Loading...
MISC: 1966 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN MISC: 1966 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN FORE WARD We were delightfully surprised to note the potential indicated by the Overall Economic Plan for Jefferson County. Only a base economic study such as has been done by this Plan can reveal the economic possibilities that exist in a specific area. Jefferson County has an enormous capability for tourist development. It has a bright future in agriculture too, as the population explo- sion all over the world is putting an increasing demand on the supply of food. We hope the Wood Products research project currently underway by the University of Montana for Jefferson County will disclose an additional potential from the County's great forest reserves. A lot of work has gone into the Overall .:conomic Development Plan for Jefferson County. But all this work will be meaningless unless def- inite steps are taken to implement it. This is only the beginning. A big task confronts Jefferson County. With the full cooperation and great interest of the Inter-County Development Corporation of Southwestern Montana in developing Jefferson County's economy we can hopefully expect the results to be more than satisfactory. tie:rm (-7 E. Lowry Kunkel,. President 4110 TABLE OF CONTENTS iPage No. Introduction Inter--County Development Corporation of Southwestern Montana Members of the Board of Directors of Inter-County Development Corporation of Southwestern Montana Jefferson County Committee Members Agriculture 91 Assumptions 3 Banking 43 Churches 66 City Government 47 Climate 29 Communications 53 County Services 57 Economic Projections 97 Education 64 Employment 684 7 Health & Medical Housing $2 Income Analysis 32 Jefferson County 1 Library 62 Manufacturing & Processing 90 Organizations 45 Population 34 Population & Retail Sales 38 Postal Services 63 Recreation 68 Retail Trade 39 Selected Services 41 Taxes 50 Montana Tax Structure 51 Transportation 55 Utilities 58 Wholesale Trade 40 Bibliography TABLES • Pace No. I Business Patterns - 1965 32a II Population-Retail Sales--Effective Buying Power 38a III Retail Trade - 1963 39a IV Wholesale Trade - 1963 40a V Selected Services - 1963 42 VI Selected Recreational Activities 75 VII Summary of Approaches and Conclusions of Tourist Studies of Upper Midwestern States 79 VIII Vacation Activities of Families 81 IX Jefferson County Housing - 1960 83 X Agriculture 1954 - 1964 93 MAPS Gas System Map 60 Power System Map 61 • APPENDIXES Page No. I POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS Population Trends 1950-1965 105 II POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS Components of Population Change 1950-1960 106 III POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS Age Distribution 1960 107 IV a POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS Labor Force Participation Rate 1960 108 IV b POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS Labor Force Participation Rate 1965 109 V POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS Unemployment Trends 110 VI POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS Family Income 1959 111 VII POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS Years of Education 1960 112 VIII POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS Remainder of the Population Labor Force Participation Rate 113 IX POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS Remainder of the Population-Unemployment 1114 X POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS Minority Group Socio-Economic Characteristics 115 XI ECONOMIC STRUCTURE AND ACTIVITY Employment by- Major Industry 1960 116 XII ECONOMIC STRUCTURE AND ACTIVITY Dollar Value by Major Economic Sector 1963 117 XIII PHYSICAL RESOURCES Agricultural Resources 1960-1963 118 XIV COMMUNITY FACILITIES Public School Facilities-Sources of Funds 119 XV ECONOMIC STRUCTURE AND ACTIVITY Profile of Economic Concentration 120 XVI ECONOMIC STRUCTURE AND ACTIVITY Average Hourly Wage Rates by Major Industry 1965 121 XVII ECONOMIC STRUCTURE AND ACTIVITY Transportation Facilities 1960 122 XVITT rnYSICAL RESOURCES Mineral Resources 123 XIX C0MMUNITY FACILITIES Public School Facilities 1966 12L XX COMMUNITY FACILITIES Other Educational Facilities 1966 125 XXI COMMUNITY FACILITIES Medical, Recreational and Public Library Facilities126 XXII COMMUNITY FACILITIES Housing Quality Indicators 1960 127 XXIII CITY POPULATION 128 INTRODUCTION In discussing the goal of E.D.A. , Ross Davis, Assistant Secretary of Commerce for conomic Development, recently declared: "The name of the game is changing the statistics which are used to describe lagging areas as economic problem areas.' Guideposts of progress can be measured by the change in statistics. This Overall Economic Development Plan includes the basic statistics by which the County can be measured. A comparison of these statistics with similar figures at a later date will show how much, if any, progress has been made. Statistics are a viable thing, changing exactly in accordance with a shifting economy. If bank deposits show an increase then we know there is more money in the county. If employment marks an increase then we can be certain that more employment opportunities are available and the economy has been strengthened. Er. Ross Davis could not have capsulated the name of the game more accurately. • INTER-COUNTY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF SOUTHWESTERN MONTANA A meeting to organize an Economic Development District under the aegis of the Economic Development Administration was held in the Hotel Marcus Daly in Anaconda, Montana, on May 2nd, 1966. Representatives from each of eight counties approved an application requesting approval of the District from the Economic Development Administration. The eight counties making up the district were: Ravalli, Powell, Granite, Deer Lodge, Silver Bow, Madison, Jefferson and Beaverhead Counties. A motion to submit the application to the E.D.A. was unanimously voted by the representatives. Copies of the application were forwarded to Mr. Vern Griffith, State Director of the E.D.A.. and Mr. Sam Chapman, Director, Montana State Planning Board, for their approval. Mr. Chapman and Mr. Howard Shinrock had visited interested parties in each of the eight counties and held meetings with various groups. Both Senator Lee Metcalf and Congressman Arnold Olsen provided the cooperation of their offices and subsequently won approval of the project from the Economic Development Administration. The project was formally approved June 28, 1966, by the E.D.A. The Inter-County Development Corporation of Southwestern Montana was in- corporated under that name by the Montana Secretary of State, Mr. Frank Murray, on`the lath of May, 1966. After the first year of operation, and acting upon a request from other counties and the E.D.A., four additional counties were added to the project. These counties included: Gallatin, Meagher, Park and Broadwater. A matching fund of $111,369.00 was provided by Deer Lodge County to provide the necessary funds to qualify for a $41,008.00 grant from the E.D.A., in 1966. In 1967, Deer Lodge County again provided $15,749.00 to match a $43,740.00 grant from E.D.A. for Planning and Administration. 1111 The members of the Board of Directors of the Inter-County Development Corporation of Southwestern Montana: E. Lowry Kunkel, President President, Daly National Bank Anaconda, Montana Dean Neitz, Vice President Owner and Publisher Philipsburg Mail, Philipsburg Allan C. Chaffee, Jr. Vice President, Metals Bank, Sec.,-Treas. Butte, Montana Dan Mizner Insurance and Real Estate Deer Lodge, Montana E. Carroll Speck Owner, Cement Mixing Plant Whitehall, Montana Joe Maitin Vice President, First Boulder Valley Bank, Boulder, Montana William Sherwood Urban Development Director of The Montana Power Company Butte, Montana Dean Wright Manager, !'The Dilmart" Dillon, Montana Richard J. Conklin Attorney at Law White Sulphur Springs, Montana Harry Grant Manager, Montana State Employment Service, Livingston, Montana Clifford Pasha County Commissioner Bozeman, Montana Reverend Clark N. McKinney Presbyterian Church - Minister Innis, Montana Ernest Post Chairman, Grievance Committee United Steel Workers of America Smelterman's Local 6002 Anaconda, Montana Replacement for Ravalli County not yet selected. Broadwater County Director not yet appointed. JEFFERSON COUNTY C01flTTE.:; MEMBERS: iJoe Maitin umber of the Board of Directors of Inter- County Development Corporation of SW Montana. Banker. Boulder, Montana. E. Carroll Speck Member of the Board of Directors of Inter-- County Development Corporation of SW Montana. Cement Business. Whitehall, Montana. Carl Kyler Bar Owner., Boulder, Montana. Aaron Remick ''76" Garage Owner. Boulder, Montana Harold Giulio Trucker. Boulder, Montana John French' Owner and Manager of Chevrolet Garage. Boulder, Montana James Sanddal Owner and Manager of Diamond S Ranchotel Boulder, Montana Lyle Parsons Mining Business. Basin, Montana. Paul Brenner Rancher. Cardwell, Montana Vince Capp Rancher and County Commissioner. Whitehall. H. L. Smith Soil Conservation Service. Whitehall, Mont. George Amen Druggist. Boulder, Montana Bill Carlson_ Rancher. Boulder, Montana Art Aspengren Druggist. Boulder, Montana Arnold Rieder Rancher. Boulder, Montana R. L. Ogren Band and Music Instructor -- Public Schools Boulder, Montana Boyd Andrews Restaurant Owner. Boulder, Montana Al LeMieux County Attorney. Boulder, Montana Al Graesser Forest Ranger. Boulder, Montana Harry S. Pyfer Lumber Dealer. Whitehall, Montana John Steingruber Rancher. Whitehall, Montana Vern Spackman, Sr. President.,, Chamber of Commerce, Whitehall. 4110 Jefferson County Committee Members (Continued): 1111 Albin McGee Realtor and Insurance Agent. Whitehall, Iknt. Leonard Schopfer Whitehall Grocer. James Fuller Owner of Motel and Service Station. Whitehall James Brennan Partner of Corner Bar. Whitehall, Montana Gil Vecaine Agent, N. P. Railway. Whitehall, i`bntana John Kelley Owner of Sporting Goods Store. Whitehall Neal Churchill Lumber Contractor. Whitehall, Montana John Gregory School Teacher. Secretary of Chamber of Commerce of Whitehall, Montana 4111 411O JEFFERSON COUNTY Jefferson County contains 1,654 square miles and 4,297 people accord- ing to the 1960 Census. In its broad and far flung acres of miles the density of population is but 2.6 persons per square mile. The City of Boulder is its county seat. Jefferson County lies immed- iately south of Helena, Montana's Capital. Butte, the state's mining metropolis, and famed Pipestone Pass, frame its southern border. Interstate Highway No. 91 extending from Helena to Butte, divides Jefferson County and provides the residents of it's most populous cities a direct route to both Helena and Butte. Highway No. 281, a two lane paved route, protrudes from the lower stem of Jefferson County and extends to Boulder located in the central part of the County. Early mining camps roared into life then faded into historical remem- brance as the gold petered out. Many former mining shafts now proclaim a cure, or at least alleviation of pain, for arthritic and rheumatic victims. Although the medical profession refuses to credit the claims made by the peculiar treatment afforded these victims, many suffering people have found relief from the rigors of arthritis and rheumatism and return regularly to the mine shafts to ease their aching joints. Celebrated Diamond "S" Ranchotel, famed for its hot springs and near- by mine shafts, caters to people from all over the world seeking relief from rheumatic ailments, is located on the outskirts of Boulder. Located here also, is the Montana State Training School with its modern buildings and training facilities. Deer Lodge National Forest blankets the western half of the County while the Helena National Forest commands much of the eastern half. The economic life of the County flows in between these two great forests. The Great Northern Railroad drops directly south of Helena following a valley course to Boulder then turns abruptly and bends southwesterly towards Butte. The Boulder River rises near Thunderbolt Mountain on the Continental Divide and sweeps in an arch past Boulder and follows Highway No. 281 to join the Missouri River on its southern flank. Whitetail Peak, soaring 8,476 feet into the western sky, spawns Whitetail Reservoir to provide water for irrigation and a haven for the justly famous rainbow trout. Fishing and hunting are popular sports here as they are in so many of the counties in southwestern Montana. 1 • Cattle is the big breadwinner for Jefferson County ranchers and miles of waving wheat is the top earner for the farmers. Lumber from the two great forests provides many jobs and much wealth as it is felled and processed by muscular woodsmen. The requisites for a balanced economy are present but have not yet been harnessed to provide an evenly distributed source of wealth. Boulder, the county seat, is pinched for housing to provide living quarters for the increasing number of people who would like to live there. Many people employed in Boulder commute daily from Helena, a scant twenty miles away. Boulder boasts a new bank, recently established, and has great ambit- ions for a more secure future. Jefferson County people are frugal, hardworking and happy to be living in this beautiful section of Montana. In other Jefferson County communities, Whitehall, Basin, Jefferson City, Alhambra, Cardwell and a scattering of smaller places, provide services for the ranch and farm population spread thinly throughout the County. Jefferson County's great challenge is to match its miles with people. Fighting against great odds, Jefferson County continues the long struggle, unwilling to throw in the towel in their unequal match. This land of contrasts has its future very far ahead of it. The people love their mountains and verdant valleys but opportunity for them is dim indeed. The Economic Development Administration is mightily engaged in a great effort to help create opportunity through its Multiple County Economic Development District. It is through this program of economic development that the best hope is offered for these people. • 2 • ASSUMPTIONS • In order to achieve a degree of comparability in the Overall Economic Development Plan, the Inter-County Development Corporation of South- western Montana has supplied certain basic assumptions. This means it is necessary to assume certain factors in our economic base study that will be reflected for the period of years indicated. Population United States Population 1960 Actual 180,670,000 1965 Estimate 195,192,300 1970 Projection 214,217,000 1975 Projection 235,2L6,000 1980 Projection 259,981,000 1985 Projection 288,000,000 * Approximately 705,000 persons were living in Montana on July 1, 1964, according to the Bureau of the Census estimate. The State=s population is growing somewhat more slowly than is the national population. Be- tween 1960 and 1964 the increase in Montana was 4.5 percent and national growth amounted to 6.7 percent. • By 1976, Montana's population will probably number around 900,000. - * Projections by the Bureau of the Census and the Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission indicate that the State's population in that year is expected to reach a figure somewhere between 852,000 and 955,000. 908,000 is selected as a reasonable expectation. Alternate Projections of Montana's Total Population in 1976 High: Assuming high migration 955,000 Assuming low migration 9212,000 Low: Assuming high migration.. 866,000 Assuming low migration 852,000 Judgement Projection 908,000 * Provisional estimate, Bureau of the Census, Current Population Re- ports, Population Estimates, Series P-25, No. 294, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C., Nov. 5, 1964, p. 10. 3* Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission, Projections to the years 1967 and 2000: Economic Growth, Population, Labor Force and Leisure, and Transportation, ORRRC study Report 23, U. S. Govern- ment Printing Office, Washington, D. C. 1962, pp. 12-16. 3 • * The National Planning Association, on the other hand, has projected Montana's population at 887,000. '- Although Montana generally is known as an agricultural state, its population is becoming increasingly urban. In 1960, slightly over 50 percent of the state's residents lived in urban areas -- towns and cities with over 2,500 inhabitants. Of the other 50 percent of the population, 16 percent lived on farms and 34 percent in rural-nonfarm areas. MONTANA'S POPULATION IN 1960 Total population 674,767 Urban 338,157 Rural-nonfarm 230,712 Rural-farm 105,598 As in the United States as a whole, future increases in population will occur chiefly in Montana's urban areas. As the trend toward larger and fewer farm and ranch units continues, rural-farm population will decline further. The rural-nonfarm areas, consisting largely of trade centers serving a decreasing number of rural residents, will find it increasingly difficult to maintain their population unless new bases of economic activity are established. • Employment Labor Force: Montana, like the other states of our Union, has a variety of talent. While the ratio of our population to land area reflects the fact that we are less densely populated than many of the other states, this does not detract from the quality, training and skill of our manpower. Montana's civilian labor force in 1964 was estimated at 253,600 by the Unemployment Compensation Commission. * Ibid., p. 416 • Bureau of the Census, U. S. Census of Population: 1960. General Social and Economic Characteristics, Montana, Final Report PC (1)-28c, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C. 1960, p. 28-87 • 14 Montana Labor Force 1964: Total civilian work force 253,600 Employed 241,700 Agriculture 36,700 Non-agricultural industries 205,000 * Unemployed 11,900 ** The National Planning Association estimates that by 1976 the labor force in Montana will have grown to 310,000. This figure is used in conjunction with a projected state population in 1976 of 887,000. Montana's Labor Force - by industrial group (in thousands) July 1965 Civilian Work Force 275.0 Unemployment 8.6 Percent of work force 3.1 Employment, total 266.0 (a) Non-agricultural wage and salary 186.1 Manufacturing 23.3 Durable Goods 14.8 Lumber & Timber Products 9.2 Primary metals 3.8 Non-Durable Goods 8.5 Food & Kindred Products 4.5 Printing & Publishing 1.8 Petroleum refining 1.3 Other .9 Non-Manufacturing 162.8 Mining 7.4 Metal mining 4.7 Coal and Quarrying 1.1 Petroleum and natural gas 1.6 Contract Construction 14.0 Building 4.0 Other than building 4.4 Special trade 5.6 Transportation and Utilities 18.1 Railroads.. 8.0 Transportation except railroads 4.1 Utilities, including commercial 6.3 Trade 44.2 Wholesale Trade 8.6 Retail Trade 35.6 General merchandise & apparel 6.9 Food & Liquor stores 5.6 Eating & Drinking places 10.0 *Includes 200 idled by labor-management disputes. ** Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission, op cit., p. 347 5 Auto & Service stations 7.1 Retail trade & miscellaneous 6.0 Finance, insurance & real estate 7.1 Service 25.9 Hotels, rooming houses, camps, etc 4.0 Personal services, other 19.8 Government 45.8 Federal 13.0 State & Local 32.8 *All other non-agricultural employment 31.5 Agriculture 48.4 In terms of employment, the fastest-growing industry groups in recent years have been government, finance, construction, and services. Metal mining and transportation (railroads) and, of course, agriculture, have experienced declines in employment over the past few years. The drop in metal mining employment apparently ended in 1964, when the number of mine workers increased slightly. A substantial proportion of Montana workers, particularly in the larger towns, are unionized. Membership in the AFL-CIO unions was estimated at 50,000 in 1960. This estimate does not include members of the indepen- dent unions such as the teamsters and the mine, mill and smelter workers. Unemployment in the state since 1962 has been somewhat lower than in the U. S. as a whole, averaging 5% of the labor force in 1962 and slightly less than 5% in 1963 and 1964. However, the state typically experiences a net loss through out-migration of persons in the working age groups. Many of these migrants would prefer to remain in Montana if satisfactory job opportunities were available. **Average Hours and Earnings of Workers in Montana Average Average Average Hourly Weekly Weekly Industry Earnings Hours Earnings All manufacturing $ 2.71 40.5 $109.76 Durable Goods 2.64 40.9 107.98 Primary metals 2.76 40.0 110.40 Non-Durable Goods 2.87 39.7 113.94 Food & kindred products2.49 41.0 102.09 All mining 2.95 38.9 114.76 Metal mining 2.97 39.4 108.74 * Includes non-agricultural self employed and unpaid family workers, and domestic workers in private households. Excludes administrative and salaried personnel. Unemployment Compen- sation Commission of Montana, Montana Labor Market Supplement FL 262, • March 1965. 6 Educated Youth: Both state and private schools in Montana offer advanced courses in technical studies enabling lndustry's technical personnel to continue their education. Organized Research is carried on at the institutions of higher learning, government agencies, and private business organizations. Some of this research has been directly responsible for new industry in Montana. Skilled Labor: Montana has an available source of skilled labor. More of Montana's labor force have been shifting from agriculture and mining to manufac- turing. Montana's labor is not only competitive on a rate basis, but it is more than competitive on a productivity basis. This is because the Montana workman is above average in education. Furthermore, a large portion have ranch or farm backgrounds and are therefore mechanically inclined, adaptable, dependable and self reliant. The Montana laborer is happy in his surroundings as a result of all the benefits derived from living in Montana. Economic Geography: A Forecast: Although Montana has a wealth of natural resources and a large potential for developing power, ,It has failed to mature industrially. Of the seven hundred thousand residents, only fifty percent live in urban centers. Montana's rate of population growth has been only 67% of the national average and far below most western states. The lack of local markets and great distances to major population and industrial centers has restrained any large scale growth of manufacturing. The industries which have developed are primarily concerned with process- ing extractive resources or are based on agricultural raw materials. In the past several decades the United States as a whole has passed through a stage of phenomenal industrial development. Although Montana has made substantial contributions to this development by supplying raw materials and agricultural products, its own industrial growth has not kept pace with most other regions of the nation. During this period when factories have been striving to fill the needs of a highly affluent society, Montana's relative lack of population and commercial growth has been viewed as being generally undesirable. Under the given economic environment Montana was simply not in a favorable geographic position to compete successfully with other areas. However, economic conditions are never static and the signs of a new human revolution are clearly evident. As the saturation level in basic consumer goods is approached and as cybernation and automation become 7 firmly entrenched, the American people and her industries are establish- ing new values and seeking new outlets. It is under these new economic conditions that Montana shall "manifest" herself. Her unspoiled beauty and immense recreational facilities shall be recognized as an invaluable resource. As traditional industrial products and concepts become modified, the importance of a highly skilled professional staff is greatly increas- ing. Surveys have clearly indicated that key men in the technical industries have a definite appreciation for natural environments and active outdoor sports. The possibilities of unconfined outdoor re- creation and a wide variety of year-round family activities are rapidly becoming a chief criteria in the selection of highly skilled positions. Technical industries which must be responsive to human locational deci- sions are finding that being situated in a desirable location is their number one asset. A 1957 survey conducted in Colorado to determine the relative importance of location factors of manufacturing firms showed that the influence of the "Desirability of living conditions" was among the top considerations. Only market conditions and regional growth were judged more important. Such traditional considerations as raw materials, labor (availability and wages), fuels and power, transporta- tion facilities, and taxation proved to be less important. In the developing economic situation Montana's deficiency of local markets should present no real problem. The state is serviced by an efficient east-west transportation network and in technical industries where finished product value are exceedingly high, the shipping charges to large markets would represent only a small percentage of total costs. As the nation's technical industries expand, areas such as Montana will be given top consideration in plant locations. In many respects the classical location theories of Weber and von Thuenen will work somewhat in reverse. Montana's lack of heavy industry and scarcity of population may well be a decisive advantage. It is doubly fortunate that the "clean" technical industries which Montana is most apt to attract are the indus- tries that will do the least to detract from the beauty and recreational opportunities of Montana's landscape. The preserving of this landscape is essential if Montana is to adequately provide for its newest and most rapidly growing industry - tourism. The same economic and social development that have altered Montana's industrial expectations have also created the new business giant of tourism. The United States Department of Commerce considers tourism to be one of the nations's fastest evolving businesses. Although facts and figures on tourism are evasive, it seems that its current national value of approximately 30 billion dollars per annum places it on a par with the value of total United States agricultural production. The annual growth rate of the tourist business consis- tently exceeds 14 percent, well ahead of agriculture, forestry, man- ufacturing or retail trade. 8 In Montana, the acceleration in growth of the tourist industry has made it one of the most important contributions to the economy of the state. Today the importance of tourism closely matches the value of mining, forest products, or oil industries, However, none of these industries are experiencing as rapid a rate growth as is tourism and in the near future tourism will rate as the second most important industry of the state. As the population of the United States continues to expand, it is be- coming more highly concentrated in urban centers. These city dwellers (over one hundred and fifty million by 1970) are seeking outdoor recre- ational opportunities in rapidly accelerating numbers. Higher pay, longer vacations, earlier retirement, and vastly improved transporta- tion systems have all helped to promote year-round tourism. The poten- tial tourist industry of Montana has scarcely been tapped. The industrial and civic leaders of Montana have recognized the impor- tance of the environment to the people of Montana. Maintaining an un- spoiled environment and abundant opportunities for outdoor recreation is essential to the economic growth and well being of Montana. A grow- ing awareness of this fact by the people of Montana is leading to an increased interest in preserving the natural beauty of the state. Ex- panding recreational facilities, wildlife programs, community clean-up campaigns, and polution control are all part of the desire to keep Montana a great place to live or visit. Agriculture: In Montana agriculture is the undisputed financial king of all enter- prises. Within the framework of total U. S. wheat production Montana ranks third or fourth, year in and year out. In barley, it ranks third; sugar beets, eighth; alfalfa seed, sixth; crested wheatgrass seed production, first; cattle numbers, twelfth; (but seventh in cow- calf numbers), and sheep numbers sixth. In addition, Montana also raises dry beans, red clover seed, potatoes, corn, flaxseed, mustard seed, sweet and sour cherries, and other crops that advertise Montana's reputation as a name-brand state. Inside Montana, agriculture is the greatest producer of income than any other source. Total farm income for 1964 was $404 million. It has climbed to $475 million in other years. This revenue is almost as large as the $23). million income derived from manufacturing sources and the $205 million from mining combined. It is almost three times the $150 million intake from tourism, much greater than the $80 million of the lumber and forest products industry and more than six times greater than the $75 million the oil industry pours into the state. * Dr. Paul B. Alexander, Department of Geography, University of Montana. i 9 Farms are increasing in size, due to enlarged management skills. Yields • are pushing to new highs but caught in the cost-price squeeze farmers, as individuals, have to increase efficiency, increase production per acre and per animal unit or else suffer the burden of high costs of production. Montana is a mighty vastness of 93.6 million acres. It is the fourth largest of the 50 states. It is second however, in acres of farmland. Usable range, pasture and crop land account for 67 million acres. Of this domain, 15 million acres are used for cash crops, with some two million acres classified as irr- igated. On these irrigated lands alfalfa, sugar beets, feed grains, dry beans, silage corn, flax and potatoes are raised. The principal dry land crops are wheat and barley. The rangelands are grazed principally by cattle and sheep whose numbers convert grass and forbs into red meat for the growing U. S. population. These pastures, as well as the dryland wheat and barley farms, are vast but manageable. The ownership pattern of this vast domain is similar to the pattern of nearby intermountain states. Federal-State ownership is approximately 35 percent of the total and administration is under the Forest Service of the USDA, the Bureau of Land Management, U. S. Department of the Interior, and the Bureau of Indian Affairs. It would be a mistake however, to conclude that Federal-State adminis- tered lands are out-of-bounds, or uithdratm from private use. These are not. Timber, recreation, grazing and mining are only some of the multiple uses that private groups and individuals derive from the gov- ernment lands. Cattle: On January 1, 1964, Montana's reputation-brand cattle numbered 2,674,000 head, a 15 percent increase over the preceding year, and a new all time high. The 1964 calf crop was 1,271,000, a seven per- cent increase over the preceding year, and the highest rate of in- crease of any of the 50 states. These statistics reveal, among other things, that Montana cattlemen are excellent managers and that feeding facilities are abundant and of superb quality. Total 1963 income from cattle was $186 million. Oddly enough, the fattening of these range produced cattle for market is almost insignificant compared to the marketing of calves, steers and heifers to feed-lot operators in other states. Historical patterns are sometimes difficult to change, and Montana is traditionally accustomed to selling cattle off the range to feed- lot operators elsewhere. In all, approximately 1 million head of cattle are sold each year to buyers in other states in the cattle- finishing business, who in turn sell to packers. 10 Therefore, cattle feeding as a developing enterprise shows promise of adding income and employment to Montanans. Feed is plentiful, and some tests have revealed that barley ration is every bit as economi- cal as corn for fattening cattle. The final meat product is also as satisfying to our increasingly knowledgeable consumer. Cattle feeding has not yet increased in Montana at the pace that many consider possible. There are 600 cattle feeders in Montana, but only 26 of these have a feedlot capacity of over 1,000 head. Sheep: Montana's wool production for 1964 approximated 13.5 million pounds. Income produced by this "side" crop was $7,394,000. This brought Montana to fifth-rank status in the U. S. in the production of wool. Most of the wool that is produced in the state is marketed through wool pools which are organized by sheep producers at local level. The quality of Montana wool is attested to by the fact that it is hardly ever used alone. It is used to blend with lesser quality wools to bring them up to standard. Only the finest and most expen- sive products are made wholly from Montana wool. Wool, like ex- tracted products from the state, is shipped out of the state for processing. Although the wool clip is down in the United States as well as in Montana, it must be kept in mind that the U. S. imports more than fifty- percent of the wool consumed here from foreign countries. • Originally both imported, as well as domestic wool, was shipped in "the grease" or in its natural soiled and rough state to the Boston area to be scoured and processed. Boston won the sobriquet of the "Wool Capital of the World". The entire wool industry was centered around Boston from scouring the dirty wool to its final use in gar- ments and other end products. This practice continued for more than 90 years even though it took two carloads of "wool in the grease" to obtain one carload of scoured wool. About half the weight of the wool went "dawn the drainw in the scouring process. To keep the wool coming to Boston, railroad rates on scoured wool were more than twice that of "wool in the grease". Thus it was cheaper to ship wool clips to Boston than scour them in their state of origin. Since then, however, freight rates have been more nearly equalized and Texas responded by establishing eleven wool scouring plants, Colorado one plant and a great many wool scouring plants have been built in the south, mainly Georgia, and South Carolina, as well as on the west coast. Montana failed to take advantage of the equalized freight rates as these other states have done and still does not scour or process any of its gigantic wool clip. Wool growers in Montana like cattle raisers, adhere to the historical patterns to which they are traditionally accustomed and have shown little or no interest in processing their wool in Montana. • 11 You may be certain this is one industrial activity that we are going to research carefully. Swine: Montana produces 200,000 head of hogs and imports 140,000 additional head for slaughter. It is interesting to note that 600,000 hogs pass through Montana for slaughter on the West Coast. These could easily be arrested in their travel and processed in Montana. Montana production of hogs is not enough to feed its own population, and hogs are imported by packers to round out local demands. This points to an immense opportunity for the industry. Barley makes an excellent hog feed, and Montana State University extension special- ists have shown that the corn-hog ratio of the Midwest is not as good economically as the barley-hog ratio of Montana. The important need for development of this industry is to have oper- ators who are willing to adopt new technology and to have necessary capital for successful operations. Wheat: Wheat shares with cattle the repute of large money-makers for Montana. Yields go up and up, a tribute to the State's weather, soil, and know- how of its farmers-ranchers, and a credit to the college extension and research teams who work constantly at upgrading quality and the use of superlative seed. Nitrogen and phosphorus are also applied liberally. Montana's wheat crop, third or fourth ranking in the U. S., is in great demand by millers and cattle feeders from other states. Predominantly a hard wheat with excellent milling qualities, about 75% of the winter wheat acreage is seeded with Cheyenne; 10% with Karmont; and 7% with Itana. Protein content is high. The Durum wheat crop which is used for the spagehetti-macaroni trade, was exceeded only by North Dakota in the nation. The spring wheat crop is the second largest of that produced in all the states. The recent announcement by the Secretary of Agriculture that wheat acreage allotments will be increased headlines the news that increa- sed yields of wheat can be expected in the future. Barley: Montana enjoys an enviable reputation among livestock feeders through- out the western states for its barley. Its high protein quality and digestabil.ity makes it a desirable feed for cattle finishers in small and large feedlots. In addition, as a hog feed, Montana State University extension special- ists have stated that it is more economical per pound of gain than the 12 highly-touted midwestern corn. This means that it is a superb source of feed, and in abundance, for the anticipated expansion in livestock feeding in Montana. In recent years too, exporters to Asiatic countries have also grown to favor Montana barley. Hay Production: Montana farmer-ranchers harvest $64 million worth of Hay. Alfalfa hay accounted for approximately 2 million tons, with the rest in wild grass, timothy and clover. Hay acreage is normally about 2.3 million, of which 1.2 million acres is irrigated land. Because of its abundance, several alfalfa pelleting plants have been established in the state. Industri- alists and economists say that more such plants have a place in the state, both for local consumption and also for export to other states and countries. Sugar Beets: The output of sugar beets went to an all-time high in the 1963 growing season, the latest year figures are obtainable. The crop totaled 1,170,000 tons, with an average yield of 17.7 tons to the acre through- out the entire state. The acres of sugar beet production are restricted by marketing quotas established by the U. S. Government for the sugar beet companies. In turn, these companies, based on their industrial plant facilities, al- locate acreages to individual farmers. In the past ten years, the acres in production of this valuable irri- gated crop has climbed from 55,000 to over 66,000. At the same time, yield per acre has climbed from 12.6 tons in 1954 to 17.8 tons in 1963. The gross value of this crop in 1963 was well over $11 million. By- products have a high value too as a livestock feed. Green tops, if not plowed under, are readily eaten by sheep or cattle in the fall, and from the factories wet and dried beet pulp are hauled eagerly to livestock at the farm. The opportunity for expansion of sugar beets is primarily dependent on future foreign trade agreements. Should a great expansion ever be authorized, sugar beet companies would increase plant and build- ing capacities. Potatoes: Potatoes account for about 20% of the gross cash income produced by crops raised in the western part of the state. Montana seed potatoes are widely known, as are its russets sold for human consumption. The i 13 famous Idaho Potatoe, known all over the world, was started in Montana. Western Montana raised over 1.39 million hundred weight with a value of $3.5 million. Yields averaged over 180 bags (hundredweight) to the acre. Other Crops: Oil and seed crops, though minor in comparison to wheat, cattle and other higher-priced cash crops, make up a composite group that adds millions of dollars to the agricultural income. And should the mar- ket demand for any of these minor crops increase greatly, Montana farmers could easily make a transition from current cropping practices. Montana agriculture is a strong healthy factor in the state's economy. It has not yet reached its zenith and more crops will be grown by few- er farmers in the future. The uncomfortable trend of producing more food than the American population could consume seems to be about over. Our monumental piles of surpluses have vanished, in some cases even below the amounts calculated to be necessary to carry us from one crop year to another. Along with the growth of American population, the world's population has grown to the point where there is an increasing number of hungry people who cannot be fed properly. Irrigation and use of fertilizers to restore worn out soils, although growing fast, cannot keep pace with the demand for food. In spite of our enormous gains in technology, automation, increased acre yields, food preparation and more importantly, food preservation; half the people in the world still go to bed hungry at night. All of this, unpleasant though it may be, augurs well for our agri- cultural industry, for that is what it has become during these tur- bulent years. Billions of acres throughout the world that now lie barren and unproductive will have to be cultivated. Millions of American acres that are now resting will have to be employed full time. Even with this great expansion, agriculture will not be able to do more than stay even with the demand for food. The population explosion is more than academically interesting. It could cause us to strangle on masses of people who must be fed for the only other alternative is death from starvation. Along with the population explosion, advances in medicine are keep- ing more people alive. The science of geriatrics is allowing people to live longer. All of which, added to the rapidly growing birth rate, is crowding the world. For the first time in the world's history a single nation has been able to produce enough food to feed its own people with enough left over to help feed many other countries. At no other time in history • 14 • has any nation been able to grow enough food so that surpluses were a problem. There has been no time in history where a nation could pro- duce more food with fewer farmers than in the United States. If the American farmer, using the improving techniques made available to him by science, could be exported to the hungry nations of the world the problem would probably be resolved. But it is not possible to export our farmers nor even their methods to very many other parts of the world. With the threatening clouds of growing hunger in an increasingly grow- ing population, American agriculture could be the most important con- tribution to the future of the world. Wars and famine are the only other alternatives to inadequate food supplies. So you might say that the peace of the world hovers on the shoulder of the farmer and is depending on his skill and ingenuity. The American farmer could emerge as the greatest force on earth. What will this mean to Montana? With only a portion of its millions of productive acres under cultivation, the increase in food produc- tion will undoubtedly employ a far greater percentage of our tillable land. This in turn, will create a vast new market for things farmers use. Processing of agricultural products will also become more im- portant. We can assume then, that the future economic growth of Montana will be keyed on agricultural industry. And actually, there is no firmer base upon which to build an economy than on the foundation stones of agriculture. Montana Forests and Forest Industries Writing in the Montana Industrial Manifest, Kent T. Adair reported that Montana has approximately 17,300,000 acres of commercial forestland. Most of this acreage is located in the mountains of the Western one- fourth of the State. An estimated 11,801,000 acres of this total is owned by various public agencies. The U. S. Forest Service, with 10,578,000 acres, is the largest single landowner. Approximately one- fourth (1,047,000 acres) of the 4,860,000 acres of privately owned, commercial forestland is owned by the forest industry. The largest private landowner group in the State, however, is the farmer with 2,002,000 acres. Commercial forestland ownership in Montana 1962 Landowner Thousands of Acres U. S. Forest Service 10,578 Bureau of Land Management 612 Bureau of Indian Affairs 595 • Miscellaneous Federal 16 State 601 County and Municipal 38 Total Public 12,440 15 Lumber Companies 1,047 Farmers 2,002 Miscellaneous private 1,811 Total Private 4,860 Grand Total: All Ownerships 17,300 Source: Timber Trends in the United States, U.S.D.A., Forest Service, Forest Resource Report No. 17,1965. The commercial forestland in Montana contains an estimated 86,488 mill- ion board feet of mature softwood sawtimber and 20,281 million cubic feet of growing stock. This resource provides raw material for the wood products industry in the State and also serves as habitat for wildlife, recreation, grazing, and water resource development. Sawtimber trees must have a minimum diameter outside the bark of 9.0 in- ches at a point 4'2 feet above the ground. Growing stock diameters range from 5.0 to 8.99 inches. The Montana Wood Products Industry The Montana wood products industry is a primary manufacturing industry concerned mainly with the conversion of trees into logs and logs into • a wide variety of products. The industry is a leader in terms of in- come generated within the state; it employs approximately 8,800 people in logging and milling activities; and it is composed of approximately 50 large sawmills which operate continuously. There are several hund- red smaller sawmills which operate only intermittantly or during times of relatively high lumber prices. One pulp and paper plant and several pole treating yards, some 30 to 40 post yards, an established Christ- mas Tree industry and one shingle mill also are in operation. There are also several secondary manufacturing plants producing custom mill work, laminated beams, modular panels, novelty products, rustic and finished furniture and pre-fabricated homes. The industry is thus diversified in the sense that many different pro- ducts are manufactured in the State but concentrated in that the pri- mary products are limited to lumber, plywood, pulp and paper. There are sufficient mill residues and other pulp raw materials in West- ern Montana to support a greatly expanded pulp and paper industry. In addition, there are several sites having sufficient water supplies to support pulp production. The slow rate of growth of the industry to date, however, indicates that factors other than demand and raw material supply contribute to determine the progress of local industry. Indeed, new construction of pulp and paper plants in Western Montana appears contingent on the industry's ability to fabricate plants having local, • popular, acceptance. The output of specialized wood products in Montana has increased. How- ever, the total contribution of the industry to the State is not known 16 • with precision at the present time. There appears to be opportunities for expansion in some areas such as fabricated plywood-lumber panels, box beams, roof and floor trusses, etc. and it is expected that the production of these secondary-manufacture items will increase in the future. However, each opportunity must be evaluated according to its own merits and the extent of potential expansion in this area is open to conjecture at this time. The forest products industry of Montana is an industry in transition. New mills have been built to produce traditional wood products more efficiently and new items such as plywood, pulp, paper and specialised wood products have been introduced during the past decade or so. The industry is thus growing in terms of numbers of products produced in the State and becoming a more competitive producer of traditional lumber and related wood products. The forest products industry is thus a significant segment of the Montana economy, particularly in Western Montana, and it is expected to contribute to the progress of the State in the future. TODAY AND TOMORROW Oil and Gas Production: James F. Neely, Executive Director of the Montana Oil and Gas Conser- vation Commission wrote in Montana's Industrial Manifest that the future of Montana's oil industry is directly related to the growth of the nations economy and population. By the end of the 1960's our nation's population will be in excess of 200 million. To fulfill the energy requirements of this number of Americans, and the industries for which they work, the oil industry will necessarily be called upon to keep its oil producing capacities at levels to surpass any prediction made a few years ago. At the beginning of 1953, the United States daily consumption of oil products was approximately 7,500,000 barrels. During 1963 the domestic demand had risen to 10,560,000 barrels daily and by this example, it appears the daily demand might well be in the area of 15 to 16,000,000 barrels daily by 1970. The increased demand for oil nationally will be here and with wise foresight, Montana can profitably share in this growth. Most of those engaged in the oil industry, in Montana, are optimistic as to their chances for cashing in on the future. Usually in looking and planning ahead, it is necessary to make a good survey of the past and present. Since the first discovery of oil in this State in commercial quantities, over 4880400,000 barrels of oil have been produced and marketed with a value in excess of $1,035,483,500. Montana's production in 19511 totalled 11 ,195,450 barrels, with a valua- tion of $31,280,000, as compared to the 19611 total of 30,637,500 barrels valued at approximately $74,755,500. Montana now stands in twelfth place among the 31 oil producing states, and stands in eleventh place • as to known reserves. 