylene. The
low level of halogenated VOC's in the car wash sumps is probably
the result of persons using solvents to improve engine cleaning at
the carwash. This business is very near a well that has shown high
levels of perchloroethylene.
DRYCLEANERS
WHP-011
WHP-011 is a commercial drycleaner and laundromat. Final disposal
of perchloroethylene wastes was not documented at this business
during the Phase I investigation. Poor storage practices were
documented, where empty perchloroethylene barrels Were documented
upside down in the alley, and stained soil and pavement was noted.
We consequently decided to sample the soil near the
perchloroethylene barrel and under the garbage hopper in back,
where some unidentified sludge was noticed. Results showed the
soil to contain 5.8 micrograms/gram perchloroethylene. No other
VOC was detected at this site.
WHP-143
WHP-14 3 is also a commercial drycleaner and laundromat. During a
preliminary survey by the consulting firm Merideth Boli & Ass., a
large amount of stained soil and spillage from barrels was
documented on the South side of the building. These barrels and
soil stains were also noted during the Phase I investigation by
this department. Final disposition of still bottom sludge
generated during the distillation process could not be documented
at that time.
9

-------
When samples were collected the barrels had been removed and the
soil covered with clean gravel. This site was sampled and found
to contain 35.3 micrograms/gram of perchloroethylene, and lower
levels of non-halogenated hydrocarbons. What appeared to be still
bottom sludge from the distillation operation was noticed on the
West side of the building during sampling. This material was also
sampled and found to contain >12,622 micrograms/gram (1.26%) of
perchloroethylene. A duplicate sample was also collected, and
found to contain >7638 micrograms/gram of perchloroethylene.
Most of the still bottom sludge has since been removed and disposed
of in an unknown manor. This site has been referred to the State
Dept. of Health & Environmental Sciences (DHES) for enforcement
action. The business has been notified by DHES, and will be
required to clean up the site and practice proper disposal.
MISCELLANEOUS
WHP-033
WHP-033 is a mobile carpet and furniture cleaning business. This
business uses a 5D2 storm drain near the office to dispose of waste
water from there vehicle after returning from a job. The sludge
sample was collected from the bottom of the 5D2 (parking lot sump) .
A very strong septic odor was noticed during sampling. Toluene was
found at 9.7 micrograms/gram and p-isopropyltoluene at 4.4
micrograms/gram.
WHP—0 62
WHP-062 is a dental tool manufacturing plant. A soil sample was
taken on the West side of this business in an area that was heavily
stained with an oily substance. This sample had .7 micrograms/gram
of toluene. The site also had a distinctive odor that was the same
as the odor inside the manufacturing facility. This ' business
manufactures stainless steel dental tools. No other VOC's were
found at the site.
WHP-2 0 3
WHP-203 is a vacant property located near WHP-062. This site was
noticed while sampling at WHP-062, and is located across the street
to the East. The site is an empty lot along a railroad right of
way. The site appears to have been used throughout the years as
a disposal site for used oils and/or solvents. Dirt, debris, and
used motor oil were all noted at the site. Of special interest
were several piles of sludge that appeared to contain high
10

-------
concentrations of metal filings, and had the sane cdcr as the WHP-
062 site. A soil core sample was taken from below one o: t
sludge piles, and it showed only toluene at 2 aicrograms/gram. Nc
other VOC's were detected. The location, odor, appearance, and
sample results all suggest that this sludge came from the dental
tool manufacturing facility. It is possible that the current cr
former occupants of WHP-062 is responsible. This however is
unproven. The Health Department is planning to collect another
sample and have it analyzed for metals. The department believes
that this site may require prompt cleanup.
WHP-2 0 4
WHP-204 is a storm drain in a residential area. This site was
sampled to get an indication of the background levels of VOC's in
non-commercial areas. The sample was collected by hand using a
disposable plastic scoop. The results showed .9 micrograms/gran
of perchloroethylene. No other VOC's were detected. Cross
contamination can be ruled out since the disposable scoop was used.
Contamination in the lab however can't be ruled out. With levels
in the ppm range however, it is assumed that the data is valid.
VI. CONCLUSIONS
CHLORINATED HYDROCARBONS
The presence of perchloroethylene (PERC) in wells in the Missoula
Valley Aquifer created the impetus for investigation of disposal
practices and sampling of class V injection wells. Although PERC
was not readily identified during the phase I investigations, the
sampling showed it to be common in the waste streams of these
businesses. It's use in carburetor cleaner and other cleaning
solvents is probably a main source of PERC contamination in the
aquifers.
Other halogenated VOC's that were found are also probably coming
from solvent and cleaning products. The department is in the
process of identifying the products that contain the VOC's most
often detected. Upon identification of the products the
information will be assimilated into an education program for the
businesses.
The most common halogenated solvents found in sludges from
automotive repair facilities were perchloroethylene, 1,4-
dichlorobenzene, 2-chlorotoluene, and 1,2-dichlorobenzene. These
are all primary or secondary components found in solvent products.
Of these solvents perchloroethylene is the most prevalent solvent
found in the Missoula Valley aquifer. Similar solvents are seen
11

-------
in the sludges from carwash sumps, but at much lower
concentrations. This is most likely due to dilution from the large
amount of water that moves through the carwash sumps. The relative
loading from carwashes compared to repair facilities is unknown at
this time.
Groundwater samples have shown that perchloroethylene is much more
common in the aquifer than the other VOC's tested even though it's
not the only chlorinated solvent that is disposed of in 5X28
(automotive repair facility) sumps. There are probably several
reasons for this_.„ First, even though the average concentration of
PERC in automotive sumps is lower then the average concentration
of some of the other solvents, it is the most frequently detected
chlorinated solvent in 5X28 injection well sludges (see tables
2&3). The relative loading of the solvents is unknown, but it may
be that loading of PERC is higher than for the other solvents.
Second, PERC is used in much greater quantities in the drycleaning
industry, and in the past large amounts of free product may have
been introduced into the Missoula Valley aquifer. Finally, the
relative half lives and stabilities of the various chlorinated
solvents in the aquifer is poorly understood at this time. The
other chlorinated compounds may not be as prevalent in the aquifer
due to chemical breakdown in the vadose zone and in the aquifer.
NAPHTHALENE
Naphthalene was also detected in all of the automotive repair
facility sludge samples. This compound is common both in solvents
that do, and don't contain chlorinated compounds. It is a major
component in many industrial solvents such as Valvoline "Cam Carb
CL 5GL", which also contains PERC and other chlorinated
hydrocarbons. Chevron "325 solvent", which doesn't contain
chlorinated hydrocarbons, and common mineral spirits both contain
naphthalene.
GASOLINE
By far the most common VOC's found in the sludge samples were
common gasoline components. 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene, 1,3,5-
trimethylbenzene, toluene, p-isopropyltoluene, p,m-xylene, and o-
xylene were detected in all of the automotive repair facility
sludge samples (see table 3). 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene was present
in the highest concentrations in these same samples (see table 2).
Gasoline components were also found in one of the soil samples
(WHP-143S). The gasoline components consist of various forms of
benzene, toluene,' and xylene compounds. The actual compounds of
benzene, toluene, and xylene vary depending on the brands and types
of gasoline analyzed, however compounds of all three are always
present. Because of the presence of these three compounds in
various proportions in all gasolines, they are typically referred
to as "BTX".
12

-------
RECOMMENDATIONS
Although the EPA has issued orders that for the most par- requires
-he elimination of Class 5X28 (automotive repair) injection wells
in the greater Missoula urban area, the alternatives suggested by
EPA for proper disposal of the wastes from these automotive repair
facilities are in many cases not available to the businesses.
These alternatives include connection to city sewer, installation
of a holding tank, and operation of a dry shop. In addition a
policy for proper abandonment of the 5X28 injection wells was not
considered. The MCCHD is currently looking into solutions to these
problems.
Abandonment of the injection wells and the new disposal practices
will generate new waste streams. These new waste streams consist
of contaminated sludges from the abandoned 5X28's, and the new
sand/oil interceptors that are required for connection to the
Missoula municipal sewer. In addition contaminated liquid effluent
and contaminated oil absorbent pillows will have to be disposed of.
The liquid effluent can go into the city sewer via a direct
connection, but at this time the use of a holding tank may not be
a viable option. The Health Department is proposing to take more
samples of these waste streams and have them analyzed both directly
and using the new EPA Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure
test (TCLP) to help determine if any of these wastes will have to
be disposed of as hazardous wastes. Because of this possibility
it is important that the generators be educated in proper disposal
practices
Finally, only a small percentage of the businesses that, use these
sumps have been notified by EPA to discontinue use of their sumps.
The Missoula City-County Health Department is proposing to expand
the inventory and inspection of these 5X28 injection wells to
include the entire greater Missoula urban area. The MCCHD is
planning to work with the EPA in seeing that all 5X28 injection
wells are identified, generators of waste are educated in
alternatives for disposal and providing local inspection services
for injection well closure.
This department is working with the EPA Region VIII office, the
State Dept. of Health and Environmental Sciences, the City of
Missoula , local business owners, and private waste disposal
companies in developing alternative disposal methods for the waste
streams created by automotive repair facilities. In addition the
Health Department Is concerned, with, the use of other injection
wells, such as 5W20 injection wells, which are used for non-
automotive industrial wastes. The Health Department is proposing
to inventory, inspect, and characterize the use of these injection
wells, to determine their impact on the Missoula aquifer. The use
of 5D2 injection wells, which are storm drains designed to dispose
of urban runoff are also of concern in the Missoula aquifer, and
should also be looked at.
13

-------
i AB1 [-
.1
r.A l'LG< >KY
At 11 i iMO 1 I VI.
AUTOMOTIVE
AUTnUPirVf:
A11"( i »M< > T 1 VI-
ADIOMOTLVK
Aini'MDl I VL
Al.11 l.)M<) I I vp;
AUTOMOTTVE
AuioMor rvE
Alll'OMnT I vt
AUTOMOT I Vf"
AllIUMIII 1 VF
All I	rvf-
AllTDMi >T "I VE
OARWASH
OARWASH
CARWASH
DRY C;| EANER
DRV GLEANER
DRY OLt.ANEP
MISCELANFnl IS
MlSCELANFOUS
MIS(':EL.ANE<>US
M7 SUEL ANEOUf.
Mi sen ANtOIIV,
HI IS [MLS
Ci 'DE
wnpocn
WHP02o
WI-IP02"
wHPf i ;?¦-!
wi-ipo'.v.-,
WHPO'/.: :
WHPi 1(
WHP075
WHPO:J.\'
WHPI
lOHPO'j.'
WHP] ',><+
WHP[24
WHPI4]
WHPO-l
WHPLL*:7:
WHP 1 J,;':
whp i .:i
WHP] 4.-;
WHP ] n ."i
WHPO I 1.
WHPov,."
whpo'-.;.'
wHpr.'o'*
WHP'.VDO
SAM PI K
TYPE
Si O 1.
WA TER
SI UDGE
SI. UDGF
SL 111'OK
M.ODGfc"
SLl IDIjF!
SLUDGH
SLUDGE
si hdge
si upor
WATER
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
SI ILL
son.
S M L L
SLUDGE
SI. 11DGE
SLl IDGE
SOT!.
SLUDGE

-------
TABLE 2
AVERAGE V.O.C. VALUES AT 11 AUTOMOTIVE SITES
200
150 -
<
DC
O
tr
ID
£L
cn
<
tr
o
O
QC
U
100
50
121 9
64.1
49 8
	43 8-
12.41 I
121.91.3 n o io.7o irnrn
TTT^brTTVY
21 I
33 96 6
5 4
12 7
ft
31.7
0 7
r-
3 4 5 6 7 B 0 10 11 12 13 14 15 .16 17 18 1nn6fcN/ENE
5
2 CllLOHOIUl ULNfc
6
icuLomouJEnE
7
i 3[)iciunnoBUJ/t"Nf:
e
I 2 DlCMl OROQf ri?l Nl
9
2 DlCl 11 onO£ II i£h
10
DlCi It OnOME If lAf JL
11
\ \ diouonoe imame
\2
i 2 Diem nnopnoPAME
13
I 2 3 THICMl OUOOLN/E
1 4
t 2 4 inicm oiioernzE
15
non hiJoyenaetJ

QENZEHE
to
E IHY1 REN/1 NE
1 7
101 UENE
IU
p rn XYl ENE
19
u XYl EliE
20
n liUTYl BmztnE
2»
ISOpnOPYl 0EN71 NE
22
pISOPROPYt 101 IJFIJL
23
fJAPlllAlENE
24
nPnOPYI BEN/ENE
25
bBUTYl BEN7EHE
26
(L-rt BUlYlUtNZEHL
2/
i ? 4 TRlMETllYl BEM^E
20
i 3 5 TRlME II (Yl Of tt?L
2^
bfomi .-icd

IHlnMOM M7ENI
30

-------
TABLE 3
DETECTION FREQUENCY OF VOC's
KEY
i i l l i i i i I " I"" I I II " I " I " I " , " I " I " I " I " I " l " I I l" I "jl
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 ^0
COMPOUND CODE
CODE #
PERCHLOROE THYLENE
l
TRlCHLOROETHYLENE
2
1 l.l-TCA
3
1 4 DICHLOROBENZENE
4
chiorobenzene
5
2 CHLOROTOLUENE
6
4 CHLORTOLUENE
7
1 3 DICHLOROBENZENE
8
1.2 DICHLOROBENZENE
9
cisi .2 DtCHLOROE THE N
10
DICHLOROME THANE
11
i.i -DICHLOROETHANE
12
1.2 DICHLOROPROPANE
13
1.2.3TRICHLOROBENZE
14
1.2 4-TRICHLOROBENZE
IS
norvhatogentfed

BENZErJE
16
ETHYLBENZENE
1 7
TOLUENE
IB
p.mXYlENE
19
~ XYLENE
20
n BUTYLBENZENE
21
ISOPROPYLBENZENE
22
pISOPROPYLTOLUENE
23
NAPTHALENE
24
nPROPYLBENZENE
25
s BUTYLBENZENE
26
tort BUTYLBENZENE
27
1.2 4 TRIMETHYLBENZE
26
1 3 5 TRIMETHYLBENZE
29
brorninaied

BROMOBENZENE
X

-------
tt
W
Cu.
2!
sw
299)
2 9 70
Elevation m (eel obove seo level
| Uppei Wisconsin glociofacuslrine deposits; momfy unconsolidated vorved cloy ond Sill underlying the high lerroces
1 QwL 1 l 0w®r or P^e-Wisconsin glaciofluviol deposits; mainly sond mterbedded with cloy, sill, and grovel
I35«S
Bosol Pleistocene deposits; momly grovel
¦ V
~	Pliocene (?) chonnel deposils, well bedded, well sorted, unconsol ido I ed sand ond giuvel
EM
011 gocene (?) olluviol deposits-, semi to well consolidated conglomerate ml er st r u 11 f ied with mcom pulent buds ol shult, coul,ond some volconic ash
comb, ion rocks, undifferentiated
Lpe_rJ p recombrion rocks, undifferentiated	^
I mi le
Differences in oltilude eioggeroled
and not to scole
—Diiiiji iimmnlic section iicrobs Missoula Valley showing topographic, .structural, stratigraphic, and seilimonlo-
logii: relationships.

-------
GEOLOGICAL MAP OF MISSOULA VALLEY
SOURCE: MONTANA BUREAU OF MINES AND QEOLOOY
FIGURE 10

-------
APPENDIX C
0 CPA fact sheet
underground injection control
CLASS V INJECTION WELL TYPES
NAME OF WELL TYPE AND DESCRIPTION
WELL
CODE	DRAINAGE WELLS (alia. DRY WELLS)
5F1 Agricultural Drainage Wefls - receive irrigation taiiwaters, other field drainage,
animal yard, feedot, or dairy runoff, etc.
5D2 Storm Water Drainage Wefls - receive storm water runoff from paved areas,
inducing parking lots, streets, residential subcfvisions, buftfng roofs, highways,
etc
5D3 Improved Sinkholes - receive storm water runoff from developments located in
karst topographic areas.
5D4 Industrial Drainage WeBs - include wells located in industrial areas which
primarfly receive storm water runoff but are susceptible to spis, leaks, or other
chemical cfscharges.
5G30 Special Drainage Weds - are used for deposing water from sources other than
drect precipitation. Examples of this wed type include: landslide control
drainage wefls, potable water tank overflow drainage wells, swimming pool
dranage wefls, and lake level control drainage weds.
GEOTHERMAL RQNJECTION WELLS
5A5 Electric Power Reinjection Wells - reinject geothermal fluids used to generate
electric power - deep wefls.
5A6 Direct Heat Reinjection Wefls - reinject geothermal fluids used to provide heat
for large biddings or developments - deep wells.
5A7 Heat Pump/Air Condrtioning Return Flow Wefls - reinject groundwater used to
heat or cool a buildng in a heat pump system - shaBow wefls.
5A8 Groundwater Aquaculture Return Flow Wefls - reinject groundwater or geothermal
fluids used to support aquaculture. Non-geothermal aquaculture dsposal wefls
are also included in this category (ag. Marine acpjariums in Hawaii use relatively
cool sea water).
1

-------
WELL
CODE	DOMESTIC WASTEWATER DISPOSAL WELLS
5W9 Untreated Sewage Waste Disposal Wefts - receive raw sewage wastes from
pumping trucks or other vehicles which collect such wastes from single or
multiple sources. (No treatment)
5W10 Cesspools - include multiple dweffing, community or regional cesspools, or other
devices that receive wastes and which must have an open bottom and sometimes
have perforated sides. Must serve greater than 20 persons per day if receiving
solely sanitary wastes. (Settling ofsoSds)
5W11 Septic Systems (Uncifferentiated dsposal method) - are used to inject the waste
or effluent from a multiple dweffing, business establishment, community, or
regional business establishment septic tank. Must serve greater than 20 persons
per day if receiving solely sanitary wastes. (Primary Treatment)
5W31 Septic Systems (Wefl Disposal Method) - are used to inject the waste or effluent
from a multiple dweffing, business estabfishment, community, or regional business
establishment septic tank. Examples of wefe include actual weds, seepage pits,
cavitettes, etc. The largest surface dmension is less than or equal to the depth
dmension. Must serve greater than 20 persons per day if receiving solely
sanitary wastes. (Less treatment per square area than 5W32)
5W32 Septic Systems (Drainfield Disposal Method) - are used to inject the waste or
effluent from a multiple dweing, business establishment, community, or regional
business estabfishment septic tank. Examples of (franfiekJs include drain or tile
fines, and trenches. Must Serve more than 20 persons per day if receiving solely
saretary wastes. (More treatment per square area than 5W31)
5W12 Domestic Wastewater Treatment Plant Effluent Disposal Wefls - dspose of treated
sewage or domestic effluent from facilities ranging from small package plants up
to large municipal treatment plants. (Secondary or further treatment)
MINERAL AND FOSSL FUEL RECOVERY RELATED WELLS
5X13 Mining, Sand, or Other Backfffl Weds - are used to inject a mixture of fluid and
sand, mill taings, and other sofids into mined out portions of subsurface mines
whether what is injected is a racioactive waste or not Also includes special
wefls used to control mine fires and acid mine drainage weds.
5X14 Solution Mining Wells - are used to in—situ solution mining in conventional
mines, such as stopes leaching
5X15 In-Situ Fossil Fuel Recovery Wefls - are used for in—situ recovery of coal,
Ignite, ofl shale, and tar sands.
5X16 Spent-Brine Return Flow Weds - are used to reinject spent brine into the same
formation from which it was withdrawn after extraction of halogens or their
salts.
2

-------
WELL	OL FIELD PRODUCTION WASTE DISPOSAL WELLS
CODE
5X17 Air Scrubber Waste Disposal Wells - inject wastes from air scrubbers used to
remove sulfur from crude oil which is burned in steam generation for thermal 08
recovery projects. (If injection is enhanced recovery and not dsposal, it is a
Class II welL)
5X18 Water Softener Regeneration Brine Disposal Weds - inject regeneration wastes
from water softeners which are used to improve the quality of brines used for
enhanced recovery. (If injection is enhanced recovery and not dsposal, it is a
Class II wed)
INDUSTRIAL/COMMERCIAL/UTUTY DISPOSAL WELLS
5A19 Cooling Water Return Flow Wells - are used to inject water which was used in a
cooling process, both open and closed loop processes.
5W20 Industrial Process Water and Waste Disposal Weds - are used to dspose of a
wide variety of wastes and wastewaters from industrial, commercial, or utility
processes. Industries include refineries, chemical plants, smelters, pharmaceutical
plants, laundromats and dry cleaners, tanneries, laboratories, petroleum storage
facilities, electric power generation plants, electroplating industries, etc.
5X28 Automobile Service Station Disposal Wells - inject wastes from repair bay drains
at service stations, garages, car dealerships, car washes, etc.
RECHARGE WELLS
5R21 Aquifer Recharge Weils - are used to recharge depleted aquifers and may inject
fluids from a variety of sources such as lakes, streams, domestic wastewater
treatment plants, other aquifers, etc.
5B22 Saline Water Intrusion Barrier WeBs - are used to inject water into fresh water
aquifers to prevent intrusion of salt water into fresh water aquifers.
5S23 Subsidence Control Wells - are used to inject fluids into a non-oil or gas
producing zone to reduce or eliminate subsidence associated with overdraft of
fresh water and not used for the purpose of oil natuiril gas produc tion
3

-------
WELL	MISCELLANEOUS WELLS
CODE
5N24 Radioactive Waste Disposal Wells - include all radioactive waste dsposal wefls
other than Class IV wells.
5X25 Experimental Technology Weds - include wefls used in experimental or unproven
technologies such as pilot, scale in-situ solution mining wefls in previously
unmined areas.
5X26 Aquifer Remedation Related Wells - include wefls used to prevent, control, or
remediate aquifer pollution, including but not limited to Superfund sites.
5X27 Other Wells - include any other unspecified Class V wells.
5X29 Abandoned Drinking Water Wefls - include those which are used for dsposal of wasta
4

-------
APPENDIX D
SIC CODES
CLASS V WELLS
TITLE SORT
SIC CODE
TITLE
UIC CODE
1742-02
Acoustical Contractors
5W20
1742-01
Acoustical Materials
5W20
0721-03
Aerial Applicators (Service)
5W20
4512-02
Air Cargo Service
5X28
4513-01
Air Courier Service
5X28
7359-39
Aircraft Charter Rental & Leasing Svc
5X28
5088-19
Aircraft Engines
5X28
4581-02
Aircraft Engines Servicing\Maintenance
5X28
3721-01
Aircraft Manufacturers
5X28
5088-22
Aircraft Rebuilding
5X28
8299-17
Aircraft Schools
5X28
4581-04
Aircraft Servicing & Maintenance
5X28
4512-01
Airline Companies
5X28
4581-06
Airports
5X28
5571-01
All Terrain Vehicles
5X28
7539-08
Alternators & Generator Repair
5W20
5531-05
Alternators & Generators-Automotive
5W20
4119-02
Ambulance Service
5X28
0742-03
Animal Hospitals
5W20
7694-02
Armature Repairing & Rewinding
5W20
7381-03
Armored Car Service
5X28
5199-18
Art Dealers Wholesale
5W20
5039-13
Art Metal Work
5W20
8999-08
Ait Restoring
5W20
5039-14
Asbestos & Asbestos Products (WholVMfr)
5W20
9999-35
Assembly & Fabricating Service
5W20
5521-02
Automobile Antique & Classic
5X28
3711-03
Automobile Body Manufacturers
5X28
7532-01
Automobile Body Repair & Painting
5X28
5531-08
Automobile Bumpers Guards & Grilles
5W20
7532-03
Automobile Customizing
5X28
5511-02
Automobile Dealers-New Cars
5X28
5511-03
Automobile Dealers-Used Cars
5X28
5012-05
Automobile Dealers-Used Cars Wholesale
5X28
7542-03
Automobile Detail & Clean-up Service
5X28
7549-03
Automobile Lubrication Service
5X28
7538-02
Automobile Machine Shop
5X28
7538-04
Automobile Motor Rebuilding
5X28
5013-19
Automobile Motors
5X28

-------
7533-01
Automobile Muffler Repair
5X28
5015-01
Automobile Parts-Used/Rebuilt (Retail)
5X28
5521-03
Automobile Racing Cars
5X28
7532-05
Automobile Reconditioning
5X28
7514-01
Automobile Renting & Leasing
5X28
7538-01
Automobile Repairing & Service
5X28
5013-14
Automobile Repr.& Serv. Equip. & Supp.
5X28
7532-04
Automobile Restoration-Antique/Classic
5X28
4226-01
Automobile Storage
5X28
7549-09
Automobile Striping Service
5X28
7549-02
Automobile Undercoating & Rustproofing
5X28
7542-04
Automobile Upholsteiy Cleaning
5X28
7542-01
Automobile Washing & Polishing
5X28
5015-02
Automobile Wrecking
5X28
7539-15
Axles (Repair)
5X28
1629-09
Backhoe Service
5X28
5063-25
Batteries Storage Wholesale & Mfrs
5W20
5063-42
Battery Charging Equipment
5W20
5063-45
Battery Repair & Rebuilding
5W20
7231-06
Beauty Salons
5W20
7231-05
Beauty Schools
5W20
7695-06
Blacksmiths
5W20
7334-01
Blueprinting
5W20
3732-01
Boat Builders
5W20
4499-04
Boat Cleaning
5X28
5551-04
Boat Dealers
5X28
5551-03
Boat Equipment & Supplies-Retail
5X28
4493-04
Boat Repairing
5X28
4493-02
Boat Storage
5X28
1799-28
Boring Contractors
5X28
2086-01
Bottlers
5W20
7539-14
Brake Service
5X28
7539-17
Brake Shoe Bonding & Exchanging
5W20
7539-21
Buses - Repairing & Service
5X28
4151-01
Buses-School Transportation Service
5X28
1751-03
Cabinet Makers
5W20
5012-11
Campers & Pick-Up Coaches Distrs & Mfrs
5W20
7539-16
Campers & Pick-up Coaches Repair & Svc
5X28
5063-48
Capacitors (Wholesale & Manufacturers)
5W20
4119-04
Car Service
5X28
7542-05
Car Washing-Coin Operated
5X28
5087-08
Car Washing & Polishing Equipt. & Supp.
5W20
5169-41
Carbide (Wholesale & Manufacturers)
5W20
7539-19
Carburetors (Service & Repair)
5X28
5023-07
Carpet & Rug Distributors & Mfrs
5W20
7217-03
Carpet & Rug Dyers
5W20

-------
5251-01
Chain Saw (Retail)
5X28
5169-25
Cleaning Compounds
5W20
7215-02
Cleaning-Coin Operated
5W20
7539-18
Clutches (Service & Repair)
5X28
7694-01
Coil Winding
5W20
7699-77
Contractors' Equipt.& Supplies-Repair
5X28
5082-06
Contractors' Equipt. Supplies-Dlr/Serv.
5X28
9999-43
Corrosion Control
5W20
4215-01
Courier Service
5X28
7353-01
Crane Service
5X28
7699-80
Cranes-Repairing
5X28
7538-06
Crankshaft Grinding
5W20
0721-02
Crop Dusting, Seeding & Spraying
5W20
7216-02
Curtain & Blanket Cleaners
5W20
7378-02
Data Processing Equipment Maintenance
5W20
5169-30
Degreasing Equipment & Supplies
5W20
4212-05
Delivery Service
5X28
7699-82
Dental Equipment Repairing\Refinishing
5W20
8072-01
Dental Laboratories
5W20
8072-02
Denture Repair Service
5W20
3544-03
Die Cutting
5W20
5084-14
Diesel Engines
5X28
5013-21
Drive Shafts (Wholesale & Mfrs)
5W20
5063-33
Electric Motors Dealers & Repairing
5W20
7629-02
Electrical Appliances-MajorRepair\Parts
5W20
7629-01
Electrical Appliances-SmaHRepair\Parts
5W20
7629-03
Electrical Equipment Service&Repairing
5W20
7538-10
Engine Rebuilding & Exchanging
5X28
7538-09
Engine Rebuilding & Repairing
5X28
7538-97
Engines Diesel Fuel Injection SVC\RPR
5X28
5261-02
Engines Gas
5X28
5261-37
Engines Gasoline
5X28
7699-91
Engines Marine-Repairing
5X28
7699-90
Engines Small-Repairing
5X28
2796-03
Engravers-Photo
5W20
7699-42
Farm Equipment Repairing & Parts
5X28
3296-01
Fiber Glass Fabricators
5W20
7699-45
Fiber Glass Repairing
5W20
7538-14
Four Wheel Drive-Repairing & Service
5X28
4731-04
Freight Forwarding
5X28
5172-06
Fuel Oils (Wholesale)
5X28
7261-03
Funeral Directors
5W20
7219-03
Fur Cleaning & Dyeing (Retail)
5W20
3479-02
Galvanizing
5W20
3993-01
Gold Leaf
5W20
5571-02
Golf Cars & Carts (Dealers)
5X28

-------
4213-07
Hauling-Heavy
5X28
4522-01
Helicopter Charter & Rental Service
5X28
8062-02
Hospitals
5W20
2759-14
Hot Stamping, Foil, Gold, etc
5W20
7699-52
Hydraulic Equipment-Repairing
5X28
2893-01
Inks-Printing & Lithographing
5W20
7342-02
Insecticides (Service)
5W20
3446-04
Iron Ornamental
5W20
7692-04
Ironwork (Service & Repair)
5W20
7699-53
Irrigation Systems & Equipment Repair
5X28
3911-01
Jewelry Manufacturers
5W20
3479-08
Jewelry Plating
5W20
7631-01
Jewelry Repairing
5W20
7641-07
Kitchen Cabinets Refinishing
5W20
8731-01
Laboratories-Research & Development
5W20
8734-11
Laboratories-Veterinary
5W20
7389-65
Laminations-Plastic, Paper, etc
5W20
7218-04
Laundries-Industrial & Commercial
5W20
7699-57
Lawn Mowers Sharpening and Repair
5X28
5079-09
Lifts-Automobile, Truck, etc
5X28
5084-21
Lifts-Industrial
5X28
4119-03
Limousine Service
5X28
2491-01
Lumber Treating
5W20
3599-03
Machine Shops
5W20
8734-13
Machine Shops-Experimental
5W20
5112-19
Maps-Publishers & Distrs
5W20
5551-01
Marine Engines
5X28
4493-05
Marine Repairs
5X28
8071-01
Medical Laboratories
5W20
8734-12
Metallurgists
5W20
7699-65
Mirrors-Resilvering
5W20
5039-17
Mobile Homes-Distributors & Mfrs
5W20
7349-24
Mobile Homes-Washing & Cleaning
5W20
7819-07
Motion Picture Laboratories
5W20
4213-09
Motor Freight Lines
5X28
7539-09
Motor Homes Repairing & Service
5X28
7699-67
Motorcycle&Motor Scooter Repair & Serv.
5X28
0782-10
Mowing Service
5X28
7641-06
Office Furniture & Equip ReprVRefinish
5W20
7694-03
Outboard Motors Repairing
5X28
5169-45
Paint Manufacturing Materials
5W20
1799-10
Paint Removing
5W20
7342-01
Pest Control (Services)
5W20
5191-01
Pest Control Supplies & Equipment
5W20
7384-02
Photo Finishing Custom
5W20
7384-01
Photo Finishing Retail
5W20

-------
7384-04
Photo Finishing Wholesale
5W20
7384-09
Photo Laboratories-Commercial
5W20
3498-02
Pipe Cutting & Threading
5W20
3086-01
Plastics-Foam
5W20
3083-01
Plastics-High Pressure T -aminates
5W20
5084-80
Plastics-Machinery & Equipment
5W20
2821-01
Plastics-Raw Materials,Powder,Lqd,Resin
5W20
3471-05
Plating
5W20
5031-04
Plywood & Veneers-Wholesale & Mfr.
5W20
2842-01
Polishes (Manufacturers)
5W20
3081-01
Polyethylene Materials & Products
5W20
5169-22
Polyurethane Products
5W20
3672-01
Printed & Etched Circuits
5W20
2752-02
Printers
5W20
2759-03
Printers-Glass, Metal, Plastic, etc
5W20
2741-05
Publishers
5W20
7539-01
Radiators-Automotive
5X28
5013-01
Radiators-Automotive-Wholesale & Mfrs
5X28
5088-01
Railroad Equipment & Supplies
5X28
5261-27
Railroad Ties
5W20
7538-11
Recreational Vehicle Repairing&Service
5X28
5561-03
Recreational Vehicles (Dealers)
5X28
3711-01
Recreational Vehicles & Campers Mfrs
5X28
7519-01
Recreational Vehicles-Renting & Leasing
5X28
5012-10
Recreational Vehicles-Wholesale & Mfrs
5X28
5169-21
Resins (Wholesale & Manufacturers)
5W20
5169-24
Rust Preventives & Removers
5W20
7699-24
Saws-Sharpening & Repairing
5X28
2759-02
Screen Printing
5W20
5541-01
Service Stations (Gas-Oil)
5X28
7251-04
Shoe Dyers
5W20
7389-05
Sign Painters
5W20
3393-01
Signs
5W20
3914-02
Silversmiths & Goldsmiths
5W20
7699-27
Silverware Cleaning/Repairing/Replating
5W20
5261-32
Snow Removal Equipment
5X28
7699-29
Snowmobile Repairing & Maintenance
5X28
5599-04
Snowmobiles (Dealers)
5X28
7542-02
Steam Cleaning-Automotive
5X28
1799-17
Steam Cleaning-Industrial
5X28
7699-34
Tank Cleaning
5W20
5088-04
Tanks-Fiber Glass, Plastic, etc
5W20
4121-01
Taxicabs
5X28
7699-04
Taxidermists
5W20
5531-23
Tire Dealers-Retail
5X28
5014-02
Hie Dealers-Used
5X28

-------
7534-01
Hie Retreading & Repairing
5X28
3544-07
Tool & Die Makers
5W20
5084-99
Tools-Hydraulic
5W20
5033-04
Tractor Dealers
5X28
7699-41
Tractor Repairing & Service
5X28
7699-09
Trailers Truck Repairing & Sendee
5X28
7537-01
Transmissions-Automobile
5X28
5012-13
Truck Bodies
5X28
5511-05
Truck Dealers
5X28
5521-01
Truck Dealers Used
5X28
7532-06
Truck Painting
5X28
7513-03
Truck Renting & Leasing
5X28
7538-12
Truck Repairing & Service
5X28
5541-03
Truck Stops
5X28
7542-06
Truck Washing & Cleaning
5X28
5015-04
Truck Wrecking
5X28
4212-01
Trucking-Contract Hauling
5X28
7538-03
Trucks Industrial Repairing
5X28
5084-57
Trucks-Industrial
5X28
7699-40
Typewriters-Repairing
5W20
7532-08
Van Conversions
5X28
0742-01
Veterinarians
5W20
1781-01
Water Well Drilling & Service
5X28
1799-09
Waterproofing Contractors
5W20
7692-03
Welding (Shops)
5W20
1751-04
Wood Finishing Service
5W20
5211-49
Wood Preserving
5W20
7549-01
Wrecker Service
5X28
8071-02
X-Ray Laboratories-Dental
5W20
8734-04
X-Ray Laboratories-Industrial
5W20
5169-32
Zinc Processing
5W20