17 Petroleum surpassed copper in 1957, as the State's most valuable mineral resource, and since that time a steady increase in production has been experienced. Water Supply: "Water, water everywhere and all the boards did shrink Water, water everywhere and not a drop to drink" from "The Ancient Mariner" Unlike the Ancient Mariner's plaint, Montana has water and plenty of it to drink. Montana's abundant water supply represents one of its great- est resources. Water plays an important role in agriculture for irri- gation purposes; in industry as a source of power and for production processes; in the home; and in recreation and huge undeveloped resources of high-quality water remain. A. D. McDermott, Director of the Montana Water Conservation Board, lays a valid claim to the State's water supply as being one of Montana's great assets. Two great rivers have their headwaters in the State. One is the Missouri with its principal tributary, the Yellowstone, and the other is the Columbia with its principal tributaries, the Clark Fork and the Kootenai. It is along the major rivers and their tributaries that most Montana cities and towns are located. As a headwaters state, Montana is blessed with an abundance of water in areas near our major streams since an average of 25 million gallons of water per minute (or 111 million acre-feet per year) flow out of the State. This is enough water to irrigate nearly 15 million acres of new land or to supply water to approximately 35 cities the size of New York City: Most of Montana's surface water is both clear and cold. Summer water temperatures rarely exceed 60 degrees Farenheit. Montana has hardly begun to realize its hydroelectric potential. Poten- tial hydroelectric energy in Montana was estimated at 6,227,000 kilo- watts in 19511 by the Federal Power Commission. Installed capacity of hydroelectirc plants in Montana amounted to 1,369,2112 kilowatts in 1964. Water is essential to the State's important agricultural operations. Approximately 2 million acres of farmlands are irrigated in Montana, contributing to the stability of agriculture. Throughout the State, our many streams and lakes provide the basis for extensive recreational opportunities, both for Montana citizens and for its many vacation visitors. As the nation's population increases, and with the growing interest in outdoor recreation, these resources will undoubtedly assume even greater importance. 18 Mining: Uuno M. Sahinen, Associate Director of the Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology, wrote in his "Mining in Montana", that Montana will always be a mining state. A positive statement -- but true. The products may vary, the methods may vary, but always within the foreseeable future will a good many Montanans be engaged in extracting mineral raw mater- ials from the earth, whether they be the exotic minerals of the rare metals or just common clay for the extraction of aluminum. The mineral wealth of Montana was first touched in 1852 with the dis- covery of gold on Gold Creek in present Powell County, but active ex- ploitation did not begin until the discovery of gold at Bannack ten years later. Alder Gulch in Madison County was discovered in 1863 and the golden era of placer mining was in full swing. This period of Montana mining was short-lived, and by 1870 the richest of the cream had been skimmed from Montana's gold placers. Miners then turned their attention to gold and silver lode mining. Gold and silver could both be recoved as metal from the free mining gold ores and from the silver ores after a chloridizing roast in the gold and silver mills of the day. Railroads had not yet entered Montana, so base metal ores of copper, lead and zinc which required large centralized smelters, could not be worked because of the lack of shipping facilities. This era, which began in 1869 lasted until the slump in silver price in the early 1890's, thus overlapping the era of copper mining by about ten years. In 1882 the Oregon Short Line Railway reached Silver Bow, near Butte, and in September 1883, the gold spike was driven on the Northern Pac- ific Railway at Gold Creek marking the completion of the first north- ern trans-continental railway. With railroad transportation facilities available, copper and lead mining became feasible, and Montana entered into its third mining epoch. Butte, of course, was the center of cop- per mining but lead-silver mining was well scattered over western and central Montana. High-grade silver-lead districts such as Neihart, Barker, Corbin-Wickes, Philipsburg, Helca and Argenta, boomed and metal mining became an established industry throughout western and central Montana. With the silver-lead ores occurred a troublesome mineral that the min- ers avoided and the smelters penalized -- the mineral was sphalerite, a present day ore of zinc. Not until organization of the Butte and Superior Mining Company did zinc mining come into prominence. At this company's Black Rock mill in Butte was introduced the first successful large scale selective flotation system in the United States which made zinc recovery profitable. In Montana, zinc ores are not smelted; the ores are roasted to convert the zinc sulfide to soluable zinc sulfate, which is leached from the roasted ore in large wooden tanks and the solution electrolyzed to produce high-purity electrolytic zinc. This was another Montana "first" in the mineral industry. 19 Future Outlook For the future, the metal outlook is not dim. Montana will continue as a leading copper and zinc producer for many, many years. Silver and gold are now produced essentially as by-products and will continue as such. The quantities produced, however, are not insignificant. Lead can be produced when market conditions warrant. Montana has reserves of manganese, tungsten, and chromium and can produce when needed. The last three metals, together with Montana iron ores and cheap electric power, could form the basis of a profitable ferro-alloy industry in Montana. Of space-age metals titanium is plentiful in the titaniferous magnetite ore of North-central Montana. Occurrences of beryllium and columbium are known, but commercial deposits have not yet been developed. The Anaconda Copper Company is currently occupied in researching beryll- ium and has developed some definitive qualities and characteristics of the metal. It is used in our space program and new uses for it are mov- ing from the test tubes to the production line. The non-metal mineral products are not as glamorous as the metals and do not, except for petroleum, possess the "get rich quick" lure of the metals. They are, for the most part, low-priced commodities, and their development depends a great deal upon population growth and industrial expansion. In Montana, the non-metalic mining began with coal and pro- ducts for building industry -- building stone, clay for bricks, and limestone for lime used in plaster and mortar. The future of the non-metalic mining industry is assured through necess- ity. As the population of the State increases there will be a greater demand for construction materials such as bricks from clay, lime for mortar and plaster, gypsum for plaster and wallboard, cement for con- crete, expandable shales for lightweight aggregate, vermiculate for in- sulation, and stone for construction and decorative purposes. The demand will increase for bentonite as fillers and filters of var- ious kinds and for a tinder in pellitizing taconite (Montana has enor- mous reserves) and phosphate rock for fertilizers and household chemi- cals. Montanans oil shale deposits may be utilized as a source of petroleum products, and alumina, the "ore" of aluminum, may be derived from common clay. Last, but not least, coal will be mined in ever-in- creasing amounts for use in generating electric power, and may supplant the use of petroleum products as they and natural gas begin to fade from extended use of known deposits. Pipe-line transportation of coal may well solve present high transportation costs of coal. As the State grows, so will grow its non-metallic industry. The shadow of a new form of energy begins to loom over the mining and processing industry as the largest known deposit of Thorium in the free world lies untouched in vast quantities in Southwestern Montana. Many new Atomic Energy Plants to generate electricity are being engineered to use Thorium as a fuel. 20 Thorium might be called "the metal of the future" for like its radio- active partner uranium, it can be used in nuclear reactions. Although this heavy gray metal does not have a natural fissionable isotope, it can be converted to uranium 233 in a breeder reactor. Monazite, thorite, and thorianite are the major thorium minerals. In Western Montana monazite and thorite have been found in numerous placer deposits in Silver Bow, Granite and Ravalli Counties. Veins carrying thoria occur in the Lemhi Pass district in Beaverhead County. Spotty but high-grade concentrations of thorite occur on Duck Creek in Broad- water County. Similar material has been reported from the Big Belt Mountains. Thorium-bearing pegnatites and veins have been found in the Deer Creek Area in Broadwater County. Thoriante has been reported near Norris in Madison County. With the thorium deposits in Beaverhead County are commercial quanti- ties of the rare earths. Yttrium and Europium are foremost of these rare earths because of their growing use in the television manufactur- ing industry. The inside of the picture tubes in colored television sets are coated with yttrium and europium. It seems obvious from the growing use of the metals found in Montana that the mining and processing industry will account for an increasing percentage of Montana's income. Gypsum A substantial deposit of gypsum has been found in Beaverhead County about 8 miles Southwest of Dillon. The gypsum in this deposit is from 90 to 98% pure. In two claims, it is estimated, the deposit will run to six million tons with another 3 million tons in a third claim. This should be sufficient to warrant the construction of a wall board plant which could be erected at the mine site. The owners of the claims have been identified and in a discussion with them have indicated they are willing to sell, lease or operate the mines. There is a road built to within one half mile of the claims and the owners assured us they could complete the road to the claims site. The Union Pacific Railroad is only three miles from the claims and if they were to be developed the Railroad could easily lay track to the mines. Facilities for manufacturing wall board are either present or could be readily installed. There seems to be more than sufficient water in the area and power is nearby. • We expect to make application to the Offices of Technical Services for a grant to prepare a feasibility study of the amount of gypsum present 21 which if it is found promising, will be sent to the large gypsum com- panies in the United States hoping to attract their interest. Tourism Annual vacation travel has become an accepted way of life for millions of persons from every country under the sun. It is not a new pastime but its much easier than it used to be. Travel time once measured in months, weeks and days is now measured in hours. Montana became his- torically and romantically appealing to vacationers through the Louis- iana Purchase, the Lewis and Clark Expedition, a well-exploited gold rush, Vigilante law enforcement and its "War of the Copper Kings". Many factors combined to expand an early-day casual interest into an ever-increasing flow of vacation travel that has become the State's third largest industry. More than three million visitors coming from out of State contribute $115 million to our annual economy. Montanans vacationing within the borders of their own state add another $38 mill- ion to Montana's economy each year. Steady improvement of our state highway system has done much to promote this travel growth, providing easy and comfortable access to our 26 state parks and historical monuments, scenic routes into Glacier and Yellow- stone National Parks, and to a wide range of recreational playgrounds, including summer camp sites and winter ski runs. Big game hunting draws thousands of sportsmen into the State each fall, just as even more thousands are lured here each spring and summer to enjoy our fabulous fishing and fine State and Forest Service campgrounds. And as the leaves fall and the snow flies, a hardy and adventurous breed of winter sports lovers arrive to ski in bright winter sun and fresh powder snow at Montana's 21 ski runs, some of which rank high among America's finest. A brand new Montana winter adventure, snowmobiling from West Yellowstone into the white wonderland of Yellowstone Park to Old Faithful and other world famous scenic areas, has already aroused national interest. Local people are buying small two seater snowmobiles and exploring new areas not accessible by foot or car in the summer. Mammoth Montana. Ninety-four million acres of Big Sky country welcomes you to a four-season vacationland. "Big Sky" Transportation A title truly fitting the aviation industry of Montana, but probably more accurately accented as Big "Sky Transportation" Montana, a leader for years in general aviation, moved into first place in the nation for the highest per capita ownership of privately owned aircraft in August 1958. Later nosed out of this position when Alaska joined the Union, and again later on, a greatly expanded ownership of aircraft in Nevada, Montana, now holds third place nationally for all 22 • private aircraft owned on a per capita basis, but still retains first place in the ownership of private business use aircraft. The State is served by four airlines, including jet service, two of which are trunk carriers and two local service carriers. Western Air- lines serves Montana through a system extending from Alberta to the Twin Cities, Denver and California points with service scheduled at Great Falls, Billings, Helena, Butte and West Yellowstone. Northwest Airlines, as an International Carrier, serves the State from West to East, accommodating traffic bound for the extremes of the Nation, from the Pacific Northwest to the Industrial Great Lakes centers, the New York area and winter resort areas of Florida. The Airline plans to be full jet over its entire route structure by the end of this year. Frontier, a local service carrier, serves Denver, Salt Lake City and points East of Montana. West Coast Airlines, another local service carrier, funnels the Pacific Northwest in Montana through its points of Kalispell and Great Falls. Montana's pilots pool now totaling over 3200 are capable, experienced and diversified. The commercial "Air Taxi" men are predominently in- strument rated with numerous individuals holding airline transport pilot ratings. • The "Big Sky", the big, clean, beautiful, blue sky for which Montana is famous and the absence of coastal fog and the haze of industrial smoke- stacks makes this great State a pilot's paradise, where the familiar voice on "Flight Service" radio is often heard, saying, "Ceiling unlimited, visibility sixty miles," and the job, the "work" of flying is a pleasure and a joy. This is Montana, Flying Montana, the Land of the Big Sky: Railroad Transportation According to John Willard, Director, Montana Railroad Association, the railroads furnish the heavy-duty transportation needs of Montana indus- try and commerce. They do this at prices, or rates, designed to move Montana's industrial and commercial products long distances to meet the competition of products moving only half to one-third the distance to the same market. Such pricing and service demand the fullest cooperation between rail carriers and their customers, and over the years such common efforts have resulted in a steady and healthy growth of raw material and semi- processed product industries. For example, since World War II, the forest products industry in Montana has grown 240 percent, the largest growth in any Northwest timber state. Agriculture, mining, forest and related industries provide the backbone for both the State's economy and railroad movements. Montana's transi- • tion to include more and more manufacturing plants has given railroads an opportunity to provide specialized equipment and service and to make rates to open new markets. 23 The State has more than 5,000 miles of railroad, all of which is under- going constant improvement and additions to carry heavier loads at higher speeds. Heavier rail has been laid on main lines, highly auto- mated maintenance equipment keeps the roadbed in top condition, central- ized train control makes for greater safety and speed, new two-way radio and other communications facilitate contact between operating crews and dispatchers and keep close track of cars in transit. Constantly improved power, coupled with road and track improvements make possible schedules of as low as 55 hours from Chicago to the North Pac- ific coast. Other fast freight schedules from Montana are available to California, the Gulf Coast, Mississippi Valley and, through connect- ions, to Alaska on ships which carry loaded cars through to Alaskan destinations on the Alaska Railroad. Railroads maintain industrial sites and provide individual industrial locations at virtually all points they serve. These are designed es- pecially to accomodate industry, and many firms have taken advantage of the facilities. Research is an important part of railroad service to the State's economy. All railroads serving Montana have engaged in research to find new mar- kets, new materials and better uses for products and raw resources. As industrial potentialities develop through railroad efforts, transpor- • tation service and rates are made available to reach markets for pro- ducts which are feasible and economically practical. This is a contin- uing process to which the railroads serving Montana are committed. Montana Climate Mr. R. A. Dightman, State Climatologist, provided the following disser- tation for inclusion in the Industrial Manifest of Montana. Within any given area of more than 146,000 square miles, climatic var- iations of some size should be expected, and even a cursory review of Montana's climate records more than meets such expectations. The State's 146,316 square mile area contains a very complex topography which prob- ably is more important in determining climate patterns than any other factor. It seems appropriate, then, to first review some of the feat- ures of Montana's mountain-valley-plains structure which are germane extending from the Canadian Border North of Kalispell roughly South- Southeastward to just West of Helena, then Southwestward to the Idaho Border near Gibbons Pass where it coincides with the Idaho Border to just South of West Yellowstone. West of the Divide it is quite mountainous, with many deep valleys and high ridges. There is no general direction patterns to these valleys and ridges except that valley elevations decrease roughly from South- east to Northwest. • 24 There are many elements necessary to describe fully any climate. Here the descriptions are confined to some of the more common items includ- ing temperature, precipitation, cloudiness, sunshine, freeze data, snow- fall, and wind; although descriptions of such elements as potential evaportranspiration, next radiation, soil temperature profiles, etc. , would be necessary to a comprehensive discussion. Where mentioned, temperature is in degree Fahrenheit, precipitation is in inches, cloudiness in tenths of sky cover, sunshine in percentage of possible, snowfall in inches, wind in miles per hour (mph) , and freeze periods in days between specified temperature values, and humidity in percentage of possible water vapor content. In a very basic sense, the climate of an area should be considered a fundamental natural resource. In records of rainfall, temperature, etc. , one can define probabilities with many agricultural and industrial ap- plications, such as potential water supplies, growing seasons, building design requirements, road construction and heating needs, not to mention such recreational possibilities as boating, fishing, travel, and winter sports. Like any natural resources, there are important features of Montana's climate which can and should be exploited (water power, irri- gation water supplies, sunshine and very desirable summer weather) . There are others (occasional severe cold, wind, and hail) , which re- quire careful handling even though they are necessary to an overall appraisal of the climate resource and may even help establish and main- • taro exploitable phases, i. e. winter sports require some cold weather, winter snows provide summer water supplies. Viewing climate in the sense that it is a renewable natural resource appears to be a good way to assess its importance to the overall economy. Temperature One of the elements most commonly used to define climate is temperature. In Montana, where temperature variations are large both in time and space, it is necessary to view these variations against the background of an extremely mountainous country, ranging in elevations from about 1,800 feet above sea level where the Kootenai River enters Idaho to 12,799 feet at the summit of Granite Peak just North of Yellowstone Park. The Contentinental Divide has marked influence in several ways. Perhaps the most important and most dramatic effect is its shielding of the Columbia Basin portion of the State from most of the winter cold waves that visit Eastern Montana each year. In this sense the climate of Eastern 'Montana is classified as continental, while West of the Divide it is closer to a modified North Pacific Coast type. On the other hand, Eastern slopes experience warm "chinook (foehn)" winds sev- eral times each winter. On the West side of the Divide winters are not so cold, summers average cooler in most cases, and winds are generally lighter than on the East side. The lack of wind and the narrower, deeper valleys on the West • side result in cooler night-time temperatures during summer months. For example, Thompson Falls afternoon highs in July average about 88 degrees, 25 but it cools to an average early morning low of just under 50 degrees. The contrast between areas on both sides may be noted by choosing Glasgow on the East side, at about the same elevation and latitude, but in a much less sheltered valley, where July highs average 85 degrees, and the lows, 56 degrees. Annual average temperatures range from 35 degrees at West Yellowstone to about 48 degrees at several warmer locations, such as Big Timber, Thompson Falls, Halter Dam; and to warmer than 45 degrees over about half of the State. It would be noted that winter AVERAGE temperatures are generally not nearly as low as a fairly general impression has supposed them to be. In fact, winter averages over nearly all Montana are sev- eral degrees warmer than in the Dakotas, Minnesota, Northern Wisconsin, :nd com..re f.vor: • _th No t er 'ch' •an • thern W' -co in and similar areas. The primary differences are that "cold waver' extremes can be a little colder in some of Montana's mountain valleys, and a Montana winter's coldness is usually not very steady -- being interrupted by frequent relatively warm spells of several days in duration. Heating degree day requirements, an important weather measure to industry (as well as all who use heating equipment) range in Montana from 10,910 at the resort city West Yellowstone, to 6,656 at Thompson Falls and less than 7,000 in several fairly large valley areas on both sides of the Continental Divide. Annual heating requirements for most Montana cities • range from 7,000 to 8,500 degree days. Except in some of the higher mountain valleys, heating requirements in general run measurably lower than in areas of similar latitudes Eastward as far as the Great Lakes. Precipitation A second extremely important part of the climate resource is precip.ta- tion in all its forms. The mountainous country along both sides of the Continental Divide, including such ranges as Big and Little Belt, Crazy, Bridger, Highwood, Absarokee Mountains, as well as the many ridges West of the Continental Divide, supplies orographic lift sufficient to re- sult in these areas being the State's wettest. However, there are im- portant local lee side rain shadow effects, and the State's driest areas (although small in size) are found in parts of some sheltered valleys. Examples are found in Southeastern Sanders County, much of the DEER LODGE VALLEY, several valley bottoms near and South of Helena, and along the Wyoming border South of Billings, where some annual average totals are well below 12 inches. Conversely, the State's wettest sections are associated with mountain or hill locations. areas averaging 40 inches or more include the North- ern Rockies South about to Gibson Dam West of Great Falls, the BITTER- ROOT RANGE from Southwest of Libby to lower RAVALLI COUNTY. Winter snows on Western mountains have supported an increasing number of winter sports areas over the last 20 years or more. These resort areas have found snowfall sufficiently dependable from year to year to warrant quite an investment in tows, chair lifts, and other services. 26 Cloudiness - SuLehine As is the case with the climate variable discussed, Montana's topograph- ical complex of valleys and mountains has important effects on cloudi- ness and sunshine. In general, the Western and South Central mountain areas experience more cloudiness and less sunshine than the Eastern slopes and so-called plains sections. The most important exception to this pattern is found in Western Montana valleys, mainly in fall and winter seasons, with valley fog and low clouds forming during periods of otherwise clear sky and low wind movement. This phenomenon occurs in such valleys as the Clark Fork of the Columbia, Kootenai, and Flat- head several times each season and can persist for several days at a time while surrounding mountain ridges and passes are experiencing bright, clear weather. Wind Wind variations across the State are fairly large. From very low average wind speeds in much of the country West of the Continental Divide, fair- ly brisk wind country prevails along Eastern slopes. Some Western Montana valleys have average wind speeds of 6 mph or even a little less, reflecting the stagnant fog-stratus fall-winter condi- tion described previously in the Cloudiness section. The average wind speed in the Butte area, the economic center of the economic development • district, is only 7.4 mph in January; 8.2 mph in July and average for the year is only 8.1 mph. The winter warmth of "Chinook winds" is largely accounted for by its effectiveness in replacing the cold air mass, its dynamic warming as it moves downslope, and its inhibiting effect on the normal tendency to- ward formation Df inversions. Humidity The "Humidity" most commDnly used in this type of discussion of sens- ible climate elements actually is "relative humidity" defined as "the ratio of the actual vapor pressure (vapor content) of the air sample, to the saturation vapor pressure (vapor content) , or, roughly, the percentage derived from the actual water vapor divided by the maximum possible water vapor content, with 100 percent meaning saturation:' It is a difficult element to cover simply in summary form, but it should be noted that oppressive levels of relative humidity seldom oc- cur during Montana summers. In fact, in most of Western Montana, un- comfortable ccmhinati.ons of relative humidity and heat are practically unknown. S 27 • SUMMARY With largely "built-in" air-conditioning in late spring to early fall, Montana possesses an almost ideal climate, as a whole during the year's warmer half. Western mountain areas have warm afternoons and cool nights and oppressive heat is unknown. Even in the warmer sections during July nighttime cooling provides welcome relief. The winter cli- mate is not as cold as it is widely and often erroneously reputed to be. The climate permits a diversified agriculture, a wide range of outdoor work and recreation activities, and does much to enhance the attractiveness of the "Land of Shining Mountains", or the "Big Sky Country". 28 CLIMATE The subject of weather is always interesting to contemplate when the extreme weather myth of Montana is exploded. And myth it certainly has become. In seeking weather extremes to report to newspaper and television audiences, weathermen have grown accustomed to looking at Montana first. But as Al Smith, Governor of New York and candid- ate for President, used to say, "Let's look at the record". In the northern tier of counties in Montana there are two or three traditional "cold spots". Their recorded low temperatures, which only occasionally are the record for the nation, have given Montana the reputation for being America's "ice box". Because Montana is so big, being the fourth largest state in the Union, there are several weather belts extending through the state. The western section is in a comparatively mild belt. Obviously in a location in the north section of the country cold weather will be experienced but not necessarily the extremely frigid weather most people believe. Montanans have become somewhat sensitive to the subject of weather and heatedly defend the State's weather conditions. Many metropolitan cities of the United States endure colder weather than Montana cities. Yet the myth continues. So we publish the record to belie the myth of Montana's winters. With the advent of the snowmobile and the attraction of winter sports many people visit Montana in the winter now. Actually the winter is the best time to see this country because the majesty of its mountains is far more regal wearing a crown of snow. Travel conditions are no worse than driving through the Minnesota, Michigan, and New York areas. Temperature readings only tell part of the story. The dry clean air characteristic of Montana provides comfort from the cold where in areas where the humidity is high the cold becomes severe and pene- trating. The invigorating climate of Montana is more salubrious than the cloy- ing cold often felt in our southern states in the winter and the debilitating heat of their summers. People grow old in Montana only to retire in the warm regions of the country to die. Remember this engineering fact, "It costs more to air condition space than it does to heat it." Montana has its own natural air condition system. It becomes comfortably warm in the summer during the daytime and comfortably, blanket sleeping, cool at night. Jefferson County is located in a relatively high altitude and enjoys the maximum of comfortable dry air and reasonable extremes of temp- erature. It feels good to be a]_iveI 29 Ca matolo2ic& Data • Temperatures: Npmal Extremes Daily Daily Monthly Record Record Month Maximum Minimum Average Highest Lowest January 28.8 8.4 18.(2 63 -42 February 33.7 12.7 2 ,2 69 -41 March 42.5 20,2 31.4 73 -30 April 56.1_ 30.5 43.3 ___ __ -1Q May 65.8 39.9 52.9 _ 95 17 June 72.3 46.6 59.3 _ 102 31 July __U AA_A_ 5,x-3 68.4 103 36 August 82.2 50.1 66.2 _ 103 29 September .70.8 4.2 56.0 _ 96 6 October 58.8 32.3 45,6 84 -8 November 42.4 20.8 31.6 71_,_ -29 December 34.2 14„2 24.2 . 64 -40 Precipitation: Normal Maximum Minimum itnth_ Total Monthly Monthly January .47 3.75 0.03 February __&,42... 1.69 0.07 March .70 2.39 T April .83 2.86 0,01, May 1,56 6.67 0.g4 June 2.,23 5.63 049_ July 1.03 3.25 0.14. • 30 (Precipitation:) Normal Maximum r�onthl.y August .89 3.06 _ _—I___ September .95 _ 3.66 T October .66 2.78 _ 444 November .37 3.29 Q,Q2 December .53 4.64 _ T Average Yearly Precipitation total 12.84 inches. Average Yearly Snowfall total 53.7 inches. Average Daily Temperature Range During July and August: From: 82.6 degrees To: 51.1 degrees. `Lean Daily Minimum Temperatures: January. 8.4 _ degrees. July _ 52.3 degrees. Mean Daily Maximum Temperatures: January, 28,a degrees. July 84.4 degrees. Average length of growing season 118 days. Earliest Recorded Frost September 2 Latest Recorded Frost June 19'4; Number pf Dayfi Per Year Clear 99 _ Cloudy 144 Snow 18 Partly cloudy 122 Rain 49 Fog 3 Average Wind Speed: 7.9 A Relative Humidity Ayerage 6Q. Snowfall Averages Co' theQllowiUg. Months: October 3.6 January 2.9 November 6.9 February 0.0 December 8.2 March 9.3 Seasonal Average of Percent of„S una i : Winter 47 Spring__ _ Summer 71 Fall 56 Averagg Degree Temperature: Winter a Spring 42.5 Summer 64.4 Fell. 43.9 31 INCOME ANALYSIS Data obtained from the 1964 edition of County Business Patterns, published by the U. S. Department of Commerce, show the need for economic development in this area. There is no employer employing as many as 50 people and the only ones who employ from 20 to 49 people are the Hospital and the Montana State Training School respectively. By far the majority of people employed are working in retail trade. There is little employment that brings money into the County. Ser - vices and Dining are the big income employers in the County, and their employment is not very considerable. Note also, the per capita income. It lies below both the State and National average. More than 25% of all Jefferson County families earn less than 0,000 a year. Total personal income for Jefferson County in 1959 was estimated at 45,800,000. Total income from wages was estimated to be 0,200,000. Per capita income (total income divided by total population}.'-amounted to 41,350.00. This is mudilower than the 1959 State per capita income which was estimated to be 41,978.00, as well as the National per capita income of 42,027.00. It is also much lower than the 41,497.00 per capita income for the 12 Montana southwestern counties making up our multiple -county econ - omic development district. The median family income for 1960 was 4,4,989 as compared with the median income for the State as a whole of yv5,403. Obviously something has to be done to improve the earning capacity of these people and there is nothing in sight now that will give them the opportunity. S 32 TABLE I 410 Business Patterns -- 1965 Employment covered under F.I.C.A. (Mid-March pay period) Number Taxable of Payrolls No. of Reporting Units by Emyloyees (01000) Employment Size 1-3 4-7 8-19 20-49 Agriculture 0 0 0 0 Mining 19 23 2 1 Contract Construction 15 18 6 1 1 Manufacturing D D 3 1 Transportation & Public Utilities 18 2 1 Wholesale Trade D D 1 Retail Trade 94 54 28-. 2 Fine/19e, Ins. & Real '1st. D D 2 1 Services 71 36 11 2 "D" Information withheld to avoid disclosure of data of individual firms. Total personal income for Jefferson County in 1959 is estimated at 45,800,000. Total income from wages is estimated to be $3,200,000. Per capita income (total income divided by total population) amounted to 4,350. This is much lower than the 1959 state per capita income estim- ated at 41,978, or the national per capita income of 42,027. It is also much lower than the twg1ve southwestern counties making up our economic development district. The median family income for 1960 was '44,989 as compared to the median income for the state as a whole of 45,403. 25% of the families had incomes under 43,000 62% of the families had income from 43,000 to '9,999 13% of the families had incomes of 410,000 or over For the State of Montana: Median Under 43,000 to 410,000 and _.41.100 410.00Q UD 45,403 20.2% of 68.3% of 11.5% of families families families 410 32a • Agate Incomes 1959: (Jefferson County) Family income (836 families) Median family income 44,989 Number of families with income under 42,000 -- 140 or 16.7% Number of families with income from 42,000 to 43,000 -- 69 or 8.2% Median earnings by occupation: Male total earnings, Median 43,777 Female total earnings, Median 41,919 Total personal income ;6,800,000 Per Capita income 41,350 Total income from wages 43,200,000 • 33 • POPULATION 1960 Census 4,297 1965 Estimate 5,300 The population of Jefferson County in 1870, the first year the U. S. Census was taken of this area, was 1,531. By 1880 the number had grown to 2,464. The following ten years after the railroad was built, the population more than doubled and by 1890 more than 6,000 people were living within its boundaries. The 1890 count of 6,026 persons is the high point of Jefferson County's population. By 1900 it had declined to 5,330 and in the next ten years rose again to 5,601. During the next twenty years the population declined at a steady rate. In 1920 it was 5,203 and by 1930 had dropped to 4,133. Another population growth was experienced in the next decade and by 1940 the census of that year showed a population of 4,664 people. However, in the 1950 census there were 650 fewer people living in the County as the popula- tion at this time had again dropped to 4,014. Despite a migration loss of 21 people from 1950 to 1960, the popula- tion increased by 283 and the 1960 census reported 4,297 people living in the County. This was a 7.7% increase during this period but the increase for the State over a comparable time amounted to 14.7%. The population for 1965 by Sales Management Survey of Buying Power show that during the five years from 1960 to 1965, the population again increased by 26% for a new total estimated 5,300. Where thhe neop,1,e_ re Living: 1950 1960 1965 estimate Living in towns 73.2% 78.1% 80.1% Living on farms 26.8% 21.9% 19.9% Only 1.4% of the population is non-white. The non-white residents include 4 Negroes, 50 Indians and 7 of other races. The median age of all residents is 29.5 years. 34 • The marital status of the 1,614 males,14 years of age and over was in the 1960 Census: Married 787 Single 707 Widowed or divorced 120 The 1960 Census shows that of the 1,476 females, 14 years of age and over: Married 795 Single 475 Widowed or divorced 206 The 1960 Census report showed 2,060 people were living in the same house in which they were living in 1955. 545 were living in a different house but the same county, 1,094 were living in a different county but the same state, 195 were living in a different state, and 12 were abroad. In 1960: 36.9% were under 18 years of age 53.3% were 18 to 64 9.Sro were 65 years or over The fertility ratio was 406. People 18 years and older were 51.8% males. There were 1,081 households -- a 1.9% decrease from 1950 to 1960. 3.14 persons in each household. Population in group quarters -- 904 (21.8% of the total). • 35 Population by Age and Sex - 1960: Aye Group Male Female 10 to 14 years of age 245 264 15 to 19 218 163 20 to 24 124 120 25 to 39 375 339 40 to 49 294 285 50 to 64 339 301 65 and Over 211 208 Median Age 29.8 29.2 Place yf Wprk - 1960: All workers 14 years of age and over 1,238 Worked in County of residence 893 Worked outside County of residence 301 Place of work not reported 44 Social Charagt.9risti cs: Native parentage 3,320 white 3,271 Foreign or mixed parentage 839 white 826 Foreign born 138 white 138 Total native population ....4,159 Born in state of residence 2,871 Born in different state 1,122 Not reported 166 77.2% of total population are of native parentage. 67.8% born in State. 3.2% Foreign born. 1111 36 • Population by Co4nty Divisors: Boulder Division Total 2,603 Male 1,366 Female. 1,237 White 2,547 Negro 4 Other 52 Households Total 531 Non-white 8 Population 1,699 Whitehall Division Total 1,694 Male 836 Female . 858 White 1,689 Negro 0 Other 5 Households Total 550 Non-white 2 Population 1,694 Population_ of towns of 100 ponula_tj.on or over: 1940 1950 1960 Boulder 510 1,017 1,394 Whitehall 818 929 898 Clancy NA NA 230 Jefferson City NA NA 100 % Increase 1940 to 1960 - Boulder 173% % Increase 1940 to 1960 - Whitehall 9.8% • 37 • POPULATION AND RETAIL SALES The significance of retail sales can only be measured by comparison with population. In Table II both are shown. These figures were obtained from Sales Management Survey of Buying Power, perhaps the most authoritative source of retail and effective buying income data available. Because figures from former years were not available it was not pos- sible to make any comparisons with other years or projections for future years. Although the 1960 population was 4,297, Sales Management projects the 1965 population to 5,300, an increase of 23.3% over 1960. Jefferson County population totals have been irregular. If sufficient economic figures for previous years was available we would have been able to chart the reasons for differences in population. In Jefferson County more money was spent on food than on automobiles and more was expended on eating and drinking places than in gas sta- tions. This does not mean people own fewer cars per capita but they keep them longer and do not drive them as much. The County spent p3,518,000 in retail sales which was 80.0% of its effective buying income. Effective Buying Income is the balance of income subtracted from federal, state and local taxes. More than 300 separate calculations are required to perform all of the steps needed to measure income for each county and city. Of the 4,297 people living in Jefferson County in 1960, 78.1 percent lived in towns and only 21.9 percent resided on farms. The density of population is 2.6 persons per square mile. The County's large area of 1,654 square miles accounts for this relatively small popula- tion per square mile. The per capita effective buying income was 4'52,208 while the effective buying income per household was a8,359. This indicates that more than one member of the family was employed. • 38 TABLE II 1965 - Estimates Sales Management Survey of Buying Power Population increase 26% from 1960 5,300 % U. S. A .0027 Households 1,400 Urban Population ---- Total retail sales 0,518,000 % U. S. A 0013 Food $ 793,000 Eating & Drinking Places 406,000 General Merchandise 145,000 Apparel Furniture and Appliances 66,000 Automotive 733,000 Gas Stations.. 