-------
APPENDIX E
ORDINANCE NO.	
AN ORDINANCE ENACTING CHAPTER 13.26 MISSOULA MUNICIPAL CODE ENTITLED AQUIFER
PROTECTION BY ENACTING SECTIONS 13.26.010 THROUGH 13.26.150.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MISSOULA, MONTANA THAT
CHAPTER 13.26 BE ENACTED BY ENACTING SECTIONS 13.26.010 THROUGH 13.26.150 MISSOULA
MUNICIPAL CODE, PROVIDING AS FOLLOWS:
Section 13.26.010 SHORT TITLE; APPLICABILITY; CONSTRUCTION.
This Ordinance shall be known as the "Missoula Valley Aquifer Protection Ordinance." It is intended to protect
the public health, safety and general welfare of those utilizing the Missoula Valley Aquifer for drinking water.
The provisions of the Ordinance are deemed to be a health ordinance and shall be effective within the City of
Missoula and all places within five miles outside the city limits that are within the boundary of the Missoula
Valley Water Quality District pursuant to §7-4-4306 MCA (1993). This Ordinance establishes prohibitions and
restrictions to prevent surface water and groundwater contamination, and to protect public health, safety and
welfare. This Ordinance shall be broadly construed to effect its purposes. Nothing in this Ordinance shall
relieve a person from the requirements of any other federal, state, or local law. If any provision of this
Ordinance presents a direct or implied conflict with any local, state or federal statute or regulation, the local,
state or federal statute or regulation shall govern. However, if the requirements of this Ordinance are more
stringent than the requirements of the local, state or federal statute or regulation, the requirements of this
Ordinance shall govern.
Section 13.26.020 LEGISLATIVE INTENT AND PURPOSE
In order to protect the Missoula Valley's sole source of drinking water and to secure and promote the general
public health, safety and welfare, the Missoula City Council declares that:
(a)	the improper storage, handling, use, transport, production or disposal of certain substances in the
Missoula Valley is potentially harmful to the quality of water in the Missoula Valley Aquifer and to
drinking water obtained by the use of private and public supply wells, and that certain activities
involving the use of certain substances should be managed to prevent water contamination.
(b)	affirmative measures to prevent pollution of the aquifer are the most effective means available to
protect water quality.
(c)	in order to effectively protect surface and groundwater, local authority is needed to require
pollution prevention measures at facilities which handle significant quantities of certain substances, and
to prohibit and deter activities which pose threats to the quality of the Missoula Valley Aquifer.
(d)	the construction, development and use of new public water supply wells in proximity to existing
sources of contamination is potentially harmful to the quality of drinking water obtained from such
wells. The location of identified contaminant sources which pose serious threats of contamination
should also be prohibited in proximity to public drinking water wells, in order to minimize the risk of
contamination.
Section 13.26.030 DEFINITIONS
For purposes of this Ordinance, the following terms have the following meanings unless the context clearly
indicates otherwise:
1

-------
1.	Aboveground Storage Tank (AST) - Any one or combination of tanks that is used to contain an
accumulation of Regulated Substance, and the volume of which is more than 90% above the
surface of the ground.
2.	Aquifer - A water-bearing, subsurface formation capable of yielding sufficient quantities of
water for beneficial use.
3.	Aquifer Protection Area - The areas within the City of Missoula and within five miles outside
the Missoula city limits which are within the boundaries of the Missoula Valley Water Quality
District.
4.	Board - The Board of Directors of the Missoula Valley Water Quality District.
5.	Bulk Petroleum Storage Facility - A facility used for storage of petroleum products for
marketing or wholesale distribution that has a total bulk storage capacity of 50,000 gallons or
more.
6.	Chemical Manufacturing Facility - A facility having a Standard Industry Class Code (SIC
Code) between 2800 and 2899 which handles Regulated Substances in a amount equal to or
greater than threshold quantities.
7.	Class II Landfill - An area of land or an excavation, as defined in Montana Administrative
Rules A.R.M. §16.14.502, where group II or group III wastes are placed for permanent
disposal, and that is not a land application unit, surface impoundment, injection well, or waste
pile. Group II and III wastes are defined in Montana Administrative Rules, A.R.M.
§16.14.503.
8.	Class III Landfill - An area of land or an excavation, as defined in Montana Administrative
Rules A.R.M. §16.14.502, where group III wastes are placed for permanent disposal, and that
is not a land application unit, surface impoundment, injection well, or waste pile. Group III
wastes are defined in Montana Administrative Rules, A.R.M. §16.14.503.
9.	Closure Permit - A permit issued by the Department in accordance with section 13.26.060 of
this Ordinance, when certain activities involving Regulated Substances are permanently
terminated or discontinued for one year.
10.	Community Water System - Any public water supply system, as defined in A.R.M.
§16.20.401(31)(a), which serves at least ten service connections used by year-round residents
or regularly serves at least 25 year-round residents.
11.	Component - Any constituent part of a unit or any group of constituent parts of a unit which
are assembled to perform a specific function.
12.	Contamination - The presence of any substance (chemical, radiological, or biological) or any
condition (temperature, pH, taste, color, odor, turbidity) in soil or water which may create or
threaten to create a hazard to human health or the environment, or impair the usefulness of the
soil or water.
13.	Department - The Missoula Valley Water Quality District.
14.	Dry Cleaning Establishment - Any facility that uses a transfer machine, dry-to-dry vented unit,
or dry-to-dry closed loop unit with one or more of the following solvents to clean clothing or
2

-------
other materials: perchloroethylene; trichlorotriflouroethane (CFC-113); CFC-11; Stoddard
solvent; 1,1,1-Trichloroethane; HCFC 14 lb.; HCFC-123 lb.; and HCFC-225 lb.
15.	EPA - United States Environmental Protection Agency.
16.	Facility - An area, building or buildings, appurtenant structures or surrounding land area used
by a person.
17.	Fleet - More than 5 vehicles or locomotives.
18.	Fueling Facility - A facility that dispenses petroleum products for commercial sale, public use,
or for fleet vehicle operation, excluding bulk petroleum storage facilities and farm and
residential tanks of 1100 gallons or less capacity used for storing motor fuel for non
commercial purposes.
19.	Future Wellhead Reservation Area - The surface area overlying a portion of the Missoula
Valley Aquifer which, because of aquifer recharge, groundwater flow and potential sources of
contamination, should be protected against contamination to assure high quality groundwater
for future generations.
20.	Grass Infiltration Swale - A vegetative-lined infiltration cell designed and constructed in
accordance with Department standards to collect and treat contaminants in storm water runoff.
21.	Groundwater - Water that fills the interconnected spaces of material below the water table
(upper limit of saturation), or water which is held in the unsaturated zone by capillary action.
22.	Handle - To use, generate, process, produce, package, treat, store, emit, discharge or dispose
of a Regulated Substance, excluding (a) handling during continuous non-stop transit, (b) transit
via pipeline, and (c) handling of parcels and packages by the United States Postal Service,
motor freight companies, and private delivery services.
23.	Hazardous Substance - A substance which is:
(a)	defined as a hazardous substance by section 101 (14) of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, 42
U.S.C. 9601 (14), as amended;
(b)	identified by the administrator of the EPA as a hazardous substance pursuant to
section 102 of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9602, as amended;
(c)	defined as a hazardous waste pursuant to section 1004 (5) of the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, 42 U.S.C. 6903(5), as amended, including a
substance listed or identified in 40 CFR 261; or
(d)	a petroleum product.
24.	Hazardous Waste - A hazardous waste as defmed pursuant to section 1004(5) of the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, 42 U.S.C. 6903(5), as amended, including a
substance listed or identified in 40 CFR 261.
25.	Industrial Process Injection Well - A well or septic system that receives process wastes from a
public or private facility, excluding wells or septic systems used solely for storm water
discharge, sanitary waste discharge and/or discharge or extraction of non-contact heating and
cooling system water.
3

-------
26.	Missoula Valley Aquifer - The aquifer underlying the Missoula Valley which supplies the area
with water.
27.	New - Constructed, installed or brought into operation after the effective date of this
Ordinance.
28.	Noncomplying Activity - An activity involving the handling of a Regulated Substance in an
amount equal to or greater than its threshold quantity within a Future Wellhead Reservation
Area.
29.	Non-transient Non-community water system - Any public water supply system as defined in
A.R.M. §16.20.202(3l)(b)(i) that is not a community water system and that regularly serves at
least 25 of the same persons over six months per year.
30.	Perchloroethylene (C2CL4) - A colorless liquid used as a dry cleaning fluid; general degreaser
of metals; solvent for waxes, fats, oils, and gums; constituent of printing inks and paint
removers. Synonyms include, Tetrachloroethylene, Tetrachloroethene, PCE, PERC.
31.	Permitted Hazardous Waste Management Facility - All contiguous land, and structures, other
appurtenances, and improvements on the land used for treating, storing, or disposing of a
hazardous waste, and that are required under Montana Hazardous Waste Administrative Rules,
A.R.M. §16.44.103, to have a hazardous waste management permit. A Hazardous Waste
Management Facility may consist of several treatment, storage, or disposal operational units.
32.	Person - Any natural person, individual, public or private corporation, firm, association, joint
venture, partnership, municipality, governmental agency, political subdivision, public officer
or any other entity whatsoever or any combination of such, jointly or severally.
33.	Piping Manifold - The area(s) of a piping system fitted with apertures for making multiple
connections.
34.	Pollution Prevention Permit - A permit required of a person who owns, operates or controls a
facility that handles any Regulated Substance in an amount equal to or greater than four times
its threshold quantity. Pollution Prevention permits are issued by the Department in
accordance with section 13.26.050 of this Ordinance.
35.	Primary Container - A container which comes into immediate contact with a Regulated
Substance.
36.	Public Sewage Disposal System - A system, as defined in §75-6-102(11) MCA, for collection,
transportation, treatment or disposal of sewage that is designed to serve or serves ten or more
families or 25 or more persons daily for a period of at least 60 days out of the calendar year.
37.	Public Water Supply System - A system, as defined in §75-6-102(12) MCA, for the provision
of water for human consumption from any community well, water hauler for cisterns, water
bottling plant, water dispenser, or other water supply that is designed to serve or serves 10 or
more families or 25 or more persons daily or has at least 10 service connections at least 60
days out of the calendar year.
38.	Regulated Substance - Any liquid substance, semi-liquid substance, or soluble solid on the
most current Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA), Title III List of Lists
published by the Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxic Substances, U.S. Environmental
4

-------
Protection Agency, Washington D.C., any petroleum product, any hazardous waste, or any
other substances that the Board determines, following public review, may threaten
contamination of the Missoula Valley Aquifer, excluding substances used for personal
household use.
39.	Release - Any spilling, leaking, pumping, pouring, emitting, emptying, discharging, injecting,
escaping, leaching, dumping, or disposing of a hazardous substance into the environment
(including the past release of a hazardous substance), but excluding (a) releases contained in a
secondary containment area or the indoor workplace provided the release does not exit the
indoor workplace, (b) the use of pesticides and fertilizers as defined in §80-8-102(30) MCA
and §80-8-102(2) MCA when they are applied in accordance with approved federal and state
labels, and (c) any discharge permitted by a local, state, or federal agency.
40.	Replacement - Replacement or replace shall mean:
(a)	Replacing, repairing, upgrading or improving a facility or component of a facility
at a cost which equals or exceeds 50% of the value of the facility or component at the
time of such act.
(b)	Reoccupation of a facility, reuse of a component at a facility, or restarting an
activity which has been out of service or not practiced for a period of one year.
41.	Secondary Containment - Containment external to and separate from the primary container
adequate to prevent the release of Regulated Substances to native soil, surface water, or
groundwater. The secondary containment structure or cell must:
(a)	be non-reactive and resistant to the materials contained;
(b)	prevent infiltration of any Regulated Substance into the ground in the event of a
release from the primary storage container;
(c)	isolate the Regulated Substance from soils, injection wells, floor drains, or any
other potential surface and groundwater entry point; and
(d)	contain at least 110% of the volume of the largest container, or 10% of the
aggregate volume of all containers, whichever is greater.
A covered building or structure may fulfill the secondary containment requirements of this
Ordinance, provided the building or structure has an impermeable floor and walls and the
release of a Regulated Substance would remain in the building or structure.
42.	Storm Water Injection Well - A structure, pit or hole that primarily receives storm water
runoff from paved areas, including, but not limited to, parking lots, streets, residential
subdivisions, and highways.
43.	Tank - Stationary device designed to contain an accumulation of substances and constructed of
non-earthen materials (e.g. concrete, steel, plastic) that provide structural support.
44.	Tank Fueling Area - The area surrounding the above or underground storage tanks subject to
releases of petroleum products during tank fueling, including the area surrounding the tanker
truck during fueling.
45.	Threshold Quantity - The following quantities of Regulated Substances (excluding products in
vehicle fuel tanks, aerosol spray cans, and substances sold for retail in a container equal to or
less than 5 gallons capacity) handled at a facility at any one time shall constitute the Threshold
Quantity:
(a) For those Regulated Substances specifically listed in the Superfund Amendments
and Reauthorization Act (SARA) Title III List of Lists and for those Regulated
Substances which are listed hazardous waste defined pursuant to 40 CFR Part 261, as
5

-------
amended, the threshold quantity shall be the reportable quantity published in the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA),
40 CFR 302, Table 302.4 or the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act
(SARA) Section 355, Appendix A.
(b)	For those Regulated Substances that are characteristic hazardous wastes defined
pursuant to 40 CFR Part 261, as amended, the threshold quantity shall be based on
the substance contained in the waste with the lowest threshold quantity.
(c)	For those Regulated Substances not listed in the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act Title III List of Lists, and for those Regulated Substances that are
not a hazardous waste, the following quantities of qualifying substances at a facility at
any one time shall constitute a Threshold Quantity:
(i)	Waste oil - 1000 pounds or 100 gallons.
(ii)	Gasoline - 250 pounds or 25 gallons
(iii)	Diesel/Jet Fuel/Kerosene - 500 pounds or 50 gallons
(iv)	New Motor Oil - 2,000 pounds or 200 gallons
(d)	For those substances that are mixtures of one or more Regulated Substance, the
threshold quantity shall be based on the substance contained in the mixture with the
lowest threshold quantity.
Threshold Quantities of other substances may be established by the Board, following public
review and comment.
46.	Underground Storage Tank (UST) - Any one or combination of tanks as defmed in A.R.M.
§16.45.803 (15) (1989) of the Montana Underground Storage Tank Regulations, as amended.
47.	Vehicle Fueling Area - The area surrounding a fuel island or dispenser(s) subject to releases of
petroleum products during vehicle fueling, including a 3 foot release collection buffer zone
extending beyond the lanes of traffic next to the fuel islands or dispenser(s).
48.	Waste Oil - Oil that has been refined from crude oil, or any synthetic oil, that has been used
and as a result of such use is contaminated by physical or chemical impurities.
49.	Well - A structure, pit or hole sunk into the earth to reach a resource supply such as water.
50.	Wellhead - The physical structure or device at the land surface surrounding a well, from or
through which groundwater flows or is pumped from an aquifer.
Section 13.26.040 POLLUTION PREVENTION REQUIREMENTS
(A)	Six months after the effective date of this Ordinance, no product shall be distributed, sold,
offered, or exposed for sale within the aquifer protection area if it contains Perchloroethylene in any
quantity. Those products used at dry cleaning establishments are exempt from this provision of the
Ordinance, provided the person who owns, operates, or controls the dry cleaning establishment obtains
a pollution prevention permit from the Department and prepares a pollution prevention plan, regardless
of the quantity of Perchloroethylene handled at the facility.
(B)	A person who owns, operates or controls a facility which handles Regulated Substances in an
amount equal to or greater than the threshold quantities must submit an inventory and quantity of those
Regulated Substances to the Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC) within one year of the
effective date of this Ordinance, and every year thereafter.
6

-------
(C)	A person who owns, operates or controls a new or replacement fueling facility must:
(1)	install and maintain an awning or canopy that prevents precipitation from falling on the
vehicle fueling area(s); and
(2)	design and install a storm water collection system for the facility which shall:
(a)	prevent the flow of fuel releases in the tank fueling area and vehicle fueling area
from discharging directly to a storm water injection well; and
(b)	collect and discharge storm water from areas outside of the tank fueling area and
vehicle fueling area to a grass infiltration swale or otherwise provide for such storm
water to be handled in a manner to reduce the potential for water contamination.
The storm water collection design must be approved by the Department and permitted by the
City of Missoula Engineering Department prior to facility construction. The person owning,
operating, or controlling the facility must maintain any grass infiltration swale and any other
approved device used to prevent releases in the vehicle and tank fueling areas from discharging
to a storm water injection well. The facility shall keep records of maintenance of the device at
the facility to be viewed during Department inspections.
(D)	A person who owns, operates or controls an existing fueling facility where surface releases of fuel
from the vehicle or tank fueling area may discharge to a storm water injection well shall make the
following physical and procedural changes at the facility by December 31, 1998.
(1)	breakaway hoses and nozzles shall be installed on all dispensers;
(2)	emergency response equipment shall be kept on site to be used in the event of a
release, including absorbent materials and spill containment covers for each storm
water injection well which may receive discharge from a surface release; and
(3)	an employee trained on how to respond to a release must be on site at all times
during facility operation.
In addition to the above procedural and physical requirements, a person who owns, operates, or
controls an existing fueling facility shall by December 31, 1996 incorporate a release prevention section
within the pollution prevention plan required under section 13.26.050 (B) of this Ordinance. The
release prevention section of the plan shall describe the steps or methods that will be taken to prevent
fuel released at the tank and/or vehicle fueling areas from reaching a storm water injection well. It
must include an evaluation of installing an oil/water separator or other spill containment device where a
storm water injection well is located in such a location that personnel are unlikely to be able to prevent
a release from draining to a storm water injection well. The release prevention plan must be approved
by the Department. Physical alterations or procedural changes required as a condition of the
Department's approval must be completed or instituted within one year of the Department's approval.
(E)	A facility that handles a total quantity of any Regulated Substance in an amount equal to or greater
than four times its threshold quantity must obtain a Pollution Prevention Permit, pursuant to section
13.26.050 of this Ordinance.
(F)	A person who owns, operates or controls a facility at which a Regulated Substance (excluding
petroleum products in underground storage tanks, in vehicle fuel tanks, at bulk petroleum storage
facilities, and Regulated Substances sold for retail in a container equal to or less than 5 gallons
capacity) equal to or greater than the threshold quantity is handled on the effective date of this
Ordinance, shall provide secondary containment for that substance by January 1, 1996. A person who
owns, operates, or controls a new facility at which a Regulated Substance (excluding petroleum
products in underground storage tanks, in vehicle fuel tanks, at bulk petroleum storage facilities, and
Regulated Substances sold for retail in a container equal to or less than 5 gallons capacity) equal to or
greater than the threshold quantity is handled after the effective date of this Ordinance, must obtain
Department approval of their plan for secondary containment prior to obtaining a building permit or
first handling a Regulated Substance in an amount equal to or greater than its threshold quantity,
whichever occurs first.
7

-------
(G)	A person who owns, operates, or controls a facility at which a Regulated Substance equal to or
greater than its threshold quantity is stored in any new or replacement underground storage tank system
shall equip that system with double walled product piping, secondary containment of all ancillary
equipment from the tank to the dispenser(s), tank release detection systems, and leak detectors on
pressurized piping. Tank system design must be approved by the Department prior to obtaining a
building permit. Such systems shall, at a minimum, meet the requirements described in A.R.M.
§16.45.403 (1989) of the Montana Underground Storage Tank Regulations, as amended.
(H)	After the effective date of this Ordinance, no person shall construct or operate an industrial L
process injection well at a new or existing facility unless said person obtains a discharge permit from
the Department or EPA. A person may be granted a permit from the Department if the owner,
operator or controller demonstrates to the Department that the process wastewater does not contain a
Regulated Substance at a concentration equal to or above its EPA primary maximum contaminant level,
EPA health advisory level, or the standard proposed in the Montana Numeric Water Quality Standards,
(Circular WQB-7), whichever is lower, and the potential for water contamination is reduced by such
other measures as the Department may require.
(I)	A person who owns, operates, or controls a bulk petroleum storage facility shall:
(1)	Install all new or replacement piping aboveground;
(2)	After the effective date of this Ordinance, perform annual release response training
exercises simulating the actions that will be taken during a release of fuel at the terminal;
(3)	Within six months after the effective date of this Ordinance, have a person trained in the
proper filling of aboveground tanks at the terminal during tank filling operations, or establish a
monitoring system capable of detecting and alerting local personnel of a release during tank
filling operations in such a manner to prevent the contamination of the Missoula Valley
Aquifer. The monitoring system shall at a minimum include vapor monitors located at any
valve and piping manifold that controls the flow of fuel to the tanks and from the tanks to the
dispensers, and overfill alarms on any aboveground storage tank. The monitoring system must
be staffed during tank filling operations. Any proposed monitoring system must be approved
by the Department;
(4)	Commencing on or before January 1, 1995, conduct annual integrity and leak testing of
above and below grade metal piping to a pressure of one and a half times the operational
pressure;
(5)	On or before January 1, 1996, cathodically protect buried metal piping and the bottom of
aboveground tanks in accordance with guidelines contained in American Petroleum Institute
(API) 651;
(6)	On or before January 1, 1996, and every five years thereafter, prepare a Contingency Plan
outlining how personnel are to respond to a release of fuel at the terminal. The plan shall at a
minimum address how spilled fuel at the terminal will be prevented from contaminating the
Missoula Valley Aquifer through such measures as:
(a)	installation of impermeable barriers or liners to prevent the vertical migration of
released fuel to the aquifer;
(b)	grading of the secondary containment area to common drainage channels or
sumps equipped with dedicated pumps that can be activated to pump fuel from the
containment area in the event of a large release;
(c)	installation of vapor monitoring devices at piping manifolds and valves to alert
personnel of a release;
(d)	installation of vapor monitoring wells within the secondary containment area of
the aboveground tanks to be used to recover released fuel before it reaches the
underlying aquifer;
(e)	installation of a dedicated recovery tank outside the secondary containment area of
the aboveground tanks that can be used to recover released fuel; or
8

-------
(e) excavation of contaminated soils immediately after a release occurs.
The Contingency Plan must be approved by the Department, and all physical or procedural
changes required as a condition of the Department's approval of the Contingency Plan, shall be
completed or instituted within two years of the Department's approval;
(7)	On or before January 1, 1998, and every 10 years thereafter, test the integrity of the shell
of each aboveground tank in accordance with appropriate standards;
(8)	On or before January 1, 1998, install containment devices to prevent a surface release of
fuel at the vehicle fueling area from discharging directly to an underground injection well or
sump, or surface waters;
(9)	On or before January 1, 2000, secondarily contain all aboveground piping manifolds; and
(10)	On or before January 1, 2000, and every 10 years thereafter, test the integrity of the
bottom of each aboveground tank in accordance with appropriate standards. The frequency of
integrity testing of the bottom of each tank may be extended by the Department provided that
the owner, operator, or controller of the bulk petroleum storage facility proposes an extended
frequency in accordance with American Petroleum Institute (API) 653, the proposal is received
by the Department within two years of the adoption of this Ordinance, and the Department
approves of the change in frequency of testing.
(J) A person who owns, operates or controls a facility on which a public or private water well or
monitoring well is abandoned after the effective date of this Ordinance shall ensure that the well is
abandoned in compliance with the Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation Board
of Water Well Contractor Regulations, ARM §36.21.669 through §36.21.679 and §36.21.810.
(K) After the effective date of this Ordinance, no person shall construct or operate a new or
replacement facility which handles a Regulated Substance in a quantity equal to or greater than its
threshold quantity within the Future Wellhead Reservation Area comprised of all land within township
13N, range 19W, sections 27 and 34, all land south of the Clark Fork River within township 13N,
range 19W, section 22, and all land within the northwest and northeast quarter sections of township
13N, range 19W, section 4 of Montana Meridian, Missoula County, Missoula, Montana.
(L) Existing facilities within the Future Wellhead Reservation Area defined in section 13.26.050 (K) of
this Ordinance may continue to operate, subject to all the conditions of section 13.26.050 and the
following:
(1)	Any activity involving the handling of a Regulated Substance in an amount equal to or
greater than its threshold quantity shall be a noncomplying activity.
(2)	Any noncomplying activity that is discontinued, abandoned or ceases for a period of
twelve consecutive months may not be resumed.
(3)	A noncomplying activity may not be enlarged, expanded, or altered so as to substantially
increase the risk of soil or groundwater contamination. Any enlargement, expansion or
increase in a noncomplying activity must be approved by the Department, in writing, prior to
activity commencement.
(4)	In the event a facility which houses a noncomplying activity is destroyed or damaged by
any means to an extent that the cost to repair or replace the facility equals 50% of the value of
the facility at the time of such act, the activity shall not be resumed or continued.
Section 13.26.050 POLLUTION PREVENTION PERMIT
(A) A person who owns, operates or controls a facility at which any Regulated Substance is handled in
an amount equal to or greater than four times its threshold quantity shall apply for a Pollution
Prevention Permit from the Department by the later of (a) July 1, 1995, or (b) 60 days after the date
on which the facility first handled a Regulated Substance in an amount equal to or greater than four
times its threshold quantity. New or replacement facilities which will handle a Regulated Substance in
9

-------
an amount equal to or greater than four times its threshold quantity shall obtain a pollution prevention
permit prior to obtaining a building permit, facility construction or operation. The Department may
order revisions in the permit application submitted by the regulated facility to be completed within 30
days of receipt of an administrative order issued pursuant to 13.26.120 of this Ordinance.
(B) In order to obtain a Pollution Prevention Permit, an application for the permit accompanied by a
Pollution Prevention Plan shall be submitted to the Department for approval. The Department shall
supply a form that can be used for the plan. If a facility is required by State or Federal law to prepare
a Pollution Prevention or Release Prevention Plan, a copy of such plan, supplemented with such other
information as required by this Section, shall suffice to meet the Pollution Prevention Plan requirement
of this section. The Pollution Prevention Plan shall contain the following:
(1)	A discussion of the risks posed by major water quality hazards at the facility and the steps
taken to address each of those risks, including but not limited to:
(a)	the quantity and toxicity of any Regulated Substance handled in an amount equal to
or greater than four times its threshold quantity
(b)	potential consequences of any release
(c)	location of facility with respect to a water body, groundwater, and conduits to
groundwater
(d)	personnel training
(e)	engineering controls
(f)	emergency response plans
(g)	preventative maintenance
(h)	process safety
(i)	management structure implemented to control the risks and hazards
(2)	A description of (a) emergency equipment available at the facility to respond to a release
of a Regulated Substance, (b) written procedures describing how such equipment will be
inspected and maintained, and (c) procedures to control, mitigate and/or remediate any release
of Regulated Substance.
(3)	For each Regulated Substance that is handled in an amount equal to or greater than four
times its threshold quantity at the facility, the Pollution Prevention Plan shall describe:
(a)	The state (solid, liquid or gas), quantity and type of container in which each
Regulated Substance is acquired by the facility;
(b)	Available alternatives, if any, by which the facility could:
(i)	Reduce the quantity of Regulated Substances handled by process changes,
product substitution, reuse or recycling , or treatment that does not constitute
disposal; and
(ii)	Adopt handling practices or make site improvements to reduce the
potential for contamination.
(c)	The manner and conditions under which each Regulated Substance is stored and
transferred prior to use or disposition;
(d)	The manner and conditions under which each Regulated Substance is used at the
facility;
(e)	The manner and process by which any waste Regulated Substances are treated,
recycled or disposed;
(f)	The physical structures and/or operational procedures employed at the facility to
meet the secondary containment requirements of this Ordinance.
(g)	The procedures to be employed to ensure that Regulated Substances over the
threshold quantity do not release or otherwise cause contamination during
transportation, transfer, use, storage, and disposal.
(4)	Building plans and site development drawings showing compliance with the secondary
containment requirements of this Ordinance. Such plans shall show the pathway of a potential
release of a Regulated Substance, including but not limited to, information on the location of
10

-------
sewer manholes, injection wells, drainage ditches, nearby streams, rivers or irrigation ditches
and the direction of surface drainage. Such plans shall provide confirmation that the secondary
containment methods are compatible with the materials to be contained and that Regulated
Substances are isolated from injection wells, floor drains, surface waters, and any other
surface water or groundwater injection point. The Department may require the plans to be
reviewed by a professional engineer if the secondary containment structures require substantial
engineering design. The building or site plans must show the location of Regulated Substances
in buildings or other designated site areas.
(5) Identification of the individual(s) or staff position responsible for monitoring releases and
threatened releases and a description of the steps to be taken in the event of a release,
including but not limited to, reporting the release to the Department, Missoula 9-1-1 dispatch,
the City Fire Department, Rural Fire Department, National Response Center and any other
entity required by law. The Plan should identify the skill and knowledge of the person or
position responsible for actions in the event of a spill.
(C)	The Pollution Prevention Permit shall be valid for a period of two years. The applicant must
apply for permit renewal at least 60 days prior to permit expiration.
(D)	To obtain a Pollution Prevention Permit from the Department the applicant shall pay an application
fee in an amount determined by the Board.
(E)	The Department shall issue a Pollution Prevention Permit within 30 days of determining that the
applicant has submitted a complete and accurate permit application and the pollution prevention plan
complies with the requirements of this Ordinance. The Department may require a facility inspection to
ensure compliance with the requirements of this Ordinance before a permit is issued.
Section 13.26.060 FACILITY CLOSURE PERMIT
(A) After the effective date of this Ordinance, any facility that is required to have a Pollution
Prevention Permit by this Ordinance must obtain a facility Closure Permit as required by this section.
Applications for a Closure Permit shall be filed with the Department no later than 30 days after (1) the
activity regulated by this Ordinance is permanently terminated, or (2) the activity regulated by this
Ordinance has been discontinued for one year. If a facility is required by State or Federal law to obtain
a closure permit, a copy of such permit, supplemented with such other information as may be required
by this section, shall suffice to meet the facility closure permit requirement of this section. All
applications shall include:
(1)	A Closure Permit Application Form, supplied by the Department.
(2)	A written record identifying the Regulated Substances and quantities at the facility on the
date on which the activity regulated by this Ordinance terminated or was discontinued, and a
description of the Regulated Substances removed from the facility before or at the time the
activity is terminated or discontinued.
(3)	If the facility has underground sumps, injection wells, underground tanks, or any other
structure that may have contained or become contaminated with regulated substances, the
application shall include a plan to collect samples to assess whether contaminants are present
near the structure. The Department shall provide a guidance document for sampling
requirements to assist the applicant in complying with this requirement.
(4)	Results of any soil or groundwater samples collected on site.
(5)	Such other information as the Department may require which is relevant to the
environmental condition of the facility.
11

-------
(B)	If the Closure Permit application and required submittals are not complete, the Department shall
notify the applicant in writing of the deficiencies and the applicant shall have 45 days to cure the
deficiencies.
(C)	The Department shall issue a Closure Permit within 30 days of finding that the Closure Permit
Application Form is accurate and complete and all appropriate copies of sample analyses have been
submitted to the Department showing that the facility has complied with this section.
Section 13.26.070 REPORTING OF RELEASES
(A)	A person who owns, operates or controls a facility or a person responsible for a release must
report a release of a Regulated Substance to the Missoula 9-1-1 Center by telephone immediately in the
following cases:
(1)	A release of petroleum in an amount greater than 25 gallons.
(2)	A release of a Regulated Substance other than petroleum in a quantity which exceeds the
lesser of the threshold quantity of this Ordinance or the reportable quantity under the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980,
as amended.
(B)	Exemption from the requirement to report a release, is not intended to relieve, in whole or in part,
a person's responsibility to remediate or eliminate contamination caused by a release, as may be
required by this Ordinance or any other state, federal or local law or regulation.
Section 13.26.080	PROHIBITED ACTIVITY
It is unlawful for any person to:
(a)	cause contamination or to place, cause to be placed, or allow to remain in place any substance in a
location where it is likely to cause contamination;
(b)	violate any provision set forth in a permit for the facility issued pursuant to this Ordinance;
(c)	violate any order issued pursuant to this Ordinance; or
(d)	violate any provision of this Ordinance.
Section 13.26.090 PROTECTION OF WATER SUPPLY WELLS
(A) New water supply wells installed after the effective date of this Ordinance shall comply with the
following:
(1)	New and replacement public and private water supply wells must be installed within
design standards established by the Montana Administrative Rules, A.R.M. §36.21.670
through A.R.M. §36.21.679 and A.R.M. §16.20.401.
(2)	Wells of new community and non-community non-transient water systems may not be
constructed:
(a)	Within 1000 feet of any hazardous waste management facility required to have a
permit, Class II landfill, bulk petroleum storage facility, fuel pipeline, fueling facility
not meeting the design standards of section 13.26.040 (C) or (D) of this Ordinance,
chemical manufacturing facility, hazardous substance tank not meeting the
requirements of section 13.26.040 (G) of this Ordinance, and any site where a release
to groundwater has been reported to a state or federal agency.
(b)	Within 250 feet of a Class III landfill, railroad track, the edge of pavement of the
principal north-south or east-west hazardous substance transportation routes, or the
subsurface discharge point of a public sewage disposal system.
12

-------
(c)	Within 100 feet of a sewer lift station serving a publicly-owned or public sewage
system, storm water injection well, or wastewater absorption system, as defined in the
Missoula City-County Health Board, Regulation No. 1.
(d)	Within 50 feet of any sewer main or unlined irrigation ditch.
The siting requirements of subsections 13.26.090 (A)(2), may be waived by the Department if
it is demonstrated to the Department through scientific and technical evidence that the proposed
location of a new well is the only practical site available and the potential for contamination to
the well or groundwater is reduced by such other measures as the Department may require.
(B)	After the effective date of this Ordinance, no person shall construct or operate a new:
(1)	Hazardous waste management facility required to have a permit, Class II landfill, bulk
petroleum storage facility, chemical manufacturing facility, fuel pipeline, fueling facility not
meeting the design standards of section 13.26.040 (C) or (D) of this Ordinance, or a hazardous
substance tank not meeting the requirements of section 13.26.040 (G) of this Ordinance within
1000 feet of a community or non-transient non-community public water supply well.
(2)	Class III landfill, railroad track, or the discharge point of a public sewage disposal system
within 250 feet of a community or non-transient non-community public water supply well.
(3)	Publicly-owned or public sewage system sewer lift station or wastewater absorption
system, as defined in the Missoula City-County Health Board Regulation No. 1 within 100 feet
of a community or non-transient non-community public water supply well.
(4)	Sewer main or storm water injection well within 50 feet of a community or non-transient
non-community public water supply well.
(C)	No person shall install a new public water supply well or system if a water main which is part of
an existing public water supply system regulated by the Montana Public Service Commission is located
within 1000 feet of any property to be served by the proposed new public water supply system, and the
owner of the existing public water supply system approves of the connection.
(D)	No person shall install a new private drinking water supply well if the primary structure located on
the property is situated within 200 feet of a water main which is part of an existing public water supply
system regulated by the Montana Public Service Commission, the property abuts the right-of-way in
which the main is located, and the owner of the existing public water supply system approves of the
connection.
(E)	If a property within the aquifer protection area is part of a proposed division of land or phased
division of land involving 10 or more parcels or 25 or more persons, the person proposing the
development shall provide for a public water supply system, as defined in A.R.M. §16.20.202(31),
such that the quality of water provided to the families or persons meets the"requirements of the federal
Safe Drinking Water Act.
(F)	U.S. Highway 93 and Interstate Highway 90 shall serve as the principal North-South and East-
West hazardous substance transportation routes in the Missoula Valley. The City of Missoula shall
provide adequate signing to indicate location of the routes to persons who transport hazardous
substances through the valley.
Section 13.26.100 VARIANCES
(A) Purpose: Variances provide limited flexibility from strict compliance with specific Ordinance
requirements.
13

-------
(B)	Applicability: When a person believes he or she meets the criteria for a variance set forth in
subsection (D) below, such person may apply for Board approval of a variance following the procedure
in subsection (F).
(C)	Fees: The Board shall establish a fair and reasonable variance application fee based on the cost to
give notice of hearing and investigate the proposed variance. The application fee must be paid in full
before a variance will be considered. Application fees are not refundable. The Board may approve
changes in fees at regularly scheduled board meetings.
(D)	Criteria for Variances: The Board may approve of a variance to strict compliance with specific
Ordinance requirements only if it finds all of the following:
(1)	The applicant is subject to special circumstances which are:
(a)	peculiar to the applicant's facility or situation; and
(b)	not caused by the applicant's actions or inaction; and
(2)	Substantial undue hardship would result from requiring strict compliance with the
requirements(s) from which the variance is sought by:
(a)	creating an unreasonable financial burden on the applicant; and
(b)	depriving the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other persons similarly
situated under the terms of the Ordinance.
(3)	The variance must prevent aquifer and public water supply contamination and protect
public health, safety and welfare to an extent similar to the requirements(s) from which the
variance is sought.
(E)	Variance Restrictions:
(1)	The Board may not approve a variance which may adversely affect the health, safety, or
welfare of any individual.
(2)	No variance granted shall be construed to relieve an applicant of its obligations under
other provisions of this Ordinance, or under other local, state, and federal laws.
(3)	Variances are non-transferable and apply only to the applicant to whom they are granted
for the period stipulated by the Board.
(F)	Variance Approval Procedure:
(1)	A complete variance application shall be submitted to the Department, including:
(a)	Applicant's name and address
(b)	Specific provision(s) of the Ordinance from which the variance is requested.
(c)	Legal description or address where alternative is requested.
(d)	Detailed and accurate description of the proposed alternative under consideration.
(e)	Written explanation addressing each criteria under section 13.26.100 (D) (l)-(3).
(f)	Other relevant information which the Department may require which is obtainable
by the applicant.
(2)	The Department shall have 7 days to determine if an application is complete.
(3)	If the Department determines that the application is not complete, it shall notify the
applicant of the deficiencies.
(4)	If the Department determines that the application is complete, the Board shall schedule a
public hearing within 45 days of the Department's determination.
(5)	The Department shall serve notice of the hearing to the applicant's last known address by
personal service or certified mail at least 14 days before the hearing is scheduled. The
Department shall publish notice of hearing in a newspaper of general circulation in Missoula
County at least 4 days before the hearing. Notice shall include:
(a)	Name and address of applicant;
(b)	Time, location and nature of hearing; and
(c)	Address and phone number where interested persons may obtain information.
14

-------
(G)	Order of Hearings:
(1) Hearings shall proceed in the following order:
(a)	First, the Board shall hear the staff report, if any, on the proposed variance.
(b)	Second, the applicant shall present relevant evidence to the Board.
(c)	Third, the Board shall hear any person in support of or in opposition to the
proposed variance and shall accept any related letters, documents, or materials.
(H)	Disposition of Hearing and Continuances:
(1)	The Board shall deny, approve, or approve with conditions an application for variance to
specific requirements of this Ordinance.
(2)	The Board shall inform the applicant of its decision in writing, along with reasons for
approving, conditionally approving, or denying the variance, within 15 days of its decision.
(3)	The Board may continue a hearing for a period not to exceed 45 days.
(4)	A hearing may be continued for longer than 45 days only if circumstances require a longer
period and both the Board and the applicant agree to a longer period.
(I)	Appeals: Any person adversely affected by a variance decision of the Board may initiate judicial
review.
Section 13.26.110 INSPECTIONS
(A)	The Department is authorized to enter and inspect at reasonable hours (or at any time on evidence
of a release), upon presentation of credentials with or without prior notice, all facilities within the
Aquifer Protection Area which it reasonably believes may handle Regulated Substances, in order to
determine that the provisions of this Ordinance are being followed.
(B)	If a person with authority over a facility will not permit an inspection, the City Attorney's office
may apply to the City Municipal Court for a search warrant, based on probable cause to issue a
warrant to inspect, survey or examine the facility and the premises on which it is located for potential
violations of this Ordinance or in the interest of public health, safety, and general welfare.
(C)	If a facility appears vacant or abandoned, and the property owner cannot be readily contacted to
obtain consent for an inspection, in the interest of public health, safety and general welfare an agent of
the City may enter any open or unsecured portion of the facility to conduct an inspection.
(D)	Agents of the City or Department shall be provided with official identification and will show their
identification when making an inspection.
(E)	Law enforcement officers shall assist in making inspections when the Department requests their
assistance, when necessary to provide for safe access and entry to the facility and at such time that law
enforcement assistance can be reasonably scheduled or when a clear hazard to public health, safety or
welfare exists.
Section 13.26.120 ENFORCEMENT
(A)	The Department shall have the power and authority to administer and enforce the provisions of
this Ordinance.
(B)	Whenever the Department has knowledge or evidence that a violation of this Ordinance has
occurred, the Department may issue a written notice to be served personally or by certified mail on the
alleged violator or its agent. This notice shall specify:
(1) the provision of this Ordinance or permit alleged to be violated;
15

-------
(2)	the facts alleged to constitute the violation; and
(3)	any penalties sought to be assessed pursuant to section 13.26.130.
This notice may also include an order for corrective action, which shall specify as applicable:
(1)	the specific nature of corrective action that the Department requires, which may include
without limitation:
(a)	investigation, sampling and analysis to confirm a release or contamination;
(b)	containment, removal and remedial action to abate and reduce contamination or
the threat of contamination;
(c)	the submission of a corrective action plan and corrective action progress reports
or any other information deemed appropriate to protect human health and the
environment; and
(2)	the time within which the corrective action is to be implemented.
The order for corrective action shall become final unless, within ten (10) days after the notice and
order is received, the person named requests in writing a hearing before the Board. Upon receipt of
the request, the Board shall schedule a hearing to be held not more than 45 days after the receipt of the
request. If the person who owns, operates or controls the facility fails to comply with investigation or
sampling required in an order issued pursuant to this section, the Department may conduct said
investigation or sampling and the person so ordered shall be responsible for paying for Department staff
time, analytical costs, and any incidental costs associated with the investigation and/or sampling.
Failure of said person to pay the Department staff time or analytical costs shall be a violation of this
Ordinance.
(C)	If, after a hearing held pursuant to this section, the Board finds that violations have occurred, it
shall either affirm or modify the previously issued order. If, after the hearing the Board fmds that no
violation has occurred, it shall rescind the previously issued order.
(D)	Instead of issuing the order provided for in subsection (B), the Department may either:
(1)	require the alleged violator to appear before the Board for a hearing at a time and place
specified in the notice and answer the charges complained of; or
(2)	initiate any other action authorized by this Ordinance.
(E)	In connection with a Board hearing held under this Chapter, the Board may and on application by
a person shall, compel the attendance of witnesses and the production of evidence on behalf of the
persons.
(F)	A person aggrieved by an order of the Board may within fourteen (14) days apply for rehearing
upon only one or more of the following grounds:
(1)	the Board acted without or in excess of its powers;
(2)	the order was procured by fraud;
(3)	the order is contrary to the evidence;
(4)	the applicant has discovered new evidence, material to him/her, which he/she could not
with reasonable diligence have discovered and produced at the hearing;
(5)	competent evidence was excluded to the prejudice of the applicant.
(G)	Within thirty (30) calendar days after the decision, or in the case of rehearing within (30) calendar
days of the rehearing, a party aggrieved thereby may appeal to the municipal court.
(H)	The municipal court shall hear and decide the cause upon the record of the Board. The court shall
determine whether or not the Board properly exercised its authority, whether or not the findings of the
Board were supported by substantial competent evidence, and whether or not the Board made errors of
law prejudicial to the appellant.
16

-------
(I) Either the Board or the person aggrieved may appeal from the decision of the municipal court to
the supreme court.
Section 13.26.130 CRIMINAL PENALTIES
(A)	Any person who violates any of the provisions of this Ordinance, or any order made pursuant to
this Ordinance, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and subject, upon conviction thereof, to a fine not to
exceed five hundred dollars ($500) or by imprisonment in the County jail not to exceed sixty days, or
by both such fine and imprisonment. Each day a violation exists shall constitute a separate offense.
(B)	Action under this section shall not be a bar to enforcement of this Ordinance or orders made
pursuant thereto, by injunction or other appropriate remedy. The Board or the Department may
institute and maintain any and all enforcement proceedings.
(C)	All fines collected shall be deposited in the City General Fund.
(D)	Pollution prevention efforts made by the violator, the economic benefit of not complying with any
section of the Ordinance, and the gravity of the offense shall be considered in determining penalties for
violations of this Ordinance.
(E)	The City of Missoula may not enter into a vendor or construction contract, grant, or loan
with any person who has been convicted of an offense under this Ordinance. This prohibition
shall:
(1)	continue for a period of 1 year following the date of conviction;
(2)	affect each facility owned or operated by the person; and;
(3)	continue until the Department certifies that the conditions giving rise to the conviction have
been corrected.
(F)	Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the municipal court may also order that the offender
take action to enhance public health or the environment by restoring or otherwise improving the quality
of the Missoula Valley Aquifer in a manner consistent with public health, safety, and general welfare
and this provisions of this Ordinance.
Section 13.26.140 INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
If a person continues to operate a facility or engage in an activity in violation of the provisions of this
Ordinance, then the Board or the Department may file an action for injunctive relief in the District Court or in
the City Municipal Court if the City Municipal Court has jurisdiction and authority to do so.
Section 13.26.150	SEVERABILITY
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or word of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be
invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this
Ordinance. The Council hereby declares that it would have passed the Ordinance and each section, subsection,
sentence, clause, phrase, and words thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections,
sentences, clauses, phrases or words have been declared invalid or unconstitutional, and if for any reason this
Ordinance should be declared invalid or unconstitutional, then the remaining Ordinance provisions will be in full
force and effect.
Codification Instructions - This Ordinance shall be codified as Chapter 13.26 Missoula Municipal Code,
Sections 13.26.010 through 13.26.150.
17

-------
APPENDIX F
7-13-4501	LOCAL GOVERNMENT	742
Part 45
Local Water Quality Districts
7-13-450L Findings and purpose. (1) Pollution and degradation of
surface water and ground water pose both immediate and long-term threats
to the	safety, and welfare of citizens of this state.
(2)	Because of the expense and difficulty of ground water rehabilitation
and cleanup and the need to protect drinking water supplies, policies and
programs to prevent ground water contamination must be implemented.
(3)	The purpose of thin part is to provide for the creation of local water
quality districts to protect, preserve, and improve the quality of surface water
and ground water.
History: En. Sec. 1, Ch. 357, L. 1991.
7-13-4502. Definitions. As used in this part, unless the context indicates
otherwise, the following definitions apply:
(1)	"Board of health and environmental sciences" as used in this part
means the board of health and environmental sciences as provided in
2-15-2104.
(2)	"Board of directors" means the board of directors provided for in
7-13-4516 or a joint board of directors provided for in 7-13-4527.
(3)	"Commissioners" means the board of county commissioners or the
governing body of a city-county consolidated government.
(4)	"Family residential unit" means a single-family dwelling.
(5)	"Fee-assessed units" means all real property with improvements,
including taxable and tax-exempt property as shown on the property assess-
ment records maintained by the county, and mobile homes as defined in
15-24-201.
(6)	"Local water quality district" means an area established with definite
boundaries for the purpose of protecting, preserving, and improving the
quality of surface water and ground water in the district as authorized by this
part.
History: En. Sec. 2, Ch. 357, L. 1991.
7-13-4503 reserved.
7-13-4504. Authorization to initiate creation of a local water
quality district. (1) The commissioners may initiate the creation of a local
water quality district for the purpose of protecting, preserving, and improving
the quality of surface water and ground water, as provided by this part, by
holding a public meeting, passing a resolution of intention, providing an
opportunity for owners of fee-assessed units to protest, and conducting a
public hearing to hear and decide upon protests, as provided in 7-13-4506,
7-13-4507, 7-13-4509, and 7-13-4510.
(2) A city or town may be included in the district if approved by the
governing body of the city or town.
History: En. Sec. 3, Ch. 357, L. 1991.

-------
742
743
UTILITY SERVICES
7-13-4507
3n and degradation of
and long-term threats
ite.
id water rehabilitation
supplies, policies and
be implemented,
creation of local water
uality of surface water
s the context indicates
as used in this part
rnces as provided in
ctors provided for in
-13-4527.
ommissioners or the
it
dwelling.
with improvements,
. the property assess-
homes as denned in
blished with definite
and improving the
as authorized by this
of a local water
e creation of a local
~ving, and improving
-ied by this part, by
ition, providing an
and conducing a
vided in 7-13-4506,
if approved by the
7-13-4505. Public meeting—resolution of intention to create local
water quality district. (1) The commissioners shall hold at least one public
meeting concerning the creation of a local water quality district prior to the
passage of a resolution of intention to create the district
(2) The resolution of intention must designate:
(a)	the proposed name of the district;
(b)	the necessity for the proposed district;
(c)	a general description of the territory or lands included in the district,
including identification of the district boundaries that must correspond to the
area in which the need for the district exists pursuant to subsection (2Kb);
(d)	a general description of the proposed water quality program;
(e)	the initial estimated cost of the water quality program; and
(f)	the initial proposed fees to be charged.
History: En. Sec. 4, Ch. 357, L» 1991.
7-13-4506. Participation of cities and towns. (1) Upon passage of a
resolution of intention, the commissioners shall transmit a copy of the resolu-
tion to the governing body of any incorporated city or town within the proposed
local water quality district for consideration by the governing body.
(2)	If the governing body of the city or town by resolution concurs in the
resolution of intention, a copy of the resolution of concurrence must be
transmitted to the commissioners.
(3)	If the governing body of the incorporated city or town does not concur
in the resolution of intention, the commissioners may not include the city or
town in the district but may continue to develop a district that excludes the
city or town.
Hiatory; En. Sac. 5, Ch. 357, L. 1991.
7-13-4507. Notice of resolutions of intention and concurrence. (1)
The commissioners shall give notice of the passage of the resolution of
intention and resolution of concurrence, if applicable, and publish a notice
that:
(a)	describes the local water quality program that would be implemented
in the local water quality district;
(b)	specifies the initial proposed fees to be charged;
(c)	designates the time and place where the commissioners will hear and
decide upon protests made against the operation of the proposed district; and
(d)	states that a description of the boundaries for the proposed district is
included in the resolution on file in the county clerk's office.
(2)	The notice must be published as provided in 7-1-2121 and must also
be posted in three public places within the boundaries of the proposed district.
(3)	The commissioners shall mail to all owners of proposed fee-assessed
units, as listed in the county assessor's office, a postcard that identifies the
location where the resolution of intention, resolution of concurrence, and
protest forms may be obtained.
History; En. Sec. 6, Ch. 357, L. 1991.

-------
7-13-4509
LOCAL GOVERNMENT
744
7-13-4508 reserved.
7-13-4509. Right to protest — procedure. (1) At any time within 30
daya after the date of the first publication of the notice provided for in
7-13-4507(1), a person owning a fee-assessed unit located within the proposed
lnra] water quality district 'may make written protest against the proposed
district the fees proposed to be charged.
(2)	The protest must be in writing and must be delivered to the county
clerk, who "Hall endorse on it the date the protest is received.
(3)	Owners may file one protest per fee-assessed unit.
Histoiyi En. Soc* 7f Ch> 357p 1W1«
7-13-4510. Hearing on protest. (1) At the next regular meeting of the
commissioners after the expiration of the time period provided for in
7-13-4509, the commissioners shall hear and decide upon all protests.
(2) The commissioners may adjourn the hearing as necessary.
History: En. Sec. 8, Ch. 357, L1901.
7-13-4511. Sufficient protest to require referendum. If the owners
of more thaw 20% of the fee-assessed units in the proposed district protest the
creation of the proposed district and the fees proposed to be charged, the
commissioners are barred from further proceedings on the matter unless the
commissioners submit a referendum to create the district to the registered
voters who reside within the proposed district and the registered voters
approve the creation of the district and establish the fees by approving the
referendum.
History: En. Sec. A, Ch. 357, L. 1991.
7-13-4512. Referendum. (1) The commissioners may adopt a resolution
causing a referendum to be submitted to the registered voters who reside
within a proposed local water quality district to authorize the creation of the
district and establish fees.
(2) The referendum must state:
(a)	the type and maximum rate of the initial proposed fees that would be
imposed, consistent with the requirements of 7-13-4523;
(b)	the nrnrimiim dollar amount for a family residential unit;
(c)	the type of activities proposed to be financed, including a general
description of the local water quality program; and
(d)	a general description of the areas included in the proposed district.
History: En. Soc. 10, Ch. 357, L. 1991.
7-13-4513. Insufficient protest to bar proceedings — resolution
creating district — power to implement local water quality program.
(1) The commissioners may create a local water quality district, establish fees,
and appoint a board of directors if the commissioners find that insufficient
protests have been made in accordance with 7-13-4511 or if the registered
voters who reside in the proposed district have approved a referendum as
provided in 7-13-4512.
(2) To create a local water quality district, the commissioners shall pass
a resolution in accordance with the resolution of intention introduced and
passed by the commissioners or with the terms of the referendum.

-------
744
745
UTILITY SERVICES
7-13-4517
any time within 30
:ice provided for in
within the proposed
-gainst the proposed
vered to the county
2ived.
?ular meeting of the
od provided for in
i all protests,
ecessary.
ium. If the owners
! district protest the
1 to be charged, the
e matter unless the
x to the registered
.» registered voters
«s by approving the
>y adopt a resolution
' voters who reside
: the creation of the
t fees that would be
tial unit;
deluding a general
proposed district
igs — resolution
. quality program,
strict, establish fees,
.d that insufficient
>r if the registered
ed a referendum as
ssioners shall pass
on introduced and
ferendum.
(3) The commissioners and board of directors may implement a local
water quality program after the program is approved by the board of health
and environmental sciences pursuant to 75-5-311.
HUtory: En. Sec. 11, Ch. 357, L. 1991.
7-13-4514 and 7-13-4515 reserved.
7-13-4516. Board of directors. (1) Except as provided in subsections
(3Xb) (5), the commissioners shall appoint a board of directors for the local
water quality district
(2)	The board of directors consists of not less than five members, including
one county commissioner or member of the governing body of a city-county
consolidated government one member from the governing body of each
incorporated city or town that is included in the district, one member of the
county or city-county board of health, and if the district includes a substantial
amount of land that is within a conservation district or districts, one conser-
vation district supervisor.
(3)	The remaining members of the board of directors are selected from
interested persons, as follows:
(a)	from persons whose residences or businesses are distributed equally
throughout the district if a county is the only unit of local government
participating in the district; or
(b)	through mutual agreement by all governing bodies if a county and one
or more incorporated cities and towns are participating in the district
(4)	Terms of members of the board of directors are staggered and, after
the initial terms, are for 3 years.
(5)	In counties that have a full-time city-county health department, the
city-county board of health, created as authorized by 50-2-106, may be
designated as the board of directors for the local water quality district If the
city-county board of health is designated as the board of directors and if the
local water quality district includes a substantial amount of land that is
within a conservation district or districts, the board of directors must also
include one member who is a conservation district supervisor.
Hiatory; En. Sec. 12, Ch. 357,L. 1991.
7-13-4517. Powers and duties of board of directors. The board o:
directors of a local water quality district, with the approval of the commis-
sioners, may:
(1)	develop a local water quality program, to be submitted to the board o
health and environmental sciences, for the protection, preservation, anc
improvement of the quality of surface water and ground water in the district
In developing the program, the board of directors shall consult with the bo art
or boards of supervisors of conservation districts, established as provided ir
76-15-201, whose geographical area of jurisdiction is included within th<
boundaries of the local water quality district
(2)	implement a local water quality program;
(3)	administer the budget of the local water quality district;
(4)	employ personnel;
(5)	purchase, rent or lease equipment and material necessary to develoj
and implement an effective program;

-------
7-13-4518
LOCAL GOVERNMENT
746
(6)	cooperate or contract with any corporation, association, individual, or
group of individuals, including any agency of the federal, state, or local
governments, in order to develop and implement an effective program;
(7)	receive gifts, grants, or donations for the purpose of advancing the
pmgwim and acquire by gift, deed, or purchase, land necessary to implement
the local water quality program;
(8)	administer local ordinances that are adopted by the commissioners
governing bodies of the participating cities and towns and that pertain to
the protection, preservation, and improvement of the quality of surface water
and ground water;
(9)	apply for and receive from the federal government or the state govern-
ment, on behalf of the local water quality district, money to ai d the local water
quality program;
(10)	borrow money for assistance in planning or refinancing a local water
quality district and repay loans with the money received from the established
fees; and
(11)	construct facilities that cost not more than $5,000 and maintain
facilities necessary to accomplish the purposes of the district, including but
not limited to facilities for removal of water-borne contaminants; water
quality improvement; sanitary sewage collection, disposal, and treatment;
and storm water or surface water drainage collection, disposal, and treatment.
History: En. Sec. 13, Ch. 357, L. 1991.
7-13-4518. Powers and duties of commissioners. In addition to the
other powers and duties of the commissioners authorized by this part, the
commissioners may:
(1)	adopt local ordinances in accordance with the requirements of
75-5-311;
(2)	establish fees;
(3)	review and approve the annual budget of the local water quality
district; and
(4)	approve the construction of facilities that cost more than S5,000 but
not more than 5100,000 a year and that are necessary to accomplish the
purposes of this part, including but not limited to facilities for removal of
water-borne contaminants; water quality improvement; sanitary sewage col-
lection, disposal, and treatment; and storm water or surface water drainage
collection, disposal, and treatment.
History: En. Sec. 14, Ch. 357, L. 1991.
7-13-4519. Role of county attorney — contracts for legal services.
The board of directors may, by agreement with the commissioners, contract
with the county attorney or an attorney licensed to practice law in the state
of Montana to perform legal services for the local water quality district.
HUtory: En. Sec. 17, Ch. 357, L. 1991.
7-13-4520 reserved.
7-13-4521. Implementation of program. The board of directors may
implement a local water quality program in parts of a local water quality
district before the program is implemented in the district as a whole. If a

-------
*146
747
UTILITY SERVICES
7-13-4524
iividual, or
e, or local
7am;
ancing the
mplement
missioners
pertain to
face water
ite govern-
ocal water •
local water
stablished
maintain
luding but
its; water
reatment;
treatment.
ion to the
s part, the
ments of
'r quality
o5,000 but
—.plish the
.'moval of
wage col-
r drainage
services.
. contract
the state
-:rict.
¦ctors may
r quality
^ole. If a
program is initially implemented in only a portion of a district, the fees may
be levied only against that part of the district where the program is being
implemented. As the program is expanded throughout the district, each
additional part of the district that is covered by the program shall pay the fee.
History: En. Sec. 15, Ch. 357, L1991.
7-13-4522. Changes in district boundaries. The board of directors
may by resolution make changes in the boundaries of a local water quality
district that the board determines are reasonable and proper, following the
same procedures of notice and hearing provided in 7-13-4507, 7-13-4509, and
7-13-4510, except that the notice provisions of 7-13-4507(3) apply only to the
owners of proposed fee-assessed units in new areas that are proposed to be
included in the district. If 20% of the owners of fee-assessed units in the new
areas protest the inclusion in the district and the fees proposed to be charged,
the board of directors is barred from further proceedings on the matter unless
the registered voters who reside in the areas proposed for inclusion agree to
be included in the district and accept the proposed fees by approving a
referendum in accordance with the provisions of 7-13-4512.
History: En. Sec. 16, Ch. 357, L. 1991.
7-13-4523. Fees — determination of rates — increases — exemp-
tion for agricultural water use. (1) The commissioners shall determine fee
rates according to a classification system that is based upon the volume of
water withdrawn and the volume and type of waste produced at each fee-as-
sessed unit in the local water quality district.
(2)	Fees for commercial and industrial units must be based on a com-
parison with a typical family residential unit as to volume of water withdrawn
and volume and type of waste produced. Commercial and industrial units may
be assessed fees that are not greater than 50 times the fees assessed on a
family residential unit.
(3)	The commissioners may increase fees up to 10% a year by passing a
resolution to establish the new fee rate. The commissioners may not approve
a proposed fee increase of more than 10% a year unless notice of the proposed
increase is given as provided in 7-13-4507(1) and (2) and opportunity for
protest is provided as set forth in 7-13-4509 and 7-13-4510. If more than 20%
of the owners of fee assessed units in the district protest, the fee increase may
not be approved except through the referendum procedure provided for in
7-13-4512.
(4)	Water withdrawals for irrigation and livestock use and related water
discharges may not be assessed fees.
History: En. Sec. 18, Ch. 357, L 1991.
7-13-4524. Procedure to collect fees. The month the local water
quality district is created pursuant to 7-13-4513, the department of revenue
or its agents shall ensure that the amount of the fees is placed on the county
tax assessments for each fee-assessed unit Unpaid fees are a lien on the
fee-assessed unit and may be enforced as a lien for nonpayment of property
taxes.
History: En. Sec. 19, Ch. 357, L1991.

-------
7-13-4525
LOCAL GOVERNMENT
748
749
7-13-4525. Disposition and administration of proceeds. (1) All fees
and other money received by a local water quality district must be placed in
a separate fund maintained by the county treasurer and must be used solely
for the purpose for which the local water quality district was created.
(2) The commissioners shall draw warrants upon the fund on claims
approved by the board of directors.
History: En. Sec. 20, Ch. 357, L. 1891.
7-13-4526 reserved.
7-13-4527. Creation of joint local water quality districts. (1) Joint
local water quality districts are districts that encompass two or more counties
or parts of counties.
(2) A joint local water quality district may be created if the commissioners
of each affected county:
(a)	create the district, following the procedures prescribed under
7-13-4504 through 7-13-4507 and 7-13-4509 through 7-13-4513; and
(b)	appoint a joint board of directors that consists of at least five members
and that is consistent with the requirement of 7-13-4528(2)(b), if applicable.
History: En. Sec. 21, Ch. 357, L. 1991.
7-13-4528. Composition of board of directors of joint district —
terms. (1) The board of directors for a joint district consists of one commis-
sioner from each county involved, one member from each incorporated city or
town included in the district, one member from each county or city-county
board of health, and if the joint district includes a substantial amount of land
that is within a conservation district or districts, one conservation district
supervisor.
(2)	The remaining members of the joint board of directors are selected
from interested citizens, as follows:
(a)	persons whose residences or businesses are distributed equally
throughout the district if counties are the only units of government participat-
ing in the joint district; or
(b)	through mutual agreement of all commissioners and governing bodies
of cities and towns participating in the district
(3)	Terms of appointed members are staggered and, after the initial
terms, are for 3 years.
History; En. Sec. 22, Ch. 357, L. 1991.
7-13-4529. Administration of funds in joint districts. Pees and other
money collected by a joint local water quality district may be administered by
one county treasurer upon mutual agreement by the commissioners of the
counties participating in a joint local water quality district.
History; En. Sec. 23, Ch. 357, L. 1991.
7-14-101.
7-14-102.
7-14-103.
7-14-104.
7-14-105
7-14-111.
7-14-112
7-14-120.
7-14-201.
7-14-202.
7-14-203.
7-14-201.
7-14-205.
7-14-206.
7-14-207.
7-14-208.
7-14-209.
7-14-210.
7-14-211.
7-14-212.
7-14-2ia
7-14-214.
7-14-215.
7-14-216.
7-14-217.
7-14-218.
7-14-219
7-14-220
7-14-221
7-14-222
7-14-231
7-14-232
7-14-23:
7-14-234
7-14-23.'
7-14-231
7-14-23"
7-14-24
7-14-24!
7-14-24
7-14-24
7-14-24
7-14-24
7-14-3C
7-14-3(
7-14-3C
7-14-a

-------
425
WATER QUALITY
75-5-311
reasonable land, soil, and water conservation practices have been applied.
Conditions resulting from the reasonable operation of dams at July 1,1971,
are natural.
History: En. Sec. 121, Ch. 197, L. 1967; amd. Sac. 1, Ch. 21, L1971; amd. Sac. 1, Ch.
455, L. 1975; &CM. 1947,69-4801(2).
75-5-307. Hearings required for classification, formulation of
standards, and rulemaking. (1) Before streams are classified or standards
established or modified or rules, made, revoked, or modified, the boajrd shall
hold a public hearing. Notice of the hearing specifying the waters concerned
and the classification, standards, or modification of them and any rules
proposed to be made, revoked, or modified shall be published at least once a
week for 3 consecutive weeks in a daily newspaper of general circulation in
the area affected. Notice shall also be mailed directly to persons the board
believes may be affected by the proposed action. The council shall be given
not less than 30 days prior to first publication to comment on the proposed
action.
(2) At a hearing held under this section, the board shall give all interested
persons reasonable opportunity to submit data, views, or arguments, orally
or in writing. The board may make rules for the orderly conduct of the hearing
but need not require compliance with the rules of evidence or procedure
applicable to hearings held under 75-5-611.
HUtory. En. Sec. 134, Ch. 197, L. 1967; amd. Sec. 12, Ch. 21, L. 1971; R.C.M. 1947,
69-4814.
CroM-References
Montana Administrative Procedure Act—
rulemaking, 2-4-302.
75-5-308 through 75-5-310 reserved.
75-5-311. Local water quality districts — board approval — local
water quality programs. (1) A county that establishes a local water quality
iistrict according to the procedures specified in Title 7, chapter 13, part 45,
shall, in consultation with the department, undertake planning and informa-
tion-gathering activities necessary to develop a proposed local water quality
program.
(2)	A county may implement a local water quality program in a local water
quality district if the program is approved by the board after a hearing
conducted under 75-5-202.
(3)	In approving a local water qu ality program, the board shall determine
that the program is consistent with the purposes and requirements of Title
75, chapter 5, and that the program will be effective in protecting, preserving,
tod improving the quality of surface water and ground water, considering the
administrative organization, staff, and financial and other resources available
to implement the program.
(4)	¦ Subject to the board's approval, the commissioners and the governing
bodies of cities and towns that participate in a local water quality district may
&dopt local ordinances to regulate the following specific facilities and sources
pollution:
(a) onsite waste water disposal facilities;

-------
75-5-311
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
426
(b)	storm water runoff from paved surfaces;
(c)	service connections-between buildings and publicly owned sewer
mains;
(d)	facilities that use or Btore halogenated and nonhalogenated solvents,
including hazardous substances that are referenced in 40 CFR 261.31, United
States environmental protection agency hazardous waste numbers F001
through F005, as amended; and
(e)	internal combustion engine lubricants.
(5)	For the facilities and sources of pollution included in subsection (4)
and consistent with the provisions of subsection (6), the local ordinances may:
(a)	be compatible with or more stringent or more extensive than the
requirements imposed by 75-5-304, 75-5-305, and 75-5-401 through 75-5-404
and rules adopted under those sections to protect water quality, establish
waste discharge permit requirements, and establish best management prac-
tices for substances that have the potential to pollute state waters;
(b)	provide for administrative procedures, administrative orders and
actions, and civil enforcement actions that are consistent with 75-5-601
through 75-5-604, 75-5-611 through 75-5-616, 75-5-621, and 75-5-622 and
rules adopted under those sections; and
(c)	provide for civil penalties not to exceed SI,000 per violation, provided
that each day of violation of a local ordinance constitutes a separate violation,
and criminal penalties not to exceed S500 per day of violation or imprisonment
for not more than 30 days, or both.
(6)	The local ordinances authorized by this section may not:
(a)	duplicate the department's requirements and procedures relating to
permitting of waste discharge sources and enforcement of water quality
standards;
(b)	regulate any facility or source of pollution to the extent that the facility
or source is:
(i)	required to obtain a permit or other approval from the department or
federal government or is the subject of an administrative order, a consent
decree, or an enforcement action pursuant to Title 75, chapter 5, part 4; Title
75, chapter 6; Title 75, chapter 10; the federal Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, 42 U.S.C. 9601 through
9675, as amended; or federal environmental, safety, or health statutes and
regulations;
(ii)	exempted from obtaining a permit or other approval from the depart-
ment because the facility or source is required to obtain a permit or other
approval from another state agency or is the subject of an enforcement action
by another state agency; or
(iii)	subject to the provisions of Title 80, chapter 8 or chapter 15.
(7)	If the boundaries of a district are changed after the board has approved
the local water quality program for the district, the board of directors of the
local water quality district shall submit a program amendment to the board
and obtain the board's approval of the program amendment before implement-
ing the local water quality program in areas that have been added to the
district.

-------
[ON	42a	427	WATER QUALITY	75-&401
id publicly owned sewer
nonhalogenated solvents,
in 40 CFR 261.31, United
as waste Aumbers F001
deluded in subsection (4)
the local ordinances may;
more extensive than the
"5-5-401 through 75-5-404
water quality, establish
i best management prac-
Jte state waters;
'ministrative orders and
insistent with 75-5-60]
5-621, and 75-5-622 and
X) per violation, providec
utes a separate violation
violation or imprisonment
ion may not;
id procedures relating t
rcement of water qualit;
.he extent that the facilit
al from the department o:
strative order, a cons en
5, chapter 5, part 4; Titli
rehensive Environmenta
1 42 U.S.C. 9601 throug]
or health statutes ani
(8)	The department shall monitor the implementation of local water
quality programs to ensure that the programs are adequate to protect,
preserve, ""d improve the quality of the surface water and ground water and
or"	n/4rwiwi«rt^»rwl in n itiinnwmwnint^rih	pnrpn»KX ar») »wyiiw».
ments of Title 75, chapter 5. If the department finds that a local water quality
program is not adequate to protect, preserve, and improve the quality of the
surface water and ground water or is not being administered in a maimer
consistent with the purposes and requirements of Title 75, chapter 5, the
department shall report to the board.
(9)	If the board determines that a local water quality program is inade-
quate to protect, preserve, and improve the quality of the surface water and
ground water in the local water quality district or that the program is being
administered in a manner inconsistent with Title 75, chapter 5, the board
gh«n give notice and conduct a hearing on the matter.
(10)	If after the hearing the board determines that the program is inade-
quate to protect, preserve, and improve the quality of the surface water and
ground water in the local water quality district or that it is not being
administered in a manner consistent with the purposes of Title 75, chapter 5,
the board shall require that necessary corrective measures be taken within a
reasonable time, not to exceed 60 days.
(11)	If an ordinance adopted under this section conflicts with a require-
ment imposed by the department's water quality program, the department's
requirement supersedes the local ordinance.
(12)	If the board finds that, because of the complexity or magnitude of a
particular water pollution source, the control of the source is beyond the
reasonable capability of a local water quality district or may be more efficient-
ly and economically performed at the state level, the board may direct the
department to assume and retain control over the source. A charge may not
be assessed against the local water quality district for that source. Findings
made under this subsection may be based on the nature of the source involved
or on the source's relationship to the size of the immunity in which it is
located.
History; En. Sec. 24, Ch. 357, L. 1991.
approval from the depart
obtain a permit or othe
of an enforcement actioi
ir 8 or chapter 15.
ir the board has approve
board of directors of th
amendment to the boai
• dment before implemeo
have been added to th
Part 4
Permits
75-5-40L Board rules for permits. (1) The board shall adopt rules:
(a)	governing application for permits to discharge sewage, industrial
wastes, or other wastes into state waters, including rules requiring the filing
of plans and specifications relating to the construction, modification, or
operation of disposal systems;
(b)	governing the issuance, denial, modification, or revocation of permits.