307,000 Lumber, Building and Hardware 461,000 Drug. 155,000 Sales Average Index Sales Activity 48 Buying Power 0022 Quality 81 Effective Buying Income and Cash Breakdown of Households, Effective buying income $11,703,000 % U. S. A 0025 Per Capita 2,208 Per Household 8,359 Percentage of Households jv Income Grano $ 0 to 2,499 25.3% 2,500 to 3,999 19.5 4,000 to 6,999 25.6 7,000 to 9,999 13.5 10,000 or over 16.1 38a • • • ••, . I • i..7. • • alIl•. . . •. • • 1 (I 1 • I • lill1 :f• I . . • RETAIL TRADE • The large number of retail stores in Jefferson County makes up an important segment of the County's economy. Retail establishments in 1963 employed an average of 103 people accounting for more than 19% of all non agricultural wage and salary workers. In addition, there were 56 active proprietors of small unincorporated firms. There must have been a considerable number of retail business failures and consolidations because the number of retail establish- ments in 1963 were 23 fewer than in 1958. Retail sales for 1963 were down 31.1% compared with 1958. It is difficult to trace this decline but the lack of housing in Boulder causes many of the administrative staff of the Montana State Training School to seek housing in Helena and commute to work. As commuters they do not spend much in Boulder but make most of their retail purchases in Helena. Lack of retail establishments would account for fewer retail sales and the loss of retail firms can only decrease retail sales. It is paradoxical that with an increase in population there should be declining retail sales but that is the situation in Jefferson County. In Table III the number of establishments and retail sales for Jefferson County in 1963 are shown. It may appear that the city of Helena has, strangely enough, become a bedroom for Boulder, a much smaller community. Traditionally the smaller community becomes the bedroom for the larger nearby city and as a result retail and service establishments are curtailed in the bedroom city. But here, the reverse is true. Not only is there a great deal of commuting to the smaller city but considerable re- tail buying has taken place in the "bedroom" city rather than in the community where the people work. If the City of Boulder expects to reverse this trend they will have to start with housing. This consititutes a problem also. It is almost impossible to build a house for rent in these days of high construction costs. An investor building homes has to get at least 1% per thousand dollars spent in building the houses as rent or he can't realize a profit on his investment. An average two bedroom home today costs a minimum of 415,000 to Q17,500 to build which would set the rental rate at 4150 to 0170 per month. Employees of the Montana State Training School cannot afford to pay this kind of rent. Neither can they afford to build apparently, so the problem remains unresolved. 39 TABLE III Retail Trade - 1963 Establishments In Jeffgrson.County, TOTAL 59 Total with payroll 43 Sales -All establishments SALES Sales total all establishment (41,000) 0,624 Sales total establishments with payroll 3,394 Payroll entire year 284 Payroll week-end Nov. 15th 5,960 Paid employees 103 Active proprietors of Unincorporated Businesses 56 Number of Est$h1ishments by Kind Number in County Sales 01,0000 Lumber, Building Materials and Hardware 5 494 General Mdse. Stores 3 120 Food Stores 7 833 Auto Dealers 5 715 Gas Service Stations 8 320 Apparel Accessory Stores 0 0 Furniture and Home Furnishings 1 D Eating and Drinking Places 21 406 Drug and Proprietory Stores 2 D Non-Store Retailers 2 D Other Retail Trade 5 492 uDu Information withheld to avoid disclosure of data of individual firms. • 39a WHOLESALE SALES A comparison between 1958 wholesale sales and 1963 is shown in Table IV. Although the number of wholesale firms only increased by one, wholesale sales jumped nearly 250% in 1963 over 1958. This marked increase in sales was probably accounted for by the Permente Cement Company who wholesales the cement products they manufacture in- stead of going through wholesale building material companies. Al- though they may market some of their production through building material companies the amount of their production that goes direct to the builders has vastly increased the amount of wholesale sales in Jefferson County. Where wholesale sales were 4530,000 in 1958, the 1963 total sales jumped to '92,477,000. The additional wholesale firm increased the yearly payroll from w4,00O to 470,000. The payroll of the week ending November 15, 1963 amounted to )1,384.00. Because figures for a similar payroll week was not available in 1958, no comparison can be made. Higher dollar value in 1958 accounts for some of this increase but does not reflect all the change indicated. The unavailability of data for many of the wholesale indicators prevents drawing any comparisons between 1958 and 1963. 40 1111 TABLE IV Wholesale Trade 1958 1963. Total number of establishments 6 7 Sales (41,000) 530 2,477 Payroll entire year (p1,000) 4 70 Paid employees, week ending Nov. 15th NA 10 Payroll, week ending Nov. 15th ($) NA 1,384 Active proprietors of unincorporated businesses 0 0 Merchant wholesalers 0 0 Establishments -- Number 0 0 Sales (41,000) 0 0 III, 40a SECT.a }SERVICES Table V lists the number of service establishments and their sales. Although there were 25 establishments in the County in 1963, only 9 were firms with payrolls. These firms paid out 464,000 in wages to 22 employees in 1963. 1963 receipts of the 25 service firms amounted to 4364,000. The es- tablishments with payrolls, however, accounted for 4300,000 of these receipts. There were 10 firms dealing in personal services in 1963. Included in personal services are establishments primarily engaged in providing services generally involving the care of the person or his apparel, such as barber and beauty shops, cleaning and pressing, and shoe repair shops among others. These personal service firms top the number of selected services and are followed by the number of Auto garages, and recreational services. There are five of each in the County. 41 TABLE V Selected Servi 1958 11.2 Total number establishments 25 25 Number with payroll 13 9 Receipts Total of all establishments (41,000) 355 364 Establishments with payroll (41,000) 277 300 1✓ayroll entire year (41,000) 81 64 Number of Hotels and Aotels 3 Number of personal services 10 Number of miscellaneous services 2 Number of auto services, garages 5 Number of miscellaneous repair services 4 Number of motion pictures 3 Number of recreation services 2 Number of active proprietors of unincorporated businesses 22 Number of paid employees 22 42 1110 BANKING An alert and progressive attitude characterizes the banking field in Jefferson County, and new as well as established business firms and industries are assured the utmost in cooperation, consistent with modern banking practice. There are two banks providing service for Jefferson County. In Boulder is the First Boulder Valley Bank and in Whitehall is The Whitehall State Bank. Both banks are members of the Federal Insurance Deposit Corp- oration and of the Federal Reserve System. These banks may participate with each other in making loans where the loan limit is exceeded or where for the purposes of good banking practice, it is better to involve more than one bank. The First Boulder Valley Bank was opened for business in January, 1967, and now has deposits of more than 4400,000. Because of its recent orgin no Bank Statement is available. • 43 Statement of Condition December 31, 1966 WHITEHALL STATE BANK Whitehall, Montana Member FIDC ASSETS Cash and Due from Banks $ 428,328.08 United States Obligations 866,165.80 Obligations of States & Political Subdivisions 303,045.46 Securities of Federal Agencies & Corporations 95,000.00 Other Loans and Discounts 1,059,796.58 Bank Premises, Furniture & Fixtures 12,275.88 Other assets 719.62 TOTAL ASSETS $2,765,391.42 LIABILITIES Demand Deposits $1,182,205.77 Time and Savings Deposits 778,442.23 Deposits of U. S. Government 17,303.02 Deposits of States and Political Subdivisions 531,977.78 Certified and Officer's checks, etc 5,773.39 Other Liabilities 37,534.57 TOTAL LIABILITIES. $2,553,236.76 Member Federal Reserve System OFFICERS: DIRECTORS: John J. Jardine, President John J. Jardine Mrs. Ruth Opie, Exec. Vice Pres. Mrs. Ruth Opie Harold Paazzola, Vice Pres. and Harold Pizzola Cashier Ted Vanover, Assistant Cashier Mks. Thelma Lindquist, Assistant Cashier 44 . oRGAMZATI ONS Whitehall: Service Cubs Rotary Volunteer Fire Department Community. Soc&a and Other Organ 'zations Veterans of Foreign Wars American Legion Whitehall Saddle Club Veterans Club Fraternal Lodges Masonic Lodge and Bodies Business O.raanizations Whitehall Chamber of Commerce Junior Chamber of Commerce Business & Professional Women Whitehall's claim to fame is in the famous people who called Whitehall home. These include: Chet Huntley of NBC's famous Huntley-Brinkley newscasting team. Shawn Davis, 1966 World's Champion Bareback Rider. Paul Hawkinl-s parents. Paul is the two-time National Dystrophy Poster Boy. (1966 and 1967) Annual Events in Whitehall include an annual Rodeo, Whitehall Festival Day and the 4-H and FFA Stock Sale. Boulder; Service Cl alb Rotary International Boulder Merchants Community, Social and Other Organizations Boy Scouts Girl Scouts 4-H Club Church Groups 45 . (Boulder:) Frgtgrnal Lodges Masonic Lodge Eastern Star Business Organizations Junior Chamber of Commerce Labor Uniong Carpenters Union State--Iinicipal & County Employees Union 46 CITY GOVERNMENT Boulder, County Spat, Jefferson Co ty Mayor: James Streib, elected two year term. Councilmen: (4) Fred L. Bell Milton Gilmer Ronald Faller William Shoquist Responsibilities of Councilmen: Streets Milton Gilmer Parks William Shoquist Police DepartmentRonald Fuller Fire Department Ronald Fuller Finance Fred L. Bell Water William Shoquist City Finances: (1966 Clerk's Annual Report to State Examiner) Mill Levy 60.00 mills Based on Valuation Assessed Valuation4978,711.00 Taxable Valuation267,051.00 General Obligation Bonds Sewer 85,000.00 Water 42,454.50 Fire 8,000.00 Bonded Indebtedness Revenue Bonds .. Sewer 35,000.00 Local Government Fees and Charges: Building permits 4 1.00 Water Connection 25.00 Dog License 1.00 and 03.00 Police Protection: One part time constable • 47 Police Department .2quipment: One radio equipped prowl car. Present jail capacity 6 Average jail occupancy 1 Curfew law enforced...Minors 10 P. M. Over past year crime rate has decreased. Fire Protection: One Fire Chief and 28 volunteers. Firemen required to take regular training course. Fire Station and Equipment: Fire Hall located on Second Street One 1966 Chevrolet Darley Pumper, 750 GPM There are 32 fire hydrants installed in the community which meet the National Board of Fire Underwriters specifications. Boulder has a National Board of Fire Underwriters Insurance rating of Class 7. All public buildings, schools, commercial and industrial facilities are checked by Fire Department personnel for potential fire hazards twice each year. Fire drills are held periodically in all public schools. Average annual fire loss: None during the last three yeare Refusa,Garbaga and Trash: Garbage and trash oollection on an individual fee basis once a week. Rates: Residential 4v4.00 per month Commercial cv10.00 per month Waste Disposal: A new sewer system is currently being installed. Maximum daily flowage capacity 85,000 gallons Rates: Residential units, average 46.00 per month 4110 Commercial units, average 412.00 per month 48 • Water: The capacity of the water system is 85,000 gallons per day. Water is obtained by pumps and stored in an 85,000 gallon storage tank. Rates: Residential unitsaverage 05.00 per month Commercial units average ;l2.00 per month There are no meters attached to measure consumption of water. Streets: Total number of paved streets 1/2 miles Total number of unpaved streets10 miles Type of paving blacktop There are no parking meters in use and no off street parking facilities. All streets are marked with street signs. All down- town areas and major traffic arteries are equipped with street lighting. A Mercury Type lamp is employed to provide street lighting. The City Maintenance equipment includes a grader. There is no snow removal equipment. The State Highway, which traverses the central business district is cleared of snow several times a day when required. • 49 TAXES, The total taxable valuation of Jefferson County was $6,606,001 in 1966. A breakdown of mill levies for the past five years: 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 City 54.00 54.00 54.00 60.00 60.00 Total School 52.48 63.57 60.36 60,82 62.22 County 35.62 36.59 32.57 32.32 33.26 State 8.00 8.25 6.35 9.00 5.50 TOTAL 150.10 162.41 153.28 162.14 160.98 The percent of assessment to actual value is 40%. Jefferson County has 030,846 of bonded indebtedness for schools. No new bond issues are being contemplated. The local tax revenue per capita is 6160.00. The percentage, by land area, of tax free property in Jefferson County, is 54.4%. Because so much of Jefferson County is tax free property the tax burden falls more heavily on that part that is subject to taxes. This is accounted for by the large areas of the County that are part of the Deer Lodge National Forest and the Helena National Forest. The Assessed Value of All Proertv:. In the last fiscal year the assessed value of all property amounted to $20,006,338 in Jefferson County. Assessed Value in Dollars for Land and improvements $3,951,049 City & town lots & improvements 1,675,093 Livestock 1,079,321 Personal property exclusive of livestock..., 6,012,558 Local property of Public Utilities 277,709 Utilities allocated by the State 6,788,175 Net Proceeds of Mines 222,433 Mills Levied Last Fiscal Year: For State purposes 5.50 For County purposes 33.26 For School purposes 62.22 For City of Boulder 60.00 Taxes Levied On Property Last Fiscal Year: By City of Boulder $ 35,805 Other than City 784,494 Total $820,299 50 mug TAX STRUCTURE Montana is considered to have a broad-based tax structure which over the years has proved to be a stable source of revenue. At the state level, there are relatively few ear-marked taxes which makes for a more business-like handling of state fiscal affairs than those states with revenue sources tied up for special purposes. Considering all revenue sources, approximately 58- percent of state and local revenue comes from the property tax in Montana. With in- creased collections from other sources of revenue, the percentage has declined slightly during the last few years. It is from this property tax that our county, city and public schools are largely supported. In Montana there is a high degree of local responsibility in county government. County commissioners, city councils and school boards, as well as county assessors and other officers are elected by the people and are responsible to the people. Montana has one of the soundest budget acts in the United States simply because it provides for a documentation of proposed spending needs by local officials tha: can be reviewed under law by local citizens. Except for inter-city public utilities, property is assessed locally by the county assessor. The law provides that the board of county commissioners sit as a county board of equalization from the third Monday in July to the second Monday in August to examine assessments and equalize the property in the county. Taxpayers who feel assess- ments are incorrect can then appear before the county commissioners and seek evaluation adjustments. If satisfaction is not obtained at a local level, Montana law provides that appeals can then be made to the State Board of Equalization and ultimately to the courts, if need be. The Montana law states that property shall be assessed at "full and true value", and also refers that property shall be assessed at full "cash value", but, as in most states, a reduction factor (approximately 40% in Montana) is used so that in reality only a small percentage of true value is used for mill levy purposes. One of the unique aspects of the Montana tax law is that property is divided into 8 classes for taxable purposes, as follows: Class 1: Net proceeds of mines and the value of the right to enter upon land for explor- ing for minerals 100% of assessed value. Class 2: Household goods and furniture; agricultural machinery and implements; vehicles of all kinds -- 20% of assessed value. • 51 Class 3: Livestock and poultry; stocks of merchandise; • commercial furniture and fixtures -- 33 1/3% of assessed value. Class 4: All lands and improvements; city and town lots and improvements, including trailers; manufac- turing and mining machinery, fixtures, and sup- plies -- 30% of assessed value. Class 5: Moneys and credits (except moneyed capital of banks) ; properties of rural electric coopera- tives; all unprocessed agricultural products on farm or in storage, except livestock and poultry --- 7% of assessed value. Class 6: Moneyed capital and shares of banks --- 30% of assessed value. Class 7: All new industrial property (including land, buildings, machinery, and fixtures) used by a new industry during the first three years of operation, not assessed prior to July 1, 1961 -- 7% of assessed value. Class 8: All property not included in the seven preceding classes 40% of assessed value. The following sample will serve to illustrate the method of levying taxes on property in Montana: The true value afac?10,000 house would be reduced to 40% of true value to reach an assessed value of 44,000, and this would be further reduced to 30% (Class 4) of assessed value to reach a taxable value of w1,200. The mill levy would then be imposed against the ,,,1,200 figure for tax purposes. In the final analysis, the mill levy is imposed against only 12% of the true value of the property. The above sample points out one of the peculiarities of Montana's tax structure, which is that high mill levies are placed against low valu- ations. Under a lair enacted in 1961, all new industry has the privilege of being taxed at a rate of only 7% of the assessed value for a period of three years, instead of at the usual 30% rate. New industry as defined by this act shall mean any person, corporation, firm, partnership, associa- tion, or other group which establishes a new plant or plants in this State for the operation of a new industrial endeavor, as distinguished from a mere expansion, reorganization, or merger of an existing industry or industries. 52 COMMUNICATIONS Radio Radio stations in Helena and Butte serve the Jefferson County area. Radio Stations received in the area are: CITty Call Letters Wattage Kilocycles Hours Received Butte KXLF 5,000 1,370 18 Butte KBOW 5,000 550 18 Helena KCAP 1,000 1,240 18 Television Television stations normally received by local residents: Channel Call Letters City Network Hours Received 4 KXLF Butte All 18 12 KXLJ Helena All 18 Telegraph Telegraph service is provided for by Helena. Wires may be placed by telephone twenty four hours a day. Telephone Telephones in use in Jefferson County: gaez Residential Commercial-Industrial 1950 114 118 1960 191 171 1966 270 226 Telephone Rates: Residential Private Line $4.05 per month Commercial Private Line 0.75 per month Extension Phone Charge Residential4 .90 per month Business 41.75 per month A centralized automatic message accounting system called "CAMA" is employed by the Telephone Company for billing. 53 111, Newspaper, The Boulder Montana newspaper is published weekly in Boulder and the Jefferson Valley News, also a weekly, is published in Whitehall. Both papers are circulated throughout the County. 54 TRANSPORTATION Rail The Northern Pacific Railroad provides main line rail service to Whitehall and operates a branch line to Boulder. Its terminal points are St. Paul, Minnesota and Seattle, Washington. There are local offices in both Whitehall and Boulder. The Northern Pacific Railroad connects at Butte with the Union Pacific, Great Northern, Butte Anaconda and Pacific and Milwaukee Roads. A ticket office and small warehouse is located in Boulder and an office and warehouse in Whitehall. The freight facilities in Whitehall include docks, ramps, team tracks, freight warehousing for LCL shipments, freight pick up and delivery service and trap car service. In Boulder there are docks for cattle and ramps, LCL warehousing and freight pick up and delivery service. Local freight forwarding service is available at Butte. Several tracts suitable for industry are available in both Whitehall and Boulder on the railroad. Anuroximate carload del very time to selected cities: City Tige in Days, New York 5 Chicago 3 Minneapolis - St. Paul 2 Omaha 3 Dallas 5 Denver 4 Salt Lake City 2 Seattle 2 Portland 2 Los Angeles 5 San Francisco 4 Phoenix 5 Billings 2 Motor Transport The Northern Pacific Transport Company, home based in Billings, provides trucking service to the Jefferson County area with connections at Missoula, Butte and Billings with all other common carriers. The County is also served by the United Buckingham, and Garrett Freight Lines. The Dorris Molitor Company, home based in Boulder provides non-scheduled service. Terminal points for trucks serving the County are Butte, Helena, Whitehall and Billings, Freight loading facilities in both Whitehall and Boulder are available. Freight forwarding service is available at all freight depots. All • 55 . carriers provide freight pick up and delivery service. Commercial Bus Ser ce The Intermountain Transportation Company provides excellent bus service to the western half of Montana with connecting routes to any part of America from Boulder. Greyhound provides bus service from both Whitehall and Boulder. Both Bus Companies have two scheduled busses arriving and two leav- ing Boulder each day. Bus Lines are often confused as carrying passengers only. This is not the case. Many and variable types of express are carried by the Intermountain Transportation Company, providing quick and economical express service. With large freight bays underslung below the passen- ger cavity the Company is able to provide the quickest possible service at all points along its route. Air There is located in Whitehall an intermediate air field providing service for small private and business airplanes. The Federal Aviation Agency operates a Systems Maintenance Sector at the airfield. 56 COUNTY SERVICES S Sheriff George Paradise Number of deputies 2 Present Jail Capacity 10 Average Jail Occupancy 3 Number of Montana State Highway Patrolmen 1 stationed in Whitehall (Boulder will be assign- ed a State Patrolman in the next few months) There has been no measurable change in the crime rate over the past year. Jefferson County maintains an ambulance service. 57 UTILITIES Electric Paler Electric Power is supplied by the Montana Power Company. Its source of power is both hydroelectrically and steam generated. The power lines are inter-connected with Idaho Power, Utah Power and Light, Washington Water Power and Bonneville Power Administration. This is all part of the Northwest Power Pool. Power generation capacity exceeds 500,000 KVA. There are no seasonal restrictions. Rates and other information may be obtained by contacting either Mr. Dix C. Shevalier, Division Manager, Montana Power Company, in Helena, or Mr. Richard Setterstrom, Industrial Engineer, Montana Power Company, Butte, Montana. Natural Gas Natural Gas is also supplied by the Montana Power Company. The Company derives its gas from natural gas wells in the Cut Bank area. Gas is also obtained from other Northern Montana and Canadian gas fields. The capacity of the system is not fixed and can be easily expanded as the demand increases. Non-interruptible contracts for gas are available although a more economical rate may be obtained by an interruptible contract. Experience rates have shown that it is rare indeed, that the supply of gas for manufacturing or processing industry is ever inter- rupted. There are no normal seasonal restrictions. Natural Gas Q,p.ality Percentage of Methane 92.20% Ethane 1.83% Propane 0.55% Carbon Dioxide 0.99% Nitrogen 4.33% Hydrocarbons 0.10% Specific Gravity 0.63% Pressure maintained, at distribution system level at Boulder, elevation 4,907 feet above sea level and Whitehall, 4,360 feet above sea level, is 20 PSIG at Gate Station. Whitehall Area Gas Meters: Commerc ate, Industrial Residential 1950 12 1 60 1955 70 4 307 1960 71 5 344 1966 73 5 392 The City of Boulder did not get natural gas until September, 1962. 58 Boulder Area Gas Meters: CQgMgrcial Industrial. Residential December, 1963 19 2 106 January, 1967 36 3 182 Approximate Fuel Usage by type of fuel: (rural and city -- Boulder) Commercial IncugtriaL Residential Fuel Oil 10% -- 25% Natural Gas 90% 100% 50% Because Boulder came on the system in 1962, fuel usage figures are limited. • 59 Boulder Area Gas Meters: Commercial Ind4strial Residential December, 1963 19 2 106 January, 1967 36 3 1$2 Approximate Fuel Usage by type of fuel: (rural and city - Boulder) Commercial Industrial Residential Fuel Oil 10% -- 25% Natural Gas 90% 100% 50% Because Boulder came on the system in 1962, fuel usage figures are limited. i 59 A LB R T A •1. - THE ALBERTA 1358 TRUNK LINE PENDANT DOREILLE OCMPANY LIMITED FIELD MANYBERRIES 1 SMITH COULE MPpA„MOMTAt�• 1 l FIELD CpN t•a5 COMRSfIY uMITEO 1 ` '• A C t 3600}^P R • CNNPOIPN-YOHTPN ANAMANMONTPNP •, PIPE LINE n.TX:y PIK LINE COMPANY- r - «.Bggv STORAGE FIIELD ADECN FIELD 4, FIELD 4 G' CFIELD ¢ 6 `EAST KEITH FIELD • +o =K7 ST O I L SAGE EY 1 24fgp0 •tr OpO UTM FIELD P ( 4 CUT BANK J y =. s ,s,.•p O Jp CHINOOK b u.I.COMPRESSOR NOI .WEST GLACIER I.41fIg I•gr n .F !' ,tp d, HA'LEM 1990 x.P. F LD ALUM NUM ^BROWNING IE TEIATAO • R, • . I WHITEFISH _ f A EAST GLACIER-, S�Ry A„5„,, ,sn COMPRESSOR CHESTER -FT.BELKNAP A.I COLUMBIA FALLS ; 4 • { 250 IZr 11201Y BOWES FIELD 4 NC VALIER=i r I CALISPEII .4NRAD \ ....COMPRESSOR NOE ' SS00 H.P. \ b 1 CHOTEA'I• p FAIRFIELD @,„,f" G i I AUGUSTA GREAT FALLS '•� ML.COMPRESSOR ea 3 ,' 1500 HP '. 4�pP M 0 $ N T A 1V \ g ,pi has ft... LEwI TOWN •` .4-„..,4•„...... -WOLF CREEK HEATH 4 M1lA.i _ LEGEND LINTON (../). The Montana POwlr Lpmpony System •-J- p- OautINA7ND JUDITH �A1pI�TANA ELLISTON GAP Nan-AlfiliAle9 Compinlee '6 N F510DPHATE HALL HELENA" EAST HELENA • City Gale Sales ■ TEVENSVILLE 'RISON - PERMANENTE Retail De Sales S VICTOR MAAVILL ppEE LANCY M°RL ; CunPreseor Stations Lr We- i CNAPRESSS R DEER LODGE HELENA 3RVALLIS 2000 H P. - JEFFERSON CITY SHAWMUT v o • o m m ., w e HAMILTON PHILLIPSBURG GALEN., ._-_ „r 4 . WARM SPRINGS'- BOULDER BIG COULEE`J ANACONDA • 4,, FIELD I OPPORTU,Us ,_ ♦ ..CKER • SILVER BOW „ •BUTTE TRIDENT VICTOR THREE NORTH LAKE BASIN FIELD •� CHEMICAL WHITEHAL FORKS_' - LOGAN BIG T BER J •T-.. , «^ ANMATTAN ( e STORAGE -BELGRADE GREYCLIFF • M f /\--) SILVER STAR AMSTERDAM 702EMAN CHURCHILL I (,- a UVINGSTOR .CODAS • T `" TWIN BRIDGE- COMPRESSOR ( NP 560 ABSAROKEE D. SHERIDAN ke ,ROBERTS ` ` . ', DILLON « .'Y CREEK -FIELD RED LODGE- TRI-STATE , 4 6 ) MINERALS - WARRENS fl 1_-.—.-W.._.Y —O— M 1 N G .� ` I --- THE MONTANA POWER COMPANY el'' I AND SUBSIDIARIES. C) •\;r,� �_ ( GAS SYSTEM 1453I-D, 60 II 4[-------------- -- ----�-- _C....1-1----- - A . p 11 w rrt•.•••el, —. s A D -- - _ A -- .................. •-------- --- '-- 2 -,:;..-,-r- r 1 ) r\ eo..OwwAOLU wN,x-' II r /.eaai ,. .L17,a.T._--1191!_--..1 4 _ _�LL9.�..ww+aw i• 1 1- I. a NAT I NA i•s t-, c•If rf t. '' I 1/. . I I r� •, iL- a ar �ti--,.•___ •\ ■1-EL1.v.J".� 1- \.., —._�_�-_�'J w.l 1 �w .wtYRtw LI \( I - cwusnLL ;..wn.�e •,,, - 1 I J_-- r a ,� E. - • 'y-ri _f l wv ww , ______ I lag& 1_ I e I .w. rE.. 4 46 f� e ic ill° ...1 INl . I wu.a 7 1 7 C �° J A yy ,ter 1_. f--- Id.i 9I� .�,� .. �� �ws'°�w 1 r u ,, . 'w,STOWN �I ril '�J♦\ 11., IL .ril� p.wN,. •• `_'-) .orL.lw 1��....'C'L �1s/L rw w I. .._a 4. +f mss, '„ -j t'"'"-- - \,,,•4 �/..f 4J22VTh. ..�j j 444:** 11 / a " .LL �� ma Elsa p ♦ wY J{e. 4� i• •� - - II II C ll 1111a-r r ` _•,���4 .•--� • •r.w v.-el..., -..._�"�,'' II,f� �r I au.r�. ,�_1.......6. •twwr.. �// , Prn i. 1- .. . 1 rL \� Ln r'1 l-_�yy �,�Ir1.. wwNCe ��. if .I � =�, I EM.w �_ fMlr. OO,nM.wn.F�es( t E1 �4.1 i � ,� Arun. s , I , j :;1 „ 1 ''.-.�✓Kwp.wT F , y ` or•I Uw9Hpw I ...,.. •"-f r'' _ I-�. D ..ri Y, \� • • Mrarm J / Mlv• w..[.a' J J •I /'La •if rJ •:.,r...w... 1/ :J {/r ',••••• \ r r GR[AT vw1 • 1 1 ` •.m wu► . •.i,wMlr I i .; �LVNTww_ '.: 11� j -�• • { •� • \._• • .IL wn I I L. I MYfT10• �f ��• c- �� w rr.4. 1 �w,csc ••ter _,�+ ' �� •"I�,o,. /M-- fi.wa] g lF A--- .-1 I 7 -a...;s4'.1.',--:_,:1;,,,,:s, dM+»1t" I 1_ - wEE'Q--�- R --------- L r• •�� PLa. .,TTc rum J—G 1`tlr�aa Natso.° TEL L man. ST O N 5' w Y 0 Y 1 N THEgTRICMONTANA GAS TRANSM�ISS ON SYSTEMS COMPANY MAP s. 19 4 IP sn 1' b j1 NA I O N A L _ or �,'- >>,t\ 9CZLE III MME a • � „,� ,. ELECIl<74 CAS GENERAL OWNERSHIP 4.r . —Z 2 Mf,l,;•'"'.-. CEII MEI ICOIUTT : L...Iw. N111Mtdt AM LW ■-Nn Un CO LUs 4 °� `_ fay ++ P A C near ......"...a ,, snnw 0-0.11.11000901 NM ,/ y L 1. r."-- - NW•Igla TPA/41 -�OUA*OIIMG fl1so • C�.,1'.." f%SE, • SC.LE Ir LILED r�J.l. f�`1 1 .IIN.I< ..It..r r.l.r rw.,-+,ar.F.lr •�W w111Wlllr Nln mow,rWp<i-u axs.,.c•.• Lrl ^�...... 1 - j"O A N•s0 `e'. •�'� r..«a.N-..•.rl«..w, ® a rrt> I It r1.o.-wnn S-NILeue mono, - •-e.o..., •!- i j "t •,�,,, I."---I ,r_.�....«...... ou.ewwnwo$T& swat-maws _--(1.rrsNe - D'M^GNa E . J ..,rr....••••••••••.666 a.wr,., own*MOM r,,.„IC wilts &1 REV :.' �.� .,t� I 1 .. «I.� 1.________________ LEGEND - 17411 = K w 62 • LIBRARY SERVICES Because of its scattered population there is no library in the County. Library services are provided, however, by the State supported Book- mobile which visits the County's communities once each month. The facilities of the Helena Library is extended to the residents of the County. The Montana State Library is available also. University libraries in Butte, Bozeman and Missoula are available to Jefferson County residents. 62 POSTAL SERVICES Both Boulder and Whitehall have second class post offices serving an area of approximately 325 square miles. Annual Postal Receipts; The record only goes back to 1960. Boulder: 1960 0 9,575 1966 14,464 Whitehall: 1960 11,956 1966 24,146 The Boulder post office serves most of their patrons with Star Routes which extends for 72 miles. Whitehall patrons are served by R.F.D. Routes and post office boxes. Boulder Post Office schedule for regular mail: Outgoing: 5:55 P. M. 11;25 A. M. 4:10 A. M. Incoming: 2:55 A. M. 9:15 A. M. Whitehall Post Office schedule for regular mail: Outgoing: 8:00 A. M. All directions 9:00 A. M. East only 10:00 A. M. Butte, Branch, Dillon 3:00 P. M. West only 5:00 P. M. All directions Incoming: 8:00 A. M. All directions 9:00 A. M. West 11:15 A. M. East 11:30 A. M. Butte 3:45 P. M. East 63 EDUCATION There are six school districts in Jefferson County. The name of the school, its location and enrollment are as follows: Name Location Enrollment Clancy Elementary Clancy 107 Whitehall Elementary Whitehall 436 Whitehall High School Whitehall 200 Basin Elementary School Basin 36 Boulder Elementary School Boulder 180 Jefferson County High School Boulder 133 Cardwell Elementary School Cardwell 60 Montana City Elementary 9 miles south of Helena 18 The number of students per teacher: School Number o students per teacher Clancy 21 Whitehall Elementary 24 Whitehall High School 16 Basin elementary 18 Boulder Elementary 23 Cardwell 20 Montana City Elementary 18 Jefferson County High School 16 The number of high school graduates in: 1964 1965 1966 1967 52 67 63 70 The average salary for teachers in the elementary schools is 5,286. The average salary for senior high school teachers is ca6,236. The Boulder and Whitehall High Schools are members of the Northwest Accrediting Association. Schools in the County open around September 1st and close about May 31st. The County school systems have active Parent Teachers Associations. The Boulder School Board elects 7 members in Boulder and Whitehall elects 5 and 4 from the outlying area. They all serve terms of three years each. They hold meetings once a month in the school. In matters of urgency they meet more often. It is estimated that about 25% of Jefferson County High School graduates continue to live and work in their hometowns. s 64 1960: Persons 5 to 34 years of age in school (21.3 percent of total population) 917 Kindergarten (4.2 percent of school population) 39 Elementary (64.9 percent of school population) 596 High School (28.1 percent of school population) 258 College or Professional (2.6 percent of school population) 24 Enrolled in School by years: 14 and 15 years of age 147 16 and 17 years of age 126 18 and 19 years of age 20 Of those 25 years and older in the County, 213 or 17.5 percent of the 1,216 males have graduated from high school, and 259 or 22.7 percent of the 1,137 females are high school graduates. Hu h Schoo Graduates: Media Years Cglnplated: Males 213 8.9 Females 259 10.2 College Graduates: Males 69 Females 79 4110 65 CHURCHES Saint Catherine Catholic Church in Boulder and Saint Teresa's Catholic Church in Whitehall with a combined membership of 765, representing about 20% of the County population, provides many religious education programs on the Elementary and High School levels. In Boulder, St. Catherine Catholic Church provides services and religious instruc- tion for the Montana State Training School. St. Teresa's Catholic Church has a membership of approximately 450 in Whitehall and St. Catherine Catholic Church in Boulder has a member- ship of approximately 315. There are no Catholic Parochial Schools in Jefferson County. Many dinners, socials and outings are sponsored by both Catholic Churches as a minor part of the religious program. Dances and other social programs, as part of the religious organizational activities for young people, are sponsored by the Catholic Churches as well as other programs to encourage fuller participation in school and community activities. There is a Catholic Church in Basin but it operates under the Boulder Parish. There are eleven Protestant Churches in Jefferson County with an approximate total membership of 677. Seven of these Churches are in the Whitehall area and four are in the Boulder area. The Protestant Churches provide Sunday School classes for all ages and sponsor Junior and Senior High School Youth Groups. The Protestant Churches are: In Whitehall: Members Jefferson Valley Baptist 50 Christian Church 75 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints 145 Lutheran 40 St. Paul's Methodist 90 Reorganized Latter Day Saints 30 Cardwell Community Church 60 In Boulder: Methodist Church 77 Seventh Day Adventist Church 25 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints 30 Lutheran 55 66 HEALTH AND IEDICAL The Montana State Training School and Hospital provides medical ser- vices for Boulder. The hospital has a capacity of 61 patients and its occupancy ratio is 70%. The Training School and hospital care for mentally retarded patients. There are three doctors in the community and one consulting physician. There are 6 Registered Graduate Nurses and 3 Registered Practical Nurses. The hospital employees 36 people. In the hospital there is one private room, one emergency facility, one operating room, one laboratory, X-Ray, Basal Metabolism and electro- cardiograph facilities. In addition there is a Deep Heat Therapy unit. The hospital operates an ambulance service. The ratio of physicians to population in Boulder is one doctor for 1,395 people. The ratio of hospital beds is 1 to 23. A full time medical laboratory is available in St. Peters Hospital located in Helena about 20 miles away. There is one Doctor who is a General Practioner in Whitehall and one Den tint_ The ratio of physicians to population in Whitehall is 1 to 898. 67 111/ RECREATION ION With much of its land area in forests and mountain peaks and slopes, Jefferson County has an enormous recreational potential. Numerous lakes and streams provide "Blue Ribbon" fishing and the forests and slopes harbor large numbers of game animals. The larger lakes per- mit boating, swimming and water skiing on crystal clear waters. The avid "rock hound" has a plethora of exciting rock samples to choose from and the camera enthusiast can point his camera at hundreds of beautiful targets. The advent of the popular "snowmobile" puts far reaches of virgin country in reach of the more adventurous. Places formerly inaccessible by any other means are laid open to the sputtering snow machines. Hot springs abound in the area„ Old mine shafts have become the Mecca of the rheumatic and arthritic sufferers. Although doctors attach no claim to their curative powers many victims of these diseases find relief and comfort from visits to the mine shafts advertising the proximity of radium. The Diamond "S" Ranchotel in Boulder caters to these people, for in addition to curative mines, the hotel features a hot springs plunge and steam baths. The large rambling hotel has been the scene of many "miracle cures". People frequently coming to the hotel walking on crutches to ease their rheumatic and arthritic pains, throw them away after a series of visits to the mine shafts and the soothing relief of the hot springs plunge and steam baths. Many sufferers re- turn annually to the hotel to find relief from their infirmities. The Diamond "S" Ranchotel features a distinctive cusine as well as a restful atmosphere. There is much to do within a short distance of the hotel to provide outdoor activities for the healthy companions of the afflicted. In the area around Whitehall excellent fishing is available. In these waters lurk fighting fish of several species including Rainbow Trout, German Browns, Lock Levan, Silverside Salmon, White Fish, Perch and the rare, elusive Golden Trout. The Lewis and Clark Caverns are located in Jefferson County. This popular extravagance of nature was first discovered by the Lewis and Clark expedition and was described in their journal. The Caverns and environs have been made into a State Park which has become one of the most visited features in the Mountain West. A tour of the caverns begins with a narrow gauge train ride up a slope so steep the chairs on the cars are tilted at a 45 degree angle to keep the passengers upright. While riding this open air train sweeping vistas of mountain beauty become revealed. Then a walk through the most fantastic series of caverns, made even more beautiful • 68 111/ by the wonderous stalactites, long tapering formations hanging from the roof of the caverns which are produced by continuous watery deposits containing certain minerals especially calcium carbonate. Rising to meet them, often fusing with them to form a column, the counterpart of the stalactite, the cylindrical or conical form of the stalagmite erupts from the floor of the cavern slowly building up over the ages. Many fantastic and beautiful encrustations, some form- ing caricatures of famous features, are spotlighted by an ingenious lighting system. A walk through the caverns accompanied by a State employed guide is a never-to-be-forgotten experience. Ghost Towns: Montana's ghost towns, both romantically and historically rate high on the Treasure State's list of attractions. There is a certain air of mystery and adventure in seeking out and exploring these once- thriving towns which poured billions of dollars into the nation's coffers. Many of these camps are now just a few decayed scraps of wood, weed- topped placers and a few odd pieces of crude mining equipment. But, surprisingly enough, some appear almost-ready-to-live-in towns from which people just walked away. Elkhorn, a few miles from Boulder, still has a lot to see. Elkhorn started in 1872 and sent out 032 million in gold and silver. The townsite is more than a mile high, and its saloons still show bullet holes from 75-year-old arguments. Nearby Elkhorn Peak, with its glistening white marble cliffs, stretches 9,500 feet in the air. Any visit to Jefferson County should include a trip to the old Elkhorn ghost town. Yet with all these attractions, Jefferson County has not become the tourist haven it should. Promotion of these natural wonders has not kept pace with other scenic and wonderful arts of nature in the Mountain West, which command a much larger share of advertising and promotion money. Visiting Jefferson County is not a "one time" thing. People come back time after time to enjoy more leisurely the restful and zestful attractions that are not yet too well known. Recreation for Jefferson County promises an increased and continuing aid to its economy. It must be promoted more. Recreational Development Possibilities in_Jeffe • C. _.ct : Recreational development possibilities in Jefferson County offer a wide ranging choice of feasible projects. Nature's abundant recreational attributes and natural setting is evident throughout the area. Little has been done, however, to exploit these opportunities. 69 1111 Summertime recreational attractions appear to be the first to be attempted as most of the facilities needed will serve dual purposes and apply at other times of the year as well. The County has a number of lakes and streams available for use by the public. Accessibility to these waters varies from locations adjacent to main traveled paved highways to use of trails in the forested vastness of its massive national forest regions. Although many natural summertime assets are located in the County, other facilities are necessary to attract tourists. These facilities include establishment of new restaurants, motels, lodges, packing outfitters and guides and camping areas. Boats and sporting goods businesses seem to have a good potential too. These facilities would hold present tourists in the area for longer periods of time and attract additional people. Motels and lodges, along with good restaurants, cafes and construction of several hundred more camping units in the County's more attractive regions would greatly facilitate growth of tourism. Improvement of access roads into outlying areas is also needed for the County to realize a reasonable percentage of the known potential. The Z-T Ski Run, 16 miles west of Whitehall on U. S. Highway No. 10, needs to improve the access road to the ski area. The operator of the Ski Lift is well aware of this need but has been unable to obtain the financing to effect it. He should be granted the assistance of all those who can help to more fully develop his popular ski facility. The venerable Diamond "S" Ranchotel is interested in developing more tourist attractions in its area. Help in this development should be accorded to this well established business. There are other existing attractions that must be developed and ex- ploited to help the economy of the County. Facilities developed for summer activities could also provide for the hunting season of big game which includes deer, elk, moose, sheep and bear. Watmfowl are also plentiful to provide a greater variety of interest to the sportsman and tourist. Pack trips from dude ranches into the vast National and State Forests for game and fish as well as pleasure could be exploited. In addition to tourist and recreational development there is a wealth of historical background in the old mining camps. Exciting tourist attractions could be developed by exploiting the famous ghost towns and celebrated gold camps. In these places fortunes were won and lost by frenzied miners and many artifacts of their life in gold camps remain. These may be more easily promoted than some of the other tourist attractions in the County. Proper promotion, advertising and directional signs to these abandoned pioneer communities would bring • a new influx of tourism. 70 The added access roads built for logging activities will no doubt increase the number of people entering the vast recreational areas of the forest, heretofore accessible only by horseback or hiking. This would lead to more trailer and family parking facilities. Camping, hiking or horseback is a never-to-be-forgotten experience. Jefferson County is one of the seven counties making up the "Magic- land" area that inspires and delights tourists, nature lovers, rugged hikers, fishermen, hunters and the casual sightseer who wants to drive comfortably over excellent highways drinking in the beauty of the County in quick kaleidoscopic panoramas of nature's most q'ec- tacular scenery. The most comprehensive study of outdoor recreation in the United States was completed by the Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission (ORRRC) in 1962. The Commission had three main purposes: (1) to determine the outdoor recreation wants and needs of Americans in 1960, 1976 and finally the year 2000; (2) to determine the recre- ation resources of the country available to satisfy those needs in 1960, 1976 and 2000; and (3) to make recommendations to ensure that these needs are met. The ORRRC final report was supported by 27 in- dividual studies covering a variety of topics related to outdoor re- creation. Because many trends affecting outdoor recreation in the U. S. are also pertinent to Montana, we believe the projection could be extended to Jefferson County. Factors Affecting the Present U. S. Demand for Outdoor Recreation In general, the personal characteristics of an individual determine the degree to which he participates in outdoor recreation. The ORRRC study cited the following factors as being of major importance: Age_ of part ici2ants. As would be expected, the older a person is, the less he tends to engage in outdoor activities. Although the more ac- tive pursuits such as skiing, cycling, and swimming, decline more with older groups, others such as sightseeing and walking for pleasure, often last a lifetime. Income of participants. In general, participation in outdoor activi- ties increases with income, a fact to be anticipated for those activi- ties requiring significant amounts of money and time such as boating, camping and horseback riding. Rather surprisingly, however, upper income groups also do the most walking. :Education of participants. As with income, the more education an individual has, the more he participates in outdoor recreation. This is especially notable for swimming, playing games, sightseeing walking, and driving for pleasure; it is not pertinent to most other outdoor activities. 