-------
LOCAL WATER QUALITY DISTRICT - PROPOSED RULES, MARCH 19, 1993
KTTTJR T PURPOSE The purpose of this subchapter is to establish procedures for the
approval of local water quality district programs, to establish procedures for granting
enforcement authority to local water quality districts, and to ensure that the programs and
enforcement actions are consistent with Title 75, chapter 5, MCA. Nothing in these rules may
be considered to limit or restrict the authority of a local government to adopt rules and
regulations authorized by other laws of the state
AUTH: 75-5-106, 75-5-201, MCA; IMP: 75-5-106, 75-5-311, MCA.
RULE TT DEFINITIONS For the purposes of this subchapter, the following definitions,
in addition to those in sections 7-13-4502 and 75-5-103, MCA, will apply:
(1)	"District" means a "local water quality district" established with definite
boundaries for the purpose of protecting, maintaining, and improving the quality of state water
as authorized by Title 7, chapter 13, part 45, MCA and the rules of this subchapter.
(2)	"Program" means a local water quality district program designed to protect,
maintain, and improve the quality of state water within the boundaries of .a local water quality
district established according to the procedures specified in Title 7, chapter 13, part 45, MCA.
AUTH: 75-5-201, MCA; IMP: 75-5-106, 75-5-311, MCA.
RULE ni NOTIFICATION REOUIKFA/tfnts Upon passage of a resolution of
intention to create a local water quality district, the commissioners shall submit a copy of the
resolution to the department as notification that the commissioners intend to develop a district
program and to apply for board approval of the program. Submission of the resolution of
intention to the department initiates the consultation process required by 75-5-311(1), MCA.
AUTH: 75-5-201, MCA; IMP: 75-5-311, MCA
RULE IV PROGRAM APPLICATION CONTENT To obtain approval of a district
program, the district's board of directors shall file an application with the department. The
application shall contain the following:
(1)	a map delineating the boundaries of the district and a description of the existing
or potential water pollution problems within the proposed district;
(2)	a map indicating general land ownership and use within the district for land units
one square mile or more in size;
(3)	a general description of the water resources and water uses within the district, if
the information is available;
(4)	identification of the district program goals and objectives;
(5)	a district program work plan and implementation schedule;
(6)	a program budget;
(7)	information necessary for the department to conduct an analysis of potential
impacts to human health and the environment caused by implementation of the district program;
(8)	a description of any proposed distric*			 —J
1

-------
(9) copies of any proposed local ordinances for the regulation of the facilities and
sources of pollution specified in section 75-5-311(4), MCA, along with a statement demonstrat-
ing thai the local ordinances meet the following conditions:
(a)	the local requirements are compatible with and no less stringent than state
requirements for the protection of water quality, pursuant to 75-5-31 l(5)(a), MCA, and
(b)	the district's enforcement procedures and enforcement actions are consistent with
state enforcement actions, pursuant to section 75-5-311(5)(b) and (c), MCA.
AUTH: 75-5-201, MCA; IMP: 75-5-311, MCA
RULE V PROGRAM APPROVAL AND REPORTING (1) Upon receipt of a district
program application by the department, the department will have 30 calendar days lo conduct
a completeness review of the application. If the application is incomplete, the department shall
send written notification to the board of directors identifying the deficiencies and requesting
additional information. Upon receipt of the requested information, the department will have 30
days to conduct a completeness review.
(2)	Upon determination that the application is complete, the department shall
immediately notify the board of directors and submit the completed application to the board,
along with a report and recommendation regarding approval of the district program. At its next
regularly scheduled meeting following the department's submission of the report and
recommendation under this rule, the board shall hold a hearing on the application.
(3)	Prior to implementation of the local water quality district program in areas that
have been added to the district, changes in the boundaries of a district must be described in
a program amendment and submitted to the board for approval in accordance with 75-5-311(7),
MCA, and the procedures in subsections (1) and (2) of this rule.
(4)	One year after board approval of a district program and annually thereafter, the
board of directors shall submit to the department a report that evaluates the effectiveness of the
district program. The report shall include a description of program activities, a discussion of
the degree to which program goals, objectives and schedules have been satisfied, monitoring
results, a budget summary, and a description of the number and status of permits issued and
enforcement actions initiated, as applicable to a particular district program.
(5)	A district shall retain all records for a minimum of 3 years and make its monitor-
ing data available to the department upon request.
AUTH: 75-5-201, MCA; IMP: 75-5-311, MCA.
RULE VI PROCEDURES FOR GRANTING STATE ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITY
TO LOCAL WATER QUALITY DISTRICTS (1) Whenever a person is in violation of 75-5-
605, MCA, at a location within the district, the department may request that the district enforce
the provisions of Title 75, chapter 5, MCA, and rules implementing that chapter for the
particular violations. Alternatively, the district may request enforcement authority from the
department in a particular case as specified under this rule.
(2) The district shall submit a letter to the department requesting authorization to
enforce the provisions of Title 75 chapter 5, MCA, which contains appropriate documentation
of the violation(s) as required by 75-5-106, MCA.
2

-------
(3)	The department shall authorize a district to enforce the provisions of Title 75
chapter 5, MCA, in response to a district's request unless the department retains jurisdiction and
pursues enforcement.
(4)	A district is authorized to enforce the provisions of Title 75, chapter 5, MCA, and
rules implementing that chapter upon receipt of a letter issued by the department granting
enforcement authority for a particular case. The department shall respond to the district's
request within five working days after the department's receipt of the request. The letter of
authorization may include any limitations or conditions detennined necessary by the department.
Nothing in the grant of authority to a district may be construed to limit the department's legal
responsibility and authority to take enforcement action against the person responsible for the
source of pollution.
(5)	The department may revoke enforcement authorization for a district if it
determines that conditions exist that warrant such revocation. Such conditions may include but
are not limited to;
(a)	the district lacks adequate enforcement capabilities or resources for effective
enforcement efforts;
(b)	the district requests the department to undertake enforcement in the case;
(c)	the district has not complied with the conditions and limitations in the letter of
authorization; or
(d)	a re-assessment of conditions or change of conditions that indicate that
enforcement by the department would be more effective than local enforcement.
(6)	A district authorized to undertake enforcement actions pursuant to this section
shall coordinate its enforcement activities with the department in a manner determined by the
department.
AUTH: 75-5-106, 75-5-201, MCA; IMP: 75-5-106, MCA
3

-------
AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MISSOULA AND THE
COUNTY OF MISSOULA TO COOPERATE IN THE CREATION, MANAGEMENT AND
ADMINISTRATION OF A MISSOULA VALLEY WATER QUALITY DISTRICT TO
PROTECT AND IMPROVE SURFACE AND GROUND WATER QUALITY IN THE
MTSSnTTT-A VAT T FV
whk.kFas poQmiaii and degradation of surface and ground wale: poses TmmrfHate and long-term threats
tO thg Miwmla atpnfrr and health, crfaly ami «rifan» of lh*	Miwnila rarrrmnTrfty; and
whkhFas the 1991 Montana Legislature enacted statutory authority, set forth in Title 7, Chapter 13,
Part 45 Montana Code Annotated, providing^ for the Board of County Commissioners' creation of a local
water quality district in an area established with definite boundaries for the purpose of protecting,
preserving and improving the quality of both surface and ground waters; and
WHEREAS, the local governments of the city and county have limited authority to protect the quality of
drinking water, groundwater and surface water in the Missoula Valley, and the creation of the Missoula
Valley Water Quality District would provide local authority to enforce provisions of the Montana Water
Quality Act; and
WHEREAS, the local governments of the city and county lack the funds to conduct the necessary research,
monitoring, public education, facility construction, enforcement and management programs for long-term
protection of water quality in the Missoula Valley, and the creation of the Missoula Valley Water Quality
District would provide the money needed to run an effective local water quality management program;
and
YHtREAS, in order for the Board of County Commissioners to include any incorporated city within the
ooundaries of the local water quality district,the governing body of the city must approve the inclusion of
the city in the district and the city must concur in the resolution of intention adopted by the Board of
County Commissioners for the proposed water quality district; and
WHEREAS, die City ancLCounty of Missoula have determined that the most effective and efficient way
of protecting, preserving and improving die quality of both surface and ground waters serving the Missoula
community is to include the City of Missoula within the boundaries of The Missoula Valley Water Quality
District; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of this Interlocal Agreement is to provide the structure and basis for cooperation
in the creation, management and administration of . the Missoula Valley Water Quality District;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MISSOULA AND
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF THE COUNTY OF MISSOULA, EACH A PUBLIC
AGENCY OF THE STATE OF MONTANA: WITHIN THE PROVISION OFJTTLE 7, CHAPTER 11,
PART 1, MCA, KNOWN AS THE "INTERLOCALCOOPERATIONACT^rtiiarttnrc^rnf Mlssoularand
the County of Missoula agree it is to their mutual advantage to adopt this interlocal agreement for the
purposes of creating, managing and administering the Missoula Valley Water Quality District
NOW THEREFORE IT IS UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED BETWEEN THE CITY OF MISSOULA AND
MISSOULA COUNTY AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: Geographical Area Included In T^ncal Water Quality District
1

-------
Hie geographical area to be included within the boundaries af the local water quality district created
pnrmant to fnt»rfagal Agr^m wit shall he agreed on by both the City Council and Board of County
CnTTrmi«ttin«»T< before adoptioiLjof aresolution of intent to create the district.
Pmnoae - Joint Cftv and Conntv Management and Administration of Local Water Quality
District
It is hereby agreed thar the -purpose and intent of this Interlocal Agreement is to create a local water
quality district pursuant to Title 7, Chapter 13, Part 45, MCA. The parties hereto agree that any exercise
of the following powers and duties must be approved and adapted by both the City Council and the Board
of County Commissioners in order to be authorized to be implemented:
(1)	adopt local ordinances to be administered by the district;
(2)	establish or revise fees, assessed pursuant to 7-13-4523;
(3)	review and approve the annual budget of the local water quality district;
(4)	approve the construction of facilities that cost the district more than $5,000 and that are necessary
to accomplish the purposes of this local water quality district, including but not limited to facilities
for removal of water-borne contaminants; water quality improvement; sanitary sewage collection,
disposal, and treatment; and storm water, or surface water drainage collection, disposal, and
treatment Hie district may spend no more than $100,000 per year on such facilities;
(5)	adopt changes in local water quality district boundaries, proposed pursuant to 7-13-4522;
Section 3; Cltv-Conntv Designated Local Water OnaHtv District Board of Directors
The Missoula City-County Board of Health with the addition of one member who is a Missoula
Conservation District Supervisor, agreed upon by both the City and County governing bodies, shalLbe
appointed as the Board of Directors of the local water quality district following adoption of the BoanLof
County Commissioners resolution to create the district -lie Missoula Valley Water Quality District
Board of Directors shall operate under the existing by-laws of the Missoula City-County Board of Health.
Upon approval of the Board of County Commissioners resolution to create the Missoula Valley Water
Quality District and appointment of die Board of Directors, the Board of Directors may exercise the
powers and duties set forth in Section-7-13-4517, MCA.
Section 4i Financing and Budget
A.	All fees and other money received by the local water, quality district be placed'in a
separate fond maintained by the county treasurer and must be used solely for the purpose
for which tbe local water quality district was created.
B.	The yearly operations of the Missoula Valley Water Quality District shall be funded by fee
assessments, grants, bequests, gifts, donations, intergovernmental transfers, remuneration
for contact serves or other financial resources.
C.	The annual budget for the local water quality district'shall be based on projected revenue
from all sources and estimated expenditures and shall be established pursuant to a July 1
through June 30 fiscal year. The annual budget shall be approved by the City Countil and
2

-------
the Board of County Commissioners prior to implementation.
D. FftheT the City or County of Missoula may appropriate additional funds for special
programs and services to the fending government.
SectionS; T#gal aenices
The Board otDirectors.af the local waler qualily district may contract for legal services with either the
county or city attorney offices or outside counsel as the need arises.
Section 6; Personnel Administration
The employees of the Missoula Valley Water Quality District established pursuant to this Interlocal
Agreement shall be staff employees of the City-County Health Department except in instances where
services are performed by independent contractors.
(1)	The Director of the City-County Health Department shall have full responsibility for hiring and
Siing local water quality district employees in accordance with adopted labor contracts and the
County Personnel Plan, except those governed by specific interlocal agreements.
(2)	The Director of the City-County Health Department shall have full responsibility for the
organization of the Missoula Valley Water Quality District employees and- for supervising the
employees in accordance with adopted labor contracts and the County Personnel Plan.
(3)	The employees of the Missoula Valley Water Quality District shall receive full employment benefits
in accordance with, the Missoula County Personnel Plan and adopted contracts with collective
bargaining units. City or County, may at their option and- expense, employ personnel for water
quality purposes who are not included in the jointly administered local water quality district
(4)	Personnel administration shall comply with the policies and procedures of the County. The County
Personnel Office shaB be responsible for processing City-County Health Department requests for
recruiting, promotion, compensation adjustment, etc. and shall maintain all personnel records
therefore.
(5)	Negotiations with collective bargaining units representing Missoula Valley Water Quality District
employees shall be conducted by the County Personnel Office.
(6)	Missoula Valley Water Quality District employees shall receive compensation from the County
following regular County payroll procedures from funds deposited with the County.
(7)	Legal liability and claims administration for persons, functions,, and property subject to this
agreement shall be determined as follows:
(a)	The County shall be responsible for furniture, fixtures, equipment and automobiles, paid for
with water quality district fees deposited with the County. Hie County shall also be
responsible for Missoula Valley Water Quality District employees regarding terms and
conditions of employment, including, but not limited to wrongful action.
(b)	Legal liability and claims administration for the Missoula Valley Water Quality District and
in areds not covered above in (a) shall be:
3

-------
(1)	the responsibility of the County with respect to all County personnel and County
administration of. the City-Coonty Health Department;
(2)	the responsibility of the City if related to a City project;
(3)	the responsibility of the Comity if related to a County piuject; or
(4)	the joint responsibility afthe Cxtyand County if related to a joint project or activity.
Section 7: Retention or Legislative and Decision Making Authority
The City Council of the City of Missoula, the Board of County Commissioners of the County of Missoula,
the Health Officer and the Missoula City-County Board of Health retain all legislative and decision-
making authority as provided by Montana State law that is not agreed to be exercised jointly pursuant to
this Interlocal Agreement
Section 8: Effective Date. Duration. Dissolution
(a)	This agreement shall become effective and binding only by ratification by both parties and shall
remain in effect until termination by withdrawal of one or both parties by resolution of their
governing bodies and upon giving notice in writing to each other.
(b)	Either party may terminate this agreement at the end of a fiscal year unilaterally by resolution of
its governing body and upon the giving of at least six (6) months notice in writing to the other
party. Hie termination shall become effective at the beginning of the next fiscal year, except in
the event of a failure to meet any afthe financial responsibilities set forth in this agreement, in
which case termination may be effective at the end of the sir month notice period.
(c)	Dissolution of the Water Quality District
TheMissoula City Council or the Board of County Commissioners may initiate dissolution of the
local water quality districtby placing the question of dissolution on the ballot, to be decided by all
qualified electors-within the boundaries of the district If the City Council and Board of County
Commissioners jointly agree on dissolution of the district, no referendum shall be required.
All contracted indebtedness and obligations of the Missoula Valley Water Quality District shall
remain unimpaired by reason of dissolution of the district The Board of County Commissioners
and City Council shall provide for
(1)	the payment and discharge in good faith of all the indebtedness and obligations according
to the tenor of the contract or indenture agreement by which they were contractea or the
indebtedness incurred; and
(2)	the. collection of any indebtedness due the city or county.
In the event of dissolution of the Missoula Valley Water Quality District, the furniture, equipment, monies
and other assets obtained after the formation of the district shall be returned to each government on an
equal basis. Assets, including furniture and vehicles, transferred to the Missoula Valley Water Quality
District pursuant to this Interlocal Agreement shall be returned when possible to the original owner (City
or County). Missoula Valley Water Quality District employees retained by eitner the County or city shail
retain all rights and benefits accrued while employed during the term of this Agreement
4

-------
This agreement «fhaH terminate automatically at such time as the parties cease operation of a local water
quality district
ectlon 9t Amendment or Modification of Interlocal Agreement
Either party may initiate a request for modification of the Interlocal Agreement by serving a written copy
of the proposed modification an the other party far review ami rmwirf^ratTon Any modification shall
become effective only when agreed to in writing and approved by both parties.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Missoula and the County of Missoula have caused this instrument
to be duly executed by their proper of&cers on this 9** day	. 1993.
CITY OF MISSOULA
TDanlel Kemmis
Mayor
COUNTY OF MISSOULA
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Ann Mary I^ssagflt, Chair

Barbara Evans, Commissioner

Fern Hart, Commissioner
ATTEST:
ATTEST:

Charles C. Stearns
City Clerk
i \ C <
Wendy Cromwell
Missoula County Gerk & Recorder
APPROVED AS TO FORM.AND CONTENT:
ugent
Attorney
Martha E. McClain	f
Deputy County Attorney
5

-------
JRAFT
•w : i J is. w w
A RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO CREATE:
MISSOULA VALLEY
WATER QUALITY DISTRICT
PROPOSED BY:
MISSOULA BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS
• CITY OF MISSOULA
MISSOULA CITY-COUNTY HEALTH
DEPARTMENT
CONTACT: ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION
MISSOULA CITY-COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT
TELEPHONE: 523-4755

-------
A RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO CREATE THE MISSOULA VALLEY
WATER QUALITY DISTRICT.
WHEREAS, pollution and degradation of surface and ground water pose immediate and long-term
threats to the Missoula aquifer and the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the Missoula
community; and
WHEREAS, the 1991 Montana Legislature enacted statutory authority, set forth in Title 7,
Chapter 13, Part 45 Montana Code Annotated providing for the Board of County Commissioners'
creation of a local water quality district in an area established with definite boundaries for the
purpose of protecting, preserving and improving the quality of both surface and ground waters;
and
WHEREAS, the local governments of the city and "county have limited authority to protect the
quality of drinking water, groundwater and surface water in the Missoula Valley, and the
creation of the Missoula Valley Water Quality District would provide local authority to enforce
provisions of the Montana Water Quality Act and to administer local ordinances to protect water
quality; and
WHEREAS, the local governments of the city and county lack the funds to conduct the necessary
research, monitoring, inspection, public education, facility construction, enforcement and
management programs for long-term protection of water quality in the Missoula Valley, and the
creation of the Missoula Valley Water Quality District would provide the money needed to run
an effective local water quality management program; and
WHEREAS, in order for the Board of County Commissioners to include any incorporated city
within the boundaries of the local water quality district the governing body of the city must
approve the inclusion of the city in the district and the city must concur in the resolution of
intention adopted by the Board of County Commissioners for the proposed water quality district;
and
WHEREAS, the city and county of Missoula have determined that the most effective and efficient
way of protecting, preserving and improving the quality of both surface and ground waters
serving the Missoula community is to include the City of Missoula within the boundaries of The
Missoula Valley Water Quality District; and
WHEREAS, A public meeting was held by the Board of County Commissioners on October 28,
1992, in accordance with Title 7, Chapter 13, Part 45, Montana Code Annotated.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF THE
COUNTY OF MISSOULA intend to create the Missoula Valley Water Quality District, pursuant to
the authority and procedures set forth in Title 7, Chapter 13, Part 45, Montana Code Annotated.
1

-------
Dated this 4th day of November, 1992
Missoula County Board of County Commissioners
Barbara Evans, Commissioner
Chair
Janet Stevens, Commissioner .
Ann Mary Dussault
Commissioner
ATTEST:
Wendy Cromwell
Missoula County Clerk & Recorder
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CONTENT:
Martha E. McClain, Deputy County Attorney
2

-------
A RESOLUTION OF CONCURRENCE TO CREATE THE MISSOULA VALLEY WATER
QUALITY DISTRICT.
WHEREAS, pollution and degradation of surface and ground water pose immediate and long-term
threats to the Missoula aquifer and the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the Missoula
community; and
WHEREAS, the 1991 Montana Legislature enacted statutory authority, set forth in Title 7,
Chapter 13, Part 45 Montana Code Annotated providing for the Board of County Commissioners,
creation of a local water quality district in an area established with definite boundaries for the
purpose of protecting, preserving and improving the quality of both surface and ground waters;
and
WHEREAS, the local governments of the city and county have limited authority to protect the
quality of drinking water, groundwater and surface water in the Missoula Valley, and the
creation of the Missoula Valley Water Quality District would provide local authority to enforce
provisions of the Montana Water Quality Act and to administer local ordinances to protect water
quality; and
WHEREAS, the local governments of the city and county lack the funds to conduct the necessary
research, monitoring, inspection, public education, facility construction, enforcement and
management programs for long-term protection of water quality in the Missoula Valley, and the
creation of the Missoula Valley Water Quality District would provide the money needed to run
an effective local water quality management program; and
WHEREAS, in order for the Board of County Commissioners to include any incorporated city
within the boundaries of the local water quality district the governing body of the city must
approve the inclusion of the city in the district and the city must concur in the resolution of
intention adopted by the Board of County Commissioners for the proposed water quality district;
and
WHEREAS, the city and county of Missoula have determined that the most effective and efficient
way of protecting, preserving and improving the quality of both surface and ground waters
serving the Missoula community is to include the City of Missoula within the boundaries of The
Missoula Valley Water Quality District; and
WHEREAS, A public meeting was held by the Board of County Commissioners on October 28,
1992, in accordance with Title 7, Chapter 13, Part 45, Montana Code Annotated.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MISSOULA that the
City of Missoula concurs with the Missoula County Board of County Commissioners Resolution of
Intent to create the Missoula Valley Water Quality District, pursuant to the authority and
procedures set forth in Title 7, Chapter 13, Part 45, Montana Code Annotated.
3

-------
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Missoula has caused this instrument to be duly executed by
their proper officers on this	day of	, 1992.
CITY OF MISSOULA
Daniel Kemmis
Mayor
ATTEST:
Charles C. Steams
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CONTENT:
Jim Nugent City Attorney
4

-------
I. STATEMENT OF NEED FOR MISSOULA VALLEY WATER
QUALITY DISTRICT.
Introduction
Missoula Valley residents depend on clean and abundant water. For generations we have been
fortunate to have plenty of clean water to drink, and excellent streams and lakes for recreation.
We depend on dean and safe drinking water to protect public health, and to ensure economic
vitality in our community. Over the years we've almost taken clean water for granted. We can't
do that any more. We have begun to pollute our rivers, streams, lakes and groundwater. As the
human population of the Missoula Valley grows, we pose more threats to water quality every
year. While the threats to water quality increase^ the ability of Missoula's local government to
protect water quality is limited. The City and County have only limited authority to protect
drinking water and the quality of our streams, because nearly all authority rests with state and
federal governments. The City and County also lack funding to administer an effective local water
quality program.
The Montana Legislature passed a new law in 1991 giving local governments the authority to
form local water quality districts. The legislation speaks strongly of the need to protect water
quality, and to prevent ground water contamination. In Section 1, Findings and Purpose, the Act
states, "Because of the expense and difficulty of ground water rehabilitation and cleanup and the
need to protect drinking water supplies, policies and programs to prevent ground water
contamination must be implemented." The stated purpose of the legislation is "...to provide for
the creation of local water quality districts to protect, preserve and improve the quality of
surface water and ground water."
By creating a water quality district, local government can assume more direct control for the
protection of drinking water and streams. Local water quality districts can be delegated the
authority to enforce the provisions of state water quality law, and to adopt laws and regulations
to protect water. Local water quality districts can also raise money from fees on all improved
properties within the district, and use the money to run an effective local program to protect
water quality.
Missoula County, the City of Missoula and The Missoula City/County Health Department propose
to form a "Missoula Valley Water Quality District" . The district would conduct needed
research, monitoring, public education, facility construction, planning, management and
enforcement programs to ensure long-term protection of water quality in the Missoula Valley.
Background
About 70,000 people in the valley now get their drinking water from a large underground
reservoir of water, known as the Missoula Valley aquifer. The aquifer extends throughout the
valley from Hellgate Canyon on the east, to Huson on the west, to Lolo on the south, and is
bordered by the surrounding hills and mountains.
5

-------
The aquifer is the only source of drinking water for nearly all of the people living in the valley.
It has been designated as a sole source aquifer by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
which means it provides at least 50% of the area's drinking water and that there is no
economically practical alternative water supply available in the valley.
An aquifer is a layer of earth or porous rock that contains water underground, much like an
underground reservoir. Our aquifer is unconfined, meaning it has no protective barrier
between the land surface and the water table to protect groundwater from pollution.
The Missoula aquifer gets a major portion of its water, roughly 83%, from the Clark Fork
River where it leaves the mouth of Hellgate Canyon. The aquifer flows rapidly through sand,
cobbles and gravel, at eight to 30 feet per day. It flows in a general southwest direction under
the Missoula urban area.
We have plenty of water. In fact, the aquifer produces roughly 15 times more water than we
currently use. But since the water moves so quickly, pollution can move very rapidly from one
place to another in the aquifer, threatening the quality of water at locations where individual
homes, small public water systems and water utilities pump water from the aquifer through
wells.
Each drinking water well pulls water from a specific "capture zone". Hydrologists have
mapped the capture zones of many Missoula wells and found that contamination over any part of
the capture zone can affect water quality in the well.
We live above the aquifer that supplies our drinking water and our daily activities can cause
pollution. Events of the past decade, including serious pollution episodes, have made us aware
how vulnerable our aquifer is to water pollution.
Known contamination problems include:
•	Mountain Water Company has shut down two public supply wells because of perchloroethylene
contamination. Perc is a potent chemical used in dry cleaning and automotive solvents. Thirteen
other public wells have tested positive for perc, but not at levels exceeding proposed federal
drinking water standards.
•	Gasoline contamination from leaking underground storage tanks has caused the abandonment of
at least 30 wells.
•	Ineffective seepage pits in the Linda Vista area near Miller Creek have caused fecal coliform
and nitrate contamination of private wells.
•	Bacterial contamination from a failed sewer lift station shut down Missoula's largest public
supply well in 1990, requiring two-thirds of valley residents to boil drinking water for three
days.
•	Herbicides have contaminated wells near the County Weed Control Shop on North Reserve
street as well as two individual wells located on Otis street on Missoula's North side.
•	Diesel fuel is floating on top of groundwater near the train yard on Missoula's northside.
•	Coliform bacteria have contaminated 10-15% of all private well samples analyzed by the
health department if these were public supply wells, federal regulations would prohibit their
use for drinking water.
6

-------
•	In 1982 a gasoline pipeline burst in the Lavelle Creek drainage and 250,000 gallons of fuel
leaked. Another leak along the pipeline in 1973 went undetected for five months, polluting
wells in the Grant Creek area. Five more gasoline spills have occurred in the past 18 months at
the gasoline terminal facility on Raser Road, causing further contamination of groundwater
•	Arsenic contamination from upstream mining and smelting has caused the abandonment of
private and public wells in Milltown. Mine wastes have contaminated many miles of floodplain
within the County, and settled in the Milltown Reservoir, a federal Superfund hazardous waste
cleanup site.
•	In the Missoula urban area, situated on top of the aquifer, we have 6,200 septic systems,
3,350 storm drains, 37 miles of irrigation ditches, 200 shallow waste wells, 187
underground storage tanks, 130 businesses that use hazardous materials, 31 pesticide storage
areas, 25 dumps, 10 sewer lift stations, 10 dry cleaners, 15 photo labs, and 3 miles of
gasoline pipeline.
•	The Missoula Sewage Treatment Plant, Frenchtown pulp mill and septic systems discharge
nutrients such as phosphorus and nitrogen into the Clark Fork River, stimulating luxuriant
growths of algae. These aquatic plants become a nuisance to people who use the river for
recreation or irrigation. They also use up life-sustaining oxygen in the river, often causing
violation of state water quality standards during hot, dry summer months.
•	CoNform Bacteria contaminates many wells in an area near Frenchtown.
•	Sewage from septic systems has contaminated private wells in the lower Hayes Creek area.
The Missoula Health Department has increased its water quality efforts during the past two
years in response to these issues and the public's demand for increased water quality protection.
Water Quality issues will likely consume the department for the next ten years, much as air
quality issues have for the past ten years.
In April, 1991, the Montana Legislature passed Senate Bill 136, "An act providing for the
establishment of local water quality districts: authorizing establishment of fees; authorizing
governing bodies of counties, cities, and towns that participate in a local water quality district
to adopt laws relating to water quality protection; authorizing the State Board of Health and
Environmental Sciences to approve local water quality programs; authorizing the Department of
Health and Environmental Sciences to monitor implementation of local water quality programs;
and amending section 75-5-106, MCA."
The proposed Missoula Valley Water Quality District would 1) conduct water quality monitoring
and research to assess and prioritize water quality issues, 2) integrate local inspections of
businesses regulated under state, local and federal water quality laws, 3) Enhance local water
quality protection by locally enforcing state water quality law and administering local
ordinances, 4) conduct public education on preventing water pollution, 5) develop a
comprehensive water quality management plan, 6) finance facilities needed to protect water
quality. These activities will ensure long-term protection of drinking water and streams in the
valley. The district would be named, " The Missoula Valley Water Quality District".
The County Commissioners and City Council would establish fees on all improved properties
within the district, including taxable and tax exempt properties and mobile homes. Due to tax
limitations placed on local government, adequate funds are not now available to the City or
County for effective water quality protection programs. Since funds are limited, the
7

-------
City/County Health Department can not now manage an effective water quality program. As a
result, the department can not accomplish important planning, research, monitoring, public
education, management and enforcement The department relies on sporadic and limited funding
from private interests and state or federal agencies to fund important research and planning to
ensure long-term protection of the aquifer. These funding sources are not reliable for the long
term, and are not sufficient to pay for the needed work. The proposed Missoula Valley Water
Quality District would provide the funding needed to operate an effective local water quality
program.
To investigate and enforce water quality violations, the Department must now rely on the State
Water Quality Bureau to respond to many local pollution episodes. Because the bureau has only
enough staff and money to handle the state's largest and most serious pollution problems, many
important issues in the Missoula Valley receive inadequate attention. This problem may worsen
in coming years because of the State budget crisis. Formation of the Missoula Valley Water
Quality District will provide local authority to enforce provisions of the Montana Water Quality
Act It will also allow the adoption of local ordinances to protect water quality. These new local
government capabilities will strengthen Missoula's ability to protect its own drinking water and
streams.
II. PROCESS FOR CREATION OF MISSOULA VALLEY WATER
QUALITY DISTRICT
State legislation authorizing the formation of local water quality districts (Available from City-
County Health Dept., 301 W. Alder, Missoula) sets forth specific procedural requirements for
creation of the district. Briefly, the law authorizes the County Commissioners to initiate the
creation of the water quality district by "holding a public meeting, passing a resolution of
intention, providing and opportunity for fee assessed units to protest, and conducting a public
hearing to hear and decide on protests".
The process and timeline are outlined below.
10/15/92 - Missoula City/County Board of Health meet to discuss and endorse proposed water
quality district program boundaries, objectives, budgets and fees.
10/28/92 - County Commissioners hold public meeting for presentation of proposed water
quality district program boundaries, objectives, budgets and fees. This meeting is required
prior to adoption of the resolution of intent to create the district
11/4/92 - County Commissioners adopt resolution of intent to create Water Quality District -
refer resolution to City Council for concurrence. This resolution must include:
1.	the proposed name of the district;
2.	the necessity for the proposed district;
3.	a general description of the territory or lands included in the district, including
identification of the district boundaries that must correspond to the area in which the need
8

-------
for the district exists;
4.	a general description of the proposed water quality program;
5.	the initial estimated cost of the water quality program;
and
6.	the initial proposed fees to be charged.
11/4/92 - City Council Conservation Committee and all City Council attend special meeting.
District program, boundaries, objectives, budget and fees, and resolution of concurrence
proposed.
11 /9/92 - City Council hearing on resolution of concurrence.
11/16/92 - City Council votes on resolution of concurrence.
11 /22/92 - Commissioners publish notice of resolution of intent and resolution of
concurrence in Sunday Missoulian, and post notice in at least three public places. Thirty day
protest period begins. Mail postcard to each fee-assessed unit in the proposed district
identifying where resolutions of intent and concurrence and protest forms can be obtained.
The public notice must contain:
1)	A description of the proposed water quality program.
2)	The initial fees to be charged.
3)	The time and place where the commissioners and city council will hear protests made
against the district
4)	A statement that a description of boundaries of the proposed district are available in the
clerk and recorders office.
The law allows fee assessed units one protest vote per unit to be delivered in writing within 30
days of the notice provided above.
12/21/92 - End of 30 day protest period.
1 /6/93- The County Commissioners and City Council will hold a hearing at _TIME?	in
Room 201 of the County Courthouse, to hear and decide upon all protests.
1 /13/93 - If less than 20% of the fee assessed units protest formation of the district, the
County Commissioners may adopt a resolution to create the district in accordance with
resolution of intent to create the district, and appoint the board of directors of the water quality
district.
1/31/93 - Latest date to form district to allow collection of fees beginning 7/1/93.
May, 1993 - Referendum. If more than 20% of the fee assessed units protest, the
commissioners are barred from creating the district unless they submit the matter to a
referendum. If the matter is placed on the ballot all registered voters in the proposed district
are eligible to vote.
9

-------
FIGURE |
PROPOSED BOUNDARIES
MISSOULA VALLEY WATER QUALITY DISTRICT
Vc-
ftiaw

' ~-n. ' l*'-l %(v. w
\ 4 • *

-------
City - County Cooperation and management of proposed water quality district.
The City of Missoula, Missoula County and the Missoula City - County Health Department have
cooperatively planned for the formation of the Missoula Valley Water Quality District. The City
Council, County Commissioners and City - County Board of Health held a joint meeting on
January 16, 1992 to discuss the proposed water quality district. All parties agreed to pursue
maximum intergovernmental cooperation in the creation and management of the proposed
district At that meeting the City Council and County Commissioners agreed to develop an
interlocal agreement to provide for joint City and County management and administration of the
local water quality district A draft of the proposed interlocal agreement is available from the
City-County Health Department, 301 W. Alder, Missoula. This interlocal agreement may be
adopted by the City and County in October, 1992, but would not take effect until the district is
created.
III.	NAME OF DISTRICT
The name of the proposed district is THE MISSOULA VALLEY WATER QUALITY DISTRICT.
IV.	GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE TERRITORY OR LANDS
INCLUDED IN THE DISTRICT.
The proposed Missoula Valley Water Quality District includes the surface water and
groundwater resources that the City Council, County Commission and Health Department find to
be in most immediate need of protection and the lands that affect the quality or use of these
waters.
The Missoula Valley Water Quality District would include:
1)	lands overlying the Missoula Sole Source Aquifer
Designated Area,
2)	adjacent areas overlying major alluvial deposits (soil and
gravel deposited by streams) and hydrologically connected to
ground water or streams in the sole source aquifer designated
area:
a)	with documented surface or ground water quality
problems, or
b)	with sufficient population or industry to degrade water
quality.
10

-------
The proposed boundary follows section lines to simplify identification of properties within the
district and limit the number of parcels split by the boundary line. Figure 1 depicts the
boundaries of the district and Table 1 provides the legal description of lands inside the district.
The single inside dark line in Figure 1 represents the boundaries of the Sole Source Aquifer
Designated Area and the starred line represents the proposed Missoula Valley Water Quality
District boundaries.
TABLE 1
WATER QUALITY DISTRICT LEGAL DESCRIPTION
TOWNSHIP 15N, RANGE 22W, SECTIONS 13, 23-26, 35 & 36
TOWNSHIP 15N, RANGE 21W, SECTIONS 15-23 & 25-36
TOWNSHIP 15N, RANGE 20W, SECTIONS 31 & 32
TOWNSHIP 14N, RANGE 21W, SECTIONS 1-5, 10-15, 23-26, 35 & 36
TOWNSHIP 14N, RANGE 20W, SECTIONS 1-36
TOWNSHIP 14N, RANGE 19W, SECTIONS 7,8, 16-21, & 27-36
TOWNSHIP 13N, RANGE 21W, SECTION 1
TOWNSHIP 13N, RANGE 20W, SECTIONS 1-17, 21-27 & 34-36
TOWNSHIP 13N, RANGE 19W, SECTIONS 1-36
TOWNSHIP 13N, RANGE 18W, SECTIONS 16-21
TOWNSHIP 12N, RANGE 20W, SECTIONS 1-3, 10-15, 22-27 & 34-36
TOWNSHIP 12N, RANGE 19W, SECTIONS 2-11, AND 15-21
A description of the lands included in the proposed district follows:
1) Lands Overlying the Designated Sole Source Aquifer
The Missoula Valley Aquifer is an underground reservoir of water stored in gravel deposits
placed here by glaciers and streams almost 20 million years ago. It stretches from Hellgate
Canyon on the east, to Huson on the west, and to Lolo on the south. Pollution sources throughout
the valley threaten the aquifer.
The Missoula Aquifer needs protection because it is the only source of drinking water for most
people in the valley. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has designated it as a "Sole
Source Aquifer," recognizing its importance to the community and vulnerability to pollution.
The proposed district includes all lands overlying the Sole Source Aquifer Designated Area.
Significant pollution sources and threats to groundwater and surface water in the Missoula
urban area include 6,200 septic systems, 3,350 storm drains, 37 miles of irrigation ditches,
200 shallow waste wells, 187 underground storage tanks, 130 businesses that use hazardous
materials, 31 pesticide storage areas, 25 dumps, 10 sewer lift stations, 10 dry cleaners, 15
photo labs, and 3 miles of gasoline pipelines.
Tributary streams such as Rattlesnake, Grant, Butler, and Miller Creek recharge the aquifer
and flow to the Clark Fork River. Pollution sources such as gasoline pipeline leaks and
subsurface sewage disposal systems underscore the need to protect surface drainages within the
11