71 Occupation of participants. Although related to income and education, the occupation of an individual has an important affect on the degree to which he takes part in outdoor recreation, perhaps primarily due to the amount of paid vacation he receives. Farm workers enjoy the least recreation; professional people, the most. Self-employed individuals and their wives participate less than others, probably because of the absence of paid vacations. De:ree to which families may participate to:ether. Although men parti- cipa e in hunting an. fis 'ng far more t an women, other activities such as swimming, driving and picnicking, women participate as much or more than men. Families having children at home seek activities in which the entire family can share; a majority of American families in- dicate that the whole family enjoys at least two of the same outdoor activities. Re ion of U. S. in which participants live. Although there is not muc i Terence in t1 total amount of recreation an individual would take part in if he lived in different regions of the country, there is considerable difference in the kinds of activities. For example: people in the Northeast participate more in swimming, walking and winter sports; in the North Central States, more in boating; in the South, more in fishing and hunting; and in the West, more in outdoor games, picnicking, camping, hiking, horseback riding, and sightseeing. Opportunities to participate. Ease of access to the natural or man- made facilities required for the outdoor activity is also a signifi- cant determinant of the tendency to participate. Thus, suburbanites and people who live in the country take part in these recreational pursuits more than city dwellers. Factors Affectin: the Future U. S. Demand for Outdoor Recreation Factors Tending to Increase the Demand. A variety of factors will probably cause the demand for outdoor recreation to increase through the years 1976 and 2000, the years for which projections were made by the ORRRC. Increase in disposable income. Because many recreational activities require the expenditure of money, the nationts disposable income is often taken as a measure of its ability to buy goods and service. Disposable consumer income (054 million in 1960) is expected to double by 1976 and quadruple by 2000. Thus, more money will be avail- able to Americans for recreation expenditures. Increase in higher-income fannies. The distribution of income will also favor recreational expenditures. In terms of constant 1959 dol- lars, 14 percent of the consumer units had more than 410,000 income in 1960; 40 percent and 60 percent will have this income by 1976 and 2000, respectively. Such affluence will permit many additional fam- ilies to participate in the more expensive activities from which their !Ili ?'4 incomes excludes them at present. The importance of this is illustrated by data for 1961 on mean expenditures on vacation trips as related to family incomes, 00 per trip for families with incomes under 0,000 per year, to 4)260 and 4610 for families with annual incomes from 010,000 to 014.,000 and over Sal5,000, respectively. Increase in leisure time. In the future, there will be more leisure time available for outdoor recreation. This is due to several causes: (1) an increase in the length of annual paid vacations and the number of paid holidays, (2) a decline in the number of hours worked per week, and (3) earlier retirement coupled with longer life-spans. In 1960 the standard scheduled work week for the entire industrial work force aver- aged 39 hours, in 1976 it is estimated to be 36 hours, and by 2000, 32 hours. In recent years, longer paid vacations have given rise to an increasingly important phenomenon, multiple vacations. In 1964, about one-fifth of the American families took two or more vacations. About 57 percent of all families had atleast one vacation, but 78 percent of those families with incomes over 010,000 vacationed at least twice. Increase_ Ln mobility. To participate in many outdoor activities, ind- ividuals must be able to travel to the recreational areas. Americans, already the most mobile people on earth, will enjoy even greater mobi- lity. For example, by 1976 the number of passenger cars registered is expected to increase by 80 percent over the 1959 level; and by 2000 about 80 percent over the 1976 levell More automobiles, coupled with more and better superhighways and jet planes, will make many parts of the country accessible to more people than ever before. Factors Tending to Decease the Demand. Although the earlier factors stimulating the demand for outdoor recreation are significant, there are some deterrents to increased demand. Some of these potential neg- ative factors affecting the demand for more traditional outdoor recre- ation activities, such as resort vacations, include: Competition fgdiscr.etionary dollars. Outdoor recreation activities and resorts face a variety of competitive demands for the consumer's dollar. Some are related to recreational activities, and some are not. Foreign travel, swimming pools, and country-club memberships are examples of the former; new cars, improved appliances, and a college education for the children are examples of the latter. Thus, though discretionary income will increase in coming years, many of these dollars will go into activities that are only distantly related to outdoor recreation. Vacations. not involving stays at resorts. The increased mobility and income have given rise to vacations involving lengthy trips or do-it- yourself camping. In both cases, the vacationers avoid extended stays in rented overnight accomodations, such as dude ranches and lake re- sorts which are not too numerous in Jefferson County. Further concentration of poou7atipn in met opolitan areas, By the year 2000, almost three-fourths of the U. S. population will be in metropolitan areas, the very places where land for recreational use 73 is at a premium. Thus, the ability to participate in such activities will be limited by the supply of readily accessible land and facilities. Preference for increased income rather than more leisure. A variety of factors indicate that, by choice or necessity, many Americans have elected to have larger incomes rather than more leisure. Four examp- les illustrate this fact: (1) an increase in overtime work in periods of prosperity, often resulting in workers foregoing their vacations to work and accept their vacation pay, (2) over 3.5 million individuals holding more than one job, each averaging 53 work hours per week; (3) an increasing number of professional, technical and managerial employ- ees who prefer work to leisure-time activities; and (4) an increasing number of employed wives and mothers. Preferences in Qgtc,or- R ere •i an A,,,ai iV is Americans enjoy a diversity of outdoor recreation activities, all of which grow in the years to come. The participation in these summer activities is indicated by the ORRRC findings summarized in Table VI Two points stand out in the ORRRC study on what Americans like and want: Water is geritral iL mgst outdoor activities.. Most Americans seeking outdoor recreation look for water to swim and fish in; to boat on; to walk, picnic, and camp by, and to look at. Mast guVaor recreational activities are relativ.ly simple. As indi- cated in Table VI, most of the recreational activates enjoyed by Americans are not elaborate. They are: walking and driving for pleasure, playing outdoor games or sports, swimming, sightseeing, and picnicking. In summary, from 1960 to 2000 the U. S. population will double, but the demand for outdoor recreation will treble! 74 • TABLE VI . Number of Occasionsa (million) in Which Persons 12 Years and Over Take Part in Selected Recreation Activities: i Actual Estimatedb ;Percentage Change Outdoor Activity i 1960 1976 2000 11960-76 1960-2000 Driving for Pleasure 872 ,! 1,3411 2,215 4 54 154 Swimming ! 672 ' 1,1821 2,307 76 243 Walking for Pleasure 566 4 8561 1,569 51 177 Playing Outdoor Games or Sports 474 R 825 1,666 74 251 Sightseeing i 287 1 456 825 59 187 Picnicking 279 1 4181 700 i 50 1 150 Fishing ! 260 i 3501 521 35 100 Bicycling 228 1 2971 452 30 98 Attending Outdoor Sports 1 ; 1 Events ! 172 1 2521 416 46 142 Boating Other Then Sailing or Canoeing j 159 1 285 557 1 79 250 Nature Walks 98 153 263 ! 56 169 Hunting 95 1 123 174 30 81 Camping bo : 1131 235 ! 89 293 Horseback Riding [ 55 ! 82� 143 49 162 Water Skiing ` 39 ! 84! 189 114 384 Hiking 34 i 63! 125 89 269 Attending Outdoor Concerts, ! Dramas, etc. 27 1 46 92 ; 69 { 232 J TOTAL 4,377 1 6,926' 12,4491 58% { 184% t aNumber of separate days on which persons 12 years and over engaged in activity during the June-August period -- except hunting, for which the September-November period was used. bAssumes continuing 1960 quality and quantity of facilities available on a per capita basis. 75 1111 Tourist Studies of Upper Midwestern States In recent years, states in the Upper Midwest have been active in study- ing tourists and vacationers who visit their states. The main purpose of these tourist studies was an attempt to learn as much as possible about vacationers in a state to make the state more effective in the future in catering to tourists. Although these studies vary in de- tails, most researchers attempted to answer the following questions: 1. Who are the tourists, with respect to total numbers, state of origin, age, occupation? 2. Why did the tourist come to the state, and (a related question) what did he do while there? 3. What mode of travel did the tourist use, and how many were in his party? 4. How much did the tourist spend in the state, and on what items? 5. How long did the tourist stay and what kind of lodging facilities did he use? Approaches and roblems in Tourist Studies. The research approach used in the Upper Midwestern tourist studies undertaken after 1957 ranges from the mail survey to the personal interview, as indicated in the top section of Table VII. Studies for each state are arranged chronologi- cally in the table to permit changes over time to be observed. Noting the characteristics of the study, such as the source of the sam- ple, the sample size, and the period of data collection, enables the data to be put in perspective. A good example in Montana, for which the data taken for five successive years is relatively comparable. Total Volume of Tourists and Expenditures. The tourist studies summar- ized in Table VII reveal that annual estimates of out-of-state visitors are available for three of the states in the Upper Midwest; Montana, North Dakota, and Wisconsin. In Montana, the annual nonresident visi- tors number 2.5 to 2.7 million for the years from 1958 to 1961 and jumped to 3.3 million in 1962, the year of the Seattle World's Fair. How many tourist dollars do these nonresidents bring to the state? For the most recent years, these same tourist studies place the dollar estimates at '4,115 million for Montana in 1962. Table VII shows the point of origin for out-of-state visitors to the six Upper Midwest States; a particularly important consideration when these states select the media and geographic areas for promoting their state vacation industries. From 1958 to 1962, Montana obtained about 76 1110 10 to 15 percent of its tourists from each of three places; Canada, Washington, and California. Of the other states, only Minnesota (seven to eight percent) consistently contributed more than six percent of the tourists in Montana. In terms of tourist incomes, all the studies show that significantly greater proportions of tourists have incomes in excess of 010,000 and X15,000 than for the population as a whole. The following breakdown of the occupation of the heads of nonresident families vacationing in the State is probably typical of other Upper Midwestern states as well. Percent of Occupation Noj esidents Professional, manager, proprietor 35 Craftsman, foreman, nonfarm worker 38 Clerical, sales worker 16 Service, government worker 7 Retired person 4 Farmer, farm worker 2 Other (including no response) 100 Average Stays`.People Per Party. As suggested earlier, one of the most significant differences between the three western and three eastern Upper Midwest states is in the average length of stay of tourists. For the five Montana studies, the length of stay was about 3.5 days, How many people are there in the average nonresident automobile party visiting Upper Radwest states? Although the variation in persons per party is not nearly as large as that for the average length of stay, Table VII suggests that there is a difference between the western and eastern Upper Midwest states. Generally, estimates for the average number of persons per party in the western three states range from about 3.25 to 3.75, and for the eastern states, about 3.7 to 4.25 per- sons per party. The significance of minor variations in this statistic is illustrated by noting that an increase of 0.25 persons per party in a million cars visiting a state results in an increase of 250,000 tourists, Most average expenditures per tourist day from the tourist studies cited earlier lie in the w`8-to-$h10 range for Montana and South Dakota, and the $p6-to-47 range for the other four states. i 77 • Reasoor T ns frip and. Activities involved. Two related questions are, "What is the primary reason for your trip to the state?" and "What activities did you take part in while in the state?" All six states are crossed by tourists who have other states or Canada as their vacation destination. However, tourist studies of Montana, North Dakota and South Dakota show that over one half of the visitors often cite traveling through the state to get to a destination in another state as the reason for being there. This "passing through" group largely explains the lower average length of stay for these three states compared with Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan. A comparison of the activities in which tourists engage while in a state is difficult because of the lack of consistent definitions. However, one study covering the entire Upper Midwest gives relatively good comparisons of activities of families vacationing in the area. The results, shown in Table VII emphasize the importance of the water- related activities in the three eastern states, because swimming, fish- ing, or boating ranked among the first three activities in all cases. In contrast, visiting historical sites ranked first for all three west- ern states. Accomod}ations Used, Overnight North South Wisconsin- Accomodations Moxntana Dakota Dakota Minnesota, Michigan Hotel 17% 23% 22% 7% 6% Motel. 33 69 39 27 37 Resort -- 11 38 37 Camping 44 8 22 20 19 Trailer Court 6 -- -- 4 -- Friend or Relative 28 23 2$ 19 17 Motels and friends or relatives are used extensively throughout the Upper Midwest, but to a slightly greater degree in the three western states. Camping facilities appear to be particularly important for Montana tourists. Hotels are significant in the three western states, and resorts are the most important single accomodation in the three eastern ones. These studies are germane to Jefferson County for recreation and tourism could make a significant contribution to its economy. The County is blessed with unmatched scenery and famous for its fishing waters. Hunt- ing draws many fall and winter visitors and fishing in the spring and summer is the magnet for more. Jefferson County is working hard to ex- ploit its tourist potential but has not yet made the kind of progress that materially shows up in local cash registers. 78 TABLE VII Summary of Approaches and Conclusions of Tourist Studies of U- per Midwestern States 1958 and Later Research Approach State Montana and Conclusions Reference a 0 0 0 General Area -I Specific Topic Year 1958 1960 1•6.2 Research Kind of Survey b P P P Approach Source of Sample c A A A Sample Size 1000's .0 Annual Number of Total -_____ _ Tourists/Visitors Out-of-State 2.6 ' 2.7 3.3 (In Millions) In-State Annual Total 12 .: Expenditures By Out-of-State 8-9.3 96.8 114.7 (In $1,000 000) B In-State _ 35.5 _ __ _ __ . - -of Total From In-State For Nonresident Tourists -7—From Montana NA NA NA From N. Dakota - 5— 5 3. %- From S. Dakota `. From Minnesota 7 Geographic % From Iowa 4 Distribution From Missouri of Tourists % From Nebraska (In Percent) % From Kansas • % From Wisconsin 3 3 % From Michigan - 3 5 % From Illinois 4 3 5 % From Ohio % From Indiana From Canada 15 114 10 From All Other 63 72 62 Total %-Out-of-State 100 100 100 Annual Income A rove$1$1 ,000 4In Percent) T Above $10 000 Age Adult 1:+ Years) Distribution %-7511-17;71-717 Yrs. or Less) Average Expenditures Total ENE 9. 9.• In the State Food F-penditures Per Person Lodging Per Day Gas, Oil,_ Auto Access. (In Dollars) All Other Average Length of By All Tourists Stay (In Days or By Out-ofSate 3.• _ 3.5 Nights)_ B In-State Average Number For All Tourists of People By Out-of-State 3.1 3.1 3.3` Per Car/Party By In-State 2.9 I See Page 81 for references. • 79 North Dakota South Dakota •�. , ' .' •- . 55 73 74 29 45 43 li [fi t[ r 9. 9. MI 19.1 19. 19. 19 : r9 9-is 196 1964 964-•., PMIINIIIM M P )4. 4 • v • u • j_jBH H A 11� A I.•DFGr R 0 11111111111111M11 15_ 3. 0._ 0.4 2.6 25,5 8.2 a_ 1J 52- 5..9 22.6 M 4.0 2.9d 07: 3,7 .1 22 Ism Um 32.3e a 8 0 .1.0 . � p .2d 22.8e �98,i � NA NA NA Ut 2• NA NA NA 1 MEI 26 �� 1 22 NA Alll 1111/1 7 13 25i 4 r 3 2 7 ©• 5 �4 3 i6i _ it 20 6 20 ��um 6 �$�IN1N ►i t ina` 20 9 6 6 b� 4 aws 20 6 7 2 8 9 100111101111___ 41 46 33 25 8 10 stommillnill 100 100 100 100 _10 -00 !Os• ! M ism RIM 10 12 21 24 - 34 36 67 70 .. 62 33 30 34 8 6. 1 6.90 '.92 10.02 8.01 6 82 6. 2 WilrAllanlingl _ 2.01 IBM EM! 1485 ����1 1. 2.48 - 1 6 2. IIKI Imilmi 2.82 IM E/ WA NI 1.0 1 8 natal .0 11621111111t11111 9.1 IMERIIIMIIIM91110.. j111L1011111111111iiiiiiiiiiii 7.3 Ilia t 1.4 • Ifs .8 .6 6 miliE1al .0 .8 • 80 • a Abbreviations for kind of survey: M = Mail; P = Personal Inter- view; T= Telephone; C= Traffic Count. "Self-administered tests" at a tourist site are termed personal interview. b Abbreviations for source of sample: A = Roadside; H = Hotel and Motel Registers; R = Resort Registers; B = Campsite Visitors; D = Private Cottage Owners; E = Tourist Information Center Visit- ors; F = Potential Visitors Writing for Travel Information; G = Canoe Travelers. c estimates on total volume of tourists and expenditures apply only to a period 6-7-65 through 8-31-65. Research is currently in pro- gress on the period from September, 1965 through May, 1966. d estimates on total volume of tourists and expenditures apply only to 19 northern Minnesota counties for the period 5-11-58 through 9-13-58. TABLE VIII Vacation Activities of Families Visiting Upper Midwest States, Ranked by Frequency of Mention Eastern Upper Vacation Activity Western Upper Midwest States Midwest States Montana N. Dak. S. Dak. Minn. Wis.-Mich. Boating 7 2 3 Camping-Wilderness Area 2 9 6 7 . Camping-Development Area 3 3 5 9 8 Fishine 1 2 Golfine 3 7 6 Hiking Swimming _3 3 5 2 1 Water Skiing i Visit Museum 5 2 2 5 5 Visit Zoo 7 3 Visit Indian Reservation 5 7 5 Attend Theatre or Pageant 9_ 3 8 Take Industry/Mine Tour 4 • 81 • According to the 1960 Census of siinng, the number of housing units in Jefferson County was 1,283. Table IX showsthe year these housing unite were built. The percentage of owner occupied housing was a high 70.8 percent. Rental units occupied amounted to 29.2%. In 1960 when this Census was made there were 16 units available for rent. From 1950 to 1960 there was a 14.1% increase in the number of units built. But during the same years there was a population increase of 7% amounting to 283 persons so the increase in housing units did little more than accomodate the increase in population. The 1960 Census of Rousing does not reflect the situation ae it exists today. A recent study of housing in Whitehall disclosed there were 227 single family dwellings in the community and none were vacant. There were also, 10 two-family homes with no vacancies. An analysis of housing in Boulder, County Seat of Jefferson County, indicated there were no livable vacancies available there. There is, in fact, a serious housing shortage in both communities. Although Table IX shows the results of the 1960 Census of Housing, the housing situation in the County now is much different. A sub- stantial number of housing units are either dilapidated or seriously deteriorating which is one reason for the current housing shortage. Even in 1960, 14% of the housing units in the County were either dilapidated or deteriorating. The percentage is such higher in 1967. The owner-occupied median value per house in Whitehall in 1960 was 45,900. The median rent per house was only 459 per month which indicates the relative value of the housing units. It is also im- portant to note that 73% of all the housing in the County was built in 1929 or earlier. All through the twelve county area, making up the multiple county economic district, studies have shown a serious housing shortage and that many deteriorating and dilapidated houses are being occupied simply because there is no other place to live. 82 TABLE IX Kousine. 1960. Tenure and Vacancy Status: Number of Housing Units 1 283 Units Occupied 1 081 Renter Occupied (29.2%) 319 Owner Occupied (70.8%) 762 Available Vacant Units: For Rent 16 For Sale 7 Other Vacant Units 179 Condition: Sound 1 103 Dilapidated 40 Deteriorating 140 Percent Year Built No. Homan 2.4% 1959 - March, 1960 31 4.7% 1955 - 1958 60 5.3% 1950 - 1954 67 8.7% 1940 - 1949 112 6.7% 1930 - 1939 86 72.0% 1929 or earlier 927 14.1% Increase 1950 to 1960. Rooms: Median Rooms per unit 4 4 Median Persons per unit 2 4 Persons per room - 1 or less 959 1.01 or more 122 Rent and Value: Median Gross Rent 09.00 Median Value - Owner Occupied 05900. 83 EMPLOYMENT • Labor Availabilttv "Deviation From Norm Formula" 1. Population 4,297 (1960 Census) 2. % White Population 98.6% 3. % Employed in Agriculture 18.2% 4. Total Employed in Manufacturing 57 5. Total Employed in Mining 78 6. % Males in Labor Force 69.7% 7. Deviation From Norm 10.3 8. % of All Females in Labor Force 30.3% 9. Deviation from Norm, Female -- 10. Density per square mile 2.6 Note: To determine the amount of potential labor from non-agricultural sources, the percentage of males in the work force (line 6) is compared with the normal relationship in the nation, or 80% for white and non- white. Where the figure in line 6 exceeds the national norm, no deviation is shown. This difference is the percentage of the total local labor pool that can be assumed to be the potential supply of males who accept jobs, if they become available, but are not reported as available by the unem- ployment compensation commission. Female labor is charted in the same manner except that deviation figures are based on 26.0% as the normal relationship in the nation. In Jefferson County's ease, only the male worker shows a deflation from Norm of 10.3 while the female worker exceeds the 26.0% as the normal relation in the nation. This formula clearly indicates there is a substantial number of males available for work in Jefferson County. If field investigation and statistical analysis fails to produce con- clusive measurement of available labor resources, we are prepared to resort to a labor registration. Such a registration offers a greater chance for success in a lightly populated county like Jefferson, than it does in a highly industrialized metropolitan center. Through blanket-wide publicity, the purpose of the labor registration is actually to solicit applicants for a proposed new employer. News- papers, direct mail, circulars in retail outlets, radio and TV public- ity are the usual mediums used. This will pin down the number of people available for employment and can even do it on a selective basis determining age, sex, previous employ- ment and skills. 84 A professional and technical source of people is available from the • graduates of the University of Montana located 144 miles away in Missoula, Montana. Carroll College, located in Helena, commuting distance from Boulder, and Montana State University, 120 miles south. Jefferson County can provide a wide variety of skills, technicians and professional people who could be utilized if job opportunities were made available. And right now there are no employers in this area bidding for the services of these people. Labor According to the 1960 Census, Jefferson County's labor force totaled 1,290. Of this number, 69.7% were males and 30.3% or 390 were females. The following is an analysis of the employment status and age of labor force: Males Females 14 and over 14 and over Total in Labor Force: 900 390 Employed 875 376 Unemployed 25 14 Not in Labor Force: 714 1,086 Inmates 380 248 In School 100 118 Others under 65 87 554 Others over 65 147 166 Age of Labor Force: 14 to 17 57 33 18 to 24 65 40 25 to 34 120 38 35 to 44 222 92 45 to 64 351 143 65 years and older 85 44 Percentage of Labor Force: 14 to 17 4.4 2.5 18 to 24 5.0 3.1 25 to 34 9.3 2.9 35 to 44 17.2 7.1 45 to 64 27.2 11.0 65 years and older 6.5 3.4 • 85 Emnlovment by Maior Industry (1960): • Labor Force Percent Occupation l&la Female Total A la Female Professional, Technical, etc. 62 69 131 4.8 5.3 Farmers & Farm Managers 136 0 136 10.5 0 Managers, Officials and Prop- rietors 85 34 119 6.5 2.6 Clerical and Kindred Workers 27 70 97 2.0 5.4 Sales Workers 23 20 43 1.7 1.5 Craftsmen, Foremen, etc. 148 10 158 11.4 0.7 Operatives and Kindred Workers 125 24 149 9.6 1.8 Service Workers 75 128 203 5.8 9.9 Farm Laborers 94 0 94 7.2 0 Laborers except Farm & Mine 76 4 80 5.8 0.3 Occupation Not Reported 24 17 41 1.8 3.1 Total 1,251 Class of Worker Agriculture 236 0 236 18.2 0 Private Wage & Salary Workers 99 0 Government Workers 0 0 Self Employed 133 9 Unpaid Family Workers 4 0 Non-Agriculture 639 376 1,015 49.5 29.1 Private Wage & Salary Workers 378 162 Government Workers 162 175 Self Employed 92 23 Unpaid Family Workers 7 16 • 86 Breakdown of Industry Group of Employed Persons - 1960: Total Employed 1,251 Agriculture 236 Forestry and Fisheries 9 Mining 78 Construction 105 Manufacturing 57 Furniture, lumber and wood products 6 Primary Metal industry 31 Machinery (except electrical) 4 Other durable goods 3 Food and kindred products - 3 Printing and publishing, etc. 7 Chemical and allied products 3 Railroad and Railway express services 45 Other transportation 11 Communications 10 Utilities and sanitary services 6 Wholesale trade 6 Food and dairy product stores 46 Eating and drinking places 69 Other retail trade 82 Finance, Insurance and Real Estate 7 Business services 4 Repair services 29 Private households 32 Other personal services 73 Entertainment and recreation services 7 Educational services - Government 65 Other professional and related services 180 Hospitals 7 Public Administration 63 Industry not reported 24 Total in Labor Force 1,290 ` Employed 1,251 Agriculture 236 (18.5%) Non-Agriculture 1,015 Unemployed 39 Percent of labor force 3.0% . In 1960 Jefferson County's employed labor force totaled 1,251, a de- crease of 5.5% from the 1950 Census total of 1,324. Although 236 per- sons were employed in agriculture in 1960, the composition of the labor force has been shifting to non-agricultural occupations, with a declining portion engaged in agriculture. • 87 In 1950 agriculture accounted for 34.6% of the employed labor force. • By 1960 the number had declined to 18.8%. A comparison of the number and placement of the employed labor force is shown below: Occuoatiozl 125Q 1960 Agriculture 459 236 Forestry and Fisheries 6 9 Iftning 88 78 Construction 99 105 Manufacturing 51 57 Transportation and Utilities 102 72 Trades 202 203 Services and Finance 211 404 Public Administration 94 63 Not reported 12 24 45.9% of the employed worked from 50 to 52 weeks per year. 35% of males 65 and over are in the labor force. 88 Average Prevailing Wage Rates by Type of Employment . Average Yearly Usual Usual Industry Group Emplovment Starting Wage Work Week Agriculture 215 4125.00 to 4300.00 per Mo. 6 days Mining 75 3 25.00 neg jav 40 hours, Construction 110 4 2.50 to $3.5Q}ler Hr. 40 hours Manufacturing 60 S 2.25 to 83.00 per HE. 40 hours Transportation 110 4 „1,25_to $ ,00ypr Hr. 40 hours Utilities 10 Sa 2.00 to $3.50 per Hr. 40 hours Wholesale Trade 6 4 2.00 to y1,00 per Hr, 40 hours Retail Trade 180 4 ;.00 to 01.50 per Hr. 40 hours Finance 37 1 1.25 yo 43.00 ner Hr. 40 hours Service 163 S L00 to 02.50 ner Hr. 40 hourg Government Federal )350 4300.00 to $700.00 per No. 40 hours State & Local) 4265.00 to $400.00 per MD. 40 hours Railroad 50 4 2.50 to 43.50 ner Hr. 40 hours Office Worker Wage Rates Employed in Area Average Tyne Approximate Number Wage Typist ) $200.00 to 4325.00 per Mo. 4300.00 Secretaries ) 30 4200.00 to $350.00 per Mo. $325.00 Stenographers) 4275.00 to $350.00 per It. $325.00 Bookkeepers) 4325.00 to 4450.00 per Mo. $400.00 Accountants) 4450.00 to $600.00 per Mo. $550.00 Dreftworkers None III 89 MANUFACTURERS AND PROCESSORS • As would be expected, agriculture provides more employment in the County than any other operation. There is, however, the start of an industrial economy. Firm Products Structural Components, Inc. Building components Jefferson Valley News Printer Boulder Sporting Goods Firearms Whitehall Sawmill Lumber and House logs Clays in Calico Pottery Mathison's Sheet Metal Commercial and Household Appliances Heap's Cheese Factory Cheese and Fine Foods Permanete Cement Company Cement Boulder Monitor Printer S 90 AGRICULTURE • Agriculture ranks as Jefferson County's most important economic activity. The trend toward larger farms and ranches has existed since 1920. The advent of power machinery in the early 1920's has made farming on a larger scale more profitable although it has made agriculture a more difficult field to enter. This has re- sulted in fewer but larger farms and ranches and has been largely responsible for the declining rural population as marginal operators and farm youths have moved to the cities and towns of Montana and to other metropolitan areas in other states. Livestock and livestock products account for 77.0% of total receipts from farm marketings. Jefferson County had more than 21,908 acres of irrigated land in 1964. More than a third, or 38.8% of the County's land area was in farms and ranches in 1964. Forest land accounts for 45.4% of the total land area in the County. Of the 1,056,640 acres comprising the total land area, 427,083 acres are commercial forest land and 52,735 acres are non-commercial and reserved forest land. Total land in forest amounts to 479,818 acres. Ranchland often contains many acres of land suitable only for grazing livestock. Many grazing areas are owned by the Federal and State Governments and are leased to livestock producers. Table X indicates the importance of agriculture in Jefferson County. The average value of land and buildings per acre has risen substant- ially in 1964 compared with the 1954 value. Although this is a large increase in value, it is not comparable with some of the other counties in the Economic Development District. The average size of farms and ranches has increased substantially since 1954. Farms and ranches averaged 1,917 acres in 1964 as opposed to 1,532 acres in 1959. This increase can be credited to improved farming and ranching methods but it is also attributable to putting more acres to work. The proportion of land area in farms and ranches increased from 31.7% to 38.8% indicating that more of Jefferson County's 1,654 square miles is being brought into production. It is a noteable fact that the number of acres irrigated has changed very little since 1959. During that year 20,000 acres were under irrigation. In 1964, however, a slight increase has been noted as 22,000 acres are being irrigated. There were 41,000 acres of total land in farms and ranches in 1964, an increase of approximately 75,000 acres in the past five years. Cash receipts from farm marketings and government payments in 1959 totaled $2,575,000. However, livestock products accounted for 41,990,000 of this total, vastly out-scoring the $551,000 of cash receipts for crops. • 91 Cash receipts per farm averaged $10,556 in 1959. This average was • increased minutely because there were 219 farms in the County in 1959 and 214 farms in 1964. Government payments amounted to $34,000 in 1959 and only $19,000 in 1954. The use of commercial fertilizer has increased. In 1959, twenty four farms used 43 tons of commercial fertilizer on 801 acres. In 1965 nearly twice as many farms used 151 tons of commercial fertilizer on 2,746 acres. The only thing that is significant about these figures is the fact that use of fertilizer has more than tripled. Additional fertilization and increased irrigation will produce much more than is being reported now. S 92 TABLE X • Agriculture, 1954 - 1964 Farms and Ranches. Acreage. Use. and Value: 1954 1959 19 46 Proportion of land area in Farms and Ranches by percentage 37.4 31.7 38.8 Total land in Farms and Ranches (1000 acres) 395 335 410 Cropland harvested (1000 acres) 36 32 33 Number of Farms 274 219 214 Irrigated land in Farms (1000 acres) 24 20 22 Average size of Farm or Ranch (acres) 1,441 1,532 1,917 Average Value of land and buildings (gip per acre) 24.61 27.54 37.96 Average Value of land and buildings per Farm ($) 35,463 42,191 73,540 Cash Receipts from Farm Marketings and Government Payments: NZ 1959 Crops - $1,000 472 551 Livestock and Products - $1,000 1,669 1,990 Total Receipts - $1,000 2,181 2,541 Government Payments - $1,000 19 34 Total Cash Receipts - x$1,000 2,200 2,575 Cash Receipts per farm - $ 7,347 10,556 93 Grain Production and Yields: • All Wheat 1962 1963 Net amount seeded - acres 7,600 10,200 Net amount harvested - acres 7,100 9,100 Yield per acre - bushels 23.6 26.9 Production - bushels 167,500 245,000 Value - $ 337,400 451,000 Oats Net amount seeded - acres 4,100 2,800 Net amount harvested - acres 1,200 1,500 Yield per acre - bushels 42.8 45.9 Production - bushels 51,400 68,800 Value - $ 30,800 39,900 Barley Net amount seeded - acres 4,500 2,900 Net amount harvested - acres 4,200 2,700 ■ Yield per acre - bushels 38.4 34.0 Production - bushels 161,400 91,900 Value - $ 134,000 76,300 Potatoes Acres harvested 54 51 Yield per acre - Cwt 135 149 Production - Cwt 7,300 7,600 Value - $ 17,400 19,200 All Hay Harvested acres 27,000 27,400 Yield per harvested acre - tons 1.82 1.59 Production - tons 49,100 43,700 Value - $ 949,300 757,500 Alfalfa Hay Harvested acres 10,600 11,000 Yield per harvested acre - tons 2.60 2.05 Production - tons 27,600 22,500 Wild Hay Harvested acres 7,200 8,200 Yield per acre - tons 1.14 1.26 Production - tons 8,200 10,300 • 94 • Grain 195? 1959 All wheat - 1000 bushels 79.0 179.1 Winter wheat - 1000 bushels 57.0 131.1 Spring wheat - 1000 bushels 22.0 48.0 Durum wheat - 1000 bushels 0 0 Barley - 1000 bushels 148.6 100.4 Livestock - Cattle and Sheep All cattle and calves - 1000 head 19.4 21.1 All sheep and lambs - 1000 head 3.7 5.7 Acres Harvested and Value of Crop Production - 1963 Acres Value Irrigated land 21,448 003,000 Non-irrigated land 19,603 64 ,500 Total Value 1,346,500 Cash Receipts from sale of principal products and ilovernment pavments.1963: Livestock and livestock products pi,860,400 Crops 590,300 Total receipts from marketings 2,450,700 Government payments 46,600 All cash receipts 2,497,300 Cash receipts per farm 10,764 Livestock on Farms and Ranches: 1962_ 1963 1964 All cattle and calves 21,600 22,700 24,600 All sheep and lambs 3,700 2,500 2,500 Hogs and pigs 1,900 1,400 1,400 Chickens 9,000 8,600 9,200 Cattle Shipment Out of County: Steers 2,940 3,420 Cows 6,127 5,094 Heifers 2,228 2,735 Bulls 716 625 Calves 10,390 12,335 Unclassified 34 12 Total 22,435 24,221 95 Numbs of C the Moved: • 1342 • 1963 Out of County 22,435 24,221 Into County 9,993 11,853 From Other States 252 288 Net Movement out of County 12,502 12,368 Livestock Sold Alive: 1959 1964 No. No. Farms No. Value Farms No. Value Reporting Sold Dollars Reporting Sold Dollars Cattle 111 2,690 446,134 143 3,863 546,436 Calves 127 7,276 830,898 163 9,558 816,251 Total 172 9,966 1,277,030 177 13,421 1,362,687 Hogs & Pigs 34 3,101 96,131 33 2,013 42,996 Sheep & Lambs 27 2,419 29,028 26 1,584 23,983 Sheen Shorn and WQ21 Produced_ 195.2 1144 No. No. Pounds No. No. Pounds Farms Shorn Wool Farms Shorn Wool 39 3,464 35,246 26 2,048 21,579 Acreage, Quantity, and Sales of Principal Crops Harvested, 1964: Wheat Oats Barley All Hav Acres harvested 5,341 635 2,460 24,647 Yield - bushels (or tons) 123,697 27,935 70,045 38,149 tons Sales - bushels (or tons) 117,375 3,860 38,457 3,843 tons Consumed locally - bushels (or tons) 6,322 24,075 31,588 34,306 tons Percent consumed locally 5.1 86.0 45.0 89.9 Dairy Products Sold - 1964: Milk and cream (value in dollars) 237,473 Whole milk sold (pounds) 4,117,721 Butterfat (pounds) 5,126 Poultry and Products Sold - 964: Total Value (all poultry & products) $37,679 . Chickens (number sold) 6,705 Eggs (number dozen sold) 100,030 Turkeys raised 175 96 • ECONOMIC PROJECTIONS From an analysis of Jefferson County's attributes there is good cause to believe that its economy can be strengthened. Lying latent in this County are many things that can be developed and several advantages that can be exploited. Because it offers so much, tourism and recrea- tion present the first opportunity and best hope for economic growth. We have delved deeply in the general subject of tourism and recreation and touched rather lightly the specific projects that hold promise. The various phases of tourism and recreation will have to be singled out and priorities established before we can become more objective. But once this is done each project should receive the collective think- ing and concerted action of those in the County most interested in dev- eloping its economy. What are the potentialities of tourism and re- creation in the County? They must be described in outline before they can be treated in detail. The following list of potentials show the extent and variety of possibilities. 1. Fishing, Boating, Swimming, Water Skiing. There are several lakes in Jefferson County that can make the most of these acquatic activities. 2. Hunting. Big Game targets are prolifically centered in the County. Accessibility to good hunting grounds may be somewhat limited. 3. Ghost Towns. Several celebrated ghost towns are located in the County. Access to some of them is considered difficult. 4. Historic Sites. There are a limited number of historic sites in Jefferson County but more could be developed. 5. Scenery. The County abounds in scenic beauty. 6. Camping. Well developed campgrounds providing the serv- ices tourist seek are limited in number and more could be developed. 7. Horseback Riding. Availability of horses and personnel to handle them are scattered and inadequately advertised. 8. Hiking. Some hiking trails are well planned but more are needed. 9. Fishing streams. Some excellent "blue ribbon" streams available but access limited. • 97 10. Old Mining Camps. Some of the best in the State. • Not advertised or exploited sufficiently. What the tourist is interested in: a. Ghost Towns b. Historic Sites c. Fishing streams and lakes d. Scenery e. Old Mining Camps f. Adventure g. Driving for pleasure h. Swimming i. Walking for pleasure j. Playing outdoor games and sports k. Sightseeing 1. Picnicking m. Hunting n. Camping o. Horseback riding p. Hiking We must evaluate Jefferson County's ability to provide all or most of these activities. The analysis indicates that Jefferson County can provide these activities but does not do so, or in a limited way. Therefore, it is incumbent upon Jefferson County to more fully develop those activities where the County is lacking in all the amenities re- quired to make the County a first class tourist area. Tourism: a. Location and condition of good highways, secondary - roads and trails. b. What is there to see that will compel a tourist to abandon a pre-conceived route of travel? • 98 c. What is there that will hold their interest to keep • them another day? d: Are tourist accomodations for meals and lodging adequate? e. Are tourist attractions accessible? f. Have tourist attractions been developed? g. What kind of promotion is currently in effect? h. Is any effort to advertise tourist attractions being made? i. Are such simple things as inexpensive directional signs placed in strategic places? j. Has Jefferson County joined with adjacent areas to promote their attractions collectively? k. Is a list of tourist attractions placed at the disposal of tourists? 1. This is important! Are the people of the County who come in contact with tourists, able and qualified to answer questions intelligently, familiar with tourist attractions in their region, prepared to do a !'selling job"? m. Is any effort being made or proposed to acquaint local people of the attractions that would be of interest to tourists? n. Is the County willing and able to take advantage of the State's tourism advertising? o. Has an objective and critical examination been made of tourist attractions in the County? p. Have all possible attractions been studied? q. Do the people living near one attraction recommend other attractions in other parts of the County? r. Is a budget for advertising and promotional programs available and is it enough to do the job? s. Will the courtesy of the people and the attractiveness of the area draw them back another year or cause them to recommend visiting the County to their friends and relatives back home? 99 t. The best advertising is "word of mouth" by tourists • who can cause many others to visit the places they have been. u. Are the cost of meals reasonably economical and are the facilities for overnight stays clean and comfort- able? v. Are camping areas adequate and well maintained? w. In places where horses are necessary to reach attrac- tions are they available? x. Are maps and other directional aids easily available? y. Are laundromats and places to "clean up" convenient to tourists? z. Are roadside parks, rest stations and other services located in convenient places? Although this completes the alphabet there are many other things that could and should be available to keep the tourist in good spirits and interested in coming back again. Lumber: With so much of its area covered with forests lumbering and wood pro- ducts could be a significant feature of the Jefferson County economy. To know more about this potential the Inter-County Development Corpor- ation has authorized a research study of the wood products industry in Jefferson County. The Wood Products Research Department of the University of Montana in Missoula began research on this subject early this summer and expects to complete the study some time in September of this year. The research project proposed and approved by the Economic Development Administration in Washington follows: 100 UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA • Missoula 59801 Phone 243-0211 School of Forestry June 6, 1967 Mr. H. W. Shinrock, Director Inter-County Development Corp. of Southwestern Montana P. 0. Box 1179 Anaconda, Montana Dear Mr. Shinrock: Enclosed is a study proposal for assessing the Jefferson County forest products situation. You will note that the study is divided into two parts: an analysis of the timber-resource base and an analysis of the products markets both current and potential. I have broken the budget into two parts: one part is the University's contribution and the other is yours. The study out- line will give you an idea of how we see the study should be approached. I feel that part III of the outline will probably be the most useful to you, but that the analysis of the resource base more important to prospective clients. If you desire further information, please contact me. Very truly yours, Signed William K. Gibson Assistant Professor Forest Economics WKG/el Eno: • 101 • G 20, 1967 WI Proposed Outline for a Timber Feasibility Study--Jefferson County, Montana I Assessment of timber resource base A. Determine type, amount and composition of timber resource for 1. Public lands a. State b. Federal (1) Forest Service (2) B.L.M. B. Assess private and public timber policies to determine direction and future timber program C. Determine sustained cut for county 1. Potential cut by a. Species b. Product combinations 2. Current utilization of potential cat 3. Net available cut for expansion of forest products industry II Assess market conditions for timber resource A. Current market outlets 1. Within county 2. In immediate county area B. Markets that might be developed III Recommendations for forest product development within county 'A. Current product expansion B. Possible new development 102 BUDGET • Inter-County Dev. Corp. of SW University Montana I Salaries Faculty $3,000 Graduate Student $1,500 II Travel & expenses 860 III Supplies & equipment Clerical 500 Misc. 40 Publication 100 3 2,500 TOTAL BUDGET...........5v6,000 • 103 We are in agreement that Part III of the outline will be of most interest to us. From these recommendations will stem a development program that should create a desirable project for us to follow-up. Agriculture: In that part of the County that lends itself to agriculture a stepped up program of growth can be anticipated. With the shortage of food looming ominously over the world more of our productive land will have to be utilized. This will undoubtedly improve the agricultural situ- ation in Jefferson County. Other proposals for economic development is expected to develop as the County leaders center their thinking on the beet method$ to improve economy. • 104 Population Characteristics Appendix I kn 0 POPULATION TRENDS 195C-1965 H Average Annual Average Annual Identification Absolute Change Percent Chance Estimated i •t.0 1'. I 1• Z- •.t •6D-i•6 • 0-1.60 1•6•-1•.NIWIll District T•tal '� 1 3200 6 0 1 5 IIIMI R A Title I _6 : 18 .: • 00 Other 2 8: _2• •88 •0. 10 • 2 2 •8 Stat: 000 • 6 811.111 U it-. States 000i. 1 26 nin 2 •• 2 , 8 8 0 Skovnty Class Beavefl t 0 6 6 i Ill (0 2 06 O 2 Gra t: 1ni 0 2 '00 24_ -1, 8 - 8 Dec- Lo.fe 0 104 18.6 0 18 00 2 08 -1 0 2 -0 Jefferson 0 n 00 28 1 00 0 26 0 Madison 0 ••8 IIMEnnii 100 11E:31 i Po - 1 0 6 0_ 002 00 0 6c3 0 _0 0 Ravalli 0 10 ni 1 000 - 60 6 • -6 0 Silva Bo, 0 8 22 6 • 00 •68 2 6 Brad.- _ = 0 11110BIO :0 2 800 - 8 - -0 0 Ga_. ati • n . 0_ inin lfAW1N 1 • 0 Meath-r 1 2 0 • 2 616 2 800 8 2 6 0 Park County 1 11.999 11.168 13.600 1-1 432 0.97 .16 • • Population Characteristic Appendix II '-o 0 ri COMPONENTS OF POPULATION CHANGE 1950-1960 Population Components of Change _ Absolute Net Total Chan a Migration 1 1950 1960 19 0-19 0 Births Deaths Amount Rate Identification �1 ` (3) (4) (5) (6) 77) District Total 142 73 148 786 6 051 35 470 1 1411 -12 27 - ; . R.A. Title I 11.5.0$1, 18 798 1 947 3 942 1 983 -12 -0.07 Other 125 uu� 9 9fl _ lOTi 31 2: 1.1 -1 2.3 -•. State 000 591 674.8 ' 84 171 62 ' -25 -4.3 United States 000 1 1 32o -1797-323 27,997 O 1127-1---15,569 3004 1,7 County Class t Beaverhead 0 6 671 7 1914 523 1 601 858 -220 -3.3 Granite 1 2 73 1111131[0}.: 11 2 1 723 31: 216 .9 Deer Lodge 0 1• 53 1. . O 2 0:7 T 5r20 1- 01 -o32 -3.. Jefferson 0 '— 0 29 2 3 70. -L02 -21 -0. Madison 0 99 211 -7W7 1 011 9 -1 133 •.9 Powell 0 _2.091 7 002 701 ' 1 3 002 0 -0.8 _ Ravalli 0 —137101 12 3 ---7460_ 2 0- 1 391 -1 77 -13. Silver Bow 0 : 22 • -11 9•: 13 13* 22. -. 140 -1..: Broadwater 0 + M -11: _ 709 312 - 1 -17. . Gallatin 0r--- 21 902 2. 0 14 110 .:7 1 9 • +222 +1.0 Mea:her 1 2 079 11011 $*I 99 277 ' +31 +1 .2 Park 1 11,999 3 .• MIEMIGIIII 2 720 1,3:• i -1.3 ` - . • 4111 Population Cha a;u:-i t.ir_3 Appendix III 60E DISTRIBUTION 1960 0 t-14 Years 15-24 Years 25 44 Years 45-64 Years 65 & Over Pop. of % of % of % of % of Median Total Number otal umber Total Number otal Number otal Number fetal A:e Identification !Tr- ) - 3 (5) (6) 7 (8) (10) 1 12 District Total _ 148,,786 45,770 30.7 19,988 13.4 34,_919 23.5 31,906 21.5 16 203 10.8 31.1 Title-I 1: •; ww a 30.. 2 2,1J 31fl •$ 1 IM 3a9'3 �Q•XI�1 1.7, Dther 12• •:: 0 01 30.: 1 1 0 278 �#� 27 .0 3 21.J 03: 10. 1.0 State 000 674.8 227.2 33.9 90.4 13.4 166.6 24.8 125.2 18. 65.4 9.7 27.6 tinted Stns 000 1-9 2 Mf :. 1.0 0 0 2..0 3. 0 20.0 M ..• •.2 29. County Class Beaverhead 0 _ 7,191{ 1,996 28.0 1.102 15.3 1,609 22.1 1,6�8 , 23.0 829 , 31. 31.6 granite 1 3,0 956 '31.2 339 11. 722 214.0 671 22.2 32. 10.• 0 : 32.2__ Deer Lodge - 18.640 5.871 1.3 2.224 31. 3 ` 4.h06 23. 3 363 23.1 1.876 10.0 32,1 Jefferson 0 _ • 1 06 0.0 6 • .8 _ 990 2 • • • Madison 0 i 60 1 0 5 ' Niv IA 2 06• rim 8 12 0 8 2 26 EMMar•al 68. 9.8 31.9 kavalli 0 _ •, • • 4 ai i. 2 0 8• Silver Bow 0 6 _ _ ' 8: 8 b kflb%k6 1 10 0._ • •• E Broadwater 0 Uallatin 0 �A 8 -. 608 _ �_ .• �� : Meagher 1 . • � _• • • • �7} � 16 6 • W : • . • Farms 1 - I 0 n �1.. i a rsa • • 4111 4111 Population Charzcteristics Appendix IV a LABOR FORCE PARTICIPATION RATE 1960 'i Or anon ears &tver Labor Force Participation Rate Total hale Female Total Male Female Total Male Female (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) District Total 05 302 53 771 51 531 54 878 39 031 15 847 52.1 72.5 30.8 . R.A. Title I 1 379 • 7.7.7 • 92 MIMS 0. 2 02jIIIIIIIIIIFS 79.9 31.2 Other 9 9 3 •,;t 639 MrallijilyaMallIIRMI 1. 30.. State (000 458.4 233:5 2214.9 248.1 174.7 73.4 54.5 75.0 32.6 United States 000 125_36: .1,000 64,368 73,0;1 49,563 '23,518 j 57.4 79. 36.1 Place Class Beaverhead County 0 5,289 2,830 ,_.4459 3,267 2.217 , 850 58.0 77.0 34.8 Granite County 1 2.118 .138 980 1.251 • 0 311 •.0 82.0 31.8 Deer Lodge County 0_13,070 6.708 6.362 6,406 6 1 8 0 ..0 44.0 29.0 Jefferson County 0 0•0 1 61 1 176 1,290 900 390 0 sr..O • 2 Madison County 0 3..90 1,989 1,701 2.144 1.610 594 58.0 ;1.0 , 31.2 Powell County 0 5,033 2,855 :IL/ 2,359 1,775 ' 584 7.0 62.0 27.0 Ravalli County 0 8 840 4 435 0 4 u;;' 3,261 1,178 50.0 7 .0 27.0 ilver Bow County 0 �c �Q :3 1 737 1.,893 11,773 _ 5,125 52.0 75.0 30.8 Broadwater County 0 1 ;911 1 01 ;;2 999 762 237 52.7 L 75.2 26.9 T 8 Gallatin County ,� 0 1;, 1 9,•'• _ 39 •,74 6 6,6 1 _ 3,024 52. 69.2 35.0 Meagher County 1 1 8 . 1 00 851 1 o6 282 Park County 1 • 0111. II 661 t t 1 32 79.7 30.7 • • Population Characteristics Appendix IV b a, LABOR FORCE PARTICIPATION RATS 1965 0 — ?ercent Change in Participation Rate Identification Population 14 years & over Labor Participation Rate (%) 1,960-196 Total Male. Eamibl Total &Le Female Total, Male Female Total Male Female (12 (10) (11) (13) (14) (15)- 15 (16) (17) (18) (19) (20 (21) District Total NA NA ._ NA _ _ NA NA - NA NA NA NA NA NA NA R. A. _ _ Title I L__13,505 NA NA , 7.106 NA NA 52.6 NA NA - 6 NA NA Other NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA State (000,) NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA I NA NA United states 9 135,844 4$5.150 79.694 7 51,70 26.6 56.7 , 76.9 37.5 • .7 t-2.8 1 County Class Beaverhead 0 NA NA _ NA NA NA NA , NA NA NA NA NA NA Granite 1 2.030 NA NA 1 • NA NA 51.0 NA NA -8.0 NA NA Deer Lodge 0 12350 NA NA 4,472 NA i NA 35.0 NA NA -714.0 NA NA Jefferson 0 NA NA NA NA NA , NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Na4i.son 0 , NA NA 1 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Powell 0 NA NA NA NA ' NA NA _ NA NA NA NA NA NA Ravalli 0 9,382 NA NA 5_.459 NA NA 58.0 NA NA -8 0 NA NA Silver Souk 0 32.736 , NA NA 15,8921 NA NA 47,0 NA NA 520 NA NA Broadwater 0 _ NA , NA , NA NA NA NA _ NA _ NA NA NA NA NA Gallatin 0 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Meagher 1 1.820 NA NA x„035 NA NA 56.8 NA NA -0.5 NA NA Park 1 9,655 NA NA 5,029 NA NA 52.0 NA NA -3.5 NA NA • 4111 Population Characteristics Appendix V 0 UNEMPLOYMENT TRENDS % Change Average in Total Annual Change 1950 1960 1965 Estimates 950 - 1-960 - 1950 - 1950 - Number , Rate Number Rate Number Rate 1960 196 1260 1965 Identification (1) - 737- 7E7 35) (b) (7) (8) (9) (10) District Total 2,330 4.1 3,522 6,4 NA NA 51.1 NA 119.0 NA R.A. Title I 278 4.0 621 - 8.3 46 6.5 12 .3 " -25.4 f X4.3 31.6 Other 2,0 2 .1 2,901 ..7 NA NA 1.3 - NA 1854.9 NA State (000) 11.7 , 5.1 16.8 6.8 NA NA 43.5 NA 5.1 NA United States (000) 3,351 5.3 3,931 $.6 3,4561 4.6 ' 17.3 -12.0 58.0 4 -95.0 County Class Beaverhead 0 99 3.4 161 5.2 NA NA 63.0 NA 6.2 NA Granite 1 63 5.1 133 10.6 77 ' 7.39 -111.0 -42.1 7.0 -11.2 Deer Lodge 0 176 2.9 362 5.7 - 201 _ 4.49 ' 106.0 -44.4 18.6 -32.2 Jefferson 0 60 4.3 39 3.0 NA " NA -35.0 NA _ -2.1 NA Madison o 99 4.o 72 3.4 , NA - K' -27.0 NA -2.7 NA Powell 0 54 - 2.4 91 3.9 ' NA ' NA - 69.0 NA 3.74 NA Ravalli 0 311 " 6.1 304 6.8 290 - 5.32 -2.0 44.6- -.7 -2.8 Silver Bow 0 1,002 5.1- 1,462 8.7 894 ' 5.63, 46.0 •-38.8 46.0 -113.6 Broadwater 0 25 2.1 30 3.0 NA NA 20.0 NA 0.5 NA Meagher 1 42 4.8 " 86 " 8.1 - 90 , 8.7 " 105.0 -4.4 4.4 0.$ Park 1 173 3.6 402 7.7 296 5.89 132.0 =26.3 22.9 -21.2 Gallatin b 226 2.7 380 3.9 NA NA - 68.1 NEt 15.4 NA • • SPIlbeilnia40.0*Oa*OP"• • • -••••••••■••••-•• —a-we•••Ss.•••• • -• • • • Population Cbaracteri3tics Appendix VI 1 FAMILY INCOME 1959 Total Median No. of Under $3,000 $3,000-4,999 $5,000-60999 $7,000 -9,999 $10,000 & Over Family Families '- No %. No. ,� No. ': No. % No, Income Identification (1) -2) --CU (4) (5) 36) 7 (8) (9) 110) 'rll) (12) District Total 3.,0564 951 21.7 9 974 27.3 9 383 .. .6 6,160 16.8 3,096 8.4 4,871 --B.A. O Title I 91• 1 012 20.. WWI 2..9 1,3.6 27.7 :•1 .• 7.3 ,0 • Other MEM • '39 21.9 MAITIUMEI -8 023 2 .3 5 299 BM 22736 8.6 ,812 State 000 16 .8 IBM 20.2 40.0 24.2 42.2 Pea 18 8 1. 1 11. 0 U. s. 000 l Na NA Na NA �� N. Q NA 12.2 �• County Class Beaverhead 0 1 02 411 24.0 20.6 394 23.0 266 15.6 195 14.0 4,998 Granite 1 164 20.4 30. 222 27.8 1 1 En 40 0 4 Deer Lode 0 3 9:: Imm'is 13.1 1 9 W• i 1 101 tRumnintrenmiginsw 022 Jefferson 0 gam 20• en 210 INC] 20,: IIIIIIIIIIIIM 1•.0 10• 1 .0 4 '8• Madison 0 1 309 agEif 331 lemnatu 22.0 MEM 13.. 100 6 MI 0 Powell 0 .•• �.T.•II*!!t • J al i 29.• 1..2 �tl 8 Ravalli 0 1 2:0 ::• 2 .0 IMIN:• NMi .0 11.0 18; 81• Sliver Bow 0 alinitaM : : llabli 2 .0 fl an 2 0: mural 1 0.1 9.2 28 !roan ater 0 IIIIMIIINER01 32.7 staggimmum 20.41 0 7.2 i 7 6.: ,9_ MeaFrhe 1 wi wa 179 29.0 e1S:j 0 101 16.4 8. Park 1 Mt9 20. :9• Mil ••0 IRMA .2• 18.0 11111muipm 2 Ta latin 0 .,311 1,3 7 21.3 1 0 23.: 1 al& 19.9 .18 9.; •• • • Population Characteristics Appendix VII N r1 rl YEARS OF EDUCATION 1960 1960 Population 13 Years 25 Years 0-4 Years 5-12 Years and over median Years and over , No. % No. No. , % Total Male Female Identification (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (r 1 (9) (10) District Total 82,847 _ 3,839 4.6 63,223 76.3 15.785 _ 19.1 11.0 LD.2 11.8 Title I 10,715 301 1 2.8 8,673 ; 80.9 1..74-1 16.2 11.0 10.0 11.9 Mier 72,132 3,538 4 4.9 514,550 _ 75.6 ' 14.0%. 19.11 11.0 10.3 11.7 State (000) , 356 , 14.6 4.1 271.1 76.1 70.3 19.8 11.4 { 10.7 12.1 j). S. ((000) 991438 8,36' 8:5- -11- 74,768 75.1 16,367 , 16.5' 10.E 10.3 10.7 Count Class Beaverhead 0 4,026 181 4.5 2,?43 3.0 02 22. 11.0 .8 12,2 am r e 1 1,717 ' LS ' 2.6 1 94 378 22.2 11.) 10.3 k. 12.2 �-e�.r. ge 0 10,662 910 8.5 ,,l 0 1,602 , 15.0 12.J..,_. 9.7 a 11.4 TEF erson 0 2,353 427 188.2 1, 75 }51 15.0 ' 9 8.9 10.2 lEc is on 0 3,018 74 - 2.4 2,35 78.0 585 19.6 11.3 10.5 12.0 Powell 0 4 1U5 189 4.6 ; j,223 -80.4 623 15.0 11.0 10.1 12.0 1�avall1 0 7,059 236 3.2 5,552 ' 75.2 1,271 17.9 11.2 10.3 12.0 M. ver ow 0 26,646 1,230 4.8 21,262 79.5 14,154 15.7 10.9 10.4 11.3 8176-aawater 0 1,493 61 4.1 11214 08 20.6 11,2 10,2 12.1 Gallatin -C1-7T7'0 2 0 1.: a 2-.2---64.. - ---4-248 . 12. i _ 2 2 `ea: er 3 2.3 127. .2 1 10. 10.. •.8 11 •ar 1 7153 _ 222 _ 2.9 _ 6 03 1.0 1,210 l..1 7] .7 10.1 12.1 . 1111 • Population Characteristics Appendix VIII M REMAINDER OF THE POPULATION-LABOR FORCE PARTICIPATION RATE H H _ 1960 ---_ 1965 Population Labor Participation Population, Labor Participation 14 'ears & over Force Rate 149ears & over Force Rate Identification (3) — (4 _) (5) • District Total 105,302 54 841 ___._ 52.0 NA NA NA R't e 13 379 7 531 56.2 13 505 10. 2.. Other 9 ,9 3 , •-----51.4 NA NA NA State (ow) 458.4 254.4 55.0 NA NA NA �- 00• lb . 2• 62 768 al C 122 05'6 611 432 .0 L Count Class Beaverhead 0 5 289 3 06 58.0 NA NA NA rang e - Ilinnall 9.0 2 030 1 0 2 X1.0 Deer Lodge • 13 • 0 • •• 9.0 2 • 0lyiallIEW.0 T f` person 0 ,•.• •• .• NA NA N1 Raison 0 3,690 24( ----38.0 NA NA NA owe 0 — 5,033 21359 __ L7 .0 NA NA NA ava i 0 840 4 439 50.0 9 387---- L, 9 58.0 i ver ow 0 2, •,:• -• — 5'2.0 32,73. 13 692 .0 roa a er 0 i9 999 r____W 52.7 _ NA NA Nil iaT 'in 0 IIIM MINIM ., 52.8 NA IIIE01111B Na eager : •. :z 03' 111111111. .• Park — • 9 • ,029 52.0 a. Remainder of the Population = Total Population - Minority Group 4111 4111 Population Characteristics ."appendix IX a ri REMAINDER OF THE POPULMTIONa UNEMPLOYMENT - 1960 15-65 of Li1Bmplo Meat Total Number or Unemployment Labor Force Unemployed Rate Labor Force Unemployed Rate Identification (7) (8) (9) (10) my (12) District Total 54 841 3 26 6.4 NA NA NA Title I 1 as 8 2 06 IIIIIII ' . Other 4 10 2 •0 6 1 NA NA NA State 000 8 6.0 NM N1 1 -! i. S. 00011 62 768 12: .0 6 2,755 h.2 County Class 1 Beaverhead 0 06 1,61 5.2 i4; NA NA Granite 1 1 251 .1.3.3_ 10.5 1,0A2 77 7.39 Deer Lode 0 • 0• 66 2 201 I • -ef erson 0 1 2•0 .0 NA NA C .dison 0 n1 72 3.4 NA NA NA Powell 0 nal1111M111111111a 1.1 N:: va i 0 t ► ..i 9 290 . 2 Siive Bow _ _ 0 . :. ) • :• 1y'd .• ..3 Broadwater • 30 3.0 NSA NA NA Gallatin 0 3:0 3.9 NA Nil NA Meagher 1 1 0. :. ; .1 1 03 -0 8. 0 Park 1 21 02 7.7 5 029 29. .89 a. Remainder of the Population a Total Population - Minority Group • • Population Characteristics Appendix X u■ rl H MINORITY GROUP SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHkRACTERISTICS Median Family Income Median School Years Median Age - 1960 Y 1959 Completed - 1960 Minority Remainder of Minority Remainder of ( Minority Remainder of Group Population Group Population _ Group Population Identification (1) ( .) (3) 14) (5) (6) District Total none __ 4,871 none 11.0 none 31.1 R.A. Title I none 3,046 none 11.0 none - -- Other none ljt312 none 11.0 none 30. State _ none 5403 none 11.4 none ' 32.2 U. S. ILL. 5,Tt1'T - - IC 10.6 Ni 29.5 County Class Beaverhead 0 NA 4,998 AL 11.0 IS;. 31.6 Granite 1 U. IL 937 I. -- ri.3 Ni. 32.2 Deer Lodge 0 AA - 5,022 NA 107- NA Jefferson o I : L 4;989 AL 9.b 1 r 29.5 Madison 0 AL 41470 NA 11.3 11 t 33.9 Powell y 0 ILL. 5;3134 it 11.0 - NA j 31.9 Ravalli 0 IL 3 819 AA 11.2 INIL I 33.8 Silver Bow 0 Nil _ 5,253 it 10.9 NA 32.3 Broadwater 0 r� it 3 -988 _ Na 11.2 - NA 2$.7 Gallatin �- 0 16.'. 5,360 'L 12.3 NA 24.6 Meagher 1 ii; 1049 E. 10.6 N:. 31.2 Park 1 It 5,255 AL 11.1 NA 1 31.9 . III Economic Structure and Activity Appendix BI H H EMPLOYMENT BY MAJOR INDUSTRY 1960 Transportation Whsle. Finance, Total Pub. Utilities and Insurance, Employ- .ontract and Common- Retail & Real l merit MI;. Minin: 'oast. cations Trade Estate Services Gov't A:. ic. Identification: Ti 2 3 (7) i i 9 10 District Total 51,392 6,147 4,357 2,491_ 4,533 9,633 1 292 8 911 i 6 6 1 1 1 11.A.title 1 p 1"(2 411 x.44 �J � •7 • �cLt Other n 85 2,b 0 _ 8 = r�[:I f n 1 1 1 1 1 1 . • . State (000) 250.6 23.4 6.8 14.9 21.0 47.0 8.0 U. 8. 00 11,39 5392 38.6 37.3 000 9,92 1•,79• 712 2�•: � ,39 2,669 7,392 8,353 � 5x7231 County Class Beaverhead 0 2 906 60 83, 151 178 550 60 323 453 1,053 granite I-- 1 1: •9 147 °82 90 77 8- 139 ' 94 i 282 Deer Lodge 0 o 0 0 Ewa 31 1 • 729 j 91 1 331 1 468 122 Jefferson 0 75 10 2 20 —_ 7 Madison 0 }* 162 2 6 j • 7�.� •• 2 • 2•• 2 • Powell 0 2 2.: 2 3 114 2.4 221:7 —17 211 ' • Ravalli 0 1 3 _121„--7------230 .32 •� 46 ,silver Bow_ Q_ 1 404 1 28. . 3 294 736 , 1,43 3, 27 �� 13 19 1 2 0 Broadwater 0 96 :• • 3 50 1.6 " • "-8— IIMIs[71 .. Gallatin 0 9 3 . 0 7" — : ` 107 , • 250 •. • Meagher 97• •' • sua Park 1 -" ,81) . _• • 3 9 2 130 7 .. 7 1 • • Economic Structure and Activity Appendix XII ti H H DOLLAR VALUE BY MS.JOR ECONOMIC SECTOR 1963a (all figures in $000) Manufacturing Mining Value Wholesale Value of Value Added Added Sales Retail Sales _ Services Farm Products Identification (1) (2) (3) (4) ( ) (6) District Total NA Na Na 194,506,000 19,2981000 58,161,660 R.A. Title I ' 3,585 000 IL ' 171000 23,965,000 _. 2,527000 10,927,349 Other P - Ka 170,5413000 16,4712000 47,234,311 State (000) 236 230 Na 844,249 9651/34 100358 375,500 U.S. (0001 191,0 ,000 4),, •,O•' 358,382000 2330003000 44,5803000 37,205,000 County Class Beaverhead 0 D D 3,017,000 12,4263000 9211 000 9 667,922 Granite 1 560,000 N:. 508 2000 31044,000 344,0x0 6 305,843 Deer Lodge 0 D N., ll 16,333,000 1,241,000 1,622,977 Jefferson 0 D _____f____...0.--_ 2;47,�2006 3,624.„000 364,000 , 1,996,535 Madison 0 b ` - 1' 1,175,000 000 783,000 6,634,85b Powell 0 _178 000� _ _ Na D • 00• 444.000 4,016,431 Ravalli 0 , 3.166,000 Na 3,531,E 12,1g2,000 905)000 7,350,282 Silver Bow _ 0 9.94 ,000 Na 59,549,000 641,574,000 6,185,000 669,171 Broadwater 0 281,000 IL 1 294 000 470 ••• 251,000 3,516,574 Gallatin 0 9,467,000 Na 1:, .10000 ••• 5,371,000 11,75Q,261 Meagher 1 1,205,000 Na 2 6,000 . ••• 317 000 3,185L227 Park 1 2,120.000 ' NA 7,•53,000 ••• ••• 5,43 ,279 a. Except for column 6 which data is for 1964 D. Withheld to avoid disclosing figures for individual companies • 4111 Physical Resources Appendix XIII co HI H AGRICULTURAL RsSOURCFS 1960 and 1963 _____ verage thnual Average Two host Important Cross and Yield Per Acre Growing Annual v _Anal-70 One Number Two Season Rainfall 1960 1963 _ 1960 1963 (days) (inches) Crop Yield Crop Yield Crop Yield Crop field Bu. Bu. I Bu. Bu. Identification 1 2 , 3 14) 7 ((1) (9) (101 District Total 112 13.61 Wheat 4,213 L100 Wheat 4 303 700 Earle 2)801,500 Barley 3,371,800 R Title 107 _ 1 . 0 teat 677,800 Wheat 1 900 Barle 31 •IIO Earle 9. 00 Other 113 12.:: Wheat 3,5'35,300 Wheat 3 11 :00 Barley 2, •2,900 ; Barley 2,:7 , 00 County Class i Beaverhead 0 11 11.41 Wheat 2,2E411210 Wheat 162 000 Earle 126 000 Earle 159 600 Granite 1 :7 1J Barle h6000- Bar e 0 100 Wheat 23 000 Wheat 22 000 Deer Lodge 0 107 13.3 Wheat ,300 Wheat 29 200 Earle 12 200 ! Earle' i 00 Jefferson 0 P1). r-- 13 Wheat 179 000 ?That 100 Barley i 100000 Barley 91,900 _ Madison 0 111 13.9 Wheat 1,000 Wheat 291 00 Berici 122 000 Barley 232,200 Powell 0 100 10 Z4 Earle 111 200 Barle 13 200 Wheat >W200 Wheat 84,700 Ravalli 0 130 12.22 Earle 3F 000 Barley r 339 11.00 Wheat 246=600 , -Jheat ' 205,200 Silver Bow 0 110 12.i7 Earle 3 700 Barle, 00 Wheat 1,200 Wheat 1,900 Broadwater 0 121 11.53 1 eat :•,900 Wheat .91, 00 Earle 2:2 J00 Barley 354,000 Gallatin 0 11 17.31 wheat 1 919 700 Wheat 1,:70,d00 Earle 1,39,,600 Barley ' 1,540,800 Meagher 1 108 _ 11, . Wheat .9 000 Wheat 134 600 Earle 255 800 Barley 179,600 Park 1 127 13.61 Wheat 585:800 Wheat ■ ,300 Barle 246 T00 Earle 2 6,700 1111 Community Facilities -PP endix XIV o. H PUBLIC SCHOOL ta.CILITIM - SOURCE OF FUNDS — — - - __ Local as Local State Federal of Total Identification (11T (i21 `113) (1U) District Total L2,799,470 4,533,240 243,246 1 32.8 ILA. Title I 1,516,135 626,707 L 40,688 i 69.0 Other — 11,233,335 3,906,533 207,558 ; 73,-2 County Class Beaverhead 0 740,124 161,636 i 26,230 79,9 Granite 1 354,198 - 84,596 13.027 i 78.0 Deer Lodge 0 1.112x494 34 4232 _ _ 13 161 75.5 Jefferson 0 437.100 143,447 10.021.s J 74.0 Madison 0 508 780 - 184,540 14.109 1 71.9 Powell 0 685',745 192,108 26,765 75.1 i TES-Valli 0 __x.4,188 45 860 _ 69,423 ( 53S Silver Bow 0 2081,213 1,128 0 21,39 69. Broadwater 0 h14 ,T87 6 .417 3,548 86. Gallatin 0 3,515,804 938,703 24 901 78.4 Meagher 1 Si 839 53 034 5'000 81.1 Park 1 910,09 9,077 22,0 1 .1 • • Economic Structure and Activity Appendix XV c c PROFILE OF ECONOMIC CONCENTRATION r Farms-1964 — - Manufacturing I No. of Corrmiercial Establishments-1963 1 Financial Farms Establishments-1963 Avg. j Institutionsa 1966 Over Total Avg. Value Value 1 Total Avg. 1000 Avg. Sales Sales Added Added ! Deposits Deposits No. Acres Size No. ($000) $000 No. $000 $000)' No. ($000 ($000 Identification (lj 12) 3 : 9 10 12 District Total 1119 1,409 222 1,816 194,506 107 PLl NA R.A. Title I asst 408 3113 29 23 965 litallallift/ 3 :; sain vi Other mil 1 001 Efinjammj 170 ft ICPAIMIIIIM , If ; "a rr - State NA Nn Nun 7 800 96 7 4 976 2 6 2001242 1 1 1 118 000 8 534 UU S NA NA N1 1 07 931 2 200 000 � Ti ,:3191 03 000 •• 2 �'il��7_ '�. 1 000 2. 9: ' County Class Beaverhead 0 269 193 6,835 12,426 109 7 D D 7,772 Granite !14•� ]@!•Rf7 W �.fl aa!l .��1 • 1- -r od:e 0 WM 22 EitRUIONanni mai 11 D D 1 • " •4 Jefferson 0 214 87 1,917 9 ;_____ .0 I D D 3 10; 1 Madison rr 20 Fa : 1 1 _ :a: :.. . 'owe ��l 06 1 �� s:" M •; Rava i 0 1 NM WM�9 12 iT2 ; .. 2l l �fV`] 1 Si. ver Bow 0 ��5'�fi�1:_fil .. 7 2 �1� Inn 9 3 Broadwater 0 �: �J 2 3 0 31170 79 a� 2:1 '0 Gallatin 0 8 8 �i :3 :e 2 27 131 ®=MI Na Meagher 1 8 8 l mo ,1 �� 11207 17• NA PPark 1 25 220 2 073 19 1.,937 .7 23 2 12 2 N �A 3 a. Commercial Banks D. Value withheld to avoid disclosing data of individual firms 4111 4110 Economic Structure and Activity Appendix XVI H cv rl :.VERAGE ROURLY H-GE RATES BY MAJOR INDUaTaY 1965 Trans., Finance, Public Irsur. Mining Con- Utilities and (Specify tract and Whsle, Retail Real Identification Mf:. Activit' Const Commun. Trade Trade Estate Services Gov't. A&ric. 1 2 3 4 5) 6 7j (8) (9) (10) District Total g.i0 - 2.53 .3.02 2555 2..32 _IAN .J-a7 1,.32. _ 23.21 1.25_ - R. A. Oth: I 2 • 2 0 •~� i � _ 2 awx M II _ 2 Otn- 2 60 � �y Saste 000 2 80 NA NA IMIBIPIIIMIM 0 NA NA U t:d St: . : - 000S 6 W 6' NA 2 61 IIIMI ,fit SAM NA County class Beaverhead 0 2 0 2 0 II 2 0 2 0 1111111.11. 2 Granite 20 201.* 0 2 0 illnrann Dee Lode 0 •• M r1 :0 I�U !�.Mi� � Jefferso 0 2 0 2 0 ►� 2 0 W, l�i :d' • 0i'� 0 Porrel 0 MI 2 0 nnnil Ray: s 0 2 6 2 10 0 � � iii Sil : B• . 0 2 •0 W51 •0 0 2 80 2 2 0 0 2 2 5 a Br.:d r-. :r • MM�AI 2.2 2 00n� fl i G eV ! 0 60 0 00 2 •0 00 0 104111S Meagher 1 2 00 IiiinglienlillIggi 2 2 _ 0 2 00 Sell P:rk 2 60 2 0 00 Mill ._ '0 2 00 inallin • • Economic Structure and Activity Appendix XVII cu cv ri TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES 1960 Rail Miles of Air No of Area in Miles Line Per No. of Length of Intercity Square of R.R. Sgrfre Commercial Longest Trucking Identification Miles Line Mile Airports Runway Companies n (3) District Total 27 456 L350 047 N_ NA NA R. A. , Title I 6724 288 .042 NA NA NA Other _ 20,732 862 .041 NA NA NA State 000) _ 147 4.94 .034 NA NA NA United States 000) _ 3.615 214.4 .059 NA NA NA County Class Beaverhead 0 5.580 120 .021 0 0 5 Granite 1 r 1.737 18 .045 0 0 4 Deer Lodge 0 741 50 .067 0 0 5 Jefferson 0 , 1.654_ 125 .075 0 0 5 Madison 0 3.541 101 .928 0 _ 0 4 Powell 0 2,327 94 _ .$41 0 _ 0 5 Ravalli 0 2,388 50 .021 0 0 5 Silver Bow 0 716 137 1.90 1 6.857 10 Broadwater 0 1.245 45 .036 0 0 0 Gallatin 0 2.640 140 .955 NA NA NA Meagher 1 , 2.356 15 .031 0 0 4 Park 1 2.631 135 .051 NA NA NA III • Physical Resources Appendix 7NIII MINERAL RESOURCES 1966 rf Minerals Presently Extracted (List in order of value) Dollar Dollar Mineral Deposits Not Extracted Name Value Name Value Name (List those which can be Identification `a) id.2� 1 2A 3 4 5 6 7 District Total NA NA R. A. Title I Metal. Manes . NA Phosphate NA M - G - I - E - J - H - 0 Other Metal Mina. NA , BA Talc_ NA Place Class t A - B - E - F - G - H - I - J - K - L ` Beaverhead Co. 0 Metal Mines 75.2 Phosphate 1,176 Talc 101 Q - R Granite Co. 1 M e t a l Mines 586.4 :Phosphate 1,799 M - G - I - E - J - H - 0 Deer Lodge Co. 0 i P - F - K - I - H Jefferson Co. 0 Metal M i n e s 15.4 Cement 3.591 F - E - I - G - H - J Calcium Madison Co. 0 Carbonate 61 H - D - I - J - G - L Powell Co. 0 Metal Mines .965 Phosphate 4,416 A - P - K - F - H - J - G - E - I ':7: : • 8 Phos•hate 103 K - E - I - G - H Silver Bow Co. 0 Metal Mines 98.0 8 Silica 48 A - H - E - K - M Broadwater Co. 0 Iron Ore N A Gold N A and N A E - I - G - F - J rave l � Gallatin Co. 0 Metal Mines .678 Cement 2,989 Sand & NA F - K - L Gravel Meagher Co. 1 Lead NA Copper NA Sand & NA G - I - H Gravel Park Co. 1 Sand & NA Stone NA H - I Gravel A - Phosphate E - Lead I - Silver M - Manganese B - Tungsten F - Stone J - Copper 0 - Manganiferous Ore C - Fluorspar G - Zinc K - Sand & Gravel P - Lime D - Talc H - Gold L - Mica Q - Thorium R - Yttrium, Europium • • Community Facilities Appendix XIX PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITIES 1966 Number Number of Pupil Teacher Average Annual Expenditure of Pupils a Teachers Ratio Expenditures Per Pupil Identification Elem. Sec. Elem. Sec. Elem. Sec. Elem. Sec. Elem. Sec. 1 (2 (3 4 5) • i = 9 10 District Total _ NA_ NA _ NA NA _ NA_ NA NA_ R A T'tle I NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Other NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA County QM= Beaverhead 0 1.306 482x 66 18 27 640.601 332,854 690 Granite 1 555 210 40 14 15 270.000 178 000 Deer Lodge 0 1,678 855 66 31 28 847,778 401,985 505 470 Jefferson 0 837 333 34 20 17 470.958 293,849 563 882 Madison 0 •• I 2 • 8 6 28 6 Powell 00 521.020 240.088 a 460 Hawn' 0 •• • 8 0 8 6 _ 0 Broadw Bow 0 5,694 1.982 ' 251 83 22 f 2.832,323 0 Broadwater 0 NA NA NA PIA NA NA Gallatin 0 NA NA NA NA NA }ks•her 0 20 21 0 ���� 0 •• 6 0 `. �t. Park 1 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA a. In cases where the school system is classified other than Elementary -- 1 through 8, Secondary -- 9 through 12, please note the classification used. x. Grades 10 through 12 • • Community Facilities Appendix XX In cv OTHER EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES 1966 Parochial School- Higher Educ. Enrol nt Number Number of Pupil Teacher Four Year Vocational of t}pils Teachers Ratf,c Junior College & Training Identification Elem. Si�c, Elemr Sep. E],em. Sec. 200 1@ge Univer@ity Enrg1 nt (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) District Total - - _ R. A. Title I NA , NA - NA , NA NA NA , NA NA NA Other NA , NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA County Class Beaverhead 0 None NQne -- -- -- — - __ 800 __ Granite 1 None None — — __ __ __ _ __ _ Deer Lodge 0 _ •• _ 0 — -- 15 Yefferson 0 , Nnna Nnna , -- -- -- __ -- l4 Madison 0 None None -- -- — — — __ __ Powell 0 185 — 4. — 46 -- — -- — Ra`Talli 0 None No , — — — _- __ Silver Bow 0 2,868 855 77 1 46 19 18 , -- 603 18 Meagher 1 None None -- — -- -- __ -- Gallatin o NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA.. NA Broadwater 0 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA _ Park 1 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 1111 Community Facilities Appendix XXI ri NFDICAL, RJCREATIONAL, AND PUBLIC LIBRARY FACILITIES 1966 Medical Recreational Public Library No. of No. of No, of Bed Acres Per No. of No, of Hospitals Hospital Persons 0cc. Recreational 1,000 • Library Books per Identification Beds Per Bed Rate a Acreage Persons Books Capita (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) District Total -NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA R. A. , Title I NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Other NA NA NA NA _ NA NA NA NA Place Class Beaverhead County 0 _ 1 45 160 70% 190.000 27,000 22.000 3 Granite Counts 1 1 10 _ 300 47% 130.000 43.000 2.000 0.66 Deer Lodge County 0 1 86 217 36.000 2.000 23.000 1.20 1 Jefferson County 0 1 61 71 70% 36,000 8,300 0 0 Madison County 0 2 22 , 232 80% 75.000 15,000 10.200 2 Powell County 0 1 35 210 70% 00 000 1L..500 72.000 1.60 Ra^alli County 0 1 32_ 406 76% 8 ••• 7.000 19.500 1.50 Silver Bow County 0 2 347 ] 32 85% • • • 650 78.000 1.70 Broadwater County 0 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA ' NA Gallatin County 0 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Meagher County 1 1 8 . 225 70% 130.000 . 52.000 81600 3.0 Park County 1 NA NA NA NA NA i NA NA NA a. Refers to number of days beds are occupied on an annual basis, expressed in percent. 4111 4111 Community Facilities Appendix XXII HOUSING QUALITY INDICATORS 1960 Total Housing Units Connected Units With Hot and Units in Owner Occupied Ur'_t To P bl_ S_. • Co d R 1•'n. W.t-, S. . d C. .it' .n U Identification Hub- No0.- Pe : Ni tib: P- ce t N.gibe Percent Number ,1r-41111 District Total :: .a (5)8 (7) •` R A _-------_ Title I 6.6 NA NA IIIMMIIIIrtir 6 0 Other 0 NA NA a� .� 60 0 • 6:• rrY��n�, State (000) In NA NA _NM 68 0 Mill 6 0 United States (000) liffril NA NA • : 0 11110/1311 161 0 2 70• IMES Elaga Ca s Be:v-rhe-e C. .t • NA NA IN • 0 2 0 6 0 0 MN Granite C.unt• WWI NA NA ni 0 Z 0 Derr Lod•.e Count 0 68 NA NA • 0 8 80 0 W1 62 0 Jefferson County 0 Ilinni NA NA 1111W111 :.• 0 icn 86 0 lin 0 • Nisi on C. nt 0 0 6 NA NA 11110M11 0 C .•! 6 0 n 68 0 Po -11 Count 0 2 6 NA NA 111F1M11 :6 0 8 0 n 6 Ravalli Count• 0 WM NA NA ni : 0 IIIIMI 6 0 0 6 •' Silver Bow Count 0 IIIMMICUInnnnnnn� Broadwater Count 0 • 6 NA NA •. ilini�, Gallatin Count 0 • • NA NA s _e� •0 6 6 irn Meagher Count. 1 Illira NA nil 6 6 In 0 nr 6 Park Count, 1 4 597 NA NA 4 171 90.7 3 358 73.0 2 708 62.8 a. Percent of total occupied units in District. • • • Appendix )OCII CITY POPULATION Cities 1950 1960 Change Butte 33,251 27,877 --16.1 , { Anaconda 11,254 12,054 7.1 i Deer Lodge 3,779 4,681 23.9 Dillon 3,268 3,690 12.9 Hamilton 2,678 2,495 -7.0 Philipsburg 1,048 1,107 5.6 Boulder 1,017 1,394 33.4 7bitehall 929 898 -3.3 Drummond 531 577 8.6 Sheridan 572 539 -5.8 Innis NA 525 -- Twin Bridges 497 509 2.4 Virginia City 323 194 40.0 ' Bozeman 11,325 13,361 17.9 Livingston 7,683 8,229 7.1 'Aowmsend 1,316 1,528 16.1 Uhite Sulphur Springs 1,025 1,519 48.1 Three 2orks 1,114 1,161 4.2 Belgrade 663 1,057 59.4 Manhattan 716 889 24.1 Gardiner NA 650 Lest Yellowstone NA 620 Clyde Park 280 253 -0.91 i:ilsull NA 200 trtinsdale NA 200 Jardene NA 100 Toston NA 100 'tingling NA 85 Radersburg HA 80 ; 1 ill BIBLIOGRAPHY United States Census of Population 1960 1. General Population Characteristics 1960 2. Detailed Characteristics PC (1) 28D 3. Number of Inhabitants PC (1) 28A 4. General Social and Economic Characteristics PC (1) 28C 5. Current Population Reports P-23 No. 7 United States Census of Business 6. U. S. Census of Mineral Industries 1963 M1063 (2) 25 7. U. S. Census of Manufacturers, 1963 M.C. 63(3) 27 8. U. S. Census of Retail Trade, 1963 B.C. RA 28 9. U. S. Census of IJholesale Trade, 1963 B.C. 63 Mil 28 10. U. S. Census Selected Services, 1963 B.C. 63 SA 23 11. County Business Patterns, 1965 CBP - 65 - 28 12. U. S. Census of Agriculture, 1964 Volume 1 Part 38 13. U. S. Census of Housing 1960, (State and Small Areas)HC (1) 28 14. Sales Management Survey of Buying Power 15. Montana State Board of Equalization Biennial Reports 16. Montana Unemployment Compensation Commission Manpower Guide Book 17. Montana State Superintendent of Public Instruction Education Statistics 18. Montana State Department of Agriculture Montana Agricultural Statistics 19. Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1966 20. 100 Years Under the Big Sky in Montana 21. The U. S. Book of Facts and Information 22. Catalog of Federal Programs and Community Improvement 23. Area Development Guide 24. Plant Location by Yaseen 25. Minerals Yearbook 26. Mineral Facts and Problems 27. Bulletins Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology 28. Bulletins & Reports, Montana Agricultural Experiment Station, Montana State College 29. Statistical Methods by Barnes and Noble 30. The Law of Retail Gravitation by Milliam Reilly 31. Occupational Handbook, Department of Labor 32. Pacific Northwest Economic Base Study for Power Markets U. S. Department of the Interior 33. The Economics of the Montana Forest Products Industry 34. Reports of the Upper Midwest Research Council 35. Techniques of Industrial Development by Howard Bessire 36. American Industrial Development Council Reports 37. Research Reports Office of Technical Services 38. Standard & Poors Directory of American Corporations 39. Moody's Industrial Manual 40. The Industrial Manifest of Montana 41. Economic Development published by the U. S. Department of Cotmnerce 42. Thomas Register i PART FIVE RESOURCE RECOVERY AND RECYCLING ANALYSIS I I A. GENERAL The primary objective of this section of the study is to identify and evaluate existing and potential markets for recoverable materials found in the solid waste generated in the study area and to utilize this information to determine the potential of implementing a recycling and/or resource recovery program. The potential of implementing a solid waste recycling program is directly dependent upon markets for the recoverable materials. Revenues from the recoverable materials must be obtained to offset the costs of collecting and separating the wastes in most cases. If revenues for the recoverable materials cannot be obtained,other methods of disposal will be more economical. Historically and at the present time, the markets for recoverable materials have shown signif- icant fluctuation. The fluctuations may be attributed to a number of outside forces. Among these are: 1) supply and demand for specific materials, 2) strikes in virgin materials industries, 3) governmental influence through tax or price incentives,4)foreign purchases,and 5) transporta- tion costs. In general, markets for recoverable materials have shown an upward trend similar to that of most other commodities. Although future prices are extremely difficult or impossible 1 to predict, it would be reasonable to expect this trend to continue. In addition to the economic factors,environmental, technological, political and sociological forces are emphasizing recycling programs as a desirable and practical alternative to conventional solid waste disposal. The extreme fluctuations in price and quantities are lessened in magnitude and frequency as the market for recoverable materials increases. When prices are adequate enough to make recycling attractive,many individual waste generators practice recycling. When the market drops below a certain economic level, these recycled materials become solid waste. I B. TYPES AND QUANTITIES OF RECOVERABLE MATERIALS An important factor that must be determined prior to the evaluation of the feasibility of recycling solid wastes is the quantity and composition of wastes generated in the area. Generally, there are two types of recoverable materials found in solid wastes:1) secondary materials that can 1 5.1 1 be reused such as newsprint, corrugated and glass, and 2) those materials that can be used as a fuel source to generate steam, electricity and/or heat. I A detailed investigation of the volume of solid waste was conducted in Part Three of this re- port where quantities of waste were derived by applying typical waste generation rates to the estimated number of residents in the study area for the current year and the year 2000. Through analysis of the detailed solid waste quantity and composition investigations conducted for the State of Montana during the State Solid Waste Management and Resource Recovery Study in 1976, it was possible to obtain composition data for the waste generated in the study area. During this study solid waste samples were taken from several areas of the state. For each sample the various constituents found in the wastes were weighed. Based on the sampling program, average composition data for the wastes generated in the state were developed. I Included in the following narrative is a summary of the quantities of the various potential recoverable materials found in the study area's solid waste stream. These quantities are estimates based on local records and information and the composition data obtained in the statewide study conducted in 1976. 1 1. Secondary Materials In most instances the recoverable secondary materials that are practical to recycle are limited to ferrous and non-ferrous metals, separated newsprint and corrugated, and glass. In some instances other materials such as clothing, rubber and wood products are economically I recoverable. However, these instances are uncommon and will not be investigated to a great degree in this study. I The estimated quantities of recoverable secondary materials generated in the study area are depicted in Table V-1. The quantities of materials depicted are based on the waste genera- tion information developed in Part Three of this report and the waste composition data that was determined applicable from the statewide solid waste study conducted in 1976. As the table indicates, approximately 2,113 and 358 tons of recoverable ferrous and non-ferrous metals respectively are generated in the study area annually. Also 6,732 and 2,757 tons of potentially I recoverable paper and cardboard respectively are generated annually. If market conditions are favorable, it is anticipated that a majority of this material could be recovered economically and effectively. 2. Energy Producing Materials 1 From the waste composition investigations conducted in the statewide study, it was determined that approximately 58 percent of the solid waste that is generated is combustible I 5.2 I 1 TABLE V-I ISUMMARY CT WASTE COMPOSITION FOR STUDY AREA S1978 2000 II Average(1) Quantity Projected Quantity Characteristic Percent (tons/yiJ (tons/yr.) Icombustibles Paper 18.8 6,732 10,805 Cardboard 7.7 2,757 4,426 IOther 31.7 11,351 18,220 Subtotal - 58.2 20,840 33,451 I Non-Combustibles ' Ferrous 5.9 2,113 3,392 I Non-Ferrous 1.0 358 574 Glass 4.3 1,540 2,471 ' Other 30.6 10,957 17,588 Subtotal - 41.8 14,968 24,025 TOTAL- 100.0 35,808 57,476 I (1) Source: "Population, Employment and Waste Generation Report" prepared for State 1 of Montana Department of Health and Environmental Sciences, 1976. I I I I I and can be utilized as an energy source. Utilizing this figure, it is estimated that approxi- I mately 20,840 tons of solid waste generated in the study area annually could potentially ' be used as an energy source at the current time. Based on the information obtained from the statewide study, it was determined that solid waste has an average heat value of 5,039 Btu/pound on an as-received basis. Based on an equivalent heating unit basis, the energy I available from the solid waste generated in the study area would replace approximately 13,000 tons of coal, 321 million cubic feet of natural gas or 3.5 mil. gallons of No. 2 fuel oil annually. I Therefore, it is obvious that the energy available from the wastes generated in the study area is significant and the feasibility of utilizing these wastes as an energy source should be evaluated. C. FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS FOR SECONDARY MATERIALS I A review of potential buyers for materials that can be recovered from the study area's solid I waste indicates that real markets presently exist for many products. Before some materials gain acceptance and are in demand in the market place, however, new developments must occur within industry to make these commodities attractive. In all cases the recovered materials must meet strict specifications set down by industry in order to command the highest market price. In most cases a recycling program should be designed to be flexible enough so that if one market slows down or fails, any single unit process for a commodity can be discontinued or shifted to another market without disrupting the future of the program. During such a slowdown,it would be useless for the program to continue to recover that product if no other market was available. In some situations it may also be profitable to stockpile the material awaiting a favorable change in market I conditions rather than to discontinue collection of the materials. The basic objective of the product identification and marketing portion of this study is to I identify the various potential buyers who exist for the products that could conceivably be sep- arated from solid wastes within the study area. It is apparent that a large array of products could possibly be recovered from the solid waste generated in the area. In order to explore the market potential of the alternative products more efficiently, these products have been grouped into four I categories; 1) ferrous metals, 2)non-ferrous metals, 3) glass and 4) paper products. The first phase of the task in this project was to identify the major processes used in the recovery of the material I and the uses the material may serve. Then, local markets, other Montana markets and national markets were addressed for each of the major categories. Based on this analysis, the ultimate feasi- bility of recovering each material type was addressed. 5.3 1 I U The Consultant utilized several different sources of information to identify potential buyers I of the alternate products that could be recovered from the solid wastes generated in the area. Inquiries were made to several national and state industrial and trade associations requesting their assistance in identifying members of their associations who may be considered potential buyers for these products. As the list of potential buyers increased, specific inquiries were formulated and sent to potential buyers. These inquiries basically identified the required material specifications, the capacity each potential buyer might have for recovered materials, and the pricing structure associated with each of the potential products. Included herein is a summary of the investigations ' that were conducted to determine the feasibility of recovering secondary materials from the solid wastes generated in the study area. 1. Ferrous Metals (a) General Uses Basically, there are two types of markets for the ferrous metals recovered from solid wastes: chemical processing and remelt applications. The chemical processing markets include tin recovery and copper precipitation. De-tinning is an industrial process that recovers tin from tin-plated steel. The usual sources are cans rejected in the can manu- facturing process and cans recovered from municipal solid waste before incineration. The process can generally obtain about 7114 pounds of tin from each ton of scrap cans, and is this country's only source of domestic tin. The product must not be tightly baled or compressed as the process of detinning depends upon a chemical reaction with the surface tof the metal. The copper precipitation technique involves the leaching out of copper from reclaimed cans. Through a complex series of chemical reactions, the process of copper leaching continues until the supply of iron ore is exhausted and deposited as insoluable iron. This process is one of few economically feasible ways of recovering copper from low-grade ores. Approximately three tons of ferrous metals are needed to produce one ton of copper. The utilization of steel scrap in the steel-making industry is traditional. The use of steel cans as a scrap material is not new but until recently only small percentages were used in each melt. At the present time scrap steel cans,which comprise the major portion of ferrous metals found in municipal residential wastes, can be melted in most types of furnaces. One of the problems steel companies are currently concerned with is oxidation caused by exposure to the elements and by incineration. Proper care in the refuse process- ing cycle will minimize the problem and maintain high standards. A high-bulk density is 5.4 111 1 required and many companies insist on bales or bundles of this material for transpor- tation and operational convenience. Another process dealing with refuse-derived steel is the production of ferro-alloys 1 where iron is contained with controlled amounts of other elements and used as an additive in melts for alloy steel. Iron foundries represent a relatively new potential 1 market for ferrous metals recovered from municipal refuse. Both of these processes require shredding of the material and the density of the material should be as high as 1 possible to minimize transportation costs. (b) Specific Markets Through the market analysis it was determined that several potential markets for recoverable metals generated within the study area are available. Table V-2 summarizes the local, state and national markets as well as indications of current pricing information. 1 From the inquiries made to national markets, little interest was shown in purchasing the ferrous materials that would result from a recycling or resource recovery program in the study area. The major reason for this lack of interest was economics. It was determined that it is not currently profitable with the present freight rates and transportation costs to ship the ferrous materials to the plant locations. Two of the firms contacted,Wisconsin Metal and Chemical Corporation and Vulcan Materials Company, located in Milwaukee, Winconsin and Sandusky, Ohio respectively,indicated that because of the distance to their closest plant and the high 1 freight costs involved they could not be considered potential markets at the present time. 1 i As far as state markets are concerned, several were contacted and showed considerable interest in purchasing recovered ferrous materials. One industry located 1 within the state, Anaconda Company at Butte, could be considered as a potential user of the ferrous products. The Anaconda Company is presently operating a copper pre- 1 cipitation plant and utilizes substantial quantities of shredded and detinned ferrous in their process. Officials indicated that they would be interested in purchasing metal 5.5 1 1 1 TABLE V-2 FERROUS MATERIAL MARKETS* iLocal Market Other State Markets National Market Market Price Pacific Hide & Fur Pacific Hide& Fur None at Present $25-$55/ton Helena Butte, Great Falls, Billings, Missoula ASARCO, Inc. Varies w/market East Helena The Anaconda Company Variable Butte 1 Carl Weissman& Sons, Inc. $20-$55/ton Butte, Bozeman, Great Falls, Billings McCracken Metals $20-$55/ton Butte Montana Recycling, Billings Recycling Center $.05/lb. - steel Missoula-Billings cans I *Represents pricing structure as of March 15, 1980. I 1 I I I I i from a resource recovery facility if the material met their specifications. Several other state markets were addressed. These include several Butte, Great Falls, Missoula and J Bozeman firms. These companies expressed a desire to purchase ferrous materials de- rived from a recycling operation located within the study area. Local markets for ferrous material include ASARCO, Incorporated, a custom lead smelter located in East Helena;and Pacific Hide and Fur Depot in Helena. The ASARCO smelter utilizes scrap iron to supplement coke in the plant's blast furnace. Strict specifi- cations must be met before the ferrous material would be accepted. Pacific Hide and Fur is a local operation that accepts several types of ferrous products. I 2. Non-Ferrous Metals (a) General 1 Although non-ferrous metals, which are comprised primarily of aluminum, represent less than one percent of the municipal solid waste, once separated these materials are ex- tremely valuable. If these products are segregated and in a pure form, there are many prospective buyers. Current technology permits the isolation of an "aluminum only" product by two distinct types of processes which may be used after the general waste has been shredded and ferrous metals have been magnetically removed. One process involves I a chemical additive to a water suspension in which the aluminum is sitting. The aluminum will float to the surface and thus separate itself. The recovered aluminum is a mixture of various aluminum alloys and other light metals. The aluminum isolated by this method has value and can be marketed, but the price it commands reflects the relatively poor quality of the material. Recently another process was developed whereby devices (called eddy current separators or aluminum "magnets") isolate an aluminum fraction made up of predominantly aluminum beverage cans. Since this material is essentially a single alloy, its market value is substantially higher than that produced by the previous- ly mentioned process. i Recovered aluminum is currently being purchased by two major markets: aluminum producing companies and aluminum smelters. Beverage cans separated manually and col- lected by recycling groups and aluminum can stock recovered by the eddy current process are remelted by the major aluminum companies to make new beverage can stock. Mixed alloy aluminum scrap is purchased by aluminum smelters. 