-------
valley. For this reason, lands within tributary drainages are also included within the proposed
district
The Missoula Sole Source Aquifer Designated Area also includes rural portions of the Missoula
Valley with documented pollution problems. Residential septic systems and the Frenchtown pulp
mill cause nitrogen and phosphorus pollution in the Bitterroot and Clark Fork Rivers. These
pollutants cause nuisance algae growth and violations of state dissolved oxygen standards. Homes
and businesses use septic systems and injection wells to dispose of wastes, causing potential
bacteria, nitrate and toxic pollution of groundwater. Pesticides dumped at the County Weed
Control Shop have contaminated a public water supply at a mobile home court and campground.
Fecal Coliform bacteria have contaminated many wells near Frenchtown and Huson. Upstream
mining and smelting has contaminated groundwater, floodplain environs and the Clark Fork
River at the eastern edge of the proposed water quality district
2) Adjacent areas overlying major alluvial deposits (soil and
gravel deposited by streams) and hydrologically connected to
ground water or streams in the sole source aquifer designated
area:
Areas adjacent to the Sole Source Aquifer in East Missoula, Milltown, lower Hayes Creek and
along the Bitterroot River to Lolo have documented water quality problems. These areas need
protection or restoration to protect local drinking water, downstream surface water quality and
drinking water in the Missoula Valley Aquifer.
a. East Missoula, West Riverside/Milttown
East Missoula lies directly next to and upgradient of the Missoula Sole Source Aquifer. Buildings
in East Missoula use individual septic systems, rather than municipal sewer. Soils in East
Missoula are very coarse-grained, resulting in poor treatment of sewage effluent Such
conditions can cause elevated nitrate and bacterial levels in groundwater. Automotive related
businesses in East Missoula use injection well disposal systems, discharging toxic waste
directly to groundwater. This endangers drinking water supplies.
The West Riverside/Milltown Area is the headwaters of the Missoula Valley Sole Source Aquifer
and the home of the Milltown Reservoir Superfund Site. Contaminated sediments from upstream
mining have collected over the past 100 years behind Milltown Dam, polluting a local aquifer
with arsenic and other heavy metals. A plume of contaminated groundwater is now moving
downstream around the dam. High river flows and operational drawdowns of the reservoir
release pollutants into the Clark Fork River. The pollution often exceeds federal standards
designed to protect fish and other aquatic life. Milltown has no public sewer system. Homes and
businesses use septic systems and injection wells to dispose of waste.
Approximately 83% of the water flowing into the Missoula aquifer comes from the Clark Fork
River after it passes through the East Missoula, West Riverside/Milltown area. To protect
drinking water in the Missoula Sole Source Aquifer, water quality in the river must also be
protected.
12

-------
b.	Lands Along the Lower Bitterroot River to Lolo
Lolo has no public sewer south of Ann's Lane. Businesses and homes use septic systems and
injection wells to dispose of wastes into the groundwater. One underground storage tank leak has
been documented in Lolo in 1987. The unsewered Woodlands Heights subdivision has elevated
nitrate and chloride levels in groundwater. The Lolo Waste Water Treatment Plant discharges
effluent to the Bitterroot River, increasing nutrient pollution to the Bitterroot and the Clark
Fork Rivers. Sewage from septic systems has contaminated private wells in the lower Hayes
Creek area. This area is included in the proposed water quality protection district to help
protect local water quality, as well as the quality of the Bitterroot River.
The Bitterroot River has documented water quality problems including frequent violations of the
state dissolved oxygen standard during summer months, and nuisance growths of algae. It is a
major tributary to the Clark Fork River, and provides 19% of the soluble Phosphorus and 21%
of the soluble Nitrogen to the Clark Fork River as it leaves the state.
c.	Tributary drainages and adjacent areas with sufficient population and
industry to degrade water quality
Adjacent areas to the Missoula Sole Source Aquifer, such as the Grant Creek, Obrien Creek and
Miller Creek drainages, South Hills, and Far Views need water quality protection. Grant Creek
and Miller Creek have significant numbers of people living in homes that use septic systems to
dispose of waste. As residential development expands in these areas, pollution potential
increases dramatically. The storm runoff from the South Hills and Far Views areas is collected
in storm drains that discharge to the Missoula Valley Aquifer. The South Hills and Far Views are
also included because they are part of the Sole Source Aquifer Designated Area. Water quality in
areas such as Milltown/West Riverside and Frenchtown has been degraded by industry. Grant
Creek, Miller Creek, South Hills, Far Views, Milltown and Frenchtown are included in the
proposed district to help protect local water quality, downstream surface water quality, and
drinking water in the Missoula Valley Aquifer.
The Miller Creek, Grant Creek, Big Flat and other areas are adjacent to the Missoula Sole Source
Aquifer and lie over course sand and gravel deposits, known as alluvial soils. These soils
connect these areas to surface and ground water within the sole source aquifer designated zone.
Homes and businesses in these areas use individual septic systems and injection wells to dispose
of wastes. Course alluvial soils provide poor treatment of wastes, and contamination is easily
transported to adjacent streams or groundwater. These areas are included in the proposed
district to help protect local water quality, surface water quality downstream, and drinking
water in the Missoula aquifer.
13

-------
V. General Description of the Proposed Program
A. Mission:
The mission of the proposed Missoula Valley Water Quality
District is to protect and improve surface and ground water
quality in the Missoula Valley.
To accomplish this mission, the district would undertake the following
proposed program objectives:
1)	Conduct monitoring and water quality research to assess and
prioritize water quality issues.
2)	Integrate local inspections of businesses regulated under
state, local and federal water quality laws.
3)	Enhance local water quality protection by locally enforcing
state water quality law and administering local ordinances.
4)	Conduct public education on prevention of water pollution.
5)	Develop a long-term water quality management plan.
6)	Finance and operate facilities to protect water quality.
14

-------
A general description of planned activities under each objective follows:
1) Conduct monitoring and water quality research to assess and
prioritize water quality issues
A. AQUIFER AND POLLUTION SOURCE RESEARCH
1. (year one through three) Conduct ground water research in high-density, un-sewered
residential areas to assist in policy decisions regarding installation of public sewer,
including East Missoula, Rattlesnake, Reserve Street Corridor/Orchard Homes/Target Range,
Lolo and California Street area.
500 nitrate samples @ $12/sample	$ 6,000
500 bacterial samples @ $ 9/sample	$ 4,500
50 VOC samples @ $120/sample	$ 6,000
Travel, Sampling equipment, supplies	$ 500
Monitoring wells - 15 wells @3,000	$45,000
3 -year Operations Cost	$62,000
Year one operations cost	$ 14,000
2. (year one) Investigate impacts of volatile organic pollutants in storm water discharge to
Missoula aquifer.
40 VOC samples <§> $120/sample	$4,800
Travel, Sampling equipment supplies $ 100
Year one operations cost	$ 4,900
3. (year one and two) Investigate gasoline contamination of aquifer where pollution sources
are unknown, such as West Broadway and near intersection of Brooks, South and Russell.
10 BTX samples @ $75/sample	$ 750
10 BTX soil samples @> $90/sample	$ 900
Sampling equipment, travel, supplies $ 50
Year one operations cost	$ 1,700
15

-------
4.(year one and two) Study nitrate pollution in Linda Vista area to assess improvements in
water quality following installation of public sewer.
20 nitrate samples @ $12/sample
20 bacterial samples @ $ 9/sample
Travel, sampling equipment, supplies
Monitoring wells
$ 240
$ 180
$ 80
$ 6,000
Year one and two operations
Year one operations
$ 6,500
$ 1,600
5.(year two) Investigate bacterial contamination in the Frenchtown/Touchette Lane area.
6.(year One) Investigate use of chemical deicer and potential impact on groundwater and
surface water ($8,000 project funded by Montana Dept. Health and Environmental
Sciences).
B. APPLIED RESEARCH PROJECTS: Investigate waste disposal alternatives, such as composting of
septic tank pumper waste, evaporation ponds for automotive shop wastes, storm water
infiltration swales and land farming of petroleum containated soils.
1. (year one and two) Investigate potential alternatives for waste reduction and disposal for
automotive service businesses
10 BTX samples @ $75/sample	$ 750
10 VOC samples @ $120/sample	$ 1,200
10 metals samples @ $100/sample	$1,000
year one operations cost	$ 3,200
2. (year one) Research implementation plan for household and conditionally exempt
hazardous waste collection program.
Professional Contract - year one	$ 5,000
C MONrTORING PROJECT AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT
1. (year one) Compile existing hydrogeological and water quality data in central library, on
computer data bases and Geographical Information System. This will eliminate duplication of
effort and help focus our work on clear priorities.
contract - graduate study
200 bacterial samples
Transportation, equipment, supplies
$ 2,000
$ 1,800
$ 200
Total
$ 4,000
16

-------
2.	(year one) Develop a data base of existing well monitoring data (bacteria, nitrates)
sufficient to guide policy decisions concerning installation of public water systems and
expansion of public sewer in new subdivisions and high density residential areas.
3.	(year two) Set up permanent network of groundwater monitoring wells to detect water
quality degradation or improvement and determine effectiveness of pollution control. Up to
50 wells will be selected for water quality testing.
no expense in first year budget
4.	(year two) Establish permanent water level monitoring network and observation schedule.
Sites surveyed to determine altitude, and equipped with water level recorders.
no expense first year budget
5.	Define hydrogeological characteristics in additional portions of aquifer and develop
calibrated flow models for areas not currently modeled or under study.
no expense first or second year budget
2) Integrate local inspections of businesses regulated under
state, local and federal water quality laws.
Many Missoula area businesses and facilities are currently regulated under several local, state
and federal water quality laws. The proposed water quality district would integrate local
inspections of such facilities to avoid duplication of effort, increase efficiency for local
businesses and government, and to more effectively protect water quality.
The Missoula City - County Health Department now conducts inspections for several important
water quality programs. The only regulations for which the health department has direct
enforcement authority are those governing underground disposal of wastewater, commonly
known as the local regulations for septic tanks and drainfields. The department also conducts
inspections for the Montana Department of Health and Environmental Sciences to help manage
the safe drinking water program and the state underground storage tank program. The U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency has taken action in Missoula County to prohibit the use of
underground sumps to dispose of waste from automotive repair shops. The health department
assists with this federal injection well program by conducting inspections and educating
businesses about contamination problems and alternatives for waste disposal.
The Missoula County Office of Disaster and Emergency Services collects data from local
businesses for the federal hazardous materials right-to-know program. This information is
used by the health department and the fire departments for such purposes as hazardous
materials emergency response. The City of Missoula Sewage Treatment Plant manages an
industrial pretreatment program for businesses connected to city sewer. The Mountain Water
Company has proposed a new Well Head Protection Ordinance, which may be adopted in 1993
following creation of the water quality district. As proposed, the ordinance would require
17

-------
businesses that handle, store, use or transport hazardous materials within zones affecting
public drinking water wells to inventory the chemicals they use and prepare management plans
to prevent water pollution.
Effective integration of these programs will avoid duplication of effort, ease the regulatory
burden on businesses and inclrease effectiveness of water quality protection. Integrated local
inspections of local facilities and businesses would be used to achieve these goals.
Water quality District employees would inventory and inspect facilities that may cause water
pollution with the boundaries of the proposed district. An environmental site assessment form
would be used (Draft available from City-County Health Dept, 301 W. Alder) to collect basic
information on the facility, the chemicals it uses, and regulations that govern wastes used at the
facility, a detailed site plan would be prepared, showing the location of contaminant sources,
water wells and other important information. The facility's practices for handling, storing and
using regulated substances would be reviewed. This would include determining which chemicals
are used, ensuring that chemical safety data is kept at the site, and that wastes are disposed of
properly.
Following completion of the environmental site assessment, inspections for one or more of the
following programs would be conducted:
•	Underground storage tank inspection
•	Underground Injection well inspection
•	City sewer pretreatment inspection
•	Wellhead protection ordinance inspection (if adopted)
•	Public water supply inspection for safe drinking water program
During these inspections, water quality district staff would also help educate facility operators
about the importance of water quality protection, how various laws and regulations apply to the
facility, and what actions are needed to comply with the regulations. District staff would also
help local facilities with information about alternatives for reducing the amount of toxic
materials used, and recycling or re-use of highly toxic materials such as solvents. Staff would
also help with information on acceptable waste disposal alternatives, including landfill and
hazardous waste transport and disposal options. The Water Quality District will seek to educate
businesses and facilities about their responsibilities, requirements and alternatives before an
enforcement approach is taken.
Local integration of these water quality management programs will also improve access of
citizens to decision-makers, compared to current state and federally controlled programs.
Technical assistance provided to citizens from a local agency and a coordinated approach to
inspections and permits will ease the regulatory burden of existing and new programs. Such an
approach will require an experienced and educated staff, familiar with the various programs,
proficient in working with the regulated community to solve problems, and with adequate time
and resources to complete the job.
18

-------
3) Enhance local water quality protection by locally enforcing
state water quality law and administering local ordinances.
Missoula local government currently has very limited authority to protect the quality of
drinking water and streams in the Missoula Valley. Through the legislation allowing formation
of local water quality districts the Montana legislature has granted authority to local
governments within water quality district to enforce provisions of the Montana Water Quality
Act and to adopt local ordinances regulating a specific range of facilities and pollution sources.
These new local government capabilities would strengthen Missoula's ability to protect its own
drinking water and streams.
To investigate and enforce water quality violations, the Department must now rely on the State
Water Quality Bureau to respond to many local pollution episodes. Because the bureau has only
enough staff and money to handle the state's largest and most serious pollution problems, many
important issues in the Missoula Valley receive inadequate attention. This problem may worsen
in coming years because of the State budget crisis. Formation of the Missoula Valley Water
Quality District will provide local authority to enforce provisions of the Montana Water Quality
Act This authority would be granted on a case-by-case basis under administrative rules
proposed by the Montana Board of Health And Environmental Sciences (Available from City-
county Health Dept., 301 W. Alder). The state Board of Health may adopt final rules for water
quality districts in early 1993.
Local authority to enforce the Montana Water Quality Act would provide local government the
authority to issue clean-up orders, require monitoring, inspect facilities, issue violation
notices and compliance orders, commence civil enforcement actions and seek penalties. The
purpose of any enforcement action taken through the water quality district would be to
encourage timely compliance.
The Montana Department of Health and Environmental Sciences granted local enforcement
authority to the Missoula City - County Health Department on a one-time, experimental basis in
April, 1992 following a large gasoline spill at the Conoco/Yellowstone Pipeline facility on
Raser Road in Missoula. The Health Department's ability to negotiate an effective program of
cleanup, containment and pollution prevention measures with Conoco may resolve longstanding
pollution problems at this site. The Conoco case is a prime example of how the water quality
district could provide more effective protection of our drinking water through local
enforcement, cooperation and problem-solving with business and industry.
The proposed water quality district's ability to enforce state water quality law would also help
local government protect against smaller-scale pollution problems which are vitally important
locally, but seldom important enough to attract the attention of budget-strapped state agencies.
The district would be able to take action against those who dump waste in Missoula's storm
drains, for example. In July, 1992 the Missoula City-County Health Department took action
against two companies caught dumping toxic materials in storm drains in downtown Missoula.
Most storm drains in Missoula drain into the aquifer that supplies our drinking water, and a few
drain directly into the Clark Fork River. The Health Department cited these companies for the
dumping, but lacking authority to enforce laws that protect water quality the department was
able to cite them only for littering on public streets. The violations carried a $50 fine.
19

-------
The ability to enforce water quality laws in Missoula will clearly strengthen our ability to
protect our drinking water in the Missoula Valley.
The proposed water quality district would also allow the adoption of local ordinances to protect
water quality. The legislation allowing formation of local districts restricts ordinances adopted
within districts to the following facilities and pollution sources:
•	On-site waste water disposal
•	Storm water runoff
•	Service connections between buildings and publicly-owned sewer mains
•	Facilities that use or store solvents or internal combustion engine lubricants.
The City Council and County Commissioners would retain all authority to adopt ordinances for
administration by the proposed water quality district The interlocal agreement between the
City and County calls for joint agreement an all ordinances to be administered through the
district.
4)	Conduct public education on prevention of water pollution.
The district would conduct a multi-faceted public education program to help people understand
the importance of water quality protection and how they can help prevent pollution. Education
goals of the district would include:
•	Educate small businesses on how they can comply with regulations, who to go to with
questions, and on alternatives for use, recycling and disposal of wastes. Prepare fact sheets,
fliers and conduct workshops with individual businesses. Provide a clearinghouse of
information for local businesses. Work closely with Chamber of Commerce as a liaison to the
community.
•	Publish literature and sponsor advertising on how individuals can help prevent water
pollution. Topics could include household hazardous materials use, disposal and recycling.
•	Produce public service announcements for radio and television, author monthly newspaper
column, and participate in radio and TV feature shows on water quality protection.
•	Promote water education for schools.
5)	Develop a long-term water quality management plan
The proposed water quality district would conduct a public process throughout the valley during
its first year of operation to develop a comprehensive water quality management plan, the
purpose of the plan would be to prevent degradation and improve water quality in the district
The plan would focus on long-term, proactive solutions and prevention. Without such a
comprehensive plan we will continue to react to crises after they occur. It is much more
expensive to correct pollution than to prevent it The public will be extensively involved in
20

-------
VI. Proposed fees
Water Quality District fees will be assessed to all fee-assessed units within the boundaries of
the district. "Fee assessed units" means all real property with improvements, including
taxable and tax-exempt property as shown on the property assessment records maintained by
the county, and mobile homes as defined in 15-24-201 Montana Code Annotated. Fees will be
based on a classification system determined by the volume of water withdrawn and the volume of
waste produced at each fee-assessed unit in the water quality district, as follows.
Fee Category 1. Less than 1,000 gallons per day water withdrawal or
discharge. The base fee will be $13 per year. This fee will apply to all fee-assessed units
where withdrawal or discharge is less than 1,000 gallons per day. Methods to determine
withdrawal and discharge rates are expalined below/ A typical single-family residence
produces about 225 gallons of wastewater per day, and five residences would produce more than
1,000 gallons per day. A $4 per year discount will be credited to those properties fully
connected to a publicly-owned sewage treatment plant. Documentation of physical connection to
sewer on or before January 1 of each year in which a fee is assessed is required to obtain the $4
per year discount.
Public Sewer Private Sewer
$9	$13
Fee Category 2. 1,000 to 10,000 gallons per day water discharge or 1,000 to
5 million gallon water withdrawal. The second fee category will apply to those fee-
assessed units that withdraw or discharge between 1,000 and 10,000 gallons per day. Methods
to determine withdrawal and discharge rates are expalined below.* This fee will apply to
approximately 350 properties within the district.
Public Sewer Private Sewer
$18	$26
Fee Category 3. More than 10,000 gallons per day water discharge or more
than 5 million gallons per day water withdrawal. The third fee category will apply to
those fee assessed units which discharge more than 10,000 gallons of wastewater per day or
withdraw more than 5 million gallons per day. Methods to determine withdrawal and discharge
rates are expalined below.* Each facility will be charged $26 for the first 10,000 gallons of
wastewater discharge, and an additional $26 per each 10,000 gallons discharge or portion
thereof up to a maximum of $650. Facilities which withdraw more than 5 million gallons per
day will be assessed the maximum fee of $650. The maximum fee is 50 times the base fee of
$13. This fee will apply to approximately 31 properties within the district.
$26/10,000 gallons/day up to maximum $650
22

-------
* Water withdrawal and discharge rates will be determined by:
1.	Mountain Water Company metering data (collected during winter months to exclude
irrigation use).
2.	City of Missoula Sewer Billing Data.
3.	Montana Dept. Natural Resources and Conservation "Claimed Use" data
4.	Public Water Supply Data.
5.	State Water Quality Bureau discharge data
Fee Category One - All fee assessed units would be charged this fee unless water withdrawal
exceeds 1,000 gallons per day. Withdrawal and discharge rates would be determined by
Mountain Water Co. metering data, or by calculating discharge based on 225 gallons per single-
family residence per day (A typical single-family residence produces about 225 gallons of
wastewater per day. For the purposes of assessing fees, a single-family residence would be
assigned a 225 galllon discharge rate. Thus, five residences would exceed the 1,000 gallon per
day threshold). Irrigation water use would be exempted from fees.
Fee Category Two - Fee assessed units which withdraw more than 1,000 gallons per day and less
than 10,000 gallons per day would be charged this fee. Withdrawal and Discharge rates would
be determined by Mountain Water Co. metering data, Montana Dept Natural Resources and
Conservation "Claimed Use" data, Public Water Supply Data, or by calculating water discharge
based on 225 gallons per single-family residences per day (A typical single-family residence
produces about 225 gallons of wastewater per day. For the purposes of assessing fees, a single-
family residence would be assigned a 225 galllon discharge rate. Thus, five residences would
exceed the 1,000 gallon per day threshold). All community supply wells serving ten or more
connections would be assessed the $26 fee. Irrigation water use would be exempted from fees.
Fee Category Three - Fee assessed units which discharge more than 10,000 gallons per day or
withdraw more than 5 million gallons would be charged this fee. Withdrawal and discharge
rates would be determined by Mountain Water Co. metering data, Montana Dept Natural
Resources and Conservation "Claimed Use" data, and state Water Quality Bureau discharge
permit data. Irrigation water use would be exempted from fees.
23

-------
VII. PROJECTED REVENUES
Fee category I. Less than 1,000 gallons per day discharge.
$9 IF ON MUNICIPAL SEWER X (10,527 units) =	$ 94,743
$13 IF NOT X (13,339 units) =	$173,407
SUBTOTAL	$268,150
Fee Category 2. 1,000 to 10,000 gallons per Day discharge
Residential and Commercial
$18 IF ON SEWER X (282 units) =
$26 IF NOT X (54 units) =
$ 5,076
$ 1,404
SUBTOTAL
Fee Category 3.
discharge
$ 6,480
MAJOR DISCHARGERS - More than 10,000 Gallons per Day
$52 X (20 units)
$
1,040
$78 X (1 unit)
$
78
$104 X (2 units)
$
208
$144 X (1 unit)
$
144
$ 364 X (1 unit)
$
364
$ 494 X (1 unit)
$
494
$ 650 X (4 units)
$
2,600
SUBTOTAL
$ 4,928
UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK REIMBURSEMENTS
FROM STATE DEPT. HEALTH AND
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
$ 5,000
TOTAL
$284,558
24

-------
VIII. Proposed Budget
STAFF


ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SUPERVISOR (.2 TIME)
$
5,709
ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNICAL SPECIALIST III
$
28,292
ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST II (1/2 TIME)
$
12,580
ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST II
$
32,427
ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST II (1/2 TIME, GIS-DATA BASE MGT)
$
12,580
SECRETARY II (.6 FTE)
$
9,818
INTERNS
$
5,000
FRINGE
$
26,602
ANNUAL MERIT RESERVE
$
6,650
CONTINGENCY
$
5,000
SUB-TOTAL STAFF
$144,658
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES (FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION OBJECTIVE)
$
50,000
CONTRACT RESEARCH (RESEARCH AND MONITORING OBJECTIVE)
$
7,000
LEGAL SERVICES (ENFORCEMENT, ORDINANCES OBJECTIVE)
$
10,000
CONTRACT PUBLIC EDUCATION (PUBLIC EDUCATION OBJECTIVE)
$
5,000
EQUIPMENT/SAMPLING/SUPPLIES/LAB ANALYSIS/MONITORING WELLS


(RESEARCH AND MONITORING OBJECTIVE)
$
30,400
COMPUTER
$
3,000
FURNISH OFFICE - START-UP
$
8,000
OFFICE OPERATIONS
$
8,000
VEHICLE
$
15,000
PRINT AND MAIL POST CARDS AND RESOLUTION OF INTENT - STARTUP
$
3,500
TOTAL	$284,558
25

-------
1. ESTIMATED BUDGET FOR RESEARCH AND MONITORING OBJECTIVE:
STAFF
•	Env. Technical Specialist III	$13.55/hr X (.25 time) -
•	Env. Specialist II	$15.53/hr X (.2 time) -
•	Env. Specialist II	$12.05/hr X (.1 time) -
•	Env. Specialist II - Data Base/GIS - $12.05/hr X (.5 time) -
•	Intern	$6/hour X (.2 time)
Fringe
Annual Merit Reserve
Sub - Total Staff
SAMPUNG, LAB AN ALYSIS, MONITORING WELLS, SUPPLIES
$	7,073
$	6,485
$	2,516
$12,580
$	2,500
$	7,789
$	1,947
$40,890
$30,400
TOTAL
$71,290
2. ESTIMATED BUDGET FOR INSPECTION INTEGRATION OBJECTIVE:
STAFF
•	Env. Technical Specialist III
•	Env. Specialist II
•	Env. Specialist II
•	Intern
Fringe
Annual Merit Reserve
$13.55/hr X (.1 time) -
$ 12.05/hr X (.3 time)
$ 15.53/hr X (.5 time)
$6/hour X (.2 time) -
$ 2,829
$ 7,548
$16,213
$ 2,500
$ 7,272
$ 1,818
Staff - TOTAL	$38,181
3. ESTIMATED BUDGET FOR ENFORCEMENT AND ORDINANCE OBJECTIVE:
STAFF
•	Env. Technical Specialist III
•	Env. Specialist II
•	Env. Specialist II
•	Env. Health Supervisor
Fringe
Annual Merit Reserve
$ 13.55/hr X (.25 time) ¦
$ 12.05/hr X (.1 time) -
$ 15.53/hr X (.1 time) -
$ 13.67/hr X (.05 time)
$
$
$
$
$
$
7,073
2,516
3,242
1,427
3,565
891
Sub-Total Staff
Contracted Legal Services
$18,713
$10.000
26

-------
APPENDIX G
\7
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION VIII
999 18th STREET - SUITE 500
DENVER, COLORADO 80202-2405
Ref: 8RC
To: Underground Injection Control Operator/Owner
Alan R. English, whose signature and physical description
appear below, is an employee of the Missoula City County Health
Department in Missoula, Montana.
Date of Birth: 5/16/62
Height: 611"
Weight: 180 lbs.
Hair: Blond
Eyes: Blue
AN R. ENGLISH &
ALAN
The Missoula City County Health Department has been awarded
a grant (No. G1008692-01-0) from the United States Environmental
Protection Agency, pursuant to the Safe Drinking Water Act, 42
U.S.C. Section 300f et seq., to assist in the demonstration of
local/federal implementation of the shallow injection well
program in Missoula, Montana. Under this grant, the City County
Health Department is to identify 5x28 injection wells (and, time
permitting, 5w20 injection wells) in the greater Missoula area,
inspect facilities with such wells, distribute information
concerning disposal regulations and options for wastes generated
in servicing internal combustion engines, help business owners
fill out the EPA shallow injection well information request form,
act as a liaison between the Environmental Protection Agency and
local businesses, provide technical assistance to current sump
users in employing other acceptable options for disposal, and
conduct final inspections on 5x28 injection well closures
(including photo and written documentation).
Your cooperation with Mr. English and the Missoula City
County Health Department in carrying out this grant project is
greatly appreciated.'
Sincerely.,

Max H. Dodson
Director
Water Management Division
1

-------
APPENDIX H
AQUIFER PROTECTION INSPECTION FORM
Missoula Valley Water Quality District
1 Date	 2 Time	 3 Inspector	
Purpose of Inspection: () Routine () Complaint ( ) Follow-up () Other	
General Information
4 T	R	S	1/4	1/4	 5 GeoCode	
6	Legal: Sub.	 Lot	 Block
7	SUID #	
8	SIC Code	
9	Is facility in the Water Quality District () yes () no
10	Name of Facility	
11	Street Address	
12	Owner				
13	Owner Address	
14	Facility Phone #	 15 Owner Phone #
16	Operator's Name	
17	Contact Person	
18	24-Hour Phone #	 # of Employees	
19	Current Land Use (based on description of business)	
20 Previous Land Use (based on information supplied by
contact)	
Underground Storage Tanks
21 Are there any UST(s) reported on site	 22 UST Facility #
23 Any physical indication of tanks on site	 If yes, explain	
24 Date of last UST Inspection (County or State)
List UST(s) below:
Tank #
Type
Size
Product
Age
Status
Year
Removed








-------
Water & Sewer
25	Is facility on Public or Private Water	
26	Is facility on Public or Private Sewer	
Public Water Supply
27	Public System () MWC () Other	
28	Public Water Supply ID #	
29	Connection Date		
Private Water Supply
30	Number of wells	 31 Well Depth(s)	
32 Well Screen Interval	 33 Well Log Ms	
34	0 of employees	
Public Sewer
35	Connection Date	 36 Number of:
sinks toilets floor drains	Other
Private Sewer
37 Permit #	 38 System Type	
39 Installation Date	 40 ft of employees
41 List all Non-Sanitary Discharges to Sewer	
Hazardous Material Inventory
42 Types of Materials on site:
() Fuels () VOCs () Pesticides/Herbicides ()Paints/Inks
() Metals () PCBs () Asbestos	() waste oil ()Other
List materials below:
Material
Quantity
Stored
Storage
Container
Is Quantity Above
Threshold*
































Refer to Aquifer Protection Ordinance for Threshold Levels

-------
Hazardous Waste Generation & Disposal
43	RCRA Generator Status ( ) Cond. Exempt ( ) Small () Large
44	EPA RCRA Generator ID #	
List hazardous waste generated at facility
Waste
Amount
Generated
(per month)
Amount
Stored
Quantity
Above
Threshold
Final Disposal Location













































* Refer to Aquifer Protection Ordinance for Threshold Levels
45 Are wastes stored at quantities above Aquifer Protection Ordinance Threshold Values () yes () no
If yes, list the wastes
46	Are wastes properly stored, sealed, and labeled () yes () no
47	Are those wastes disposed of off site manifested from site () yes () no
48	Are waste disposal quarterly reports filed with the state ( ) yes () no
49	Are wastes stored on site more than 90 days () yes () no
50	Does facility do on-site treatment of wastes () yes ( ) no
51	If yes, on-site Treatment Permit #	
Explain Treatment Process:
52 Has a Hazardous Waste Contingency Plan been prepared (small and large quantity generators only)

-------
Non-Hazardous Waste Generation & Disposal
53 List wastes that are:
Incinerated 	
Disposed in Landfill
Recycled or Reused
Other
Underground Injection Control Program
Injection
Well Type
Number
of Sites
Operating
Status
Date
Constructed
Depth of
Well
General Location


















Other Regulatory Programs
54	Is there evidence of illegal dumping on site () yes () no
55	Is the facility subject to storm water regulations () yes () no
56	Is the facility subject to public water supply regulations () yes () no (private well serving more than
20 employees)
57	Does the facility require pretreatment of wastewater () yes () no
58	Does the facility have the following permits: () MPDES () GWDES () Air () WWTP pretreatment
List appropriate permit #'s		
59	Is there evidence of illegal burning () yes () no
60	Are junk vehicles stored on site ( ) yes ( ) no
61	Is facility subject to Halogenated Solvent Users Registration Act (>20 gal. of solvent) () yes () no
62	HSURA Registration #	
63	Does facility have chemicals that require SARA Title III reporting? ( ) yes ( ) no
If yes, has LEPC been notified ( ) yes () no

-------
Potential Violations
Potential Violation
Recommended Action
Compliance Date


















Inspected by	 Received by
Reinspection Date		Title	
Entered in database by	 Date Entered

-------
CODE:
NAME	
ADDRESS
1/4	1/4
LEGEND
WELL
5W10 (T) INJECTION WELL
¦°°°°* | SEPTIC TANK
0
©
DRAINFIELD
CESSPOOL
SEEPAGE PIT
IRRIGATION DrTCH
POND

-------
COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
MISSOULA CITY/COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT
1 date		2 TIME	 3 INVESTIGATOR 		4 CODE	
SITE LOCATION INFORMATION
5	LEGAL DESCRIPTION SUBDIVISION	LOJ	BU	
6	STREET ADDRESS 			
7	SUID #	 8 GEO COOE # 	 9 1/& 1M T R S
OWNERSHIP INFORMATION
10	NAME OF PROPERTY OWNER 	
11	NAME OF BUSINESS 			
12	NAME OF BUSINESS OPERATOR __	
13	CONTACT PERSON	
14	HAILING ADDRESS			
15	BUSINESS TELEPHONE # 	 16 24 HOUR TELEPHONE #	
LAND USE INFORMATION
17 PRIMARY SIC COOE 	 18 ZONING DISTRICT
19 DESCRIBE LAND USE 	
	2 0 COOE.
21 DESCRIBE HISTORY OF LAND USE AND OWNERSHIP 	
FROM	TO	
FROM	TO
SITE CHARACTERISTICS
22	SOIL TYPE (USDA)	 23 DEPTH-TO-GROUNDUATER (FT)	
24		 25 DRAINAGE CHARACTERISTICS X DRAINS TO: SUMP	SOIL SURFACE WATER
2 6	JSiiTHraEjfWEEl?	 27 USE: DRINKING IRRIGATION INDUSTRIAL ABANDONED 28 WELL LOG? .
29	PUBLIC WATER? 	 30 SYSTEM: MWC	CFWC	PWS ID#
31	COMMENTS ON WELL 	
32	rNOiyx matIssuer? 33 permit #	 34 describe system: 5U3i 5U32 ' suio unknown
35	PUBLIC SEWER?	 3 6 WHEN CONNECTED?	
37	LIST CONNECTIONS TO SEWER: TOILETS SINKS FLOOR DRAINS SUMPS OTHER
38	COMMENTS 		
39 PUBLIC SEUER AVAILABLE?	
40	5W10 5W31 5W32 5D2 5 DA 5U20 5U28
41		
42	UST PROGRAM NOTIFIED?	

-------
r
-------
CODE:	
NAME	
ADDRESS	
	1/4	1/4 T R	S
LEGEND
©	WELL
5W10 ©	INJECTION WELL
| '°°°«* |	SEPTIC TANK
		DRAINFIELD
[~c]	CESSPOOL
(s)	SEEPAGE PIT
		IRRIGATION DITCH
ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
SITE PLAN



OR
H
















i
,
,
l 1 1
i ; !


















....




-

















--






-







-















--
...
-











-
-

-



-
!
!
i
i
l
-


-




-
-
-

...