5.6 i I I Mixed non-ferrous metals account for a small portion of the total non-ferrous metals that can be recovered from solid waste. This portion of the waste consists of small quantities of copper, lead, zinc, brass and other metals. Each of these metals is valuable by itself, but extensive operations to isolate individual non-ferrous metals other than aluminum are generally not economically feasible. The type and quantity of metals present in the product will govern the material's market value. (b) Specific Markets With regard to potential markets for the non-ferrous metals resulting from a re- cycling program, it was determined that a national market does exist for the non- ferrous metals. Pacific Iron and Metal Company in Seattle,Washington expressed an 1 interest in buying any clean or contaminated scrap metal. Several regional firms also expressed an interest in purchasing the non-ferrous materials, primarily aluminum. Re- cycling centers in Boise, Idaho and Spokane,Washington also indicated a desire to pur- chase quantities of non-ferrous scrap. Numerous state markets were addressed and considerable interest has been shown regarding the purchase of non-ferrous materials recovered from the area. Montana Re- 111 cycling, Inc., located in Missoula, Recycling Centers located in Billings, Bozeman, Butte and Great Falls, and the Pacific Hide and Fur group are potential buyers for this category of material. Several operations, however, are concerned with the aluminum 1 fraction only. A future market for scrap aluminum may be the Anaconda Company's aluminum plant located in Columbia Falls. Company officials have suggested that there is a good possibility for the recovery of scrap aluminum in the long-term,but not the near future. At the present time, they purchase a small quantity of aluminum beverage cans from a non-profit recycling center in Kalispell.The primary local market consists of the Pacific Hide and Fur Company located in Helena, which accepts aluminum and other non-ferrous metals. Summarized in Table V-3 are the potential markets for the non-ferrous metals generated within the study area. The table also indicates the current market prices for each potential market. • 3. Glass (a) General Recovered glass can be used as a cullet material that is re-melted for the 1 5.7 I II TABLE V-3 NON-FERROUS MATERIAL MARKETS* I 1 Local Market Other State Markets National Market Market Price Pacific Hide & Fur Pacific Hide& Fur $.10-.25/1b. Alum. Helena Butte, Billings, Great Falls, $.30-.60/1b. Other Missoula, Bozeman Helena Recycling Center Montana Recycling, Inc. $.20-.23/lb. Alum. Helena Missoula Recycling Centers- $.08-.27/lb. Alum. Billings, Bozeman, Butte, Great Falls McCracken Metals $.25-.27/1b. Alum. Butte $.30-.50/lb. Other Carl Weissman & Sons, Inc. $.12-.25/1b. Alum. Bozeman, Billings, Butte, Great Falls $.35-.60/1b. Other Energy Conservation Service $.25-.27/1b. Alum. Butte $.35-.75/lb. Other Western Recycling $.30/1b. Alum. Boise, Idaho Wastepaper Service $.30-.37/1b. Alum. Spokane,Washington Pacific Iron& Metal Varies w/market j Seattle,Washington *Represents pricing structure as of March 15, 1980. I I I I I I manufacture of new glass containers.This process has been used by nearly all glass con- tainer manufacturers using glass bottles and jars collected manually and color sorted by recycling centers. Color-sorted glass is in demand periodically by glass companies, es- pecially when difficulties in obtaining raw materials are encountered. As a result of raw material shortages, glass companies have taken a renewed interest in all sources of used glass, attempting to hold the costs down on glass container production.The major ob- I stacle for any recycling program lies in implementing a system that can meet the purity and color sorting requirements and accomodate transportation costs. Presently a market has developed for non-color sorted, refuse-derived glass.When a company has a furnace which produces colored glass, some amount of non-colored sorted glass cullet can be used safely in the mixture. This non-color sorted glass cullet can be added to the batch Iup to a certain point. (b) Specific Markets An investigation into the location of glass container manufacturing plants indicates that there are very few glass manufacturing industries in the nation that are close enough to Montana to be considered potential markets. The analysis indicates that there are two potential markets in the Pacific Northwest that could utilize glass resulting from a recycl- ing program located within the study area. The Owens-Illinois Corporation has two glass container plants;these being located in Seattle, Washington and Portland, Oregon. At the 1 present time,however, freight costs are prohibitive and utilization of these regional out- lets is not feasible. Markets located within the state include Montana Recycling,Incorporated located in Missoula, and recycling centers located in Billings, Bozeman, Butte and Great Falls. These outlets all accept numerous types of returnable beverage bottles. Coors Beer distributors throughout the state also accept returnable beverage bottles. Locally,the Helena Recycl- ing Center accepts several types of beverage bottles. Summarized in the following table is a brief review of the market locations for glass and the respective current market prices. t 5.8 I TABLE V.4 GLASS MARKETS'" I Local Market Other State Markets National Market Market Price ' Big Horn Beverage Co. Coors Distributors- $.25/case Helena Statewide Recycling Centers — $.25-.50/case Billings,Bozeman,Butte,Great Falls Montana Recycling, Inc. $.25-.50/case Missoula Owens-Illinois Inc. $25-$35/ton Portland, Oregon delivered Northwestern Glass $25-$35/ton Seattle, Washington delivered I *Represents pricing structure as of March 15, 1980. I I I 1 I I I I 1 1 4. Paper Products (a) General For many years newsprint, corrugated and mixed office papers have been a source of fiber for the paper industry. Approximately 40% of the recycled material can be directly recovered by industry and 60% may be salvaged by post-consumers. Most post- consumer corrugated and mixed papers are collected by representatives of the salvage industry from selected industrial and commercial establishments on pickup routes. These materials are usually clean as they have not been mixed with residential wastes. If market conditions are favorable, hand sorting can be accomodated within the operat- ' ing margins created by reasonable market prices. Newsprint can be separated by homeowners and bundles can be collected by regular or slightly modified collection vehicles and by special pickup vehicles. Also,newsprint can be collected by civic groups and industries by providing appropriate containers, appeals for newsprint through the media and favorable pricing. Generally the product must be clean, bundled and free of moisture, magazines or other special papers. Industry approves this type of operation because they can easily regulate the flow of material and to some degree set the price for the commodity. Several other processes exist for the recovery of paper products, one such method is the mechanical processing of mixed municipal wastes in large recovery plants. Very little paper recovery, however, presently takes place using these mechanical processes since the recovery fiber is not competitive with virgin fibers. Another possibility is to process the paper along with other post-consumer wastes by converting it to some usable form of energy, such as gas, oil, steam or electrical power. In general,there are three major types of recovered paper products that may be separated through a recycling program. They are: 1) Used containers, both solid fiber and corrugated,and container plant scraps. 2) News, which includes newspapers, special newsprint of deink quality, etc. 3) Mixed papers,which includes mill wrappers, boxboard cuttings,IBM cards, ' computer printouts, book stock and magazine, news and publication blanks, draft paper and other various papers. 5.9 The operations that use waste paper as a raw material are extremely concerned with contaminants such as plastics, metals and oils which have a serious impact on their pro- cesses. It is very probable that recycled papers could not be acceptable for food re-packaging uses because of public health concerns. I (b) Specific Markets (1) Newsprint Markets Recycled newspapers are used in a number of products within the paper indus- try. Old newsprint is used primarily in the manufacture of boxboard;however, it is also used in the production of chipboard, newsprint, and building materials such as roofing felt, insulation board and gypsum liner board. The market is subject to great fluctuations, but continued gradual growth is anticipated in the future. From the inquiries made to national markets it was determined that potential markets do exist for waste paper recovered from the study area. Several markets lo- cated in Seattle and Spokane, Washington and Hyrum, Utah have indicated their in- terest in purchasing newsprint for use in the manufacture of cellulose fiber insula- tion. Interest in using newsprint for re-pulping has been indicated by a Seattle-based I firm. Also, recycling centers in Boise, Idaho and Spokane,Washington have expressed a desire to purchase waste newsprint and will presumably act as brokers selling to consumer mills. In recent years, the market potential within the state has developed consider- ably. Two Great Falls firms currently utilize newsprint as a raw material source for manufacturing cellulose fiber insulation. Each has expressed a desire to obtain news- print from a recycling program located within the study area: Montana Recycling, Incorporated and recycling centers located in Billings,Bozeman, Butte and Great Falls presently purchase newsprint and act as brokers dispersing quantities of news- print to various industries. }r The City of Helena, through the initiation of the Solid Waste Task Force, began a city-wide newsprint recycling program in April, 1978. The City has a yearly con- tract with the Robinson Insulation Company of Great Falls to transport and purchase the collected newsprint. The City modified collection vehicles to provide convenient pickup of bundled or sacked newspapers during regular household garbage collection. Currently, an average of 16 tons of newsprint is collected monthly from this pro- gram. I 5.10 I Table V-5 summarizes the current markets for newsprint on a local, state and national level and gives some indication of the current market pricing structure. (2) Corrugated and Mixed Paper Markets The market potential for corrugated and mixed papers on a national level ap- pears to be rather limited. Of the firms contacted only three, two in Spokane and one in Boise, expressed an interest in purchasing these materials from a program within the study area. These firms are brokers who in turn sell materials to paper mills and other manufacturers. When investigating state markets for this type of material, several were located. Montana Recycling, Incorporated located in Missoula and recycling centers in Bil- lings,Butte, Bozeman and Great Falls all accept various types of mixed papers. Each of these outlets readily accepts computer cards and computer printout paper. One outlet, the Billings Recycling Center, recently began purchasing corrugated paper in addition to other types of paper. Locally, no market exists at the present time for these paper products. Table V-6 summarizes the potential markets and prices for corrugated and ' mixed paper. 5. Summary of Market Analysis Included in the following narrative is a summary of the potential of economically recov- ering and marketing secondary materials found in the study area's solid waste stream. (a) Ferrous Metals (1) In general, transportation costs are too prohibitive to transport ferrous metals any great distance (most regional markets are in excess of 600 miles from the study area). Most markets have a considerably smaller area from which they may purchase ferrous metals economically. (2) The Anaconda Company plant located in Butte has the demand and potential for developing into a local market for these materials. However, their current market policies forbid the purchase of small quantities of ferrous metals. This potential market should be continually investigated as market conditions change. 1 5.11 I TABLE V-S NEWSPRINT MARKETS* Local Market Other State Markets National Market Market Price ' None at Present All-Weather Insulation Co. $60/ton delivered I Great Falls Robinson Insulation Co. $40/ton , Great Falls Montana Recycling, Inc. $20/ton 1 Missoula Recycling Centers- $20-$40/ton 1 Billings,Bozeman, Butte, Great Falls Western Recycling& I Wastepaper Co. $40-$60/ton delivered Boise, Idaho Wastepaper Service, Inc. $40-$60/ton delivered Spokane,Washington , Thermoguard Insulation $55-$80/ton delivered Seattle- Spokane, Washington I Mountain Fiber Cellulose $30/ton Hyrum, Utah * Represents pricing structure as of March 15, 1980. 1 I 1 I I I TABLE V4 ICORRUGATED AND MIXED PAPER MARKETS* ILocal Market Other State Markets National Market Market Price I None at Present Montana Recycling, Inc. $80-$100/ton Missoula (cards & printout) IBillings Recycling Center $20/ton(con.) I Billings $80-$120/ton (cards & printout) I Recycling Centers — $60 $120/ton Bozeman, Butte, Great Falls (cards& printout) I Western Recyling& $30 $45/ton(con.) Wastepaper,Co. (baled& delivered) Boise, Idaho $140-$160/ton I (cards& printout) Wastepaper Service, Inc. $150-$175/ton I Spokane,Washington (cards& printout) 540-560/ton (baled con.) IThermoguard Insulation $70-$90/ton Spokane, Washington (baled con.) I *Represents pricing structure as of March 15, 1980. I I I I (3) It appears that on the local and state level the major markets for ferrous ma- terials exist with the scrap dealers located throughout the area. A sufficient number of scrap dealers have shown interest in obtaining any ferrous material from a recycl- ing program, assuming that the quantity of ferrous materials that may be recoverable could be sold to them. (b) Non-Ferrous Metals (1) National markets do exist in the Midwest and on the West Coast for non-ferrous materials;however, high transportation and freight costs appear to make these mar- kets uneconomical at the present time. (2) Many local and state scrap dealers are interested in obtaining all types of non- ferrous metal products. The price structure for these non-ferrous markets appears to make them the most economical material on which to base a recovery program.There appear to be several markets for aluminum and the other non-ferrous metals in or near the study area. (c) Glass , (1) A potential market does exist with the Owens-Illinois plants in the Pacific Northwest (Seattle and Portland), but only if freight rates and transportation costs are not excessive and recoverable glass exists in sufficient quantities to make the transaction profitable. Currently, however, transportation costs exceed the mater- ial's market value. I (2) Collection centers in close proximity to the study area do exist for certain types of beverage bottles but none exist for other types of waste glass. These mar- kets should be utilized to the maximum extent possible. (d) Paper Products Although national markets do exist for some paper products recovered from this area, it appears more feasible to utilize the markets within the state. As previously men- tioned, there are some operations within Montana that utilize newsprint for the manufac- I ture of cellulose fiber insulation. These markets along with others should continue to be utilized. , 5.12 1 1 I D. FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS FOR ENERGY-DERIVED MATERIALS I II. General Because of the increasing costs of fuel in the nation, alternative energy sources are I currently being developed and evaluated. Solid waste is receiving increasing consideration in this regard because it is available in substantial quantities and can be prepared for use as I a fuel. One of the primary considerations in utilizing solid waste as an energy source is to locate or develop energy markets that fit other problem constraints. Those constraints are primarily: 1) the market must have an adequate fuel demand to make it economically Iworthwhile to install the necessary receiving and firing equipment, and 2) the market must have an agreeable attitude toward the utilization and pricing of a new energy source. IThrough modern technology the utilization of solid waste as an energy source can be I accomplished by three basis methods: 1) the use of solid waste as a primary fuel source to generate steam;2) the use of processed solid waste as a supplemental fuel in combination with other fossil fuels;and 3) the use of gases derived from pyrolyzing solid waste. Each Imethod is summarized herein. I (a) Solid Waste as a Primary Energy Source Within the last ten years several facilities in the United States and Europe have Ibeen designed and constructed to utilize solid waste as a primary fuel source to gener- ate steam. In most instances, when solid waste is utilized as a primary energy source I the boilers are specifically designed to burn solid waste. In recent years several com- panies have designed and are currently marketing small incineration systems that are accompanied by heat recovery boilers which generate steam. These systems appear to Ibe the most applicable in most Montana cities since the units can be designed to burn very small quantities of waste. Current developments are also being made to provide Ielectrical generation from the energy-derived wastes to nearby users.Various institu- tions and industries located in the United States are utilizing these types of heat re- Icovery boilers to supplement their facility's steam and hot water demand. I (b) Solid Waste as a Supplemental Fuel A second concept in the recovery of energy from solid waste is the use of the combustible fraction of solid waste as a supplement to fossil fuels in power plants and 1 large industrial boilers. Facilities located primarily on the East Coast have been con- structed and have proven this concept to be economically and technically feasible.The I 5.13 degree of supplement in these facilities has ranged from 10 to 50 percent of the en- ergy requirements, depending upon the firing conditions and type of boilers. Results to date have indicated that supplemental solid fuel can be fired with coal without en- countering combustion problems. For solid waste to be used as a supplemental fuel,it must be processed to what- ever degree is compatible with the specific boiler to be used. Minimal processing re- quires that the refuse be shredded and separated into a light combustible fraction and a heavy non-combustible fraction. Processes have been developed to shred and separate combustibles as fuel for suspension-fired utility boilers, pressurized fluid-bed combustors or pyrolysis converters. (c) Pyrolysis of Solid Wastes Pyrolysis is similar in theory to incineration,in that both employ combustion as their main operation. Incineration utilizes combustion in an excess of free air which is highly exothermic and produces primarily heat, carbon dioxide and water vapor. Py- rolytic reactions,however, are conducted in the absence of oxygen or in a controlled oxygen-deficient environment;therefore, product composition can be regulated. , Several processes are presently being used to produce fuel gas, oil and char from solid waste. One system burns the pyrolitic gases to produce steam which is sold to available markets. Another corporation has developed a process that produces a gas comparable to natural gas in combustion characteristics but with a lower heating value (300 Btu per cubic foot). Other pyrolysis systems produce an oil that can be substituted for fuel oil. 1 There are some drawbacks to pyrolysis systems.The net energy recovered from solid waste is usually less than in direct fired systems. For instance, if solid waste is pyrolyzed, energy is lost in the fuel-gas conversion and then again in the steam produc- tion process. The total efficiency is approximately 50 percent, while a typical efficiency in a direct fired system is approximately 70 percent. A second major drawback is the high capital and operational cost associated with the facilities. The minimum size fa- cility that can efficiently be operated is in the several million dollar-range. Because of the small quantities of waste generated in the study area,it is not possible to econom- I ically amortize and operate these large capital expenditures. Therefore, this alternate resource recovery system will not be studied further in this project. t 5.14 1 1 2. Potential Energy From Solid Waste ' Currently there are approximately 35,808 tons of solid waste generated in the three- county area annually. As depicted in Table III-5, approximately 28,278 tons of the waste consist of municipal waste, with the remaining 7,530 tons comprised of inert materials and construction/demolition debris. As stated previously in Part B of this chapter, the municipal portion of the waste generated has an average heat content of 5,000 Btu's per pound. Utilizing this energy conversion, each ton of waste has an energy equivalence of 10 million Btu's. Based on an efficiency ratio of approximately 50 percent,it is estimated that the municipal wastes generated in the three-county area could generate approximately 1.41 billion pounds of steam per year. This equates to approximately 16,000 pounds of steam ' per hour,based on a 24-hour, seven-day-per-week boiler operation. This is based on pro- ducing high pressure steam with delivery conditions at approximately 125 psi. In regard ' to electrical generation, the same quantity of energy could generate approximately 10 million kwh annually. ' 3. Market Analysis of Local Energy Users For this project,several large energy users located in the study area were contacted. ' Table V-7 summarizes those market situations that demonstrate the highest potential for utilizing solid waste as an energy source after preliminary investigations. Through each ' contact,it was attempted to determine if it was physically, economically and administrat- ively feasible to utilize solid waste as an energy source at each facility. In addition to re- viewing each user's fuel conversion equipment and facility,market information relative to: 1) the quantity, quality and delivery conditions of the energy utilized; 2) the limita- tions and potential for expansion of the energy needs of the facility;and 3) the current market prices of the fuels utilized was obtained and evaluated. ' Based on the investigations that were made,it was determined that three market sit- uations warranted a detailed analysis.The remainder of the market situations investigated ' were determined to be unattractive waste-to-energy applications for several reasons. Table V-8 summarizes the market situations of the five applications that were determined to be ' unfavorable. Included herein is a brief description of the energy demands and delivery conditions of the three remaining market applications. ' (a) Industrial Park As a result of several meetings between the Consultant and the City of Helena, ' 5.15 I TABLE V-7 , POTENTIAL ENERGY MARKETS EVALUATED , NAME LOCATION DESCRIPTION 1 Boulder River Training School Boulder State Institution ' Kaiser Cement and Gypsum Co. Montana City Cement Plant ASARCO, Inc. East Helena Smelter ' Fort Harrison Hospital Helena V.A. Hospital St. Peter's Hospital Helena Hospital Carroll College Helena Private College I Capitol Complex Helena State of Montana Industrial Park Helena New Park I I . TABLE V-8 I SUMMARY OF ENERGY MARKET APPLICATIONS , Description of FACt!JTY I Unfavorable Boulder St. Peter's Carroll Conditions School Kaiser ASARCO Hospital College 1. Unstable Energy Demand X X X 2. Insufficient Energy Demand X X I 3. Insufficient Waste Quantities X X 4. Incompatible Existing System X X X I 5. Existing System Sufficient X X X X X 6. High Capital Cost for Modif- ications ' to Existing System X X X 7. High Transportation Costs X X ' I I 1 it was determined that one potential use of solid waste in the Helena area would be to generate steam and/or electricity from a waste incineration and recovery facility to be located at the city's new industrial park. The energy generated at the facility ' could then be purchased and utilized by the various industries located at the park. The industrial park is currently being developed, with many lots still available. Currently, all of the industries located at the industrial park utilize individual healing and cooling systems. According to local officials, the possibility of utilizing a central steam plant at the industrial park complex has been discussed. However, no tentative plans for such a facility have been developed. (b) Capitol Complex Currently the buildings located at the Montana State Capitol Complex are heated by several boiler systems.The majority of the buildings are heated with indi- vidual boilers located in each separate building. However, a central heating plant is being utilized to provide the necessary energy to heat the Mitchell Building, Capitol, ' Capitol Annex, old Board of Health Building and the Livestock Building. This central plant contains two 346 hp.low pressure natural gas-fired boilers. ' The State of Montana has retained the Honeywell Corp. to operate and maintain all boilers operated at the Capitol Complex. Each boiler facility is checked twice per ' day under this contract to assure proper operation of each boiler. In almost all in- stances, the boilers located at each building are utilized strictly for heating purposes. Thus,the boilers are usually not operational during the summer months to any great extent. (c) Fort Harrison Complex ' The Fort Harrison facility is located two miles west of Helena and functions as a Veterans Administration Hospital. The facility has a central steam system for pro- viding the necessary steam loads to the facility's various buildings. The central steam plant includes three natural gas-fired boilers(two 12,000 pound per hour boilers erected in 1962 and one 10,000 pound per hour boiler erected in 1958). Each boiler is also equipped to burn fuel oil as a standby measure. ' According to the facility's steam plant records, the hospital's steam demand varies from an average of 1,700 pounds per hour during the summer months to 5.16 1 approximately 8,400 pounds per hour in the winter. The peak steam demand occurs in the winter and is approximately 13,500 pounds per hour. On the average,the fa- cility will utilize approximately 30 million pounds of steam annually. This equates to an average steam demand of 3,400 pounds per hour. 4. Facility Requirements and Description (a) Energy Supply Versus Demand To determine the size and type of the waste-to-energy facility that is most ap- propriate for the three market applications identified herein,it is necessary to deter- ' mine the total energy demands of these applications and compare that to the energy supply available from the solid waste generated in the area. The estimated energy de- mands of the applications as well as the potential energy supply are illustrated in Figure V-1. ' For the analysis included herein,it was assumed that since the three energy 111 users determined potentially applicable are located in the immediate Helena area, the supply of energy available from waste could be based on the assumption that all wastes currently being disposed of at the Helena landfill would be handled in this program. Currently, approximately 27,000 tons of waste are being disposed of an- nually at the Helena landfill. The wastes currently being transported to the Helena landfill include all waste generated in the City of Helena, wastes generated in northern Jefferson County, municipal wastes collected by city crews in East Helena, and the wastes collected by Hartley's Garbage Service, which are generated outside the Scratch Gravel Refuse Disposal District. Currently, approximately 20,000 of the 27,000 tons of waste disposed of at the Helena landfill are considered Group II-type ' wastes which are basically comprised of residential and standard commercial wastes. Based on previous operating experiences throughout the nation, it can be assumed that all of these wastes would be compatible with standard waste incineration and heat recovery equipment. Thus for the three energy applications included herein,it was assumed that 20,000 tons of waste annually would be incinerated. It should be noted that for each energy application evaluated,it would be necessary to continue the use of the City of Helena landfill to dispose of the remaining 7,000 tons of waste annually which would be comprised of demolition debris,inert materials and ash residue resulting from the incineration process. ' Based on an average heating value of 5,000 Btu's per pound for solid waste,it is estimated that the 20,000 tons of waste incinerated annually would produce 5.17 , 1 I I21,000- 4 I18,000- I — 15,000- to- I 12,000- = C O f 9,000- '-' n m 6,000 3,000- s I :'';;;;I:rgere:''' /Sir/ ' I Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec MONTH I 12,000 toilitIE 6. 10,000 1 o 8,000- F I C o Z 6,000 G o a R rx x 4. in 4,000- o N I2,000- IJan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec MONTH INote : Information based on supply AVAILABLE ENERGY SUPPLY and demands during 1979. VERSUS I ) ENERGY DEMAND I Figure Y- I approximately 200,000 x 106 Btu's annually. This represents the energy equivalence of approximately 200 million cubic feet of natural gas annually. In regard to the ' generation of steam, it is estimated that the energy available from the same waste quantity would generate approximately 100 million pounds of steam annually, based on a generation of 125 psi steam at a 50 percent efficiency. Also, the same energy could produce approximately seven million kwh of electricity. As indicated in Figure V-1, the availability of energy derived from the incinera- tion of solid waste in the Helena area would fluctuate considerably depending upon the generation of solid waste. As depicted, it is anticipated that the availability of energy would vary from a low of 12,600 x 106 Btu's generated during the month of February to a high of 19,000 x 106 Btu's generated in July.This represents a season- al fluctuation of 63 percent from low to high. As further indicated on Figure V-1, the potential supply of energy from the wastes generated in the Helena area was compared with the energy demands of two of the three possible waste incineration applications. Obviously, for the industrial park application it is impossible to compare existing demands with potential sup- plies, since the park has not been developed to an appreciable extent at this time, and also because no central heating facility is being used. As depicted in Figure V-1, it is apparent that the supply of energy available from the wastes generated in the Helena area far exceed the demand for both the State Capitol Complex and Fort Harrison central steam facilities. For the State Capitol Complex application it is es- timated that the Complex's current energy requirements would only utilize approx- imately one-fifth of the available energy. Likewise, the Fort Harrison facility would require only approximately one-third of the available energy. (b) Evaluation of Applicable Waste-to-Energy Facilities After a thorough review of the energy requirements of the three market appli- cations and the energy available from the waste generated in the area, it was deter- mined that the most applicable waste-to-energy system would be the use of a small modular heat recovery incinerator. These types of systems do not require a high degree of initial waste processing, nor do they require large quantities of waste to be econ- omically feasible. These systems are normally supplied in modules with current in- stallations ranging in capacity from 10 to 250 tons per day. This type of energy recovery system was initially constructed in the late 1960's. Since that time major modifications have been made. The systems that have been 5.18 ' installed within the past few years have added heat recovery units and automatic ash removal systems. Basically, modular incinerator systems consist of a primary com- bustion chamber, a secondary combustion chamber and a heat exchanger.The units ' are fed by a mechanical or hydraulic ram that charges the material onto a fixed bed. The waste is ignited by use of an auxiliary fuel until temperatures allow self-sustaining 1 combustion. Combustion in the primary chamber is usually in a starved air atmos- phere. An advantage of this is that a high particulate exhaust is not generated. The ' combustible gases generated in the primary chamber are completely combusted in the secondary chamber with the aid of auxiliary fuel.The hot gases are then passed through a fire tube or water tube boiler for heat exchange. Currently there are five primary firms that market modular incineration sys- 1 terns. Included herein is a summary of each system's operating experience and system components. 1) Basic Environmental Engineering, Inc. 1 Basic incinerators utilize a three-stage incinerator. The corporation has had their greatest success utilizing an 85 percent alumina refractory,although other refractories have been used. The charging system is mechanically driven ' with a rack and pinion system. The firm primarily proposes the use of heat re- covery equipment in the primary combustion chamber. According to Basic of- ' ficials, the system is also designed to burn coal, wood and other solid fuels. The ash removal system consists of refractory line and doors that open and dump ' ash into a receiving bin. ' Currently,Basic has eleven installations on-line, of which two are equipped with heat recovery equipment. The majority of these units are located in the Chicago area and are owned and operated by large frms. 2) Clear Air, Inc. Clear Air employs a three-chamber incinerator system whereby excess air is utilized. Because of this design, air pollution control devices are required. ' Fire brick is used in the primary chamber. A movable grate transfers the waste to the primary chamber. The movement of the grate transports the waste to ' the rear of the chamber where a conveyor moves the ash to a quench tank and hopper. The system's heat recovery system consists of a fire tube boiler. Currently, Clear Air has two municipal incineration units on-line, each ' 5.19 1 with a ten ton per day capacity. Neither unit utilizes heat recovery equipment. The company also has one industrial waste unit in operation. 3) Comtro Division, Sunbeam Equipment Corporation Comtro utilizes a starved air system in which waste is charged into the combustion chamber by a hydraulically operated ram. The company has util- ized several fire tube boilers for heat recovery including those manufactured by Eclipse, Kiwaunee and ABCO. The ash handling system consists of a water sealed hopper with a conveyor that transports the ash to a disposal container. Comtro currently has several incinerator systems in operation with capac- ities larger than ten tons per day. Three of these systems burn municipal waste, with twelve units utilized at industrial facilities. Approximately two-thirds of Comtro's installations utilize heat recovery equipment. 4) Consumat Systems, Inc. Consumat systems operate on a starved-air principle in the primary com- bustion chamber. The flue gas is completely burned in the secondary inciner- ' ator chamber. The heat exchanger consists of a water tube boiler with fins placed in the unit to maximize recovery efficiencies. In more recent installa- tions an automatic ash removal system has been included. With the system a ram ejects ash into a receiving hopper where it is quenched and displaced into a pit. The ash is then further conveyed to a disposal chamber. Consumat has over 2,000 installations in operation throughout the world, 30 of which utilize heat recovery units. Several of the heat recovery installa- lions have been in existence since the mid-1970's. 5) Kelley Company, Inc. ' The Kelley system operates on a starved-air principle. The waste is charged into the combustion chamber by use of a hydraulically driven ram. Kelley has utilized York-Shipley tube boilers for heat recovery in the past. The ash remov- al system for municipal applications consists of two rams positioned below the feed ram and a sliding door that accepts the ash into a water quenched chamber. Currently, Kelley has eight municipal installations in operation, all of which 5.20 , 1 are located in New Hampshire. None of these,however,includes the use of heat recovery equipment. Kelley has installed approximately 400 units throughout the nation, of which approximately five percent have heat recovery equipment. 6) Summary Based on the investigations made for this project,it was determined that at the present time the modular systems designed by Consumat Systems, Inc. ' appear to be the most technologically advanced.and proven for the applications being considered herein. Thus cost estimates included herein are based on the ' installation of a Consumat system. It should be noted,however, that if a re- source recovery system is implemented, a detailed investigation should be con- ducted that evaluates all prospective equipment suppliers and manufacturers. c) Facility Description The facility under consideration for this project would be rated at 100 tons per day and consist of a single building that would house the tipping floor(dumping area) i and the energy recovery equipment.The building would be ample in size to store 140 tons of waste(two days' storage). The receiving area would be designed so that pri- ' vate individuals as well as municipal and commercial refuse haulers could deposit their waste at the facility. At the facility, solid waste would be dumped directly onto the tipping floor. The waste could then be moved, stacked and placed into the incinerator by diesel ' operated wheel loaders. The refuse would be charged by a ram into one of two 50 ton per day incinerator units, where it would be burned. The ash would be conveyed ' or dumped into roll-off containers located in the building.The ash would then be hauled to the Helena landfill for disposal. The existing landfill would remain opera- tional to serve as a disposal site for incinerator ash, demolition debris and other non- ' combustible waste. It would also serve as a backup disposal site, should the energy recovery facility break down for any extended period of time. Included in Exhibit V-1 are photographs that depict the various components of a similar type of facility. ' The steam generated at the plant would be in a form such that it would meet the individual delivery conditions of any one of the three market applications being evaluated. A steam extraction turbine and generator would also be provided in order that electricity could be generated from excess steam, which in turn could be sold ' to the local utility or utilized to meet all or a portion of the energy user's electrical demands. ' 5.21 • • — r • MI I • — N r MN r r NM OM NM r • MODULAR INCINERATOR PLANT WITH ENERGY RECOVERY (North Little Rock,Arkansas) y �., ,,,o., • '� r r t O R+ «wsSE n I r r e a Y W ^t �T RECEIVING BUILDING TIPPING AREA IN BUILDING 14-It x ti y.i aa-rr e, ' YIP li,S71sk, . 1 '' 1 .1-1.1.11 i , , au ■ [ Pi - 10 It' ba 44 INCINERATOR AND HEAT ASH REMOVAL EQUIPMENT RECOVERY EQUIPMENT f=1 5. Facility Costs ' (a) Capital Cost To determine%the facility capital cost for utilizing solid waste as an energy ' source for the three market applications discussed herein, the consultant drew on the expertise and knowledge of several individuals. Some of the individuals who pro- ' vided input include City of Helena officials,local engineers and businessmen, and equipment suppliers and manufacturers. Also, the consultant and local officials visited ' installations currently in existence in the country that are demonstrating a similar application to that being considered herein. ' Based on the information that was obtained during the analysis period of the project, capital and annual system costs were developed for the facilities being con- sidered. Included in Table V-9 is the estimated capital cost to construct a 100 ton per day modular incinerator plant capable of meeting the energy demands of the ' three market applications discussed herein. As indicated in the table, the total cap- ital cost would be approximately $2.855 million. It should be noted that the costs depicted in Table V-9 do not include the construction of major steam lines or any "in-house"modifications that may be necessary to effectively utilize the energy gen- erated from the system. As also depicted in the table, it is anticipated that the annual ' cost to amortize the capital investment of such a facility would be approximately $305,000. (b) Annual Cost ' Included in Table V-10 is a summary of the estimated annual cost to operate the proposed waste-to-energy incineration facility. Obviously, the precise cost to op- erate the necessary equipment for the three market applications would vary some- what. However, it is felt that this cost difference would be minute and would not significantly affect the outcome of the economic benefit analysis. It should be noted 1 that the labor costs included herein were based on the assumption that the facility would accept waste eight hours per day and incinerate the wastes 24 hours per day ' for seven days each week. All other cost components were estimated based on con- versations with equipment manufacturers, past operating records of similar installa- tions, and current local insurance and utility costs. Also, it should be noted that in addition to the annual cost to amortize and operate the modular incinerator facility, the cost to maintain the City of Helena's disposal site five days per week as a demoli- tion debris(Class III) landfill was included in the cost estimate for each application. 5.22 1 I TABLE V-9 MODULAR INCINERATION FACILITY I WITH HEAT RECOVERY (CAPITAL COSTS) , Capital Annual ' ITEM Cost Amort. FACILITY COST: I 1. Site Work $180,000 ' 2. Building(100' x 140'@ $40/sq. ft.) 560,000 3. Turbine&Generator Equipment 240,000 I 4. Scale &Miscellaneous 30,000 5. Valves, Controls, Etc. 25,000 , 6. Engineering, Legal&Contingency(25%) 260,000 1 Subtotal- 1,295,000 Amort. (8%- 30 years) 115,000 I INCINERATOR EQUIPMENT: 1. Two 50-TPD Modules with Energy Recovery ' Package 1,250,000 2. Installation (20%) 250,000 1 Subtotal- 1,500,000 Amort. (8%- 15 years) 175,000 I ROLLING STOCK: 1. Bobcat (2) 25,000 1 2. Forklift (1) 20,000 ' 3. Dump Truck (1) 15,000 Subtotal- 60,000 , Amort. (8%- 5 years) 15,000 TOTAL COST- $2,855,000 $305,000 I NOTE: No land costs have been included. ' ' TABLE V-10 ' MODULAR INCINERATION FACILITY ANNUAL COSTS ' ITEM COST 1. Labor(14 men) $315,000 2. Incinerator Units 0 & M(10% of Capital) 125,000 3. Electrical Generation (10%n of Capital) 24,000 ' 4. Fuel Gas($1.75/ton of refuse) 35,000 5. Rolling Equipment 0& M 25,000 ' 6. Insurance 12,000 7. Utilities 15,000 8. Class III Landfill 48,000 Subtotal- $599,000 Amort. of Capital- 305,000 Total Annual Cost- $904,000 1 1 1 As depicted in Table V-10, it is estimated that the annual cost to operate a modular incineration facility capable of meeting the energy demands of one of the , three market applications and waste disposal requirements for the area would be approximately $904,000. As further indicated, it is evident that approximately two- thirds of this cost is for annual operation and maintenance, while the remaining one- third is amortization of the anticipated capital costs. 