¦-

-

-
-














-


















































1
i

1
I
1







1
f
i
t !
set
LE i i j

-------
NOTICE OF INSPECTION appendix I
V7
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION VIII, 999 18TH STREET - SUITE 500
DENVER, COLORADO 80202-2405
Date:
Notice of inspection is hereby
given according to Section 1445(b) of the Safe

Drinking Water Act (42 U.S.C
/. §300f et seq.).
Hour:


Firm Name:
Firm Address:
REASON FOR INSPECTION:
For the purpose of inspecting records, files, papers, processes, controls and
facilities, ana obtaining samples to determine whether the person subject to an
applicable underground injection control program has acted or is acting in
compliance with the Safe Drinking Water Act and any applicable corxftion of
permit or rule authorization.
SECTION 1445(b) of the SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT is quoted below:
Section 1445(b)(1): Except as provided in Paragraph (2),
the Administrator, or representati/es of the Administrator
duly designated by him, upon presenting appropriate
credentials, and a written notice to any supplier of water
or other person subject to (a), or person subject (A) a
national primary drinking water regulation prescribed under
Section 1412(B) an applicable Underground Injection Control
Program, or (C) any requirement to monitor an unregulated
contaminant pursuant to subsection (a), or person in charge
of any of the property of such supplier or other person
referred to in clause (A), (B), or (C), is authorized to
enter any establishment, ... facility, or other property of
such supplier or other person in order to determine whether
such supplier or other person has acted or is acting in
compliance with this title, including for this purpose,
inspection, at reasonable times, of records, files, papers,
processes, controls, and facilities, or in order to test any
feature of a public water system, including its raw water
source. The Administrator or the Comptroller General (or
any representative designated by either) shall have access
for the purpose of audit and examination to any records,
reports, or information of a grantee which are required to
be maintained under subsection (a) or which are pertinent to
any financial assistance under this title.
Inspector's Name & Title (Print)
EPA RB 3560-1 (8-99)
inspector's Signature
Original - Regional Office Copy
Yellow Copy - fIl« Copy
Pink Copy - Operator Copu

-------
V7
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION VI
999 18th STREET - SUITE 500
DENVER, COLORADO 80202-2405
COMPANY:
REPRESENTATIVE
ADDRESS:
CITY/STATE/ZIP:.
CLASS V FIELD INSPECTION REPORT
PHONE:
RECORDS REVIEW
1	) Previous Inspection Dates:
2	)
DATE:
Inspection Type:
Well Type: 	
Well Type: 	
Well Type: 	
SITE INSPECTION
Time:
(am/pm)
Status:
Status:
Status:
(Routine, Compliance, Enforcement)
	 No. Wells: 	
	 No. Wells: 	
No. Wells:
General Site Condition:
Photos? (Y) (N) 	
Fluid Sample Needed? (Y) (N)	Sample Taken? (Y) (N)
Follow Up Inspection Needed? (Y) (N)
Comments:
INSPECTOR(S):
EPA R8 3560-IC (8-89)
Original - Regional Office Copy
Yellow Copy - rile Copy
Pink Copy - Operator Copy

-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
SHALLOW INJECTION WELL INVENTORY REQUEST FORM
Business Name			Address			
Citv	State	Zip Code	
lontact Person:			Phone ( ) 	
Shallow injection wells (Class V) include commercial or industrial sumps, drain fieids, cesspools, septic systems, drink:.-.;
•varer wells, and dry wells. The Underground Injection Control (UIC) regulations require basic inventory information tor
lisposal systems and additional information for certain types of Class V systems.
^is form is designed to collect the basic information tor all systems used for subsurface emplacement of fluids and
dditional information for those systems with a greater potential for contaminating ground water supplies.
Does your business dispose of waste, spilLs, or storm water using any of the methods below? (YES/NO)	
'lease check all methods used.
I. IDENTIFICATION OF DISCHARGE/DISPOSAL/PLACEMENT SYSTEM.
] 1.	Waste fluids discharged to a municipal sewer system.
.f J 2.	Waste fluids discharged to a lagoon or pond.
] 3.	Waste fluids discharged to surface water (lake, river, stream, wetland).
] 4.	Waste fluids stored and/or hauled away (includes wash water, oil, fuel, solvent, antifreeze etc.).Please list
J 5. Waste fluids spilled or drained on ground (includes wash water, oil, fuel, solvent, antifreeze etc.),
] 6. Waste fluids disposed of using an abandoned drinking water well.
[ j 7. Discharge of any type of fluid into a well, including cooling water.
] 8. Surface runoff to dry well (sump), mostly storm water runoff.
] 9. Surface runoff to dry well (sump), storm water runoff plus spills, leaks, and/or chemical discharges.
( | 10. Discharge to dry well, sump, or septic system, fluids from vehicle/equipment service or maintenance bay.
] 11. Discharge to a dry well, sump, or septic system, fluids from vehicle/equipment washing operation.
| 12. Discharge of cleaning solvents or waste water containing solvents to a dry well, sump or septic system.
[ ] 13. Discharge to a dry well, sump, or septic system, other.	
] 14. Any other discharge, disposal, or placement of any type of waste fluid, please describe	
•If you checked any of Items 6 through 14, you must go to section II. If not, only complete section III.
. BASIC INVENTORY INFORMATION. (See the Fact Sheet for Injection Well Codes. Call Arnold Boettcher at
(406) 449-5486 for assistance.)
Injection Number Operating	General Date Depth Diagram Average/Maximum
Well Code Of Sites Status'"	Location Constructed Of Weil Attached Injection Volume
1				
2	.	
3	.	
4	.			
*STATUS AC=Active, AN=Abandoned. UC = Under Construction, TA=Temporarily Abandoned
SEE NEXT PAGE

-------
III.	SOURCE AND NATURE OF DISPOSED FLUID(S). (i.e., solvents, waste oil. brake fluid, antifreeze, wai
paint, wash water, snow melt, cooling water, boiler blow down water etc.)
1.				
2..			
3.		
4	.			
IV.	CERTIFICATION
I certify, under penalty of law, that this document was prepared under my guidance or supervision in accordance wit.
system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gathered and'evaluated the information contained herein,
best of my knowledge and belief, the information presented above is true, accurate and complete.
Signature:	 Date:.	
Name (please print):	 Title:	
Name of Company:	
Address:	
Please return this Shallow Injection Well Inventory Request Form to:
The Environmental Protection Agency
Attention: Arnold Boettcher
Federal Office Building
Drawer 10096, 301 South Park
Helena, Montana 59626-0096
o

-------
Name
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
SHALLOW INJECTION WELL INVENTORY REQUEST FORM
Address_
City	
State
_Zip_
Phone: (
Contact:
Shallow Injection Wells (Class V) include commercial or
industrial sumps, drain fields, cesspools, septic systems and dry
wells. The Underground Injection Control (UIC) regulations require
basic inventory information for all disposal systems and additional
information for certain types of shallow injection well disposal
systems.
This inventory request was designed to collect the basic
information for all systems used for the subsurface emplacement of
fluids and additional information for those
potential for contaminating ground-water
forms are needed, copy this questionnaire,
questionnaire, please sign page 4 and return the entire questionnaire
including any blank pages to EPA.
systems with a greater
supplies. If additional
When finished with the
Does your business dispose of waste, spills, or storm runoff
using any of the following methods? Please check all methods
utilized.
I. Identification of Discharge/Disposal/Placement System.
1 .
2.
3.
4.
5
6,
7,
8,
9,
1 1 .
12.
[ ] 13
Fluids discharged to a municipal sewer system.
Fluids discharged to a "lagoon or pond.
Fluids discharged "to surface water, lake, river, or stream.
Fluids stored and/or hauled away: (Please List) 	
Fluids spilled or drained on ground
Abandoned drinking water well used for injection.
Discharge into a well.
Surface runoff to dry well (sump)-mostly storm water runoff
Surface runoff to dry well (sump) - storm water runoff plus
spills, leaks, and/or chemical discharges.
10. Discharge to a drain field (sump or septic tank) - fluids
from motor vehicle service bay.
10a. Discharge to a drain field (sump or septic tank) - fluids
from a car washing operation.
10b. Discharge to a drain field (sump or septic tank) -
industrial solvents.
10c. Discharge to a drain field (sump or septic tank)
- other
Wells for experimental technology.
Brine disposal wells associated with the extraction of
halogens or their salts.
Other, please describe 	
IF YOU CHECKED
any of items 6 through 13, go to Page 2
OTHERWISE, go to Page 4

-------
SHALLOW INJECTION WELL INVENTORY REQUEST FORM, PAGE 2 of 4
IF YOU CHECKED - any of items 6 through 13 on page 1, which are Class
V disposal systems you must provide the information listed below.
Please provide the well type, number of wells, operating status,
general location, and nature and source of waste fluids. ATTACHMENT 2
is a Fact Sheet of 32 types of Class V systems and well codes. Use
the most appropriate well code to identify the well type or call
Arnold Boettcher at 406-449 5486 for assistance in identifying.the
system.
II. Basic Inventory Information
DISPOSAL TYPE	NUMBER	OPERATING	GENERAL
	CODE 	OF SITES	STATUS*	LOCATION
(see Fact Sheet)
1 .
2,
3.
4 ,
5,
6,
7,
8,
9,
10
* STATUS AC = Active	AN = Abandoned, No approval
UC = Under Construction TA = Temporarily Abandoned
SOURCE and NATURE of DISPOSAL FLUID(S)
(i.e., solvents, waste oil, brake fluid, antifreeze, wash water)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
IF YOU CHECKED
any of items 10 through 13 on page 1 go to page 3
OTHERWISE, go to Page 4

-------
SHALLOW INJECTION WELL INVENTORY REQUEST FORM, PAGE 3 OF 4
IF YOU CHECKED any of items 10 through 13 on page 1, you must provide additional inventory
information. These systems may pose a greater threat to underground sources of drinking
water. The systems:
Discharge to a drain field	(sump or septic tank)	- fluids from motor vehicle
service bays.
Discharge to a drain field	(sump or septic tank)	-	fluids from a car washing
operation.
Discharge to a drain field	(sump or septic tank)	- industrial solvents.
Discharge to a drain field	(sump or septic tank)	-	other 	
[
]
10.
[
]
1 0a.
[
3
1 Ob.
[
3
1 0c.
[
]
1 1 .
[
]
12.
c
]
13.
Disposal systems for experimental technology.
Br:ne disposal associated with the extraction of halogens or their salts.
Otnar, please describe 	
The required information is listed below and must be provided for each individual well or
drain system. Please note that a construction diagram (including such items as casing or
piping type and sizes, cement type and volumes, valves and other fittings) is required for
each well. The location of the system must be provided by either street address; or quarter
section, section, township, and range; or the nearest intersection of two major roads.
III. Additional Inventory Information
CODE DATE SYSTEM DIAGRAM AVERAGE/MAXIMUM
(Fact Sheet) CONSTRUCTED DEPTH ATTACHED	LOCATION	INJECTION VOLUME
CONTINUE TO PAGE 4

-------
SHALLOW INJECTION WELL INVENTORY REQUEST FORM, PAGE 4 of 4
I certify, under penalty of l'aw, that this document was prepared under
my guidance or supervision in accordance with a system designed to
assure that qualified personnel properly gathered and evaluated the
information contained herein. To the best of my knowledge and belief,
the information presented above is true, accurate and complete.
Signature	Date
Name (Please print or type)	Title
Name of Company:
Address:	
Please return this questionnaire to: EPA, 8WM-DW
Atten: Arnold Boettcher
Federal Office Building
Drawer 10096
301 South Park
Helena, Montana 59626-0026

-------
Page No. 1
06/29/94
INJECTION WELL CONTROL PROGRAM - INSPECTED FACILITIES
ODE
NAME
STREETNUM
STREET
CLASS5
A7
D2
D4
F1
W9
W10
Wll
W2 0
W31
W32
X27
5X28
CLOSE_DA'
0
ROSCOE STEEL (FORMER SITE)
0
SOUTH
Y
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
1
CLEAN SCENE LAUNDRY
1220
BROADWAY W
Y
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
2
CULVER'S FOREIGN CAR SERVICE
2302
MCDONALD
Y
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
03/15/91
3
ENGINE REBUILDERS
2601
KEMP
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
05/06/91
4
ESQUIRE MOTORS
1300
BROADWAY W
Y
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
5
THATCHER CHEMICAL COMPANY
3200
RASER DRIVE
Y
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
6
FINEST OIL & BATTERY SUPPLY
940
BROADWAY E
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
7
FISHER ENTERPRISES STORE YARD
2120
LIVINGSTON
Y
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
8
GATEWAY PRINTING
939
STEPHENS
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
9
GENERAL MACHINERY AND ELECTRIC
1825
KENSINGTON
Y
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
10
HARV'S BODY SHOP
1041
S 5TH W
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
08/21/91
11
HIGHLANDER CENTER LAUNDROMAT
1963
S 14TH W
Y
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
12
IMPORT PALACE (old)
914
KENSINGTON
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
05/08/92
13
LAUNDRA QUEEN
146
WOODFORD
Y
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
/
/
14
LES SAINTS AUTO REPAIR
2831
CLARK
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
05/14/91
15
MISSOULIAN, THE
500
HIGGINS S
Y
0
4
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
16
MONTANA POWER CO (MAINT. YARD)
1903
RUSSELL S
Y
0
4
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
08/01/91
17
MONTANA PRINTING CO.
1629
SOUTH AVE W
Y
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
18
MONTANA RECYCLING, INC.
806
SPRUCE W
N
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
19
MOUNTAIN BELL MAINTENANCE YARD
1515
S 14TH W
Y
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
08/26/92
20
MOUNTAIN MOVING PRESS
315
S 4TH E
Y
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
21
TNT/UNITED TRUCK LINES
2602
INDUSTRY ROAD
Y
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
22
CITY ELEC/ELECTRO SERVICE CENT
101
CATLIN
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
09/27/91
23
MSLA CITY STREET DEPT.
800
BROADWAY W
Y
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
04/02/91
24
MSLA CITY PARKS & REC VEH MAIN
101
HICKORY
Y
0
4
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
01/29/93
25
USFS MSLA DISTRICT
1615
CATLIN S
Y
0
13
0
0
0
0
0
1
6
0
0
9
12/21/92
26
MISSOULA ROOF COMPANY
740
RIVER RD
Y
0
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
27
MISSOULA TEXTILE SERVICES
111
SPRUCE E
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
28
SENTINEL HIGH SCHOOL
901
SOUTH AVE W
Y
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
2
07/31/91
29
NEW LOOK AUTO REFINISHERS
602
MYRTLE
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
3 0
NIELSON/ROCKY MOUNT.DENTAL LAB
913
HIGGINS S W
Y
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
31
QUICK SILVER GRAPHICS
2347
SOUTH AVE W
Y
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
32
OTTO'S CRANE & TOWING, INC.
514
DEFOE
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
33
PACESETTER RUG & FURN.CLEANERS
335
HIGGINS S W
Y
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
34
SOUTHGATE AUTO SALES
3838
BROOKS
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
35
WEST ELECTRIC DISTRIBUTORS
101
TRADE
Y
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
36
UNIVERSITY MOTORS
3600
RESERVE S
Y
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
06/12/91
37
CALKINS DISTRIBUTING
2034
MULLAN RD
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/

-------
Page No. 2
06/29/94
INJECTION WELL CONTROL PROGRAM - INSPECTED FACILITIES
ODE
NAME
STREETNUM
STREET
CLASS5
A7
D2
D4
F1
W9
W10
Wll
W2 0
W31
W32
X27
5X28
CLOSE_DA1
38
CHIC HARBINE
208
COMMERCE
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
39
QUALITY AUTOMOTIVE
2424
MARY
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
08/09/91
40
RAINBOW INT'L CARPET DYEING
1046
S 3RD W
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
41
RC'S EXXON
2000
HIGGINS S
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
42
ROEMER'S TIRE & AUTOMOTIVE
240
BROADWAY E
Y
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
05/30/91
43
RON'S AUTO REFINISHERS
919
STRAND
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
02/09/91
44
MONTANA TRANSMISSION SERVICE
2002
SUSSEX W
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
05/24/91
45
MONTANA RAIL LINK
1930
SOUTH AVE W
Y
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
46
RTO AUTO
523
BICKFORD
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
47
TIME RENTALS
2630
BROADWAY W
Y
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
/ /
48
SEARS AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE
0
SOUTHGATE MALL
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
11/18/91
49
SEILLER GARAGE
2101
S 12TH W
Y
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
08/21/91
50
SEIM DENTAL LAB
715
KENSINGTON
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
51
SHOPPE DRYCLEANING & LAUNDRY
700
HIGGINS S W
Y
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
52
SMITH'S REPAIR
606
SHERWOOD
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
53
SOUTH AVENUE LAUNDRY CENTER
117
SOUTH AVE W
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
54
BITTERROOT WELDING & HYDRAULIC
1909
WYOMING #1&2
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
08/12/92
55
SOUTHSIDE AUTO RECONDITIONING
1721
DEARBORN
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
04/09/91
56
FAB TECH
100
JOHNSON N #7
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/ /
57
SPARKLE LAUNDRY
812
HIGGINS S
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
58
SPARR'S TOWING AND AUTOMOTIVE
2000
CENTRAL W
Y
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
07/30/91
59
WORLD WIDE MOTORS
235
RUSSELL N.
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/ /
60
MINI MART #703
2738
BROADWAY W.
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
/ /
61
SUPER WASH
231
HIGGINS S W
Y
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
04/26/91
62
MISSOULA SPRING BENDERS
100
JOHNSON N #12
Y
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
/ /
63
THRIFTY AUTO SERVICE
1101
TOOLE
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
08/12/92
64
TRANSOLUTION
2100
SUSSEX W
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/ /
65
UNIQUE AUTO SERVICE (old)
920
S 3RD W
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
05/13/91
66
NORTHLAND DISTRIBUTING
901
S 2ND W #B
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
/ /
67
MONTANA FLASHER & PARTY TIME
1916
MAPLE STREET
Y
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
68
VASSER'S AUTO SERVICE
1809
AGNES
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
04/26/91
69
KENT BROS SERVICE
127
S 4TH W
Y
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
70
VILLAGE CLEANERS
1004
SOUTH AVE W
Y
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
71
WELSCH-BECKMANN DENTAL LAB INC
690
HIGGINS S W
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
72
WEST BROADWAY SINCLAIR
1340
BROADWAY W
Y
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
07/13/92
73
DENTAL PICK MANUFACTURER
2626
CLARK
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
74
PHOTOGRAPHER'S FORMULARY
115
S 4TH W
Y
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
75
EXPERT TIRE
139
MAIN E
Y
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
01/21/91

-------
Page No. 3
'29/94

INJECTION
WELL CONTROL
PROGRAM -
INSPECTED 1
FACILITIES








X3DE
NAME
STREETNUM
STREET
CLASS5
A7
D2
D4
F1
W9
W10
Wll
W2 0
W31
W32
X27
5X26
CLOSE
:_da:
76
RANGITSCH BROTHERS
2001
BROADWAY W
Y
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
05/29/93
77
FEDERAL EXPRESS
5500
MOMONT
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
78
VALLEY MOBILE HOME SERVICE
2300
PALMER W.
Y
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/
/
79
BITTERROOT MOTORS TOY-FORD-VOL
0
US 93 S & 39TH
Y
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
09/19/91
80
WHALEN TIRE RETREAD SHOP
205
COMMERCE
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/
/
81
JESSE'S AUTO REPAIR
325
ORANGE S
Y
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
01/04/91
82
B & R AUTO CRAFT
1862
S 14th W
Y
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
83
FOUR SEASONS SUBARU/BUICK
1600
STEPHENS
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
02/01/91
84
AARON MOTOR WORKS
901
MARSHALL
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
09/10/91
85
QUALITY SUPPLY
2904
BROADWAY W
Y
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
/
/
86
ADVANCED DENTAL CERAMICS
925
HIGGINS S W
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
87
ALL AMERICAN AUTO WASH
701
STRAND
Y
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
88
BALBOA VOLKSWAGON (CLOSED)
1120
CEDAR
Y
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/
/
89
OKIES ELECTRIC
3755
RESERVE N
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
06/03/91
90
ANDREW'S AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE
1900
SUSSEX W
Y
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
04/26/91
91
THE TAXIDERMIST
221
COMMERCE
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I
/
92
TOWN PUMP #2 010
10955
HWY 93 S.
Y
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
/
/
93
ARTCRAFT PRINTERS OF MISSOULA
150
SPRUCE E
Y
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
94
NORTH FACE BIKE SHOP
218
MAIN E
Y
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
95
AUTO SEAT COVER
2010
RESERVE S
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
96
AUTOMOTIVE CLINIC
800
CATLIN
Y
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
01/31/91
97
BERT'S AUTO REPAIR
1414
MONTANA
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
04/22/91
98
DIAMOND Q CABINETS
2011
CENTRAL W
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
99
STEPHENS AVE. TIRE-RAMA
1801
STEPHENS AVE.
Y
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
/
/
100
SPECTRUM REFINISHERS
2300
PALMER W #3
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
12/02/92
101
AMERICAN DENTAL MANUFACTURING
2800
RESERVE S
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
102
BLUE RIBBON AUTO BODY (NEW)
1450
CEDAR
Y
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
103
C & H LAUNDROMAT
1101
S 3RD W
Y
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
/
/
104
CLAWSON MANUFACTURING CO.
1225
RODGERS
Y
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
0
0
/
/
105
CLUTCH MASTERS
2400
SOUTH AVE W
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
106
INLAND TRUCK PARTS
2300
PALMER W
Y
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
06/11/91
107
CRIST PLUMBING AND HEATING
174 0
NORTH AVE W
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
108
DON & RICK'S UPHOLSTERY
2125
S 14TH W
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
109
DUDS-N-SUDS COIN LAUNDRY
1502
TOOLE
Y
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
110
ED'S AUTO REPAIR
2026
S 12TH W
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
111
ECONOMICS LABORATORY
610
ORANGE S
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
/
/
112
ERNST HOME CENTER
3025
PAXSON
Y
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
113
FAIRWAY CLEANERS
1776
STEPHENS
Y
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/

-------
Page No. 4
06/29/94
INJECTION WELL CONTROL PROGRAM - INSPECTED FACILITIES
CODE
NAME
STREETNUM
STREET
CI
114
THE BODY SPECIALIST
11060
US 93 S
N
115
FLANAGAN'S AMC/RENAULT/MAZDA
1700
STEPHENS
Y
116
GIBSON'S AUTO FURNITURE UPHOLS
1025
RONAN
N
117
HANK'S BEAR ALIGNMENT
1365
BROADWAY W
Y
118
NORTHERN ENERGY
3301
BROADWAY W.
Y
119
TIM'S AUTO AND PAINT
2205
KEMP
Y
120
TRANS-ELECTRIC
2120
DIXON
Y
121
JERRY'S TRANSMISSION, INC.
2340
SOUTH AVE W
Y
122
JMK PERFORMANCE
801
RONAN
N
123
MISSOULA SHEET METAL
209
TRADE ST.
Y
124
K-MART AUTOMOTIVE
3626
BROOKS
Y
125
KARR SHOPPE
129
S 4TH W
Y
126
EVERETTS AUTO (KC AUTOMOTIVE)
1027
RONAN
N
127
FIRST SECURITY BANK DRIVE UP
541
BROADWAY E
Y
128
BENNETT'S PLACE
0
US 93 S
N
129
LAUNDRA QUEEN II
907
BROADWAY E
N
130
M AUTO SERVICE
1265
RIVER RD
N
131
MIKE TINGLEY SUZUKI & YAMAHA
2150
SOUTH AVE W
Y
133
NIELS WELDING
100
JOHNSON N #13
Y
134
IRONHORSE WELDING
100
JOHNSON N #2-4
N
135
DAVIS TRANSPORT
216
TRADE
Y
136
PROFESSIONAL AUTO GLASS
1801
BROOKS
Y
137
NORTH AVE. FURNITURE REFINISHI
1910
NORTH AVE W
Y
138
S & S PAYLESS CAR WASH
2204
SOUTH AVE W
Y
139
SUPER AMERICA NO. 4063
1701
BROOKS
Y
140
BAKKE TIRE/WALTON REPAIR
501
CALIFORNIA N
N
141
ALPHA 93 CHEVRON
2130
BROOKS
Y
142
RENT A WRECK
2401
BROADWAY W
Y
143
AJ'S LAUNDRY
401
ORANGE S
Y
144
BOURQUINS CONOCO
438
S 3RD W
Y
145
WASH WORKS
9600
CARTAGE ROAD
N
146
CENEX LTD (closed)
400
MAIN W
Y
147
CENEX PETROLEUM INC
1108
CENTRAL W
N
148
MISSOULA CHAIN SAW SUPPLY, INC
201
COMMERCE
Y
150
AERO POWER VAC
6390
HWY 10 W.
Y
151
G.W.G. SECOND HAND
6593
HWY 10 W.
N
152
BIRD WATHCHERS COUNTRY STORE
202
MAIN E
N
153
EASTGATE CONOCO & MR. MUFFLER
1002
BROADWAY E
Y
D2
D4
F1
W9
W10
Wll
W2 0
W31
W32
X27
5X28
CLOSE_DAl
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
03/27/91
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
03/15/91
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
09/25/91
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
- 05/10/91
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
07/13/92
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
/ /
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
11/30/91
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
04/09/91
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
4
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
02/19/93
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
11/15/89
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
04/02/91
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
04/15/91
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
01/02/91
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
10/15/91
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
12/11/90
A7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

-------
Page No. 5
06/29/94
INJECTION WELL CONTROL PROGRAM - INSPECTED FACILITIES
CODE
NAME
STREETNUM
STREET
CI
154
GRIMEBUSTERS CLEANING CENTER
1202
KENT W
N
155
GARY'S CONOCO
2125
HIGGINS S
Y
156
OLE'S COUNTRY STORE #3
1235
MOUNT AVE
Y
157
GILLY'S GAS AND GROCERY
2340
S 3RD W
Y
158
COLE CAMPERS
5450
MOMONT
Y
159
LOUISIANA PACIFIC, INC.
3300
RASER ROAD
Y
160
HELLGATE CONOCO
711
BROADWAY E
Y
161
HI-NOON PETROLEUM
1101
S 6TH W
N
162
NEW ERA BICYCLE(wasKentBroExxo
741
HIGGINS S
Y
163
EXPRESS LUBE
601
BROADWAY E
Y
164
R. BROWN COMPANY
9400
INSPIRATION DR.
Y
165
SCHWAN SALES ENTERPRISE
9170
FUTURITY DR
Y
166
MINI MART #410
3502
BROOKS
Y
167
PETERSEN'S TRUCKING
3909
SO. 7TH
Y
168
B & B CONOCO
510
BROOKS
Y
169
INDUSTRIAL DESIGN & MANUFACTUR
9600
INSPIRATION DR
N
170
EDUCATIONAL LOGISTIC
3000
PALMER
Y
171
SAMMONS TRUCKING
3665
BROADWAY W.
Y
172
INTERSTATE TRUCK & AUTORECYCLI
7620
RIVERSIDE DR W
Y
173
DAVE'S COUNTRY STATION(CLOSED)
0
HWY 200 E
Y
174
SOUTHS IDE CHEVRON
2325
HIGGINS S
Y
175
HAVE WRENCH WILL TRAVEL/HARLEY
2315
SOUTH AVE W
N
176
HI-COUNTRY MINI MOTORS, INC
2600
INDUSTRY RD
Y
177
DEANO'S #15
540
BROADWAY E
Y
178
MONTANA WHEEL
9330
FUTURITY DR.
Y
178
BOB STOLTZ
9330
FUTURITY DR.
Y
179
GOMER'S DIESEL/ELECTRIC
2400
PALMER W
Y
180
SDT AUTOMOTIVE
2300
PALMER W #4
Y
181
ROCKY MOUNTAIN MECHANICAL
9125
FUTURITY DR.
Y
183
TABISH BROTHERS CONOCO
1451
BROADWAY W
N
184
NELCON, INC
8900
CARTAGE RD
Y
184
ANTIQUE MOTOR CAR COMPANY
4101
PATTEE CANYON
N
165
TOWN PUMP & Wildlife Refuge
318
ORANGE S
Y
186
MISSOULA CARTAGE CO, INC.
9300
CARTAGE RD
Y
187
UNIVERSITY GAS
630
HIGGINS S
Y
188
PRO-FORMANCE AUTO CENTER
901
ORANGE N
Y
189
RD CLEANERS
335
HIGGINS S W
Y
190
ADAMS AUTO
2101
STRAND
Y
32
D4
F1
W9
W10
Wll
W2 0
W31
W32
X27
5X28
CLOSE_DA1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
08/28/91
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/
/
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
/
/
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
08/20/91
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/
/
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/
/
1
0
0
0
0
0
" 0
0
0
0
1
11/12/91
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/
/
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
06/25/92
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
04/09/91
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
07/29/91
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
08/15/91
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/
i
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
f
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
/
I
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
I
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
06/15/93
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
03/21/91
A7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

-------
Page No. 6
06/29/94
INJECTION WELL CONTROL PROGRAM - INSPECTED FACILITIES
CODE
NAME
STREETNUM
STREET
CLASS5
A7
D2
D4
F1
W9
W10
Wll
W2 0
W31
W32
X27
5X28
CLOSEJ3A1
191
HAQAN WELDINO
9200
CARTAGE RD
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
10/21/91
192
NORTHWEST PETERBILT CO
0
US 93 N & 1-90
Y
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
3
08/06/92
193
WHITE PINE AND SASH
1301
SCOTT ST
Y
0
0
18
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
194
IMPORT PALACE (new)
1358
BROADWAY W
Y
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
195
RICK'S AUTO BODY
1920
MONTANA
Y
0
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
04/15/91
196
FORT MISSOULA OMS
0

N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
197
JONES BROTHERS TRUCKING
7145
HWY 10 W
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
06/30/92
198
JIM PALMER TRUCKING
9730
DERBY DR
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
/
/
199
TRANSPORT EQUIPMENT, INC
9300
INSPIRATION DR
Y
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
04/20/93
200
JONES EQUIPMENT INC
8155
OLD HWY 10 W
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
08/06/92
201
CROSSROADS TRUCK CENTER
0
US 93 N & 1-90
Y
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
/
/
202
B C AUTO & MACHINE
1200
KENT W
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
203
SHOP WORKS
1200
KENT W
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
204
POLINSKY AUTOMOTIVE
2005
FLYNN LANE
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
10/23/92
2 OS
CUMMINS NORTHWEST
4950
RESERVE N
Y
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
02/28/90
206
WESTERN MATERIALS
2800
4Oth/TARGET RAN
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
207
MARVIN'S BODY SHOP
11375
MULLAN RD
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
10/08/91
208
BONNEVILLE POWER ADMIN.
2324
MCDONALD
Y
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/
/
209
FLANAGAN'S AUTO FITNESS CENTER
909
STRAND
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
07/12/89
210
AL'S OUTBOARD SERVICE
3614
HWY 200 W
Y
0
3
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
09/25/91
211
BURNICH MANUFACTURING #1
3645
HWY 200 E
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
/
/
212
BURNICH MANUFACTURING #2
0
RANDLES&MINNESO
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
/
/
213
CARL'S AUTO SALES
3620
HWY 200 E
Y
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
214
GRIMEBUSTERS E, SINCLAIR CONVN
505
HIGHTON
Y
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
/
/
215
HELLGATE EQUIPMENT
913
STAPLE
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
/
/
216
SUREJAM #2 (ONE STOP #1)
3700
BROOKS
Y
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
217
HUMMER'S PLACE
501
MINNESOTA
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
218
GARDEN CITY FUNERAL HOME
1705
BROADWAY W.
Y
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/
/
219
HUTCHESON, ALFRED
460
MONTANA AVE
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
220
NICK'S DIESEL POWER
3750
HWY 200 E
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
08/28/91
221
TABER'S GLASS.TRUCK & BODYSHOP
3655
HWY 10 W
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
09/04/91
222
B & B SIGNS
416
COLORADO
N
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
223
L, M, & G FUNERAL HOME
224
SPRUCE W.
Y
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
224
SQUIRE, SIMMONS & CARR FUNERAL
3035
RUSSELL
Y
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/
/
225
PIP PRINTING
1118
CENTRAL W.
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
226
BEACH TRANSPORTATION
1025
BURLINGTON
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/
/
227
EVERGREEN ENGINEERING
523
BICKFORD #A
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
06/30/92
228
BAKKE TIRE
1012
KENSINGTON
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
06/17/92

-------
Page No. 7
06/29/94
INJECTION WELL CONTROL PROGRAM - INSPECTED FACILITIES
CODE
NAME
STREETNUM
STREET
CI
229
L & R TIRE
1120
KENSINGTON
N
230
US POSTAL SERVICE
1100
KENT W
Y
231
FORT MISSOULA VEHICLE MAINTENC
0
FORT MISSOULA
Y
232
KWIK LUBE
721
MOUNT AVE #B
Y
233
WINDSHIELD WIZARD
721
MOUNT AVE #A
Y
234
BEACH TRANSPORTATION
825
MOUNT AVE
Y
235
KAY BROWN CONTRACTING
1900
SHERWOOD
N
236
THE MUFFLER BANDIT
1935
BROOKS
Y
237
DAN JENSEN
7995
HWY 10 W.
Y
238
POWER WASH
1620
RUSSELL S
N
239
ARROW AMBULANCE
1 ?nn
BURLINGTON
Y
240
MUFFLER BANDIT
1760
BROOKS
Y
241
LISACS TIRE
1019
CENTRAL W
Y
242
VALLEY MOTOR SUPPLY
1105
SUSSEX W
N
243
EXPRESS LUBE
2310
BROOKS
Y
244
STEVE'S SALES & SERVICE
600
HIGGINS S
Y
245
U OF M SHOPS
0
BLDG 32, U.M.
Y
246
CHAMPION AUTO STORE
903
BROADWAY E
Y
247
CAB CO
9500
FUTURITY DR.
N
248
CHESTER ALBERT LOGGING
9490
SUMMIT DR.
Y
249
BITTERROOT INTERN. SYSTEMS
500
TAYLOR
N
250
TABISH BROTHERS
955
BEECH
Y
251
BAKKE TIRE
340
PINE W
N
252
REYNOLDS RADIATOR & WELDING
233
MAIN W
N
253
ZIP AUTO SERVICE
251
MAIN W
Y
254
PALMER BROTHERS AUTO SUPPLY
1421
BROADWAY W
Y
255
BAKKE TIRE
3575
HWY 10 W
Y
256
MOUNTAIN WATER CO. SHOP
1345
BROADWAY W
Y
257
PROFESSIONAL AUTO SALES
1301
BROADWAY W
Y
2 56
SUNSHINE HEAT AND AIR
1124
CEDAR
Y
259
MEADOW GOLD
420
NORA
N
260
ORANGE STREET SINCLAIR
400
BROADWAY W
Y
261
TIRE RAMA
601
BROADWAY W
Y
262
POLINSKY BODY SHOP (OLD)
3015
RAILROAD W #8,9
Y
263
KELLY'S AUTO AND WELDING
0
US 93 S
Y
264
JJ'S USED CAR
100
RUSSELL S
Y
265
ACE AUTOMOTIVE
1215
DAKOTA
N
266
MIDAS MUFFLER
332
ORANGE S
Y
32
D4
F1
W9
W10
Wll
W2 0
W31
W32
X27
5X2 8
CLOSE_DAl
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
07/09/92
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
05/12/93
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/ /
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
01/30/92
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
06/17/93
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
01/04/93
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
04/15/91
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
02/19/91
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
09/09/91
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
09/09/91
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
05/31/91
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
04/23/91
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
01/04/93
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
09/18/91
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
07/13/92
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
07/02/93
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
08/19/92
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
01/29/92
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
08/01/91
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
10/15/91
5
0,
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
05/17/91
A7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