6. Economic Analysis Summary To determine the economic feasibility of utilizing solid waste as an energy source for the three applications discussed herein, it was necessary to subtract the potential benefits • (revenues) that the proposed waste incineration facility would generate from the antici- ' pated incineration facility's capital and annual costs. Basically, the only additional major annual costs that would be incurred for the three market applications other than the costs depicted in Table V-l0would be the increased transportation costs to haul the solid waste to each of the three proposed incineration facilities compared to hauling the wastes to the present Helena landfill. Since the City of Helena landfill is located near the center of • the city, it is anticipated that either an additional collection crew or additional time by existing crews would be required to drive the additional miles to one of the three market applications. It was estimated that one additional City of Helena collection crew would be required if the Fort Harrison application were implemented, whereas only a few addi- , tional man-hours by current collection crews would be required if the wastes were to be transported to the other two market application locations. I Included in Table V-11 is a summary of the feasibility analyses that were conducted for each of the three market applications discussed herein. As depicted in the table, the potential revenues of each application were subtracted from the potential incineration fa- cility costs to determine the net system cost of each application. As indicated in the table the revenues associated with each application basically include: 1) the current fuel and production costs for the existing steam facilities;2) the amortization (replacement cost) I of the existing steam generating facilities;3) the anticipated revenue from the sale of el- ectricity that would be generated from the excess steam produced by the waste inciner- ation system;and 4) the savings realized by the City of Helena due to the absence of a requirement to operate their sanitary landfill as a Class II site(requiring daily compaction and soil cover.) Included herein is a summary of the resultant feasibility analyses for each of the three market applications evaluated herein. 5.23 , I TABLE V- 11 ' MODULAR INCINERATION FACILITY IECONOMIC ANALYSIS SUMMARY 1 Alternative 1 Item Fort Harrison Capitol Complex Industrial Park I. Annual Costs ' 1. Facility Costs $904,000 $904,000 $904,000 2. Increased Transportation Costs 52,000 10,000 25,000 ISubtotal- $956,000 $914,000 $929,000 1 H. Less Potential Revenues 1. Current Steam Plant Operation Costs 1 $420,000 $200,000 178,0002 I 2. Steam Plant Amortization 89,0003 - 3. Electric Sales 108,0004 158,0005 4. Current Sanitary Landfill Cost 165,000 165,000 165,000 ' Subtotal- $871,000 $612,000 $165,000 1 HI. Net Annual System Cost IITotal Net Cost $85,000 $302,000 $764,000 ' Energy Cost Not Applicable Not Applicable $3.82/mmBtu6 1 1 Based on best available operating records 2 Based on $2 million capital investment amortized over 30 years at 8% 3 Based on $1 million capital investment amortized over 30 years at 8% I4 Based on 4.8 million kwh at $.0225/kwh 1 5 Based on 7.0 million kwh at $.0225/kwh 6 Based on 200,000 x 106 Btu produced annually 1 1 (a) Fort Harrison Veterans Administrative Complex , For this application,it is anticipated that the waste incineration facility would be located in close proximity to the Veterans Administration's(V.A.) existing steam plant. The existing steam plant would serve as a back-up facility in case of extremely high steam demands or aloss of waste supply due to strikes, etc. Under this system, high pressure steam would be produced and distributed through the existing steam piping system to meet all VA steam requirements.The remainder of the stem would ' then be transferred through a turbine with the resultant electricity then either utilized on-site or marketed to the local utility company. I s v As depicted in Table V-11, the total annual costs of this alternative would be ap- proximately $956,000. The resultant net system cost of the alternative after all po- tential revenues were subtracted would be approximately $85,000.This basically in- dicates that the alternative evaluated herein would cost an additional $85,000 per year compared to the steam generation and solid waste disposal practices currently being used by Fort Harrison and the City of Helena,respectively. This represents ap- , proximately a ten percent higher cost than the current budgeted costs for generating steam at the VA Complex and landfilling wastes at the City of Helena's site. , (b) Capitol Complex The mechanics and reasoning behind this alternative are quite similar to that de- monstrated for the Fort Harrison application in that the existing steam generation fa- cility utilized to heat the Capitol Complex would be replaced with a waste incinera- tion facility with the existing steam plant to remain in service for possible standby use. The major difference between this application and the Fort Harrison application is 1 the delivery conditions of the steam. Since the Capitol Complex system utilizes a low- pressure steam, it would be possible to initially transfer all steam produced through a turbine and generate electricity. The resultant steam could then be introduced into the steam distribution system for use in the various buildings. As depicted in Table V-11, the net system cost for this alternative is $302,000 per year. This is based on an annual cost of $914,000 per year for the incineration facility and a potential revenue of$612,000 annually. When compared to the Fort Harrison application, it is apparent that the net system cost is substantially higher, ' primarily due to the lower revenue associated with the current Capitol Complex steam plant costs compared to the current Fort Harrison steam costs. The major reason for this is the lower steam demand and operating pressures of the Capitol Complex system compared to the Fort Harrison system. , 5.24 1 (c) Industrial Park Since the industrial park currently does not have a central steam facility in oper- ation, the economic analysis conducted for this application identifies the approximate energy production costs that would be necessary to offset the capital and annual op- erating costs of a waste incineration facility. As indicated in Table V-11, a net system I cost of$764,000 would be incurred to operate a waste incineration facility after the revenues associated with the modification of the City of Helena's landfill from a Class II to a Class III facility were subtracted. Basically, this net system cost represents the revenue that must be obtained from ithe sale of the resultant available energy in order for the facility be economically feas- ible. As further depicted in the table, an energy cost of approximately $3.82 per mil- , lion Btu's would be necessary to generate $764,000 in revenue. This would further equate to $.109 per kwh if the available energy was utilized to produce electrivity, or ' $7.64 per thousand pounds if steam were to be produced and marketed. It should be noted that these estimated unit costs are based on the assumption that all energy avail- able from waste incineration at the facility would be marketed. Also, no adjustments or costs are included for placement of a steam distribution system, since such decisions would be nearly impossible without substantial field work and analysis. Realistically ' speaking, adjustments for these items could represent substantial increases in the unit energy costs illustrated herein. (d) Summary of Market Applications As summarized in Table V-11 and the previous narrative,it is apparent that the most economically attractive waste-to-energy incineration application for the study area is the Fort Harrison application. According to current estimates, the annual cost of this alternative is within approximately ten percent of the existing costs for the VA Center and the City of Helena to individually operate their own steam and landfill ' facilities, respectively. Also, since the economics of this waste incineration alternative are directly related to the cost of energy, the economics of this alternative should ' continue to become more attractive as energy costs increase. One other advantage of this alternative is the capacity savings at the City of Helena landfill site. Current esti- mates indicate that the City of Helena landfill site has sufficient capacity to handle the area wastes for the next 15 to 20 years. The implementation of a waste incinera- tion facility would increase this site's life to approximately 70 to 80 years. With regard to the Capitol Complex application, it is apparent that the feasibility 5.25 I 1 of this application is less attractive than the Fort Harrison application at this time. The net system cost for this alternative currently appears to be approximately 50 per- cent higher than current State Complex steam generation and City of Helena waste disposal practices. In addition to economics, an adverse environmental impact may be evident due to possible facility siting problems and increased traffic in the Capitol area. In general,it appears that this application is technically feasible and should con- tinue to be pursued if the Fort Harrison application is not implemented. As summarized in the previous narrative, the implementation of a waste-to-energy , incineration facility at the City of Helena industrial park is dependent upon the future development of the park. Since all facilities currently located at the industrial park I utilize individual heating and cooling systems, a central steam distribution system would be required. Basically, in order for each current or prospective industry lo- cated at the industrial park to be agreeable to utilizing a central steam facility, a price incentive for doing so would be necessary. According to the estimated costs de- veloped in Table V-11, a minimum energy cost of$3.82/mm Btu would be required to offset the capital and annual costs of the incineration facility. The added cost as- sociated with the construction and maintenance of a steam distribution system would increase this cost, depending upon the pressure of the steam produced. In summary,it appears that this application is potentially feasible. However, it does not appear at this time that the costs associated with producing energy from a waste-to-energy in- cineration facility are less than or equal to the cost of individual heating or cooling fa- cilities for each industry. It appears that the current energy cost would have to in- crease at least two-fold before such a central system would be economically advantag- eous. V 7. Co-Incineration of Solid Waste and Wastewater Sludge 1 (a) General For the past several years the disposal of sludge at the City of Helena Wastewater I Treatment Plant has caused serious public criticism,primarily due to the offensive odors generated in the spring and summer months. In the early 1970's, the City of Helena installed a new sludge handling system. The system, which is commonly re- ferred to as a "Purifax"system, involves the exposure of raw sludge to an intense chlorine dosage. This is accomplished in a closed reactor and is intended to biologic- ally and chemically stabilize and disinfect the wastewater sludge. After the sludge has been stabilized with chlorine, it is then piped to drying beds located adjacent to the treatment plant for dewatering. The dried sludge is then transported to a City-owned landfill for final disposal. ' 5.26 , I In recent years the noxious odors released from the sludge drying beds have ' caused public concern and legal action by local residents. Because of the seriousness of the sludge odor problems, the EPA issued a grant to the City of Helena in March, ' 1979 to evaluate the effectiveness of the existing sludge handling system and to de- termine the best possible method for handling the city's sludge. The City subsequent- "' ly retained the consulting firms of Black &Veatch and Robert Peccia &Associates to conduct the study. The consulting firms published the results of their evaluations in a report entitled Wastewater Treatment Plant Sludge Handling Study in February, 1980. The study basically concluded that if the odor problems continued during the spring and summer months of 1980, the current sludge handling system should be replaced with another system. The study addressed six basic potential alternatives for treating and disposing of the sludge at the Helena treatment plant. The most cost-effective solution addressed ' in the study included the replacement of the existing "Purifax" system with anaerobic digestors. Under this plan the anaerobically digested sludge would be stored in drying beds during the winter months and injected on nearby agricultural land during the late spring,summer and fall months. ' Due to the fact that the same consultant, Robert Peccia&Associates, was con- ducting the wastewater sludge handling study concurrently with this three-county ' solid waste management study, a seventh sludge disposal alternative was determined applicable and thus was evaluated. This alternative included the co-incineration of solid waste and dried sludge at a modular incineration facility. Since the most econ- omical situation for utilizing solid waste as an energy source was determined to be the Fort Harrison modular incineration application,the alternative of co-incinerating the waste and sludge at this facility was determined to be the most logical and econ- omic solution. (b) Facility Description The co-incineration alternative evaluated herein is basically similar to the waste incineration system discussed in Section 6 of this chapter, with the addition of the necessary equipment to dewater, transport, store and convey the sludge to the modu- lar incineration equipment located at the VA Complex. Under this proposed alterna- tive, the sludge generated in the City of Helena would not pass through the "Purifax" handling system currently being used, but would instead be subjected to a dewatering process comprised of a chemical addition chamber,centrifuges and belt presses. This ' 5.27 1. dewatered sludge(solids content would be approximately 25 percent compared to less than five percent originally) would then be transported to the Fort Harrison I Incineration Facilility by a specially designed truck. It is anticipated that one trip per day would be required to handle the city's current sludge production. At the Fort Harrison facility the truck would dump the sludge cake into a re- ceiving pit served by a belt conveyor, which would transport the material to a steel bin with four days' storage capacity at the present rate of sludge production. An auger feed system would transfer the bin contents to a direct rotary sludge drier. The dried sludge would be augered into individual feeders added to the two inciner- ators. These mechanical feeders would control dried sludge feed to the incoming I municipal refuse en route to the combustion chamber. A basic flow diagram indi- cating these steps is depicted in Figure V-2. Through several conversations with engineers and equipment manufacturers it was determined that drying of the sludge prior to injecting it into the modular incin- eration units is necessary to assure the success of this co-incineration process. As was discussed in Section 6 of this chapter, the Fort Harrison facility's existing steam de- mand represents approximately one-third of the total steam available from the incin- eration of the wastes generated in the Helena area. Based on this substantial surplus , of steam, it was determined that the rotary driers utilized to dry the sludge could be fired with a heat exchanger using a portion of the excess steam available from the incineration of the solid waste. Based on an energy balance analysis, it was determined that the drying and incineration of the sludge would result in a net energy loss of ap- proximately 8,500,000 pounds of steam per year. This equates to an energy loss of approximately 8.5 percent of the total energy available from the incineration of the solid wastes brought to the plant. I (c) Feasibility Analysis In addition to the capital improvements determined necessary for solid waste in- cineration at the Fort Harrison complex(see Table V-9 for breakdown), substantial capital improvements would be necessary in order to process the sludge for incinera- tion at the same facility. Included in Table V-12 is a summary of the anticipated cap ' ital costs for making these necessary improvements for dewatering, transferring,stor- ing and drying the sludge. As indicated in the table, approximately $1,121,000 in cap- ital improvements would be necessary to process and handle the sludge prior to its incineration at the Fort Harrison complex. As further depicted, the amortization of 1 5.28 a WASTEWATER SLUDGE STREAM LIQUID SIDESTREAM 9NDARYCc2E ,RS -------- PROCESS STEAM MISCELLANEOUS STREAMS AS LABELED POLYMER ADDITION }� /11147 CENTRIFUGE Er DIGESTER PRIMARY WASTE ACTIVATED SLUDGE TO EXISTING LIQUID / • ��� REMODEL EXISTING TREATMENT PROCESS • SLUDGE STORAGE TANKS ap W PRIMARY DIGESTER PRIMARY DIGESTER PRIMARY SLUDGE TO EXISTING LIQUID TREATMENT PROCESS J _ ED POLYMER ADDITION ROTARY AUGER FEED STORAGE TRUCK TRANSPORT �/ mF" ���� 1 CBEELT FILTER • PROCESS STEAM V •..� ELECTRICITY A V.A..A HOSPITAL ELECTRICAL TO HEATING GENERATOR(S) M.P.CO. GRID Tw� ! • WASTE STEAM •3•• A PROCESS STEAM •••'••• •••• • *> ' TO AUGER FEED INCINERATORS •••••' ` ATMOSPHERE s • STACK GASES TO ATMOSPHERE MUNICIPAL -I [ -ASH TO LANDFILL T. � SOLID WASTE -- C as SOLID WASTE / WASTEWATER N SLUDGE CO - INCINERATION ALTERNATIVE I TABLE V-12 SLUDGE HANDLING FACILITIES FOR CO INCINERATION ALTERNATIVE CAPITAL COSTS Item Capital Cost Annual Amortization I. At Existing Treatment Plant I 1. Polymer Feed Equipment $ 18,800 2. Belt Presses 240,000 3. Modifications to Sludge Building 25,000 4. Additional Pipelines&Pumps 80,000 Subtotal — $363,800 $34,600 1 II. Truck Transportation Equipment 1. Semi-tractor $50,000 2. Hopper Trailer 28,000 Subtotal — $78,000 $11,200 is III. At Fort Harrison 1. Truck Unloading Dock& Storage $ 40,000 , 2. Rotary Drier 175,000 3. Modifications to Incinerators 30,000 4. Increased Building Size 150,000 1 5. Misc. Conveyors, Etc. 60,000 Subtotal — $455,000 $48,000 IV. Engineering, Legal&Contingency $224,200 $23,500 1 Total Cost $1,121,000 $117,300 I 1 I Reference: City of Helena- Helena Valley Wastewater Treatment Plant Sludge Handling Study, February, 1980. I I 1 these improvements would result in an annual debt repayment of approximately $117,300. The estimated annual operation and maintenance cost of the sludge handling fa- cilities decribed herein were also estimated. A summary of these costs are included in Table V-13. As noted in the table, the estimated annual cost to operate the sludge handling facilities required to process the sewage sludge into a form that can be incin- erated is $140,700. As further depicted in the table, the total annual cost for the ne- cessary sludge handling facilities is estimated to be $258,000 if all amortization, oper- ation and maintenance costs are added. It should be noted that the costs included in Tables V-12 and V-13 were derived through the detailed analyses conducted in con- junction with the Wastewater Treatment Plant Sludge Handling Study prepared for the City of Helena in February, 1980. For further information with regard to the de- scription or costs of the sludge handling facilities summarized herein, this referenced ' study should be consulted. To determine the economic feasibility of co-incinerating solid waste and sewage sludge at a waste incineration facility located at the Fort Harrison complex, it was ne- cessary to compare the net annual costs of this alternative with the current or proposed solid waste and sludge handling methods. In this case it is apparent that if the co-incin- eration alternative is not implemented,the solid waste will most likely continue to be disposed of at the City of Helena landfill. Likewise,it is most probable at this time that the City of Helena will utilize an anaerobic digestion —land injection system for the disposal of the city's sewage sludge. 1 Summarized in Table V-14 is an annual cost comparison of the Fort Harrison co- incineration alternative with the sanitary landfill —anaerobic digestion alternative. As indicated in the table,the total annual cost for the landfill —anaerobic digestion al- ternative is estimated to be $503,800. This basically includes all capital and annual costs associated with the operation of the City of Helena's landfill as well as the pro- jected costs for the city to convert its existing sludge handling system to the proposed anaerobic digestion —land injection alternative. As further depicted in the table, the annual cost to implement the co-incineration option is estimated to be $1,214,000. This includes all costs associated with the amortization and operation of the waste in- cineration facility at the Fort Harrison complex (see Table V-11) and the sludge handling facilities that would be required to process and dry the sludge prior to incin- eration (see Table V-13). 5.29 • TABLE V-13 SLUDGE HANDLING FACILITIES FOR CO-INCINERATION ALTERNATIVE 1 ANNUAL COSTS Description Annual Cost I 1. Labor $29,600 2. Operation&Maintenance a) Chemicals 32,900 b) Dewatering Equipment 14,200 c) Driers, Conveyors,Etc. 45,500 d) Pumps&Pipeline 8,000 1 e) Truck 5,500 3. Insurance 5,000 1 Subtotal — $140,700 4. Amortization of Capital 117,300 TOTAL ANNUAL COST $258,000 I 1 1 i I Reference: City of Helena- Helena Valley Wastewater Treatment Plant Sludge Handling Study, February, 1980. I 1 1 ' TABLE V -14 ALTERNATIVES COST COMPARISON Alternative Landfill - Fort Harrison Item Anaerobic Digestion Co -Incineration 1 I. Annual Cost 1. Sludge Handling $338,8001 $258,000 2. Class II Landfill 165,000 — 1 3. Incineration — 956,000 Subtotal — $503,800 $1,214,000 II. Less Revenues 1 1. Existing Steam Costs — $420,000 2. Steam Plant Amortization — 178,000 1 3. Electric Sales — 94,000 Subtotal - $ 0 $692,000 1 TOTAL ANNUAL COST $503,800 $522,000 1 1 1 1 1 See City of Helena-Helena Valley Wastewater Treatment Plant Sludge Handling Study, February, 1980. 1 1 In order to determine the net system cost of each of the two disposal alterna- tives, the potential revenues associated with each alternative must be subtracted from 111 the estimated annual costs. As depicted in Table V-14, there are no potential revenues associated with the landfill-anaerobic digestion alternative. However,steam and elec- tric revenues can be deducted from the estimated annual costs for the co-incineration 1 alternative. It should be noted that these revenues are quite similar to the steam and electric revenues as discussed in Part 6 of this chapter with the exception of a $14,000 I decrease in electric sales compared to possible sales with the solid waste-only alterna- tive. This decrease in sales is due to the net volume of steam that would be utilized for operating the sludge rotary driers. As depicted in Table V-14, the net system cost for the two waste disposal options I are quite competitive. According to the cost estimates included herein, the annual cost difference between the two alternatives is less than four percent, with the least- 1 cost option being the landfill —anaerobic digestion alternative. (d) Summary 1 Based on the evaluations and cost estimates included in the previous narrative and tables,it is apparent that there are several potential advantages in implementation of the solid waste / sewage sludge co-incineration alternative. Some of these possible advantages include: 1) Economics , Since the co-incineration alternative is directly related to the cost of energy, the incineration of the wastes will undoubtedly become more economically at- tractive as the price of fuel increases. In direct comparison, the landfill —anaer- obic digestion alternative is directly cost-intensive, with minimal long-term eco- nomic benefits available. 2) Financing , Due to the benefits that such a co-incineration facility would afford,several state and federal loan and/or grant programs are available for construction of the necessary facilities and equipment. Such possible funding would make the eco- nomics of this alternative substantially more attractive than outlined herein. I 3) Energy As discussed herein the co-incineration of solid waste and sludge each year 5.30 i has a heating value of approximately 200,000 million Btu's. This energy is equivalent to approximately 13,000 tons of coal annually. Obviously, if these wastes are disposed of by landfilling, this energy is for all practical purposes being wasted. 4) Environmental Obviously, whenever bacterial or pathogenic wastes are disposed of on or in the soil, potential health hazards must be taken.into account.With the use of land disposal techniques for both solid and liquid waste, the potential for soil or water contamination is present. However, when the solid wastes and sludges are 1 incinerated the resultant residues are for all practical purposes inert, with little possibility of pollution present. 1 5) Aesthetics ' For the past several years, the odors,blowing paper and unsightliness of operating waste disposal sites have caused several complaints as well as legal ac- tion. A co-incineration facility can substantially reduce these aesthetic problems. 6) Long-Term Solution The current land disposal practices being employed for the wastes generated in the area can be considered short-term solutions. In approximately 15 years a new sanitary landfill will be needed if the City of Helena's solid waste genera- tion continues at the present rate. In addition, federal laws regulate the quantity of sludge that can be applied to any one parcel of land. Thus, after the current disposal sites reach their maximum limits,new sites will be required. The loca- 1 tion of new disposal sites will undoubtedly become increasingly difficult in the years to come. However,if the area's solid wastes and sludges were incinerated, the number of new sites necessary in future years would be substantially reduced. The major stumbling block that may be encountered in making the decision to implement the co-incineration alternative is the lack of solid, proven technol- ogy for the system. The various waste incineration, steam generation and sludge handling equipment has been in use for several years throughout the United States and Europe;however, at the present time only four installations in the nation utilize the total process and heat recovery system. Because the co-incineration alternative that has been identified herein is 1 5.31 , . relatively unproven as a system, it is the Consultant's recommendation that a site-specific feasibility study and preliminary design be conducted prior to any decision to implement a solid waste- wastewater sludge co-incineration system. From investigations made by the Consultant, it is apparent that several state and federal agencies have grant funds which are available for feasibility studies of this nature. Two of the more prominent agencies that may fund this type of evaluation are the State of Montana Department of Natural Resources and the U.S. Department of Energy. I I I I 1 I i I I I I 5.32 I I I I 1 1 PART SIX I SPECIAL WASTE ANALYSIS I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 PART SIX SPECIAL WASTE ANALYSIS I A. GENERAL The quantity and composition of solid waste varies considerably around the State of Montana and within the study area. Although various sections of the study area generate diff- erent types and quantities of solid waste, the conventional portion of the total waste generated (residential and commercial) generally has similar composition characteristics and is generated in about the same per capita quantities in all parts of the study area and state. It is the remainder of the wastes which vary the most in composition and quantity from area to area. These "special wastes"are responsible for many of the solid waste management problems encountered in the study area because most of these wastes require special handling and disposal. In order to determine the proper disposal method for these "special" wastes, it is first necessary to classify them according to waste type. The federal government through the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently published waste classification and preliminary disposal guidelines throughout the nation. The EPA guidelines basically categorize solid waste into hazardous and non-hazardous wastes. Disposal criteria which are being developed for the var- ious types of wastes by the EPA are in the draft stages and are currently being reviewed and finalized. The State of Montana generally classifies wastes according to guidelines established by the EPA. Under current state regulations all wastes categorized by the EPA as being hazardous are classified as Group I type wastes. The current state standards require that all wastes class- ified as Group I materials must be disposed of in a Class! disposal site. The state requirement for operating a Class I site coincide quite closely with the standards which have been established by the EPA for a "Hazardous Waste Disposal Site". The state further classifies all decomposable wastes excluding hazardous wastes as Group II waste. State regulations require that these waste types be disposed of in a conventional sanitary landfill,more commonly referred to as a Class II site. According to state regulations,all other materials such as construction debris, wood wastes and inert materials are classified as Group III materials and can be disposed of in a Class III disposal site (demotion and fill site). Included in the following section of this report is a brief evaluation of the existing disposal regulations, practices and concerns and the analysis of potential policies and procedures for properly disposing of those "special" type wastes which have given local officials problems for 1 6.1 I the past several years. Obviously there are other types of wastes generated in the area that give local officials and residents occasional problems. However, in most cases these disposal problems are solved on a case by case basis and thus do not warrant an indepth analysis at this time. B. ANALYSIS OF INDIVIDUAL WASTE TYPES Included in the following narrative is a summary of the information obtained and the con- clusions and recommendations that were formulated for each type of waste a nalyzed L 1. Septic Tank Pumpings and Sludges I (a) General Significant quantities of septic tank pumpings are generated within the study area annually. Septic tank systems are commonly used in much of the study area due to the fact that municipal treatment services are not available in many of the smaller communities and no centralized services exist in most rural areas. In regard to sludge disposal, the treatment of industrial wastewaters and municipal sewage are responsible for the formation of most sludges. Currently most industrial operations and municipal I plants are responsible for the handling and disposal of their sludges. In order to determine the proper disposal technique for these liquids and semi- liquids, it is first necessary to classify them according to waste type. According to the current EPA guidelines,septic tank pumpings are considered to be non-hazardous type wastes, and thus can be deposited in a conventional sanitary landfill. However, numerous types of sludges generated by industrial processes are included in the hazardous waste classification list and thus specific industries must comply with the EPA hazardous waste guidelines. In regard to the specific classification of septic tank pumpings and sludges, the 1 State of Montana classifies these materials as Group II type wastes with the exception of those industrial sludges which are classified as "hazardous"by the EPA. Unlike the majority of Group II type wastes, however, the state regulations mandate that these type materials cannot be disposed of in a Class II disposal site without a special use permit to do so. The operational procedures and hydrogeologic conditions of each site must be evaluated individually and determined to be satisfactory before state approval to deposit there materials can be issued. I 6.2 1 1 V (b) Disposal Practices (1) Septic Tank Pumpings As previously mentioned, disposal of septic tank pumpings may occur at Class II landfills if state approval is granted. At the present time, very few land- fills within the state have applied for permission to dispose of this material. Therefore, any landfill which presently accepts such materials and does not have licensed approval by the state is not in compliance with state law. There is also evidence in the area that some septic tank pumpings are being indiscriminately dumped. This practice is not only unlawful but quite hazardous due to the pot- ential of groundwater pollution and public health problems. (2) Sewage Sludges The present published EPA regulations prohibit the disposal of raw sludge to landfills, or by other methods of land application such as spreading, spraying, or tilling. Under typical sewage treatment processes utilized today, approximately 95% of the sludge produced is water. To comply with EPA reg- ulations some form of sludge concentration is required prior to disposal. There are several common methods of sludge treatment and disposal in use at the present time. One method involves the addition of chemicals to condition the sludge before filtration to an intermediate concentration. This conditioned sludge produces a cake with a fairly high solids concentration. A second possible method involves the drying of sludge in evaporation beds. This requires the use of large areas of open surfaces and drying beds. Digested sludge is applied to the surface of the beds and excess water is filtered downward into a collection system. This process produces a relatively high solids concentration under proper conditions. Concentration of solids may also be accomplished by the drying and incineration of sludge in multiple hearth furnaces fired by oil,gas, or coal. Incin- eration of sludge results in the production of a totally dry ash which can then be disposed of. In most instances this conditioned sludge can then be disposed of in one of several ways, two of the more common being; 1) in an approved licensed landfill, and 2) on agricultural land for use as a soil conditioner. I 1 63 1 I (c) Recommendations (1) Septic Tank Pumpings Based upon conversations with state officials and the evaluation of the ex- I isting disposal guidelines and laws regarding disposal of septic tank pumpings,it is recommended that the following disposal methods be utilized. a). Disposal of pumpings at an existing sewage treatment facility. The waste material may be integrated into the treatment process. Also, the dis- posal of septic tank pumpings directly into wastewater treatment lagoons is an acceptable disposal method with no apparent ill affects on the waste- ! water treatment process. b). Land spreading c). Drying in shallow evaporation ponds. d). Proper disposal at licensed landfill sites. (2) Sewage Sludges As discussed herein the primary method of disposing of sewage sludges is in either an approved landfill site or on agricultural land for use as a fertilizer. Obviously, any sludge must be conditioned prior to its disposal utilizing one of the methods discussed herein. 'I 2. Dead Animals I (a) General Disposal Practices The number of dead animals, both domestic agricultural animals and game animals, varies throughout the year. Animal losses may occur during calving and lambing season when weather conditions are critical to many newborn animals. Hunting season also produces numerous instances of carcass abandonment. State law prohibits the placing of all or any part of a dead animal in any water body, road, street alley, lot, or field. It is also unlawful to place all or part of a dead animal within one mile of the residence of any person unless it is burned or buried at least two feet under- I ground. Dead animals are classified as a Group II waste and may be disposed of at a Class II landfill if special procedures are taken. However, almost every county in the I 6.4 1 1 state prohibits the burial of dead animals at sites within their respective counties. Several methods of disposal currently practiced are in compliance with present state regulations. These include proper disposal on private land, disposal of the carcass at rendering plants and disposal at Class II landfills. Each of these techniques if properly administered will contain and restrict any of the potentially harmful con- stituents of the waste. (b) Recommendations Based upon conversations with state officials and examination of state regulations,the best method of carcass removal and disposal is by a rendering operation that is licensed and meets the Montana Department of Livestock requirements for rendering operations. In most instances the rendering service will provide free pickup and delivery if the number of animals and transportation distances are economical. Currently there are five rendering plants in the state which provide a disposal service for dead animals. The name,location and phone number for each are listed below: NAME LOCATION TELEPHONE NO. Billings Rendering Co. Billings, MT. 248-8410 Dillon Rendering Co. Dillon, MT 683-2812 Miles City Rendering Co. Miles City, MT 232-1956 Rocky Mountain Rendering Co. Great Falls, MT. 454-1953 Western Montana By- Products, Inc. Missoula, MT. 543-8291 I The second most desirable disposal method for dead animals is by individual owners on private property. This method in most instances is the least costly due to low transportation and handling costs. A third acceptable disposal method is at state approved sanitary landfills where proper handling procedures and supervision is adequate. 3. Bulky Materials 1 (a) General Bulky wastes consist primarily of discarded appliances(white goods), demolition 6.5 I I debris materials(brick, rock, concrete, and wood wastes) and waste wood materials. According to state laws, these materials which are non-water soluble,inert solids are classified as Group III wastes. However, used appliances depending upon their con- stituents may be classified as Group II materials,and then must be disposed of at Class I II landfills. The Group III materials may be disposed of at Class II or Class III sites. (b) Existing Disposal Practices As mentioned above, disposal of bulky materials may occur at Class II or Class III sites. At the present time,very few licensed Class III sites exist within the state, therefore, most of these materials are disposed of at Class II sites. Most landfills accept these bulky materials; however, in certain instances some municipalities prefer the dumping of some materials (brick, stone, concrete, dirt) in locations where fill is needed. Stockpiling of discarded appliances, brush and tree wastes is a common prac- tice at many landfill sites. (c) Recommendations After examining the existing state laws regarding disposal of bulky ' materials, it is apparent that the majority of the existing disposal practices are in compliance with the laws. Of course,numerous instances of disposal occur that are in violation of state guidelines. One practice common at many landfills involves the burning of the combustible fraction of the bulky materials, primarily the wood wastes. Burning of any type is prohibited at any landfill. Indiscriminate dumping of materials is also prohibited by state law but will usually occur to a small extent. The recommended disposal practices for bulky materials are as follows: I 1. Proper disposal at a Class III (demolition debris) site I 2. Disposal at a Class II disposal site 3. Salvage of the useable portion of the bulky materials (use of stone, I brick, concrete and dirt for fill material is a good example). I 4. Used Tires (a) General It is estimated that within the State of Montana approximately 680,000 used tires are generated as waste each year. This is based upon a national average of 6.6 I 1 I 1.14 waste tires per registered motor vehicle per year. This represents approximately 1 6,800 tons of tires assuming an average of 100 tires per ton. Over the past few years the composition of the tires manufactured has changed considerably. Synthetic rubber has replaced the use of natural rubber in the manufacturing of tires. The primary non-rubber components found in tires produced today are woven steel belting, fiber- glass belting, polyester cord and steel bead wires. According to state laws, used ve- hicle tires are classified as Group III wastes and thus may be disposed of at Class II or Class III disposal sites. I (b) Alternate Disposal Methods The most common practice of disposing of used tires within the study area and the state consists of stockpiling or burying them in landfills or dumps. Unless properly placed in landfills, however, the tires will eventually work up to the surface. Because the majority of tires placed in landfills are not properly buried, the disposal of used tires has been a problem for many years. Summarized in the following narrative are several alternative methods for used tire disposal which have been investigated and analyzed for application in the study area. The majority of these alternatives are currently being used or have recently been used in various sections of the nation. (1) Recapping Information obtained from individuals associated with the recapping in- dustry have indicated that only approximately 30% of the used tires casings disposed of are suitable for recapping. Several large companies collect used tires from local tire dealers and numerous small recapping plants operate within the state. Recapping partially solves the used tire disposal problem however, there are many waste tires which are not capable of being recapped that must be dealt with. (2) Preliminary Processing Tires may be processed before disposal in order to eliminate problems associated with the handling and disposal. Another reason for preliminary pro- cessing relates to the potential recoverability of some or all of the constituents which comprise used tires. Processing may be accomplished by three methods; shredding, slicing and cryogenics. Shredding and slicing reduces the chances of tires working their way to the surface after burying. Also both processes substan- 6.7 1 I tially reduce the volume of the tires which in turn reduce transportation and disposal costs. Shredding and/or slicing tires also prepares used tires in a physical form which is desirable for the reclamation of all or a portion of the tires con- stituents. Cryogenics is a special process whereby materials are subjected to sudden drops in temperatures. The process is based on the principle that embrit- tled materials will shatter easily. When applied to used tire disposal the net effect is similar to tire shredding, However, past study has indicated that this process is not feasible in Montana due to the small number of used tires generated annually. (3) Recycling Several applications have been investigated that may make it possible to re- claim significant quantities of rubber from used tires. Reclaimed rubber may be utilized as an additive to asphalt for paving. Considerable interest has also been I shown for pyrolzing tires. The pyrolysis process consists of heating shredded tire casings in the absence of air to a high temperature and breaking down the rubber into its original chemical constituents. Investigations have also been conducted to determine the feasibility of utilizing used tires as an energy source. (4) Statewide Disposal Program The State of Montana is currently investigating the feasibility of 1 implementing a statewide tire disposal program. Based upon market investiga- tions and other related studies completed by the state,it was determined that the ' initation of a statewide program is dependent upon locating a market outlet for the used tires. Recently, a Canadian firm has shown interest in obtaining large quantities of whole tires from the State of Montana for use as an additive to asphalt aggregate. Further study is currently under way to determine the economics and practicability of a statewide program. (c) Recommendations I Based upon the investigation conducted for this report, it is recommended that tires be recycled by one of the methods discussed herein to the highest degree pos- I sible. If recycling of these tires is not economically attractive, these materials should be disposed of at state-approved sanitary landfill sites. Also,the possibility of implemen- ting a state or regional recovery or disposal program should be continually evaluated and monitored. If such a program becomes feasible, each community should partici- pate in the program to the maximum extent possible. 6.8 I 1 t 5. Scrap Automobiles (a) General Basically, a scrap automobile can be defined as a derelict, unused, inoperable auto- mobile with little or no value. Based on national averages, it is estimated that the motor vehicle survival rate decreases from 95% surviving after 6 years in service to less than 20% after 14 years. During its "life cycle", a motor vehicle will pass from a transportation unit to a valuable source of materials, providing spare parts for other vehicles. Finally, the vehicle becomes a natural resource of scrap metals to be used by the metal making industries. According to state law, abandoned automobiles are classified as a Group II waste, which may be disposed of at a Class II landfill. Due to the large amount of space required for storing junk vehicles at disposal sites and problems encountered with burial of the automobiles, manylandfills, however, do not accept junk vehicles. (b) Existing and Recommneded Disposal Practices A statewide junk vehicle disposal program was implemented in July, 1973. The program is financed by several sources: (1) the sale of junk vehicles;(2) a $2.00 fee levied on all vehicles registered in the state: (3) a licensing fee levied on all wrecking facilities and (4) a title transfer fee for all junked vehicles. Under the program, funds are provided to counties for planning as well as operation. Each county may determine the type of program it feels best suits the needs of the citizens. The state provides assistance to each county as situations and problems arise. The program stipulates that each junk vehicle graveyard must have a minimum of two acres of land and be properly shielded from public view. After each graveyard has accumulated 200 vehicles a contract is obtained with a scrap dealer to dispose of the vehicles. The profit obtained from the vehicles is then placed in the state's operating budget. At the present time there are 127 licensed motor vehicle wrecking facilities in the state. Since the program was initiated, these wrecking facilities have removed over 10,000 junked vehicles from the state.The majority of the vehicles are crushed and transported to one of various shredding plants located in the northwest. The shredded vehicles are then processed into scrap which in turn are transported to foundries to make new steel. I 1 6.9 I In summary, it is recommended that every attempt be made to dispose of a junk vehicle at properly licensed junk vehicle wrecking facilities participating in the junk I vehicle disposal program. This program has functioned quite effectively since its concep- tion and is an economical and practical solution to a past waste disposal problem. 