-------
Page No. 8
06/29/94
INJECTION WELL CONTROL PROGRAM - INSPECTED FACILITIES
CODE
NAME
STREETNUM
STREET
CLASS5
A7
D2
D4
F1
W9
W10
Wll
W20
W31
W32
X27
5X28
CLOSE_DA1
267
BFI SHOPS
1501
RODGERS
Y
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
06/26/92
268
I.T.I., INC.
9845
DERBY DR.
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
/
/
269
MISSOULA CITY CEMETERY SHOP
1820
RODGERS
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
09/06/91
270
SACS TRUCKING
9225
CARTAGE RD
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
271
RUSS'S BODY & PAINT
1111
RUSSELL N
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/
/
272
BLACKFOOT TELEPHONE
1112
RUSSELL N
Y
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
09/17/91
273
MOUNTAIN LINE
1221
SHAKESPEARE
Y
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
11/04/91
274
ZIP BEVERAGE
1200
SHAKESPEARE
Y
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
08/21/91
275
INDUSTRIAL SERVICES CO.
9665
SUMMIT DR.
Y
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
276
VACANT
924
PHILLIPS
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/
/
277
RENT TO OWN, INC.
1337
BROADWAY W.
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
278
EAST MISSOULA FIRE DEPARTMENT
300
MONTANA
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
09/30/92
279
COLLECTOR'S SHOWCASE
1359
BROADWAY W
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
280
SUN MOUNTAIN SPORTS
237
N 1ST
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
281
JEROME'S DRILLING
9520
INSPIRATION DR.
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
282
RED'S TOWING
321
RUSSELL N
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
06/23/92
283
MONROC CONCRETE
1600
RIVER RD
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
284
RAWLINGS CONSTRUCTION
1750
IDAHO
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
/
/
285
BIRCH STREET FLOORING
1942
BIRCH
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
286
BAKKE MOTORS
207
CATLIN N
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
287
MOUNTAIN IMPORTS
1B 0 0
S 3RD W
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
01/21/91
288
JENSEN & SONS CONSTRUCTION
1920
S 3RD W
Y
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
/
/
289
MONTANA SALVAGE POOL
9775
SUMMIT DR.
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
290
GALLAGHER CEDAR PRODUCTS, INC.
9555
INSPIRATION
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
291
CARAS CABINETS
725
RONAN
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
/
/
292
FWP SHOPS
3201
SPURGIN
Y
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
09/16/92
293
DSL MAURICE CUSICK EQUIP.
2705
SPURGIN
Y
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
08/25/92
294
DSL STATE FORESTER NURSERY/OFF
2705
SPURGIN
Y
0
4
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
09/30/92
295
OPPORTUNITY RESOURCES
501
ASH
Y
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
296
REAL LOG HOMES
9570
FUTURITY DRIVE

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
297
WINDY'S AUTO REPAIR
2
NIGHTINGALE PL
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
07/30/91
298
LOLO GLASS
11060
US 93 S
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
299
STEVE'S SAW SHOP
2309
GRANT
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
04/30/91
300
CAMP WELL DRILLING
1522
S 14TH W
Y
0
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
301
DON TRIPP'S TRUCK STOP
11880
US 93 S
Y
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/
/
302
INTERMOUNTAIN LUMBER
119
RUSSELL

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
303
SMITH & JONES COACH WORKS
1804
NORTH AVE W C&B
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
09/06/91
304
R H GROVER, INC
9550
DERBY DRIVE
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/

-------
Page No. 9
06/29/94
INJECTION WELL CONTROL PROGRAM - INSPECTED FACILITIES
XDDB
NAME
STREETNUM
STREET
CI
305
WES'S & BOB'S AUTO REPAIR
1900
NORTH AVE W
N
306
BITTERROT TAXIDERMY
707
RONAN
N
307
ROCKY MOUNTAIN AUTO SALVAGE
2049
S 12TH W
Y
308
TOTAL MECHANICAL
801
RONAN #3
Y
309
CHAMPION INTERNATIONAL
140
RUSSELL, N
Y
310
TOM SHERRY TIRE CENTER
2605
BROOKS
Y
311
MISSOULA NISSAN
2715
BROOKS
Y
312
GORDY'S BODY SHOP (closed)
2340
CHARLOTT AVE
Y
314
FIVE VALLEY HONDA
5900
US 93 S
N
315
LOLO LAUNDROMAT
12270
HWY 93 SOUTH
Y
316
SPRINKLER SUPPLY COMPANY
2440
MCDONALD
N
317
CABINET SHOP
901
SO 2ND W
Y
318
METAL WORKS OF MONTANA
109
N CALIFORNIA ST
Y
319
JOHNSON BROTHERS
925
SO 3RD W
N
320
UNITED BUILDING CENTER
800
SO 3RD W
Y
321
HILLCO INC
0
9th & RIVERSIDE
Y
322
EQ MUFFLER
3004
BROOKS
Y
323
FRENCHTOWN RURAL FIRE DIST#4
0
PINEY MEADOWS L
Y
324
WILLIAM'S EQUIPMENT
3790
HWY 200 E
Y
325
BOB & DAISIES (OLD MT.CAR&TRK)
329
MINNESOTA
N
326
FRENCTOWN RURAL FIRE DIST #2
0
GROOMS ROAD
Y
327
FRENCHTOWN RURAL FIRE DIST #3
18650
SIX MILE ROAD
Y
328
RUSSELL & SONS
400
COLORADO
N
329
MONTANA ELECTONICS CO
1314
RUSSELL N
Y
330
BARTLETT AUTOMOTIVE
100
JOHNSON N #8
Y
331
TOTAL PROFORMANCE AUTOMOTIVE
100
JOHNSON N #11
Y
332
TLC CAR WASHES, INC
501
RUSSELL S
Y
333
FRENCHTOWN RURAL FIRE DIST #5
995
TERRACE VIEW DR
Y
334
FRENCHTOWN RURAL FIRE DISTSICT
16875
MARION STREET
Y
336
JOHN'S COLLISION & TRUCK
1203
RIVER RD 1203 . 5
N
337
MARGARET'S
126
S 5TH E

341
MOUNTAIN STATES AUTO BODY
525
SPRUCE E
Y
344
EQUIPMENT REPAIR
13350
HWY 93 SO
Y
345
CROSSLEY VET HOSPITAL
1605
STEPHENS
N
346
ECONOMY BODY SPECIALISTS
400
KNOWLES
Y
347
CAR TUNES
1003
CENTRAL W
Y
348
MONTANA TRUCK PARTS
1250
TREMPER
Y
349
LIQUID AIR CORP
204
COMMERCE

D2
D4
F1
W9
W10
Wll
W2 0
W31
W32
X27
5X28
CLOSE_DA'
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
05/24/91
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
f
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
10/23/92
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
10/15/92
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
/
/
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
2
09/16/92
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
09/04/92
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/
/
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
/
/
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
03/15/91
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
03/11/91
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
03/11/91
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
12/12/90
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
04/02/91
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/
/
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
A7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Q
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

-------
Page No. 10
06/29/94
INJECTION WELL CONTROL PROGRAM - INSPECTED FACILITIES
CODE
NAME
STREETNUM
STREET
CI
350
SOUTHGATE TIRE-RAMA
1926
SOUTH AVE W
Y
353
CUSTOM STREET AUTO
3112
CLARK
Y
354
PRO COATINGS PLUS
1023
KENSINGTON
Y
355
HOUSE OF COLORS AUTO BODY
2409
MARY
Y
356
DEMAROIS OLDS/GMC
3115
BROADWAY W
Y
357
AGATE VALLEY RES - RAINGLOW
9480
INSPIRATION
Y
358
QUALITY LUBE
3621
OLD HWY 93
Y
359
PRUYN VETERINARY HOSPITAL
2501
RUSSELL STREET
Y
360
EMPIRE AIRWAYS
5225
HWY 10 W
Y
361
KEVIN'S AUTO REPAIR
0
US 93 S & US 12
Y
362
MISSOULA VO-TECH CENTER
3639
SOUTH AVE W
Y
363
JGL DISTRIBUTING
1002
BROADWAY E
Y
364
GREAT NORTHERN EQUIPMENT
3001
BROADWAY W
Y
365
FRONTIER CARWASH
2120
BROADWAY W
Y
366
KOCH'S REPAIR
5275
US 93 S
N
367
RESIDENTIAL SHOP
129
N 2ND W 129.5
Y
368
CROMWELL WELDING
5175
US 9 3 S
Y
369
TRUCK SPECIALTY INC
5165
US 93 S
Y
370
BLAIR TRANSFER & STORAGE CO.
7600
DESMET RD
N
371
BIG SKY MECHANICAL INC
9760
SUMMIT DR
N
372
OWINGS EQUIPMENT
9435
SUMMIT DR
Y
373
ART'S(OUT OF BUSISNESS 12/3/93
6570
HWY 10 W
N
375
WATKINS-SHEPPARD TRUCKING
6400
HWY 10 W
Y
376
SORENSON TRUCKING
6525
HWY 10 W
N
377
CHAMPION AUTO OF MSLA
1608
S 3RD W
N
378
IROQUOIS INDUSTRIAL
9660
SUMMIT DR
Y
379
EARL'S DISTRIBUTING
3305
GreatNorthrnWay
Y
380
STEEL SMITH TANK & EQUIPMENT
6725
HWY 10 W
N
361
BEARINGS, INC.
203
TRADE STREET
Y
382
AN CARE VETERINARY CLINIC
1440
RUSSELL
Y
383
GORDON CONSTRUCTIN COMPANY
1021
MOUNT
Y
384
WIMETT TRUCKING
6600
WIMETT LN
Y
386
DANA KEPNER COMPANY
1916
S 3RD W
Y
387
SPOONER CONSTRUCTION
1132
LONGSTAFF ST

392
GB AND K MACHINERY
9440
FUTURITY DR
Y
400
MISSOULA ELECTRIC COOP INC.
1700
BROADWAY W
Y
401
MISSOULA RV REPAIR
6455
HWY 10 W
N
402
MONTANA DEPT OF HIGHWAYS
2100
BROADWAY W
Y
D2
D4
F1
W9
W10
Wll
W2 0
W31
W32
X27
5X28
CLOSE JDA1
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
06/26/92
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
10/22/91
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
02/19/91
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
12/14/90
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/ /
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
04/08/91
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
04/08/91
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
08/19/92
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
12/14/90
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
06/09/93
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
09/23/92
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
01/28/92
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
4
10/21/91
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
/ /
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
09/17/91
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
3
03/24/93
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
' 0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
05/25/93
4
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
07/16/91
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
8
/ /
A7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0

-------
Page No. 11
06/29/94
INJECTION WELL CONTROL PROGRAM - INSPECTED FACILITIES
CODE
NAME
STREETNUM
STREET
CI
403
JIM PULLIAM RENTAL PROPERTIES
100
JOHNSON N #(x)
Y
405
PETROLANE OAS SERVICE
2610
CHARLO
Y
410
SAGE'S MACHINE SHOP
2145
SUSSEX W
N
411
KERR'S CUSTOM WHOLESALE DRAPER
206
S 3RD W
N
412
SEA-NIC TRANSPORT
11890
US 93 S
Y
413
SAUNDERS EQUIPMENT
1732
DEFOE
N
416
THOMPSON DENTAL MANUFACTURING
1201
S 6th W
N
417
TOWN AND COUNTRY AUTO BODY INC
1900
BROADWAY W
Y
421
DEAN WILLIAMS
9850
DERBY DR
Y
422
GLEN COWAN
0
LEWIS AND CLARK
Y
423
MEDICINE BOW MOTORS INC
5120
US 9 3 S
Y
424
BIG SKY TRUCK AND EQUIP CORP
6550
HWY 10 W
Y
425
ROCKY MOUNTAIN ELK FNDTN
2301
BROADWAY W
Y
426
BIG SKY LIFT TRUCK INC.
3015
RAILROAD W14 , 15
y
427
LIERG, INC
6205
PINE GROVE LANE
Y
428
THE PEDDLER
12445
US 93 S
N
429
MISSOULA RURAL FIRE STATION #5
12221
US 93 S
Y
430
MISSOULA RURAL FIRE STATION #2
6550
HWY 10 W
Y
431
MISSOULA RURAL FIRE STATION #4
94 B 0
HWY 12
Y
432
MISSOULA RURAL FIRE STATION #1
2521
SOUTH AVE W
Y
433
MISSOULA RURAL FIRE STATION #6
8455
MULLAN RD
Y
434
MISSOULA RURAL FIRE STATION #3
2306
GILBERT
Y
436
STEVE'S SAW SERVICE
11695
US 93 S
N
437
GRIZZLY AUTO CENTER
2000
BROADWAY W
Y
439
AC AUTO RECYCLER
6705
JUNIPER DR
N
440
BRIAN MOTORS
7000
HWY 200 E
Y
441
MILLTOWN GARAGE
7450
HWY 200 E
Y
442
STERLING MOTORS
2207
KEMP
Y
443
MISSOULA COUNTY ROAD DEPT
3095
STOCKYARD
Y
444
WHALEN TIRE
3002
BROADWAY W
Y
445
MISSOULA TRUCK SALES
2600
CHARLO
Y
446
EKO-KOMPOST, INC
3700
COMPOST ROAD
Y
448
MONTANA WOOD SPECIALTIES, INC
0
BITTERROOT & MI
Y
449
TLC CAR WASH
2500
BROOKS
Y
450
ROCKY MOUNTAIN DIESEL
2400
PALMER W
Y
451
MISSOULA AUTO SALVAGE
9905
INSPIRATION DR

452
SNAPPY RADIATOR
2600
BROADWAY W
Y
453
JAX AUTO BODY (new)
2110
BROADWAY W
Y
D2
D4
F1
W9
W10
Wll
W2 0
W31
W32
X27
5X28
CLOSE_DA"
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
11/04/91
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
06/04/91
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
04/09/92
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
12/01/92
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
10/29/91
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
04/26/91
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
10/08/91
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
09/23/92
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
09/16/92
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
03/08/93
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
•o
0
2
08/18/92
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
09/10/92
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
12/18/92
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
07/18/91
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
02/15/91
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
05/05/93
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
/ /
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
09/10/91
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
05/07/91
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/ /
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
01/03/91
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
02/04/93
A7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

-------
Page No. 12
06/29/94
INJECTION WELL CONTROL PROGRAM - INSPECTED FACILITIES
CODE
NAME
STREETNUM
STREET
CI
455
TRIPP BROTHERS TRUCKING
3750
GRANT CREEK RD
Y
456
LONG MACHINERY
3760
RESERVE N
Y
458
RUSSELL STREET MOTORS
300
RUSSELL N
Y
459
BIG-0 TIRES
3848
BROOKS
Y
460
NORCO PRODUCTS
5980
L. BLUE MTN RD
Y
462
WASHINGTON CORP HANGAR
5225
HWY 10 W
Y
463
ROBERT FOSS AUTO REPAIR
2401
ARCADIA DR.
Y
464
BFI LANDFILL
0
OLD COAL MINE
Y
465
CAR TOWN
3906
BROOKS
Y
466
MISSOULA CITY FIRE-STATION #3
1501
3 9TH
Y
469
U OF M GOLF COURSE
515
SOUTH AVE E
Y
470
NORTHSTAR AIR EXPRESS
5225
HWY 10 W
N
471
VALLEY MOTOR SUPPLY/CARQUEST
2604
BROADWAY W.
Y
472
JERRY'S MACHINE
1424
CEDAR
Y
474
EASTGATE RENTAL AND PARTY TIME
500
ALDER E.
N
476
GOODYEAR TIRE BUILDING
3303
BROADWAY W
Y
480
QUALITY AUTO AND RV SALES
450
RUSSELL N
Y
486
BROWN'S TOWING
7830
ZAUGG DRIVE
Y
491
MINUTEMAN AVIATION, INC.
5225
HWY 10 W
N
498
BROWN'S TOWING/LEMON ORCHARD
2205
BROADWAY W
N
507
MISSOULA CITY FIRE-STATION #1
200
PINE W
Y
508
MISSOULA CITY FIRE-STATION #2
247
MOUNT AVE
N
516
DAVIES EQUIPMENT INC
3201
BROADWAY W
Y
518
CELLULAR ONE
3100
PAXSON ST
Y
522
STREAMS IDE ANGLERS
501
ORANGE S

526
HART OIL DISTR.
501
TAYLOR
N
533
ROSCOE STEEL & CULVERT CO.
5405
MOMONT ROAD

535
IRONWOOD MANUFACTURING
4455
HWY 10 W

542
MIRACLE METHOD BATHTUB REPAIR
432
BROOKS

546
NIELSON PUMP CORP.
2901
LATIMOR
Y
546
PRO COATINGS PLUS
1023
KENSINGTON
Y
552
BORDEN CHEMICAL
3670
GRANT CREEK RD

557
COCA-COLA BOTTLING CO WEST INC
2010
S 3RD W
Y
561
LIFTING TECHNOLOGIES
740
RIVER STREET
Y
567
CAHOON REPAIR AND WELDING
0
HWY 83 N

569
GLEN'S AUTOMOTIVE
0
HWY 83 N
Y
571
AL'S REPAIR UNLIMITED
0
HWY 83 N
Y
578
KURT'S POLARIS YAMAHA
0
HWY 83 N

D2
D4
F1
W9
W10
wil
W2 0
W31
W32
X27
5X28
close jda:
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
12/18/92
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
2
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
06/19/92
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
8
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
/
/
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
05/22/91
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
08/20/91
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
08/10/92
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
07/02/93
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
05/22/91
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
08/21/91
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
12/14/90
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
09/04/92
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/
/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
A7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

-------
Page No. 13
06/29/94
INJECTION WELL CONTROL PROGRAM - INSPECTED FACILITIES
20DE
NAME
STREETNUM
STREET
CLASS5
A7
D2
D4
F1
W9
W10
Wll
W2 0
W31
W32
X27
5X28
CLOSE_DA'
584
CHARGER SPECIALTIES
3271
GRANT CREEK RD
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
/
/
580
BROADWAY SPLICING AND SUPPLY
200
RASER DR
Y
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
12/01/92
592
CASCADE WEST
2811
GREATNORTHRNWAY

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
593
WESTERN TRUCK REBUILD
4755
GRANT CREEK RD

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
05/07/93
599
WESTSIDE MACHINE & SUPPLY INC
204
RASER DR.
Y
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
05/10/93
610
NORTH AMERICAN VAN/MT TRANFR C
200
TRADE
Y
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
613
REX'S UPHOLSTREY
2504
BROADWAY W
Y
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
616
US BEARINGS AND DRIVES
2612
MURPHY

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
61B
CHRISTOFFERSON LOGLINERS
3820
S 3RD W

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
634
BOYCE LUMBER INC
1410
RUSSELL
Y
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
647
SAWS INC
3914
BROOKS
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
708
SERVPRO
3912
BROOKS
Y
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
709
ULTRA STRIP
4405
HWY 10 W

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
710
OLE'S STORE #12
3705
HWY 200 E

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
719
MSLA WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLNT
0
CLARK FORK LN

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
720
MISSOULA COUNTRY CLUB
2925
POST SIDING RD
Y
0
2
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
5
11/12/91
721
PRIVATE SHOP
7105
LOLO CREEK ROAD

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
723
LARKINS REPAIR
1909
WYOMING
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
08/18/92
724
A-1 TRUCK & CAR WASH
3015
RAILROAD W #4,5
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/
/
725
KLEEN-ALL
3015
RAILROAD W #3
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/
/
726
J & J RACE CARS
3015
RAILROAD W #7
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/
/
727
DEMAROIS OLDS BODY SHOP
3015
RAILROAD W #1,2
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
12/01/92
728
WESTERN TELECOM
100
JOHNSON N #6
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/
/
729
BEAVER HEATING AND AIRCOND.
100
JOHNSON N #10
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
730
DON PESCHEL CONSTRUCTING
100
JOHNSON N #1
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
/
/
731
SHOLTY CONTRACTING
100
JOHNSON N #5
Y
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/
/
732
PROFESSIONAL AUTO DETAIL
1909
WYOMING #6
Y
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
/
/
733
US SPRINT
3015
RAILROAD W #12
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
12/01/92
734
SMITH INTERNATIONAL
3015
RAILROAD W #13
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
/
/
735
BLUE RIBBON AUTO BODY (OLD)
1410
CEDAR
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
05/22/91
736
KARL TYLER CHEVROLET
3219
RESERVE N

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
737
AO SALES
4355
HWY 10 W
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
/
/
738
NORDBYE UPHOLSTERY
1359
CEDAR
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/
/
739
CATEY CONTROLS
3102
BROADWAY W
Y
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
08/28/91
740
TOM SHERRY/LES SCHWAB TIRE CTR
2800
BROADWAY W
Y
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
04/19/93
741
NORTHWAY DISTRIBUTERS / HODAKA
317
ORANGE S
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
742
MISSOULA COUNTY FAIRGROUNDS
1101
SOUTH AVE W
Y
0
13
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
743
INLAND COACH BODY SHOP
2321
BENTON AVE
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
04/15/91

-------
Page No. 14
06/29/94
INJECTION WELL CONTROL PROGRAM - INSPECTED FACILITIES
?ODB
NAME
STREETNUM
STREET
CLASS5
A7
D2
D4
F1
W9
W10
Wll
W2 0
W3 1
W32
X27
5X28
CLOSE
:_da:
744
EASTGATE CAR WASH
1002
BROADWAY E
Y
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
I
745
INTERSTATE DETROIT
3757
RESERVE N
Y
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
04/16/91
746
ROONEY'S AUTOMOTIVE
2410
MCDONALD 2410.5
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
03/17/93
747
RESIDENTIAL SHOP
7200
STODDARD
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
I
I
748
MT DEPT OF TRANS. CLINTON SHOP
0
HWY 210 MP 7.5
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
D
0
0
0
0
1
/
/
74 9
USFS AERIAL FIRE DEPOT
5765
HWY 10 W
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I
/
750
MT DEPT OF TRANS EVARO SHOP
17185
HWY 93 N

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
751
BEINEMA CAR RESTORATION
521
BICKFORD
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
06/23/92
752
JERRY'S WELDING SERVICE
2330
BENTON AVE
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
/
/
754
UNIQUE AUTO SERVICE/AUTO BODY
910
S 3RD W
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
11/15/91
755
AQRI FORD NEW HOLLAND SUPPLY
2036
MULLAN RD
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
/
/
756
GULL SKI AND BOAT
2601
BROADWAY W
Y
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
/
/
750
BIG MACK PARTS AND MACHINE
3120
BROADWAY W
Y
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
02/11/93
759
AMERICAN TRUCK WASH
3015
RAILROAD W10,11
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
/
/
760
UNNAMED SHOP IN ALLEY
129
N 2ND W
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
761
RESIDENTIAL SHOP
526
STODDARD
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
762
CRAMER'S CAR CLEANING
1750
NORTH AVE W
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/
/
763
MRL RAIL CAR SHOP
1705
RODGERS
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I
/
764
SIRCO MANUFACTURING
1919
NORTH AVE W
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I
/
765
VALLEY SALES
1900
BROADWAY W
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
I
/
766
ASTRO ARC WELDING
1618
WYOMING
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
I
/
767
STAR RENTAL
2105
SOUTH AVE W
Y
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
05/08/92
768
OLE'S
4901
RESERVE N
Y
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
06/08/92
769
NORTHWEST INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY
2555
MURPHY
Y
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
770
MONTANA BOLT COMPANY
3110
W. BROADWAY
Y
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I
/
771
HOUSE OF MANY MOLDS
1001
N RUSSELL
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
772
WASHINGTON BELT AND DRIVE
2602
BROADWAY W
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
i
/
774
MISSOULA AUTO ELECTRIC
2600
BROADWAY W
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
03/05/93
777
WESTSIDE SMALL ENGINE (NEW)
1105
N RUSSELL

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
778
MILL SERVICE
2401
PALMER W
Y
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
/
/
779
AUTO COLOR PAINT AND SUPPLY
1444
BROADWAY W
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
780
INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY
2304
BROADWAY W
Y
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
08/11/92
783
FRIENDLY AUTO SALES
2704
BROADWAY W.
Y
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
784
CRAMER'S CAR CLEANERS
2203
STEPHENS

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
785
BRETZ RV CENTER
2045
MULLAN ROAD
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
/
/
786
DEPT. OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
13850
LOLO CREEK ROAD
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
02/08/93
787
HUNTON PRECAST CONCRETE
1700
RODGERS
Y
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
/
/
788
GENE TRIPP JR. INC.
16595
HWY 10 E (OLD)
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
/
/

-------
Page No. 15
06/29/94
INJECTION WELL CONTROL PROGRAM
CODE	NAME
78 9	THRIFTY CAR RENTAL
789	GARDEN CITY AUTO RECONDITION
790	ROCKY MOUNTAIN IMPRESSIONS
791	MISSOULA SAWS INC.
792	MONTANA TIRE SHOP SUPPLY
7 92	CASTLEWOOD
793	CLINTON RURAL FIRE DISTRICT
794	L.M. NEILSON & SONS
795	WEST BROADWAY AUTO SALES
7 96	CROWN BEVERAGE COMPANY
796	TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING
797	RAM TOWING
798	4 G'S PLUMBING
799	HOUSE OF COLOR
BOO	THE AXMAN
93 5	MOUNTAIN AIR MARINE REPAIR
323 5	U-HAUL RENTALS
3335	BIG SKY FREIGHTLINERS
550 FACILITIES INSPECTED
STREET
CLASS 5
A7
D2
BROADWAY WEST
Y
0
0
BROADWAY WEST
Y
0
0
HICKORY
Y
0
0
COMMERCE
Y
0
0
MURPHY

0
0
MURPHY
N
0
0
HWY 10 E
Y
0
0
COMPOST RD
Y
0
0
BROADWAY W
Y
0
0
COMMERCE
Y
0
0
RAILROAD W.
N
0
0
GRANT CREEK RD

0
0
WYOMING
Y
0
0
BENTON AVE
Y
0
0
HWY 10 W
N
0
0
ZAUGG DR
N
0
0
STRAND
Y
0
0
HWY 93

0
0


1
259
STREETNUM
1900
1900
120
212
2604
2600
203 00
3505
2400
216
2607
3402
1515
1575
7655
7445
820
90
INSPECTED FACILITIES
D4
F1
W9
W10
Wll
W20
W31
W32
X27
5X28
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
196
9
0
9
4
44
19
25
3
359
05
07

-------
MIS
G
APPENDIX K
CI :OUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT
301 W. ALDER
MISSOULA, MONTANA 59802
(406)523-4755
September 2, 1992
This letter is a follow-up to my inspection on September 1, 1992.
As I mentioned during the inspection, the Montana Employee and
Community Hazardous .Chemical Information Act (MCA 50-78-102)
requires that employees be informed of the hazards associated with
work place chemicals. I have enclosed a copy of the law to help
you comply.
In addition, I checked with BFI, the local landfill operator about
disposal of methylene chloride wastes at the landfill. According
to BFI this type of disposal may not be acceptable. I would
suggest that you check with them prior to hauling any more waste
to them. If they will not accept the waste, I may be able to help
you find an alternative disposal option.
Finally, the Montana Halogenated Solvent Users Registration Act
(MCA 75-10-451) requires that any facility that uses more than 20
gallons of a halogenated solvent per year register with the Montana
Department of Health and Environmental Sciences. Your business
would qualify under this act due to the methylene chloride usage.
I have also enclosed a registration form for this purpose.
I realize that this is a lot to consider all at once, and I am
willing to help you any way I can. One possibility may be to
research alternative less hazardous strippers. If you have any
questions, please give me a call at 523-4755.
Sincerely,
Alan English
Environmental Health Specialist
enclosures (2)
whpl37.let

-------
MiSSOULA^Sk tr	MISSOULA CITY-COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT
COUNTY J\ /I	301 W ALDER ST
MISSOULA MT 59802-4123
Mi.ssqmlA \ v	(406) 523-475;
May 26, 1993
An inspection of your business, located at East Braodway on May
19, 1993 indicated the presence of an unregistered underground
storage tank (UST) . This tank is located behind the building on
the northwest side, and appears to be an old used oil tank.
Notification is -required by Federal and State law for all
underground storage tanks that have been used to store regulated
substances since January 1, 1974, and that are in the ground as of
May 8, 1986, or are brought into use after May 8, 1986. The
information requested is required by Section 9002 of the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act, (RCRA), as amended by Title 16,
Chapter 45, Subchapter 9, Administrative Rules of Montana (ARM) .
You must register the tank with the Montana Underground' Storage
Tank Program. I have enclosed a Notification form to assist you
with proper notification. You are required to register the tank
even if you plan to remove it. If you decide to remove the tank,
I can also supply you with an application form for obtaining a
permit-to remove the tank.
Please complete the Notification form by June 30, 1993 and return
it to me at 301 West Alder, Missoula, Montana 59802. If you have
any questions, or would like assistance completing the form(s),
please call me at 523-4755.
Environmental Health Specialist
enclosure: Notification form
whpl77.let

-------
MISSOULA	if
MISSOULA CITY-COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT
301 W ALDER ST
MISSOULA MT 59802-4123
MissoulA
vL y
MISSOULA VALLEY WATER QUALITY DISTRICT
(406) 523-4755
CERTIFIED MAIL
October 30, 1993
This letter is in response to the inspection of your facility by
Water Quality District staff on August 12, 1993. The inspection
was performed in response to a complaint that paints, stains, and
possibly lacquer thinner had been improperly disposed of into the
septic system at the frame finishing facility. I apologize for the
delay in responding to you. We have been researching alternatives
for treatment of your waste water and waste lacquer thinner, and
options for storage and secondary containment of hazardous
materials. Please find enclosed product information on waste water
treatment systems, solvent recycling systems, and hazardous
materials storage and containment systems.
During the inspection of Arnold's Manufacturing, the following
deficiencies were noted:
(1)	Improper storage of 55 gallon barrels of new lacquer thinner
outside, where they are exposed to stormwater, and unprotected from
accidental spills.
(2)	Improper storage of unlabeled five gallon buckets of waste
lacquer thinner outside, where they are exposed to storm water, and
unprotected from accidental spills.
(3)	Physical indications of improper discharge of wastes containing
paints, and possibly lacquer thinner into the septic system. I
have enclosed copies of photographs that were taken during the
inspection (Photo 33-5, 33-7, 33-8), which indicate paint waste
disposal into a toilet and sink in the bathroom.
(4)	Improper disposal of solid waste from the fire at the frame
construction facility, in the yard of the finishing facility (Photo
33-9)
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the above listed
deficiencies constitute an apparent violation of State and Federal
regulations, and to request your cooperation in correcting the
deficiencies.
1

-------
Notice of Apparent Violation
The discharge of paints and paint related products into the septic
system, and the storage of hazardous materials (lacquer thinner)
and hazardous wastes (waste lacquer thinner) outside where storm
water may become contaminated, or where spills may enter soils and
ground water, constitutes placement of wastes in a location where
they may cause pollution of State waters. This is an apparent
violation of section 75-5-605 (1) (a) MCA, which states:
(1) It is unlawful to:
(a) Cause pollution as defined in 75-5-103 of any State waters
or place or cause to be placed any wastes in a location where
they are likely to cause pollution of State waters.
The discharge of paints and paint related products into the septic
system is also an apparent violation of the EPA Underground
Injection Control (UIC) Program (40 CFR, 144.12, 144.25, and
144.27). Based on the historical usage of the septic system, EPA
considers the system to be a type 5W20 Class V well. EPA has
determined that this type of waste disposal is harmful to the
environment , dangerous to ground water, and the waste fluids are
potentially classifiable as hazardous waste. This disposal method
is an apparent serious violation of the Safe Drinking Water Act and
the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. A letter sent to you
by the EPA UIC Program requires that you close your Class V well by
December 10, 1993. If you continue to discharge waste water into
the system after this date, with the exception of sanitary waste,
you will be in violation of the UIC requirements.
The disposal of the debris left over from the fire at the framing
shop on the ground at the finishing shop is considered illegal land
disposal of solid waste. This is an apparent violation of the
Montana Solid Waste Management Act, section 75-10-221 MCA, and a
violation of Missoula City-County Health Board Regulation #2,
Section 4 and Section 5, which state that:
1.	(MCA 75-10-221), License Required-Application. ... no
person may dispose of solid waste or operate a solid
waste management system, without a license from the
department.
2.	(MCCBH Regulation #2), Section 4, No person shall burn
or bury any garbage, refuse or rubbish within any yard or
open space within the county.
3.	(MCCBH Regulation #2), Section 5, No person shall
store or allow to be stored within any yard or open space
within the county, refuse or rubbish where said storage
will create a public nuisance or be to any degree
offensive...
2

-------
Corrective Action Recommendation
The following recommended actions are intended to protect State
waters, specifically the Missoula Valley Aquifer, and bring the
facility into compliance with the above listed regulations. It is
recommended that Arnold's Manufacturing take the following
corrective actions:
(1)	Properly store 55 gallon barrels of new lacquer thinner to
avoid spills, and contamination of storm water. We recommend that
you employ secondary containment to catch any leak or spill that
may occur. In addition, depending on the type of secondary
containment system, provide cover over the barrels to protect them
from storm water.
(2)	Properly label and store the 5 gallon buckets of waste lacquer
thinner to avoid spills and contamination of storm water. We
recommend that you employ secondary containment to catch any leak
or spill that may occur. In addition, depending on the type of
secondary containment system, provide cover over the barrels to
protect them from storm water. I have enclosed information on some
to the secondary containment systems that are available.
(3)	Immediately cease discharge of all paints, stains, washes,
lacquer thinner or other non-sanitary waste water into the on site
septic system. Remove all signs of discharge into the septic
system from the bathroom in the finishing shop (i.e. clean or
replace fixtures), so that future inspections can verify
compliance.
(4)	Locate the on site septic system so that Department staff can
test the septic system for organic vapors using a soil vapor probe,
or excavate and test the septic system pursuant to an approved
workplan, to prove that no hazardous waste has been disposed of
into the system.
(5)	Remove and properly dispose of the burnt wood waste at a
licensed Class II landfill and provide receipts for disposal to the
Department.
This letter is intended to encourage your cooperation in correcting
the apparent violations noted. However, I must inform you that the
Montana Water Quality Act provides the Montana Department of Health
and Environmental Sciences (DHES) with authority to issue cleanup
orders and to require monitoring, or for enforcement measures
including injunction, civil penalties, and criminal penalties to
ensure protection of the water resource. Pursuant to MCA 75-5-106,
the DHES may delegate its authority to the Missoula Valley Water
Quality District. Should we be unable to solve this problem
cooperatively with Arnold's Manufacturing, we will request that the
DHES delegate its authority to our agency, or pursue its own
enforcement action to ensure that the water resource is protected.
3

-------
With regard to the solid waste violations, the Missoula City-County
Health Department may initiate further enforcement action if
necessary to ensure compliance.
Please submit a letter outlining the steps that Burnich
Manufacturing intends to take to resolve the above mentioned
apparent violations by December 20, 1993. Failure to address the
problems noted may result in more serious enforcement actions.
Sincerely,
Alan English, R.S.
Senior Water Quality Specialist
enclosures (4)
c: Martha E. McClain, Deputy County Attorney, Missoula County
Kevin Keenan, DHES, WQB Enforcement Section
Arnold Boettcher, EPA UIC Program, Helena office
whp212-l.let
4

-------
APPENDIX L
REGULATIONS THAT PERTAIN TO MISSOULA AREA BUSINESSES
CHLOROFLOUROCARBONS
EMPLOYEE RIGHT TO KNOW
HAZARDOUS WASTE
JUNK VEHICLES
PRETREATMENT SYSTEMS
PUBLIC WATER SUPPLIES
SHALLOW INJECTION WELLS
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS
USED MOTOR OIL
The regulations contained in this booklet are wholly or partially
administered by the Missoula City-County Health Department

-------
CHLOROFLUOROCARBONS
Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) are commonly used as refrigerants in appliances and
automobile air conditioners. CFCs are also used in many industrial and over-the-counter
solvents. Halons are frequently used in products such as fire
extinguishers. Both types of substances deplete the ozone
layer which protects the earth's inhabitants from cancer -
causing ultraviolet radiation.
The Clean Air Act Ammendments require a complete
phaseout of CFCs, halons, and other ozone depleting
substances by the year 2000. These regulations cover
Servicing of motor vehicle air conditioners
-you must have certified refrigerant recycling equipment on site,
and;
-The equipment must be used by technicians that have been
certified by an EPA approved program, and;
-you must send EPA documentation that you own approved
equipment and that certified technicians use the equipment, and;
-you must show proof that you are a certified technician in orderto
purchase these substances.
Proper disposal
-ail items containing CFCs or halons must have all of these substances removed before they are
disposed of.
-Venting
-it i« illegal to vent CFCs or batons into the atmosphere during service, regular maintenance or
disposal of Hems containing these substances.
If you need more information concerning these regulations or technician certification contact:
Hark Aguilar	Missoula City-County Health Department
EPA Region VIII	301 W. Alder
990 18th Street, Suite 500	Missoula, MT 59802
Denver, CO 80202-2405	(406) 523-4755
(303) 293-1767
Ragutattane of CFCa and almBaraubatancea are found In the 1990 Clean Air Act AmmendmanlaTMe IV
Pretectal (actions 608409. program is admMetert by the EPA.

-------
EMPLOYEE RIGHT TO KNOW
The Montana Right to Know Law requires employers to provide information to employees and the
community about hazardous chemicals used in the workplace.
The responsibilities of the business owner/operator are the core of this law, and they can be divided into
four main components:
1)	Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS)-
The most current MSDS must be maintained for each hazardous chemical in
the workplace, and must be accessible to employees. The law requires that
chemical manufacturers supply a MSDS to Montana employers. But, if a
MSDS is not supplied, the employer is responsible for obtaining it from
the manufacturer. (H is not the responsibility of the employer to determine
which chemicals are hazardous, this is the responsibility of the chemical
manufacturer. If you receive an MSDS with a chemical, assume it is
hazardous. If you have any doubts, contact the chemical manufacturer.)
2)	Chemical Lists-
Employers must maintain a list of each hazardous chemical used in the
workplace. This list shall Include common names cross-referenced with the
chemical names and note the work area where each chemical is stored and
used This list must be updated at least once a year.
3)	Labels-
Labels on containers of hazardous chemicals must not be removed or
defaced.
4)	Education and Training-
All employees must be trained before working with a hazardous chemical. In
addition, all employees must attend an education and training program at
least once-a year. This training must indude:
-interpreting labels and MSDSs
-health effects of hazardous chemicals
-safe handling of hazardous chemicals
-the location of safety equipment
-first aid treatment
-cleanup and disposal procedures
In addition to these responsibilities employers must also post a notice (that is
easily seen) informing workers about their rights under the law.
If you need more information on:
-a certain chemical, contact the chemical manufacturer
-the process of recording chemical information, contact the County Clerk and Recorder at 523-3234,
Missoula Local Emergency Planning Committee at 721-5700, and your local fire department,
•other Right to Know responsibilities, contact the Missoula City-County Health Department at 523-4770,
County Attorney at 523-3246, or OSHA at 1-600-332-7087
The Act, "Employee and Community Hazardous Chemical Information Acr was passed by the Montana Legislature in 1965. This Act (Tide 50
MCA Charter 7BI mash— ctoaafrwflh the Occupational Safatv and HaaMi AdmintalnHInn aiandsfria^OSHA)
	""—		II Tissues rmntr "tnrtr mil
Recorder, and your local Fife Department
^Material Safety j
$ Data Sheet
Enclosed

-------
HAZARDOUS WASTE
WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW
A hazardous waste is any hazardous solid,
liquid or contained gas that you no longer use
and that you either recycle, throw away or store.
If mishandled such wastes can cause injury or
death or damage or pollute land, air, or water.
There are two ways to determine if a waste
is hazardous:
1)	Listed Wastes-
The Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) regulations contain four
lists of hazardous wastes.
2)	Characteristic Wastes-
Even if a waste does not appear on one
of these lists, it is considered hazardous if it has
one or more of the following characteristics:
a)	ignttabiiity- substances with a
flashpoint less than 140 F (such as
paint wastes and some solvents).
b)	corroshrity- substances that have a
pH less than or equal to 2.0 or greater
than or equal to 12.5. (such as waste
rust removers, waste acid or alkaline
cleaning fluids, and waste battery acid).
c)	reactivity- (such as cyanide plating
wastes, waste bleaches and other
waste oxidizers).
d)	TCLP Toxicity -(Toxic
Characteristic Leaching Procedure)
including heavy metals and some
pesticides.
Mixing a nnn-haynrripug waste with a
hazardous waste (such as mixing
used oil with solvents) results in the
entire mixture being classified as
hazardous.
A hazardous waste can not be made
non-hazardous bv diluting it
You are responsible for the proper
storage and disposal for anv
hazardous
generates.
wastes vour business
There are three generator caiegwies: large quantity generators,
small quantity generators and condSionally exempt generators.
Most generators in Missoula are conditionafly exempt
The maximum limit for contfflionafly exempt generators is
220 pounds or approximately 25 gaHons. If you generate any more
than this in any month you must obtain an identification number
from EPA. Hazardous wastes must be stored in containers that are
compatible with the type of waste being stored and must not leak
into soil, water or drains.
Hazardous wastes must be disposed of at a facility licensed
to accept these types of wastes (there are currently no approved
hazardous waste facilities in Montana).
IgnttahlHfy CoiiusifUj
Reactivity
Ttaridty
If you use a parts washer or degreasing solvents, these companies
can supply and recycle solvents safely and legally:
Safety Kleen-Spokane, WA (1-509-Q28-8353)
Chem care/Van Waters & Rogers Inc. (1-800-541-5614)
The Montana Industrial Waste Exchange in Helena (1-442-2405)
can provide reuse and exchange information to waste generators.
If you need more information contact
Department of Health and Environmental Sciences
Solid and Hazardous Waste Bureau
Cogswell Building, Room B-201
Helena, MT 59620
(406)444-2821
Or
Missoula City-County Health Department
Environmental Health Division
301 W. Aider
Missoula, MT 50802
(406) 523-4755
			The 1978 Reaourca Coneervabon and Recovery Act (RCRA) mm designed to
control the management of hazardous waaie from *» generation to 8a uttmata dwpnaal, A oopy of the actual ragUatione can be found in 40
CFR 260-272. Tha atate ragulattona can be found ki ARM TBe 16 Chactar 44. Tha EPA 
-------
JUNK VEHICLES
WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW
The 1973 Montana Motor Vehicle Recycling and Disposal Act is intended to help Montana residents
dispose of their junk vehicles. This Act promotes the recycling of junk vehicles which saves eneigy, water and
mineral resources.
A junk vehicle is defined as being ail of the
following:
1.	Discarded, wrecked, dismantled or
substantially changed in form by removal of
component parts, and;
2.	Not lawfully and currently licensed, and;
3. Inoperative or incapable of being driven in its present condition
If you have a vehicle that fits this definition you can :
a.	License the vehicle with current tags, on
b.	Repair the vehicle to an operative condition, or,
c.	Shield the vehicle or any component part from public view with a
permanent type of shielding (such as a fence or a garage), on
d.	Remove the vehicle from the premises (if the vehicle has
retained some value for parts or scrap you can sell it or have a
licensed wrecking facility haul it away. Otherwise the county can
haul and recycle your vehicle free of charge).
Automobile repair facilities can have junk vehicles for a reasonable length of time for auto repairs. These must still
be shielded from public view with a permanent shield. Facilities that have more than 3 junk vehicles may be
required to obtain a wrecking facility license.
If you have a vehicle that meets the description of a junk vehicle it is your responsibility
to take the action necessary to comply with regulations. Failure to do so can result in
your being fined or jailed.
If you need more information contact	Junk Vehicle Coordinator
Department of Health and Environmental Sciences	Missoula City-County Health Department
Solid and Hazardous Waste Bureau	Envimmental Health Division
Cogswell Building, Room B-201	301 W. Aider
Helena, MT 59620	Missoula, MT 59802
(406) 523-4755
The Montana Motor Vehicle Recycling and Dtapool Act on be found in MCA 75-10-601. TNa Act is admMeterad by the Maaouta CKy-County
HeaJft Department and the Montwa Sofld W«t» Management Bureau.

-------
PRETREATMENT SYSTEMS
WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW
Pretreatment systems are used to fitter or treat commercial or industrial waste
fluids before they are discharged to the municipal sewer. Pretreatment systems will reduce the
amounts of fats, oils, greases, fuel oil, solvents, metals and pesticides in waste water
discharged to the sewer system.
In order to protect the environment and our wastewater treatment plant, pretreatment
systems are becoming a necessary part of wastewater treatment In 1990 Congress passed the
Pollution Prevention Act which calls for pollution prevention to be a "national objective". A goal
of this policy is to prevent or reduce pollution at its source wherever feasible.
if you service vehicles and discharge waste fluids to the municipal sewer plant you may
be required to:
•connect to a pretreatment system that will separate the oil and sediment from the water, and;
-install a recycling system to reduce the amount
of solvents and other chemicals being discharged.
AERATION TOWER
If your business is involved in photo
finishing you may be required to:
•connect to a system that can recover silver
or other metals before discharge, and;
- reduce the amount of other chemicals being
discharged.
If your business uses thinners, solvents or
dry cleaning fluids you may be required to:
-connect to a recycling system to reuse whatever
fluids possible,
-connect to a pretreatment system to reduce
the amount of other chemicals being dischaiged.
INCLINE PLATE
COALESCING
„ _	SCMAATO
(Nm Shewn)
OtL COLLECTION
BUCXET
HYDROCARBON ABSORBER HCAj
POLYPROfELYNE
MESH
CEJfrWFUGAL COALESCING
OR (OPTIONAL)
INTAKE FROM SUMP
RETURN TO SUMP
CHEMICAL FLOCKING
SYSTEM (OPTIONAL)
1'fc* GATE
VALVE
OUTFLOW
TO SEWER
FtTER WATER AESOVOIfl
'fi' GATE VALVE
FLEX TUBING
CONTINUOUS SELF CLEANING
RETURN UNE5
BtPLASTIC SOUOS SEPARATOR
BACK FLUSH INTAKE
If your business is food service you may be required to:
- connect to a grease interceptor.
Once a pretreatment system is installed you must:
-maintain a log book for the pretreatment system documenting all inspection and maintenence work
completed, and;
-have the system inspected once a month.
Prior to connecting to a pretreatment system you should contact the Missoula
Wastewater Treatment Plant for their approval on the type of system you will be using.
Missoula Wastewater Treatment Plant
Clark Fork Lane
Missoula, MT 59802
(406) 523-4880
Missoula City-County Health Department
301 W. Alder
Missoula, MT 59802
(406) 523-4755
Regulations on praireatment systems can be found In the Missoula Municipal Code Uto 13.06. TN» program is administered by the Missoula
WsstevMter Treatment Pfant.

-------
PUBLIC WATER SUPPLIES
WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW

— 'LI. ¦'
1 %



n b^_S.
What is a Public Water Supply?
A public water supply has 10 or more service connections or serves 25 or more people per day for at least
60 days a year. Public water supplies are required to register with the Montana Water Quality Bureau. Public
water supplies are also required to be tested to verify that the water is safe for people to drink.
Public water supplies are divided into two categories:
1)	Community water suppliers (such as a small
town), and;
2)	Non-community suppliers (such as a hotel or a
campground). Non-community suppliers are then
divided into two categories, transient (such as a
restaurant that does not serve the same people over
six months a year), and non-transient (such as a
school that would serve the same people for over six
months a year).
AH public water supplies must be tested
for contaminants.
A community water supply is
required to have a licensed operator to run the system. A
bacterial sample is required
monthly. Other sampling
requirements include lead, copper, radiological elements and organic chemicals. A non-
transient, non-community water supplier does not require a certified operator, but has
the same sampling requirements as community suppliers.
A transient non-community water suppy must be tested for coliform bacteria
once a month. Nitrate and nitrite samples are also required. In addition, the system must
be periodically inspected by a Registered Sanitarian.
It is the owner or operator's responsibility to make sure that the Water
Quality Bureau receives the results of all tests. It is the ultimate responsibility of the
owner or operator to collect and pay for all samples (conform bacteria samples are
approximately $9.00, nitrate samples are approximately $20.00).
If you feel that the description of a public water supply applies to you, or if you would like more information please
contact-
Montana Department of Health and
Environmental Sciences
Water Quality Bureau
1400 Broadway
P.O. Box 200901
Helena, MT 59620-0901 (406) 444-4549
Missoula City-County Health Department
Environmental Health Division
301 West Alder
Missoula, MT 59802
(406) 523-4755
Recognition or pubfic water wppBes are the naeut of the 1 074 Federal Sato DflnMng Water Act
The regulations for public water supplies can ba found in the AdmWaWKia Rules of Montana, Tito 16, Chapter 20,201-281. The atate of
Montana admWatera this pngam end the Ml—Cfly-CountV Berth OqiMliiiK cnrfaacfr wth tha ta pwrfnrrn jnepurWoftt pf guppftf
and ooOecttcn of water samples.

-------
Shallow Injection Wells
WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW
Shallow injection wells drain fluids into the ground. Examples of shallow injection wells
can include any sump, dry well,cesspool or drainfield. There are five dasses of injection wells,
these include:
-Class I Inject hazardous and non-hazardous waste beneath the lowermost formation containing an
underground source of drinking water (USDW) within one- quarter mile
-Class II Used in conjunction with oil and gas production (e.g., salt water disposal, enhanced recovery)
•Class III Used in conjunction with solution mining (e.g., stopes leaching)
-Class IV Inject hazardous or radioactive waste into or above a formation within one-quarter mile of an
USDW (PROHIBITED)
-Class V All injection wells not included in Classes MV and wells named specifically as Class V Wells
Most Shallow injection wells in Missoula are considered Class V Wells, these include:
-Storm drains or sumps usually found in residential areas that primarily drain storm water,
•Storm drains or sumps usually found in industrial areas that primarily drain storm water but are susceptible
to industrial spills;
-Sumps or drains in automotive service operations (these include car washes, dealerships and service
stations).
-Sumps or drains in other industrial or commercial operations (these indude but are not limited to
laundromats and dry cleaners, tanneries, petroleum storage facilities and photo processing labs).
Hazardous wastes have been disposed of into injection wells in Missoula. This disposal may be
the result of accidental spills, or intentional effort to dispose of waste fluids. Such discharges
are illegal and may result well closures, expensive cleanups, federal fines, and prison
sentences.
If you have a shallow injection well on your property or at your
facility you must:
- take necessary precautions to ensure that any hazardous substance does not IRgAP.
enter the well, and;
-report your system to the EPA for its inventory of underground injection wells,
and;
-notify the EPA of any changes such as a change of ownership, when the well is
sealed or if the facility is abandoned or is used for another purpose.
-Injection wells that are used in the automotive industry must be permanently
closed (these facilities include service stations, car washes or any business with
a fleet), or;
•connect to city sewer via an approved pretreatment system, or
-install an approved recycling system.
If your facility has a shallow injection well that fits this description please contact
your local authority for proper dosing procedures.
Environmental Protection Agency
Region 8, Drinking Water Branch
99918th Street, Suite 500
Denver, Colorado 80202-2405
(303) 293-1413
Missoula City-County Health Department
Environmental Health Divusion
301 W. Alder
Missoula, MT 59802
(406) 523-4755
The Underground Infection Control Program is a resut of the Safe Drinking Water Art or 1974. Further definitions and regulations can be found
under parte of this Act and in 40 CFR part 146. TKs program teadmirastaradbyths EPA and the I itfa CAy-County I i Department.

-------
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
Following the 3 R's is the best
way to dispose of waste:
1.	REDUCE the amount of
wastes you generate
2.	REUSE waste products
whenever possible
3.	RECYCLE wastes if they
are recyclable
If, after attempting to use these methods
you still have garbage to dispose of
remember that all solid waste must be
disposed of in a licensed facility.
The Montana Solid and Hazardous Waste
Bureau categorizes wastes into three specific
groups:
1.	Group I includes hazardous
wastes.
2.	Group II includes decomposable
and mixed solid wastes, but not
hazardous wastes.
3.	Group III includes untreated
wood wastes, and non-water
soluble, inert solids.
The State Bureau also classifies disposal sites
into three specific classes:
1.	Class I sites can generally accept
wastes from Groups I, II and III
(there are no disposal sites in
Montana that accept hazardous
waste).
2.	Class II sites can accept wastes
from Groups II and III, but not from
Group I (treated wood wastes and
asphalt must go to a class II site,
this is also where most household
waste goes).
3.	Class III sites can only accept
wastes from Group III (inert wastes
such as untreated wood.).
In addition to the state solid waste regulations the following
regulations have been adopted by Missoula County:
- every owner/business operator must
have accessible garbage containers with
capacity to hold all refuse between
collections.
-it is the responsibility of the
ownerfoperator to make sure that all
refuse is containerized at the end of each
day.
•it is the responsibility of the
owner/operator to make appropriate
arrangements for waste collection and
transportation to an authorized facility for
final disposition (transporters of waste
must also be licensed).
-it is unlawful to dump waste on vacant
lots, to bum trash or to bury garbage (even
on your own property) unless you have a
state landfill license.
If you neea more information contact
Department of Health and Environmental Sciences
Solid and Hazardous Waste Bureau
Cogswell Building, Room B-201
Helena, MT 59620
Or
Missoula City-County Health Department
Environmental Health Division
301 W. Aider
Missoula, MT 59802
(406) 523-4755
MortanaCodes Annotated (16.14503604) further daaeffiea aoOd waste Into specific waste groups, and dtapoul etas Mo epedflc classes.
Tha admrttintion erf theee regulationa rats primarty with the Montana Sold and Hazardous Waste Bureau, the loc^ Price Dcpwtnw* and
the CtyCounty Healh Department

-------
UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS
An Underground Storage Tanks (UST) is any tank with at least 10% of its volume
underground or any above ground tank with underground piping. Underground storage tanks
usually contain petroleum or hazardous chemicals. Leaks from underground tanks or pipes can
contaminate water supplies and cause fires or explosions. In an effort to protect our
groundwater, the EPA developed regulations to minimize the potential damage from petroleum
and chemicals leaking from USTs.
WHEN DO YOU HAVE TO ACT? ,mportant mmm
Owners of USTs must follow these
regulations:
•USTs installed after December, 1988 must
meet the requirements for new USTs
concerning correct installation, spHI and
overfill prevention, corrosion protection, and
leak detection.
-USTs installed before December, 1988
must meet:
a)	the requirements for corrosion protection
and spill/overfill prevention and
b)	leak detection requirements by the date
indicated on chart at page right
All USTs requirements include:
-Corrective action must be taken in
response to leaks.
-Proper closure requirements for tanks
temporarily or permanently closed must be
foHowed.
-Financial responsibility must be shown for
the cost of cleaning up a leak and
compensating people for bodily injury and
property damage caused by a leaking UST.
-Every tank must be registered with the
Montana Department of Health and
Environmental Sciences (tank installations,
modifications and closures must also be
permitted).
-All USTs which have not been officially
dosed must be registered annually and
registration fees paid.
For more information call:
TYPE OF
TANK A PIPING
LEAK
DETECTION
CORROSION
PROTECTION
SPILL / OVERFILL
PREVENTION
- Now Tarns ano Piping*
A| installation
At rataasuon
Almstautnn
Edsmg Tanks**
instaiM:
(Mora 1965 or unknown
IMS-1961
1970 • 1974
1975 • 1979
1980 - Doctfinor 1988
By No Laur Than-
~•CfnMr 1919
Oocmtwr 1990
Docorctt 1991
Docaneor 1992
Omnoii 1993
OffflDw 1998
,
| OocttTtxr 1998
Enang Peng"*
Prnsursod
Sucaon
Otctfittor 1990
Sam* as oaang
tana
DoctfltMf 1998
OtcofflOtr 1998
Oo**not amfy
Oots not apply
hlmmtOTgnMHiailHIMItaaiiMtNl
- Eutng una and Peng art thoa* miM Mora Ommmt 1MI
Montana DepL of Health and Environmental Sciences
Underground Storage Tank Program
Cogswell Bidg. Room B-201
Helena, MT 59620
(406) 444-5970
Missoula City-County Health Department
301 W. Alder
Missoula, MT 59802
(406) 523-4755
Further regulations far USTs can be found In the Montana Codes Annotated Section 75-1(W0S. The UST program it administered by Montana
Depart!11«« of Heatti and Environmental Sciences and the Mlieouta O^County Hea«h Department

-------
USED MOTOR OIL
Used oil can be considered a iwrHnns waste if It is mixed wtth other waste substances
(particularly solvents and deoreasersl.
PROPER HANDLING OF USED OIL IS IMPORTANT
Storage:
If storing used oil above ground make sure the
containers are leakproof, cap the container and keep the
storage area covered.
if storing used oil in an underground storage tank follow
the same regulations that apply to all underground storage
tanks containing petroleum products.
Disposal:
Recycling is the best way to dispose of used oil.
Remember, oil never wears out, it just gets dirty. It takes 42
gallons of crude oil to produce 21/2 quarts of motor oil, but only
1 gallon and half the energy to rerefine the same 2 1/2 quarts
for reuse. Recycled motor oil is now available in Missoula.
Burning used oil in your own waste oil burner is currently legal but make sure there are
no solvents or other hazardous materials mixed with the oil. However, burning someone else's
used oil in your burner is illegal.
DO NOT PUT USED OIL IN SUMPS, INDIVIDUAL SEWER SYSTEMS, OR THE MUNICIPAL
SEWER SYSTEM. DO NOT SPREAD USED OIL ON DIRT ROADS FOR DUST CONTROL
Recyclers in Missoula include:	Recycled motor oil is available at:
Ozzie's Oil (543-7911)	Ozzie's Oil
Ozzie's will also accept waste	goo Philllips
antifreeze for recycling and:
Sears^utoffiofiv®
£523^3204)	721-B Mount
BR will take up to two gallons per week if placed in clear containers (such as 1 gallon
milk containers) for residential customers only.
If you need more information contact	Missoula City-County Health Department
Department of Health and Environmental Sciences	Environmental Health Division
Solid and Hazardous Waste Bureau	301 W. Alder
Cogswell Building, Room B-201	Missoula, MT 59802
Helena, MT 59620	(400) 523-4755
The EPA standards for used oti recycfing are based on the criteria found In 40 CFR 261.11. EPA docket number F-82-UOLP-fFFFF Further
information can ba found by caOng the RCRA HotSne at 1-80CM244346. Thsee raguWons am admriatarad locafly by the Montana Soid wid
Hazardous Waste Bureau and the Msaouia City-County Hetffh Department.

-------
APPENDIX M
OATS
•
• -
12/02/91
Location
•
• •
MISSOULA
Initiator
•
~

Generator
• •
•
MISSOULA WWTP
Generator Location
• •
•
MISSOULA, MT
Waste Description
:
DIRT & SAND


Solid ,# phases/layers: 1 ,


Color: BROWN Odor: 	
Lab Number
•
77389
REACTIVITY REPORT
Radioactivity, exposure dose.
Results: < 0.0S mR/hr.	
Characteristic of•Ignitability as per 40 CFR 261.21.
Results: NEGATIVE	
Characteristic of Corrosivity as per 40 CFR 261.22.
Results: HOT APPLICABLE	
pH. 57. slurry by weight.
Results: 7.6			
Characteristic of Reactivity as per 40 CFR 261.23.
Results: SULFIDE <5 pram : CYANIDE <2 ppm
Reaction when exposed to air as per 40 CFR 261.23.
Results: NONE Dt.it.UTtJ	
Reaction when mixed with water as per 40 CFR 261.23.
Results: NONE DKTKLTKI): 99* INS	
Reaction when mixed with a 107. wt. solution of HCL.
Results: GASES LIBERATED: 971 INS	
Reaction when mixed with a 107. solution of NaOH.
Results: NONE DETECTED: 99X INS	
Density
Results: 2038.6 (lb./cu.vd.)

-------
Client:
Location:
Attention:
Sample ID:
Number:
ReDort Date:
Missoula WWTP
Missoula
Car Wash Sump Grit
77389
12/02/91
Date Sampled: 10/21/91
Date Received: 10/23/91
Date TCLP Prep: 10/24/91
Date Extracted: 10/29/91
Date Analyzed: 11/05/91
Analyst: DS
TCLP SEMI-VOLATILES
ANALYTE
•
POL
DILUTION
FACTOR
RESULT
PERCENT
RECOVERY
CORRECTED
RESULT
I REGULATORY!
! LEVEL !
o-Cresoi
ue/ L
75
7.5
U
68
110U
! 200000 !
Hexacnloro-
ethane, ue/L
75
7.5
U
64
117U
! 3000 !
meta u para-
Cresol. ue/L
75
7.5
U
72
104
! 200000 !
Nitrooenzene
ue/ L
75
7.5
U
78
96U
! 2000 !
hexacftlorobuta-
diene, ue/L
75
7.5
U
50
150U
! 500 !
^.4.b-iricnioro-
ohenol. ue/ L
75
7.5
U
80
94U
! 2000 !
2,4,i5-lrichloro-
phenol. ue/ L
75
7.5
u
115
65U
! 400000 !
i,4-Uinitro-
toluene. ue/L
75
7.5
U
72
104U
! 130 !
Mexachloro-
benzene. ue/L
75
7.5
u
63
11-9U
! 130 !
Pentachioro-
phenol. ue/L
375
7.5
u
104
361U
! iooooo !
Pyridine
ue/L
75
7.5
U
7
1070U
! 5000 !
* = Corrected for dilution factor
PQL = Practical Quantitation Limit
U = Compound was not detected in sample.
B = Compound was detected in the QC blank.
J = The*comDOund was detected, reported value is less than the
practical quantitation limit for the sample.

-------
Client:	Missoula WWTP
Location: Missoula
Attention:
Sample ID:	Car Wash Sump Grit
Number:	77389
Report Date:	12/02/91
Date Sampled: 10/21/91
Date Received: 10/23/91
Date TCLP Prep: 10/24/91
Date Analyzed: 10/30/91
Analyst: MM
TCLP VQLATILES
ANALYTE
PQL
DILUTION !
FACTOR !
RESULT
| PERCENT
! RECOVERY
CORRECTED
RESULT
REGULATORY j
LEVEL !
v:nyi chloride
ufc/L
100
10 !
U
! 86
116U
200 !
1.l-dichioro-
ethene. ue/L
50
10 !
u
! 68
74U
700 !
O'iUorororm
ue/ L
50
10 !
u
! 93
54U
6000 !
1. ^-dicnioro-
ethane. ue/L
50
io !
u
! 89
56U
500 !
'2-butanone
ue/ L
100
10 i
u
! ill
90U
200000 !
Carbon Tetra-
chloride. ue/L
50
io !
u
! 95
53U
500 !
irichloro-
exhene, ue/L
50
io !
u
! 78
64U
500 !
benzene
ue/ L
50
io !
u
! 103
49U
500 !
ietracftloro-
ethene, ue/L
50
io !
u
! 88
57U-
700 !
Chlorobenzene,
ue/ L
50
io !
u
! 108
46U
iooooo !
1.4-dichloro-
b«nzene. ue/L
100
io !
u
! 129
78U
7500 !
* = Corrected for dilution factor
P^L = Practical Quantitation Limit
U = Compound was not detected in sample.
3 = Compound was detected in the CC blank.
J = The compound was detected, reported value is less than the
practical quantitation limit ror the sample.

-------
DATE
12/02/91
Location
MISSOULA
Initiator

Generator
MISSOULA' WWTP
Generator Location
MISSOULA, MT
Waste Description
DIRT fi SAND
Date Sampled
10/21/91
TCLP Preparation
10/24/91
H/P Extraction
11/01/91
Lab Number
77389
TOXICITY CHARACTERISTIC - U8EPA
mumm
PJUUKETBl
Cum™. ^/L..
C2maloa, t%lL.
Laid, wgiL	
Horary. ig/L..
Saltolu, ^/L.
SUvw. toll...

ADJlSm)
ME1SU8S3
omsrroi
PEBCSfT


aacarmraa
RESULT
RESULT
LIMIT
RH2VEHI
QAIE
UULTST
5.0
< 0.1
< 0.1
0.1
113
10/28/91
cj
.. 100.0
0.86
0.91
0.01
96
10/28/91
CJ
1.0
0.03
0.03
0.01
98
10/28/91
a
5.0
< 0.C6
< 0.06
0.06
93
10/28/91
a
5.0
< 0.1
< 0.1
0.1
M
10/28/91
CJ
0.2
< 0.0006
< 0.0006
0.0006
94
10/29/91
IB
1.0
< 0.1
< 0.1
0.1
1C6
10/28/91
a
5.0
< 0.10
< 0.06
0.06
60
10/28/91
a
Extract prepared in accordance with EPA Method 1311, Toxicity
Characteristic Leaching Procedure ; Organochlorine Pesticides and
Chlorinated Herbicides determined in accordance with EPA Methods 8080
and 8150; Metals Determined using 6000 and 7000 series methods,
TEST METHODS FOR EVALUATING SOLID WASTE. PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL METHODS.
November 1986, Third Edition, USEPA, SW-846 and amendments thereto.

-------
TO:	Missoula City-County Health Dept.	LAB NO.: 91-39028
ADDRESS:	Alan English	DATE: 10/18/91 crp
301 W. Alder
Missoula, MT 59802
SOIL ANALYSIS
#0930911, Four Seasons Motors
Automotive Sludge
Sampled 09/30/91 @1201
Analyzed 10/12/91
Submitted 10/02/91
Constituent	uq/q
PURGEABLE ORGANICS
EPA METHOD 8260
Bromobenzene	< 1.0
Bromochloromethane	< 1.0
Bromodichloromethane	< 1.0
Bromoform	< 1.0
Bromomethane	< 1.0
Carbon tetrachloride	< 1.0
Chlorobenzene	< 1.0
Chloroethane	< 1.0
2-Ch!oroethyiv:nyl ether	< 1.0
Chloroform	<1.0
Chloromethane	<1.0
2-Chlorotoluene	< 1.0
4-Chlorotoluene	< 1.0
Dibromochloromethane	< 1.0
1,2-Dibromoethane	< 1.0
Dibromomethane	< 1.0
1.2-Dichlorobenzene	33
1.3-Dichlorobenzene	9.2
1.4-Dichlorobenzene	17
Dichlorodifluoromethane	< 1.0
1.1-Dichloroethane	<1.0
1.2-Dichloroethane	< 1.0
1,1 -Dichloroethene	<1.0
Constituent	ua/a
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene	<1.0
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene	<1.0
1.2-Dichloropropane	< 1.0
1.3-Dichloropropane	< 1.0
2,2-Dichloropropane	< 1.0
1,1-Dichloropropene	<1.0
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene	<1.0
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene	<1.0
Methylene chloride	< 1.0
Styrene	< 1.0
1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane	<1.0
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane	<1.0
Tetrachloroethene	47
1.1.1-Trichloroethane	32
1.1.2-T	richloroethane	<1.0
T richloroethene	< 1.0
Trichlorofluoromethane	<1.0
1.2.3-Trichloropropane	<1.0
Vinyl chloride	< 1.0
Benzene	<1.0
Ethylbenzene 1.7
Toluene 6.1
Xylenes 16
NOTE: This analysis is equivalent to EPA Method S240.
COMPLETE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYTICAL SERVICE

-------
LABORATORY REPORT
TO:
ADDRESS:
Missoula City-County Health Dept.
Alan English
301 W. Alder
Missoula, MT 59802
LAB NO.:
DATE:
91-39028
10/18/91 crp
SOIL ANALYSIS
#0930911, Four Seasons Motors
Automotive Sludge
Sampled 09/30/91 @1201
Submitted 10/02/91
COMPLETE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYTICAL SERVICE
Apparent Ethylene Glycol
150
//g/g (ppm)

-------
LABORATORY REPORT
TO:
ADDRESS:
Missoula City-County Health Dept.
Alan English
301 W. Alder
Missoula, MT 59802
LAB NO
DATE:
91-39028
10/18/91 crp
SOIL ANALYSIS
#0930911, Four Seasons Motors
Automotive Sludge
Sampled 09/30/91 @1201
Analyzed 10/15/91
Submitted 10/02/91
NOTE: Analysis done by EPA method 4-18.1 modified.
COMPLETE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYTICAL SERVICE
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons
3000
fjg/g (ppm)

-------
TO:	Missoula City-County Health Dept.
ADDRESS: Alan English
301 W. Alder
Missoula. MT 59802
LAB NO.
DATE:
91-39028
10/18/91 crp
SOIL VOLATILE SURROGATE RECOVERY
10 //g/g Surrogate Standard Spike
SAMPLE NO.
91-39028
S1
(TOP#
84
-% recovery-
S2
(BFB)*
76
S3
(DCE)#
100
51	(TOL) = Toluene-d8
52	(BFB) = Bromofluorobenzene
53	(DCE) = 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4
QC LIMITS. % Recovery
75-120
75-120
70-120
#Coiumn to be used to flag recovery values with an asterisk.
'Values outside of contract required QC limits.
COMPLETE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYTICAL SERVICE

-------
TO:	Missoula City-County Health Dept.	LAB NO.: 91-45063
ADDRESS:	301 Alder	DATE: 12/03/91 crp
Missoula. MT 59802
WASTE ANALYSIS
#1113911 Four Seasons Motors
Sampled 11/13/91 @ 12:00 p.m.
Submitted 11/18/91
Analyzed 11/23/91
Constituent	ua/Q
PURGEABLE ORGANICS
EPA METHOD 8260
Bromobenzene	<0.20
Bromochloromethane	<0.20
Bromodichloromethane	<0.20
Bromoform	<0.20
Bromomethane	<0.20
Carbon tetrachloride	<0.20
Chlorobenzene	<0.20
Chloroethane	<0.20
2-Chloroethylvinyl ether	<0.20
Chloroform	<0.20
Chloromethane	<0.20
2-Chlorotoluene	<0.20
4-Chlorotoluene	<0.20
Dibromochloromethane	<0.20
1,2-Dibromoethane	<0.20
Dibromomethane	<0.20
1.2-Dichlorobenzene	<0.20
1.3-Dichlorobenzene	<0.20
1.4-Dichlorobenzene	4.0
Dichlorodifluoromethane	<0.20
1.1-Dichloroethane	<0.20
1.2-Dichloroethane	<0.20
1,1 -Dichloroethene	< 0.20
Constituent	ua/a
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene	<0.20
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene	<0.20
1.2-Dichloropropane	<0.20
1.3-Dichloropropane	<0.20
2,2-Dichloropropane	<0.20
1,1-Dichloropropene	<0.20
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene	<0.20
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene	<0.20
Methylene chloride	<0.20*
Styrene	<0.20
1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane	<0.20
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane	<0.20
Tetrachloroethene	0.42
1.1.1-Trichloroethane	<0.20
1.1.2-Trichloroethane	<0.20
Trichloroethene	<0.20
Trichlorofluoromethane	<0.20
1.2.3-T	richloropropane	< 0.20
Vinyl chloride	<0.20
Benzene	<0.20
Ethylbenzene	<0.20
Toluene	<0.20
Xylenes	0.39
* Present but less than the practical quantitation limit.
NOTE: This analysis is equivalent to EPA Method 8240.
COMPLETE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYTICAL SERVICE

-------
LABORATORY REPORT
TO:	Missoula City-County Health Dept.	LAB NO.: 91-45063
ADDRESS: 301 Alder	DATE:	12/03/91 crp
Missoula, MT 59802
WASTE ANALYSIS
#1113911 Four Seasons Motors
Sampled 11/13/91 @ 12:00 p.m.
Submitted 11/18/91
Ethylene Glycol 	 20	P&Q (ppm)
COMPLETE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYTICAL SERVICE

-------
LABORATORY REPORT
TO:
ADDRESS:
Missoula City-County Health Dept.
301 Alder
Missoula, MT 59802
LAB NO
DATE:
91-45063
12/03/91 crp
WASTE ANALYSIS
#1113911 Four Seasons Motors
Sampled 11/13/91 @ 12:00 p.m.
Submitted 11/18/91
Analyzed 11/27/91
NOTE: Analysis done by EPA method 418.1 modified.
complete environmental analytical service
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons
4-0000
/yg/g (ppm)

-------
TO:	Missoula City-County Health Dept.
ADDRESS: 301 Alder
Missoula, MT 59802
LAB NO.: 91-45063
DATE:	12/03/91 crp
WASTE VOLATILE SURROGATE RECOVERY
2.0 (jg/g Surrogate Standard Spike
SAMPLE NO.
91-45063
S1
(TOP#
96
-% recovery-
S2
(BFB)tf
78
S3
(DCE)*
103
51	(TOL) = Toluene-d8
52	(BFB) = Bromofluorobenzene
53	(DCE) = 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4
QC LIMITS. % Recovery
75-120
75-120
70-120
#Column to be used to flag recovery values with an asterisk.
•Values outside of contract required QC limits.
COMPLETE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYTICAL SERVICE

-------