6. Hazardous Wastes Many wastes produced by agriculture, industry, hospitals and certain governmental agencies may be hazardous and require that special precautions be taken during handling and disposal procedures. Problems with the disposal of hazardous wastes have been of major con- cern for the past several decades. Detrimental affects to public health and the environment may result if proper disposal of these materials does not occur. I A major problem with hazardous wastes has been the identification of what constitutes a hazardous waste. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is responsible for identifying the hazardous wastes and recently released proposed guidelines and rules which are more com- prehensive than any previously in effect. The proposed regulations attempt to define hazardous wastes and hazardous waste generators, as well as establish guidelines for proper 1 transportation and disposal of the waste materials. The proposed EPA guidelines define "hazardous wastes" as : "A solid waste, or combination of solid wastes which,because of its quantity, concentration, or physical, chemical or infectious characteristics may: (a) cause or I significantly contribute to an increase in mortality or an increase in serious illness; or (b) pose a substantial present or potential hazard to human health or the environment when im- properly treated, stored, transported or disposed of or otherwise managed'.'(Federal Register, December 18, 1978.) The proposed guidelines and regulations established by the Environmental Protection Agency have also attempted to determine criteria for hazardous waste generators. According to the proposed guidelines, the EPA has tentatively determined that if an individual accumulates, produces or disposes of a waste classified by the EPA as hazardous at a rate greater than 100 kilograms/month (220 lbs/monthl that individual is a generator. This standard does not apply to farmers and retailers. Disposal of 100 kilograms/ 1 month of hazardous waste according to EPA guidelines, may occur at an on-site or off-site facility provided the facility is approved by the state and included in a state solid waste man- agement plan. The EPA guidelines and rules provide the basis for the State of Montana's regulations regarding the hazardous wastes. According to the state's definition, hazardous wastes include, but are not limited to,"those which are toxic,radioactive, corrosive, flammable,irritants, or I 6.10 1 I i which generate pressure through decomposition, heat or other means. The specific wastes which are hazardous wastes are those solid wastes classified by EPA's rules as hazardous wastes". (Section 16-2.14 (2) - S14100 -ARM., Solid Waste Management). It is evident from the above definition that the state is extremely dependent upon the EPA guidelines. The state has not yet established its own set of hazardous waste regulations;however, the state's regul- ations regarding identification,handling and disposal of hazardous waste will be formalized after the proposed EPA regulations have been finalized and adopted. Several types of hazardous wastes exist within the study area. The following narrative identifies the existing and recommended disposal practices for the more commonly generated waste types in the area. (a) Pesticides and Containers (1) General Because of the agricultural nature of a considerable portion of the study area, it is expected that a significant amount of excess pesticide and pesticide containers are generated within the area. Proper handling and disposal methods must be utilized in order to prevent detrimental effects on the environment and public health. According to state law,no person shall dispose of or receive for disposal any pesticide or pesticide container residue in a manner inconsistant with safe disposal criteria and procedures. It is also unlawful to dispose of these materials by burning or by dumping improperly. (2) Alternate Disposal Methods There are several acceptable methods by which excess pesticide may be disposed of without causing unreasonable adverse effects on the environment. The most preferred method of disposal is to return the excess material to the manufac- turer, distributor or to another party capable of using the material. The alternate disposal method is burial at a disposal site that has been approved by the State or EPA. 1 Several procedures are recommended for the safe disposal of pesticide containers. Many combustible containers may be disposed of at Class I or Class II landfills depending upon the chemical constituents the containers held. Burial of many containers may also occur on farm premises. Precautions should be taken, 6.11 i i however, to avoid contamination of surface and groundwater. Non-combustible containers should be triple rinsed, following a procedure established by the Depart- ment of Agriculture, to dilute the hazardous material prior to disposal or transporta- tion to a disposal facility. After the rinsing procedure, metal containers may be dis- posed of by: (1) returning the container to the dealer, (2) taking the container to a scrap metal dealer or junk vehicle graveyard which has obtained authorization by the state to recycle pesticide containers,(3) burial in a Class I or II sanitary landfill, or (4) burial on farm premises. The Montana Department of Health and Environmental Sciences was involved in a waste pesticide management program from 1969 through the fall of 1978. The Health Department accepted highly toxic or other waste pesticides from state residents and transported them to storage bunkers located at the inactive Glasgow Air Force Base in northeastern Montana. Recently, the pesticides and pesticide containers were transported from the bunkers to a hazardous waste disposal site located near Boise, Idaho. The program was developed to provide safe storage and 1 disposal for excess pesticides generated by pesticide users who would normally be faced with storage and disposal problems. The funds for this program have been exhausted and currently no additional grant monies are available to continue the program. (3) Recommendations Based on the research and analysis conducted for this project, it is recommended that all unused pesticides should be returned to the local dealers or transported to the nearest Class I site for disposal. These type materials should not 1 be disposed of in Class II or Class III landfills,nor should they be disposed of on private property without approval from the appropriate state and local regulatory agencies. All pesticide containers should be triple rinsed prior to disposal. Rinsed containers should then either be transported to a local scrap dealer for reprocessing or buried at a Class II landfill. (b) Used Lubrication Oils I (1) General Based upon studies performed in other regions, it has been estimated that over two-thirds of the automobile lubrication oil sold results as a waste product I 6.12 I I I which is not salvaged or reclaimed. Used oils are generally disposed in trash collec- tions, on roadways to control dust, or placed directly in landfills. This oil,unless it is burned, does not disappear and may eventually find its way into groundwater sources and become a pollutant to water supplies. In the study area and state it is quite possible that as much as 90 to 95 percent of the used oils are being discarded rather than recycled. This is due primarily to the lack of available recycling plants and markets located within the state. (2) Existing and Alternate Disposal Methods a). Land Disposal Presently,the most common method of waste oil disposal in the area is by dumping oil on the ground, in sewers or waterways. This is the least de- sirable method of used oil disposal and should be avoided. If used oils are not properly reclaimed, they should be disposed of using sanitary landfill techniques which do not result in contamination or pollution of nearby aquifers or streams. An acceptable method of disposal of small quantities of used oils has been to mix the oil with other materials deposited in a sanitary landfill. For large amounts of used oil, the most favorable disposal technique is dependent upon the type and characteristics of the oil. For these situations, no one disposal technique is applicable, but disposal should be in accordance with state and federal hazardous waste guidelines. b). Re-refining After lubrication oil has been used over a period of time, contaminants, such as gasoline, water, heat and cold resistant additives and dirt collect within the oil. The contaminants may be removed from the used oil by a re-refining process. The resultantproduct is a lubricating oil which is quite similar to the original product. At the present time, no real market exists for the waste oils within the State of Montana. Cenex Oil Company,located in Laurel, does re- refine used oils. However, the oils that receive processing are generally waste oils collected from Cenex service stations and no large quantities of oil from other waste oil producers are used. c). Other Reclamation Alternatives Several other reclamation methods may be used to dispose of waste oils. These include incineration and use as a fuel source, use as road oil and use as 6.13 l I asphalt. Tests conducted by various industrial concerns have demonstrated that it is possible to recover some energy from several types of waste lubricants. I The waste oils may also be used as a supplemental fuel for large boilers. An in- direct method of disposing of waste oil is the use of oils for dust control. Although road oils have been and are still manufactured from virgin materials, a large amount of this material is comprised of waste oil. Some drain oil and distilled drain oil fractions may be used as cutting. stock for producing asphalt. Most of the metallic compounds present in the oil are relatively insoluble and presumably coated with asphaltic materials. As a result, little rain leaching I would be expected for asphalt uses. Each of these processes may result in some form of pollution and special precautions should be taken to minimize the detrimental effects on the environment. d). Statewide Program Several attempts have been made to establish a statewide waste oil recovery program. A statewide program is highly dependent on a developed market or outlet for the used materials. Curently, however, no used oil market is available in the state. Any major recycling program is dependent upon the policies established at the state and federal level. Until re-refined oil gains the Society of Automotive Engineers(SAE) seal of approval, it is doubtful that the use of re-refined oil will be widespread. The state and federal government currently discourages the use of re-refined oils in government owned vehicles because of current automobile manufacturer policies which void all warranties on vehicles that utilize non-SAE approved motor oils. Until some action is taken at the state and national level, it is unlikely that many states will establish a statewide program of using re-refined lubrication oils. (3) Recommendations Based on the analysis conducted herein it is apparent that no practical method I for waste oil disposal is available to the residents in the study area which meets all state and federal criteria. The "best' current alternative available is to dispose of these materials in small quantities at Class II sanitary landfills or to set up storage tanks at strategic locations for use by the public with ultimate disposal at a major waste oil recycling depot. It is also recommended that the citizens in the study area should encourage the use of any regional or statewide oil recovery program if one is implemented in the future. I 6.14 I I 1 I I 1 I PART SEVEN ALTERNATE IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES I I I I I 1 I I I 1 1 I PART SEVEN ALTERNATE IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES I IA. GENERAL IRegardless of the solid waste management alternatives implemented in an area, it is essential that the most efficient and practical implementation strategy be utilized. Included in the follow- ! ing narrative and in Table VII-1 is a summary of the alternate organizational, operational and financial strategies that are available for implementation of a solid waste management plan for a Iportion or all of the study area. Also included herein is a brief review of the state and federal assistance programs available today. Based on the alternate strategies discussed herein along with I the disposal alternatives evaluated in Part Four, a recommended solid waste plan was developed. Included in Part Eight of this report are these recommended plans. IB. ALTERNATE ORGANIZATIONAL STRATEGIES An organizational strategy to carry out a solid waste management program in an area is 1 often difficult to establish and equitably finance.. Organizational concepts range from a single entity that is entirely responsible for the collection, transportation and disposal of the jurisdic- I tional area's waste to a strategy whereby each individual community or small area is the most efficient and best managed concept. The latter is in most instances the most costly and least Ieffective type of organization. The collection and disposal activities of any organization are vital to the health and welfare of the citizens and deserves the attention and support of responsible public officials and agencies equivalent to that given to water supply, sewerage and other public services. Inadequate Ifinancing, planning, and supervision of refuse operations in the past are largely responsible for the unsatisfactory and inadequate disposal facilities of many of the communities in the nation I today. Most of the solid waste management problems prevalent in the area today can be resolved and administered satisfactorily at the county or municipality level if the public officials will ' assume the responsibility and provide the necessary financial support. Currently, the management of solid waste within the study area is primarily handled indiv- idually by each municipality. In a few instances the local municipalities and county officials I 7.1 I U 1 TABLE VII-I ALTERNATE IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES 1 I. ALTERNATE ORGANIZATIONAL STRATEGIES A. Individual Municipal Programs B. Refuse Disposal District C. Regional Authority or Agency II. ALTERNATE OPERATIONAL STRATEGIES A. Municipal. District or Agency Operation B. Private Operation 1 C. Combination of Public and Private Operation III. FINANCIAL STRATEGIES Capital Expenditures A. General Obligation Bonds B. Municipal Revenue Bonds C. General Tax Assessments (Service Charges) I D. Direct Loans E. Revenue Sharing I F. State and Federal Loans and Grants Annual Operational Costs A. General Tax Assessments (Service Charges) B. User Fees I 1 I have developed joint use and financing arrangements of disposal sites whereby county and local manpower and equipment are utilized periodically for maintenance. However, in most instances throughout the study area solid waste disposal efforts are provided separately, either through lo- tcal municipally organized programs or utilization of individual county funds and manpower. Over the past several years, numerous solid waste organizational concepts have been tried and deemed successful throughout the nation. These concepts include: 1) individual municipal programs, 2) county-wide programs, 3) regional authority operated programs, 4) non-profit governmental corporation programs, 5) privately operated programs, 6) regulated utility pro- grams, and 7) state administered programs. Due to the State of Montana laws and regulations and the local constraints and conditions within the study area, it is felt that three organizational concepts are potentially applicable in the area for implementing a solid waste management pro- gram. These concepts are summarized herein. 1. Individual Municipal or Area Programs Currently the State of Montana laws and regulations do provide for individual incor- porated communities to own, operate or contract the collection, storage, transfer and dis- posal of solid waste in their communities. Several of the larger communities have used this concept for the past several years with a high degree of success. However, many of the smaller communities that have used this concept have found it to be somewhat inadequate because of the lack of tax base and funds to adequately provide the required degree of service and operation of facilities. With regard to a total study area solution, this organiza- tional concept has a severe drawback in that limited opportunities are available for the residents living outside the incorporated communities. Under this system the rural residents must either operate their own disposal site or utilize a municipal site and pay a user fee. Obviously, the duplication of facilities will, in most instances, increase the costs to all residents in the area. If this organizational concept is implemented, an equitable user fee system must be developed and implemented. 2. Areawide Program (Refuse Disposal District) Under the existing State of Montana laws and regulations, county officials have auth- orization to formulate refuse disposal districts that may include collection and/or disposal services and facilities. Under this law the district has authority to assess fees on county tax 1 statements and utilize these fees to provide the services determined necessary to adequately and efficiently dispose of the wastes in the county. Under this program, incorporated com- munities can join the district by passing a resolution and petitioning to be included in the district. Likewise, individual residents included within the district boundary may petition 7.2 I to be excluded from the district. The district board of directors acts on each petition indi- vidually. Basically,the following procedure must be followed to formulate a refuse disposal district according to the State of Montana statutes: a) County commissioners pass a resolution of intent to create the district. b) Notice of intent is mailed to each property owner. c) A 30-day protest period is assigned with a public hearing held at the period's conclusion. I d) The district can be formed if less than a 50 percent protest is obtained. Currently there are 26 refuse disposal districts in operation in the state. The services provided by these district vary from complete collection and disposal services provided by these districts to the use of individually operated transfer or sanitary landfill disposal facil- ities only. It is the local and state officials' opinion that this organizational concept provides the highest degree of service for the least cost to the individuals. Also, this concept is rela- 1 tively easy to administer due to the fact that only one governing body (district board of directors) is required to handle all transactions and make decisions. 1 3. Regional Authorities or Agencies This organizational concept is applicable primarily if a multi-county solid waste man- agement system is contemplated. Under this concept a specific regional authority, organ- ized similar to a county-wide refuse disposal district, could be formulated. A board of directors for the authority would be elected and equitable assessments would be made to each user of the services and facilities provided. Currently, the State of Montana statutes do I not specifically authorize local officials to create an authority for this purpose. However, since authorities have been developed for other types of services in the nation (regional air- 1 port authorities), it appears that this option can be implemented if the proper legal channels are pursued. I 4. Summary Based on the investigations conducted for the project, it can be concluded that there are several advantages in utilizing a refuse disposal district to organize, administer and finance a solid waste disposal program when several jurisdictional entities are included. It I has been demonstrated for the past several years in the state that small, individually financed and operated community disposal systems are not cost-effective and are almost impossible to administer. The primary problem with this method is the inability to obtain operating capital and annual expenses and difficulty in assessing individual facility users. 7.3 1 I l C. ALTERNATE OPERATIONAL STRATEGIES The method in which solid waste management programs are operated are quite important and deserve evaluation. In many instances the utilization of the most effective and efficient operational strategy can result in a substantial cost savings to the facility users. Based on the solid waste disposal alternatives evaluated for the area, it is apparent that three alternate opera- tional strategies are applicable and deserve analysis. A brief discussion of each is included herein: 1. Public Operation This operational strategy includes the ownership and operation of all equipment and facilities by the local jurisdictional entity. Under this strategy it would be the local entity's responsibility to purchase all equipment and facilities and hire the necessary employees to operate the system. The primary advantages of utilizing this operational strategy are: 1) potential savings due to certain local and state tax exemptions and 2) a high degree of con- trol over the supervision and operation of the necessary equipment and facilities. The primary disadvantages of this strategy in most instances include: 1) the high capital invest- ment required to initially fund the program and 2) the inability to obtain maximum effort and efficiency from the equipment and personnel due to the periodic need for certain equip- ment and manpower. 2. Private Operation 1 This operational strategy includes the ownership and operation of all facilities and equipment by a private firm. Under this strategy the local jurisdictional entity would con- tract to a private cum to supply all sites, facilities and labor required to provide the requested service. In many instances the most cost effective contractual arrangement can be made when a five-year contract is made between the private firm and the entity. This allows the firm to purchase and amortize the necessary capital investment over a rea- sonable period. The primary advantages to the local entity under this strategy are : 1) reduces the need for the entity to obtain financing of large capital outlays, 2) maximizes work efficiency and equipment usage and 3) provides competitive bidding for the necessary services. The major disadvantage of this strategy is the smaller degree of control the entity may have on the operation of the system. This can usually be overcome if a contract is negotiated whereby a strict performance clause is included and enforced. 3. Combination of Public and Private Services Under this strategy the public entity would own and/or provide certain facilities and/or services with a private firm providing the remainder of the necessary facilities and/or services. 7.4 I In many instances this strategy has several advantages compared to the other operational strategies. Under this strategy the public entity could provide facilities and services that are already owned or caneasily be obtained with the remainder of the services contracted out. This option reduces the capital investment :.)f the entity to a minimum. Also, the con- tracting of certain services can provide for the maximum efficiency of equipment and man- power. 4. Summary I For the situations that currently exist within the study area, the operational strategy that may be most advantage ous is Alternate No. 3, "The use of public and private services". It may be most cost effective and practical for the local public entities to own and construct facilities utilizing either in-kind services or private contractors. However, II it may be quite equitable for the local entities to contract out, through the use of multi- year contracts, the operation and maintenance of various facilities and equipment. This I appears to be a possible cost saying by utilizing this strategy due to the low initial capital required by the local entity and the maximizing of equipment and manpower. Obviously, II the operational strategy that is most cost effective should be evaluated after all equipment and facility needs have been finalized. D. ALTERNATE FINANCIAL STRATEGIES ' Financing is an integral part of a solid waste management system. The organizational structure, the services offered, who offers the services and financing are interdependent and consequently many complex problems face the local officials responsible for implementing cost effective waste management programs in the study area. Included in this section is a summary of the alternate methods that are most commonly used to finance solid waste management systems in the state. Basically, there are three financial requirements that must be managed when implementing a , waste disposal system. These are: 1) capital costs, 2) annual operational costs, and 3) administrative costs. Included herein is a review of potentially applicable financing methods for each of these re- , quirements. 1. Capital Costs For the capital costs that may be incurred there are several methods available for oh- taining and financing these costs. Included herein are the more applicable methods avail- able: I 7.5 1 I (a) General Obligation Bond These are generally sold to finance projects necessary to the community and are payable from "ad valorem" taxes and service charges. These bonds are backed by the full faith and credit of the local government. The bonds require a vote of the citizenery with a maximum term of 20 years. The total municipal indebtedness is limited to 5% of the assessed value of taxable property. (b) Municipal Revenue Bonds These are obligations to finance self-supporting facilities. They are not paid out of general revenues but rather are secured solely by the fees, charges and other earnings of the project(e.g., a landfill that charges a disposal fee would be classified as a self- supporting facility if the fee were adequate to cover amortization and interest in addi- tion to operating costs). The bonds may be issued without a general election and there is no impact on other outstanding municipal indebtedness. (c) General Assessment A common method to finance capital investment costs is through a general tax assessment made to each individual who utilizes the waste disposal services. These charges are usually assessed through municipal or county property taxes. This financ- ing method is quite simple to administer and is an inexpensive way to collect and dis- pense necessary funds. (d) Direct Loans One simple method to obtain financing of capital investments is the use of direct loans from local lending institutions. In many instances the necessary funds are avail- abe and relatively easy to obtain. Under this method, however, high interest rates are usually incurred. (e) Revenue Sharing In many counties throughout the state local entities have utilized local revenue sharing funds to initially purchase equipment or make necessary site improvements. The competion for these funds however, is usually high since these type funds are quite limited. (f) State and Federal Loans and Grants Currently, these are limited to loan and grant funds available from state and ' 7.6 I federal agencies for the purpose of purchasing equipment or making site specific im- provements. Included in Sections D and E of this chapter is a summary of possible assistance programs available from appropriate state and federal agencies. a 2. Annual Operating Costs I (a) General Taxes(Services Charges) The most common method of financing the operational costs incurred by a local entity is through a service charge levied on the local taxes. This is the least complex method to administer as well as disperse funds. In most instances an equitable service rate is determined for each member . The assessment is then paid through the local tax assessments. I (b) User Fees In the cases where individuals utilize the public facilities but do not live within the jurisdictional boundaries, a user fee can be assessed. In each instance an equitable user fee is assessed on a per ton or per unit basis. 3. Administrative Costs The administrative costs incurred in operating a local disposal program are usually quite small when compared to the facility's capital and annual operational costs. Thus, this cost is usually absorbed into the general tax (service charges) assessment or user fees I that are assessed to each local member. 4. Summary 1 As discussed herein, there are three financial requirements for which funds must be obtained to operate a solid waste disposal program;capital costs, annual operating costs and administrative costs. The most desirable method of financing the program's capital improve- ments and purchases is usually through general taxes, direct loans and/or revenue sharing. In regard to financing the general operation and administration costs of the program, the most desirable alternative is to assess each user a service charge. This chargecan be assessed I through the local taxes. Annual expenditures and charges can then be paid through a sep- arate solid waste disposal account administered by local personnel. Obviously, the best financial alternative will depend upon the local circumstances and disposal program implemented. These decisions should be made on the local level. I 7.7 1 E. STATE ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS 1. Financial Assistance Currently the State of Montana provides financial assistance through two programs. These programs are funded through the Department of Natural Resource and are adminis- tered by the Department of Health and Environmental Agencies, Solid Waste Management Bureau. These funding programs are summarized below: ' (a) Front-End Planning The program provides financial assistance through grants to assist local units ' of government to develop local solid waste management and/or resource recovery plans. The availability of these funds is limited and is on a priority basis. ' (b) Front-End Organizational Funding This program provides financial assistance through loans to assist local units of ' government that have developed areawide solid waste management and/or resource recovery plans for all or interim financing required during the time interval between ' the establishment of a management structure and the securing of permanent financing. These loans are available for administrative costs but are not to be used for purchasing equipment or construction of facilities. 2. Technical Assistance ' The State of Montana Department of Health and Environmental Sciences, Solid Waste Management Bureau does provide technical assistance, as manpower and funds allow. Areas in which assistance is available include the following: 1) review and licensing of sanitary landfill sites, 2) review of applicability of waste management systems and facilities, 3) ' provide assistance concerning organizational concepts and procedures and 4) review of alternate financial and implementation arrangements. ' F. FEDERAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS The federal government provides some technical and financial assistance to local officials to develop solid waste management systems. Most assistance is provided by the U.S. Environmental ' Protection Agency. Their programs provide assistance through demonstration grants, planning grants, training, and direct technical assistance. Presently, no program provides grants for the ' purchase of equipment or construction of facilities. However, there are federal agencies that in certain instances will provide low interest loans to municipalities for either implementing area- wide waste management plans or upgrading non-complying disposal sites. The funds for these loans are quite limited and the competition for these funds is nationwide. ' 7.8 1 Summarized in Table VII-2 are possible sources of assistance from various federal agencies. As can be noted,limited financial assistance is available. However, technical assistance can be obtained from several of these agencies. i I i i I i I I I I I I I I I 7.9 1 I ITABLE VII-2 ' FEDERAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS IAGENCY ASSISTANCE 1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1. Conduct and support research. I 2. Provide limited amount of training. 3. Provide technical assistance through Region 8 "Technical Assistance Panels Program". 4. Provide support to demonstrate areawide ' solid wastes management planning. 5. Provide support for local, state, and inter- state surveys and development of plans. I 6. Provide limited amount of funding for pro- jects demonstrating resource recovery of waste. 7. Provide funding for projects demonstrating Iinnovative techniques. 2. Department of Housing and Urban 1. Provide assistance through the development I Development of comprehensive plans under the " 701 Plan- ning Assistance Program" 2. Provide grants and loans to upgrade disposal sites in low income areas through the "Small I Cities Program". 3. Provide funds for the correction of problems related to public health and safety in low I income areas through the "Single Purpose Program". 4. Provide grants for waste transfer or disposal I facilities in low income areas through the "Community Development Block Grant Pro- gram". (quite competitive) I 3. Farmers Home Administration, 1. Provide loans for financial assistance to rural Department of Agriculture areas (less than 10,000 population) to imple- ment solid waste disposal systems through I the "Communities Facility Loan Program". 2. Provide loans to Resource Conservation and Development agencies for solid waste disposal I equipment and facilities through the "Re- source Conservation and Development Loan Program". I 4. Economic Development Administra- tion, 1. Provide loans and grants for public works pro- jects in areas of high unemployment. 2. Provide Supplementary grants to reduce the I non-federal share required by other grant-in- aid programs. I 5. Soil Conservation Service,Dept. 1. Provide technical assistance in evaluating of Agriculture possible disposal sites. 6. Geological Survey,Dept. of Interior 1. Provide technical assistance in evaluating Ipossible disposal sites. (cont'd) 1 Table VII-2 1 (cont'd) 1 7. Forest Service, Dept. of Agriculture 1. Provide assistance in locating disposal sites on ' governmental forest lands. 8. Bureau of Land Management, 1. Provide assistance in locating disposal sites Department of Interior on BLM administered lands. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I PART EIGHT ' RECOMMENDED SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLANS i I I I r 1 PART EIGHT RECOMMENDED SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLANS ' A. GENERAL ' For the past several months the alternatives that were evaluated in detail for this project have been reviewed by local and state officials and area residents. Several meetings were held with the members of the project technical committee for this purpose. Also, several public meetings were conducted to obtain local input from the area residents. Based on the input received from the review committee and public meetings, written recommendations were form- ' ulated by the county commissioners in each of the three counties. Copies of these recommenda- tions are included in Appendix "A". Based on the recommendations made by the local officials and technical committee ' members, solid waste management plans for each of the three counties were developed. Included in sections B, C& D respectively are the recommended management plans for Jefferson,Broad- water, and Lewis and Clark Counties. 8.1 1 B. JEFFERSON COUNTY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN 1. Recommended Facilities Based on the analysis of the alternatives determined applicable for the county and the response obtained from several public meetings, recommendations were formulated by the county's local officials. The recommended alternative includes the use of three(Class II) 1 sanitary landfills for the disposal of solid waste, two of which are located in Jefferson County with the third being the City of Helena landfill and a Class III disposal site located in Clancy. The recommended alternative also includes the location of nine rural transfer sites, each of which consist of a ramp and a 40-cubic-yard container. These containers would be picked up periodically and transported to the nearest of the three Class II land- fill sites for disposal. The containers would be loaded,transported and emptied by a tilt- frame vehicle. The approximate locations of the disposal and transfer sites included in the recommended alternative are depicted in Figure VIII-l. 2. Design and Operational Criteria To determine an approximate cost to implement the recommended alternative,general facility capital and operational criteria were developed.A detailed discussion of the design criteria determined applicable for the alternatives that were evaluated is included in Part Four of this report. Included below is a summary of the capital and operational criteria as well as the assumptions that were determined applicable for the recommended alternatives. (a) Sanitary Landfill It was assumed that all sanitary landfills would be operated in accordance with all ' state and federal regulations and criteria. For each day each disposal site was open, a gate attendant would be on duty 6 hours to supervise dumping. At the end of each operating day an equipment operator would utilize a used track type dozer for two hours to compact and cover the waste deposited that day. It was also assumed that periodically trenches would be excavated at each landfill site by a private contractor. Based on the existing conditions in the county,it was determined that the two landfills in the county (located near Boulder and Whitehall) would be open 2 days per week. It was also assumed that for all wastes transported to the Helena landfill an equitable disposal fee would be levied to the county. It was further assumed that the Class III disposal site located at Clancy would be open one day per week with the periodic maintenance to be contracted out on an hourly basis. 1 8.2 , 1 I Il TO I HELENA JEFFERSON M Goan I r" COUNTY _- 1 C11141 y Helena ,I rte'i' KEY MAP .. JeCihty 11 Notional I ,___- Forest Deerlodge IBasin I Deerlodge Notionos��� ' ----- Boulder • Forest • - — -i --` National L", IL • I • t i Forest 1 -1 ;:r I Imi 147 Vine al Cardwell r Vine i ; _ j.EGEND el I I Sanitary Landfill Site FACILITY LOCATIONS * Class III Disposal Site FOR I • 40 Cubic Yard Container Site _RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE Figure 31nr- I r t (b) Rural Transfer Sites It was assumed that each of the nine transfer sites would include a retaining wall ' constructed of railroad ties, an earthfilled ramp and a 40-cubic-yard container. Pre- liminary layouts and photographs of a typical transfer site are illustrated in Exhibits 1 IV-5 and IV-6. ' (c) Transportation of Containers It was assumed that all containers would be serviced through the use of a tilt- frame transfer vehicle specifically designed for this purpose. It was further assumed that each container would be picked up as waste generation dictated. However,it was assumed that each container would be picked up at least once per week during the summer months and at least once each 3 weeks during the winter months. It was estimated that it would take on the average 13 hours per week to pick up and dump ' the containers. During the summer months the average time needed would be approx- imately 20 hours per week where the winter months would only require approximately 8 hours per week. It is estimated that a total of 13,380 miles would be driven annually to service the containers. 3. Implementation Strategies (a) Organizational Strategy Based on the alternate strategies identified in Part Seven and the disposal facilities and services that have been delineated herein as being the most efficient and cost effec- five, it is recommended that a countywide refuse disposal district be utilized to ad- minister the program. A portion of the county is already utilizing a district for admin- istering their current waste disposal program. Thus it is recommended that rather than form a new countywide district it would be most efficient to activate the inactive areas into the current district. 1 (b) Operational Strategy 1 As outlined in Part Seven of this report, there are several operational strategies that may apply for the county. It is the consultant's opinion that an operational strategy utilizing a combination of publically and privately owned facilities and services may be the least-cost solution. Under this strategy the refuse disposal district may own and provide certain disposal facilities where a private concern may provide the necessary equipment and manpower to properly supply the required daily services. Obviously, the other two operational strategies available are: 1) complete public 1 8.3 1 ownership and operation of the necessary facilities and 2) complete private ownership and operation of the required facilities. The operational strategy that is most suitable for the county should be determined after all facility, equipment and labor requirements have been evaluated in depth and finalized. (c) Financial Strategy I Based on the analysis summarized in Part Seven it is recommended that the operational and administrative costs of the district be financed through a "service charge" that would be assessed on the general county taxes. The assessments should be equitable and based on quantities of waste generated. Once the program has been put into effect, a detailed survey should be conducted to determine each individual commercial and residential unit's equitable assessment. Average equivalent unit assess- ments have been estimated for the recommended alternative and were utilized to deter- mine the estimated equivalent residential unit cost. In regard to financing capital out- lays required by the district,it is recommended that revenue sharing or direct loans , be utilized. Funds to repay loans should be obtained through the district's "service charges". , 4. Budget Requirements Detailed cost estimates of each alternative evaluated for this study are itemized in Part Four of this report. A summary of the capital and operational requirements that were determined applicable for the recommended facilities and services are summarized in Table ' VIII-1. It should be noted that the capital and annual costs may vary considerably, depending on the operational strategy implemented. For example,if the services for main- , tailing the landfills and/or transporting the 40-cubic-yard containers are contracted to a private firm, the costs may vary when compared to the county owning and operating the necessary equipment. Also, the costs can vary substantially if used equipment is utilized versus new equipment. To determine the county's total anticipated annual cost,additional costs and expenses should be added to the facility capital and annual cost. Additional expenses that should be budgeted for include: 1) inflationary costs(all costs are based on January, 1979 prices), 2) administrative costs,3) legal and consulting services for preparation of plans,specifica- tions and contracts and 4) a contingency factor for unforeseen costs and adjustments. 1 8.4 I ITABLE VIII-1 ' JEFFERSON COUNTY CAPITAL AND ANNUAL COSTS IAnnual Expenditures Initial Capital Amort. of Operation Item Requirements Capital Maint. & Labor TOTAL A. Sanitary Landfills I I. City of Helena Drop Charge $5,610 $5,610 (1) I 2. Boulder Site $38,000 (site) 3,700 16,100 (2) 19,800 20,000(dozer) 3,000 3,000 Subtotal- $22,800 I3. Whitehall Site 38,000 (site) 3,700 17,500 (2) $21,200 20,000 (dozer) 3,000 - 3,000 ISubtotal- $24,200 4. Class III Site I (Clancy) 9,300 910 4,550 5,460 Subtotal - $125,300 $14,310 $42,760 $52,610 ' B. Rural Transfer Sites (9 Sites) - 99,000 9,720 - 9,720(3) IC. Tilt Frame Vehicle 1, Depreciation,Op. & Maint. 30,000 (used) 4,300 6,140 10,440(4) I2. Labor (651 hrs/yr. @ $9.50/hr) - 6,190 6,190 I Subtotal - $30,000 $4,300 $12,330 $16,630 ITotal Cost - $254,300 $28,330 $56,090 $84,420 (1) See Table IV-1 for breakdown. (2) Includes trench excavation costs based on $2.00 per cubic yard as well as costs depicted I (3) See in Table IV-1, less amortization of dozer. Exhibit IV-5 for breakdown. (4) Cost based on 13,380 miles per year and vehicle operating cost as indicated in Table IV-4. (Cost I included in Table IV-4 assumes a gasoline price of$0.50/gallon. A $1.50/gallon gas price would increase the indicated cost by approximately $3,350 per year.) • Summarized in Table VIII-2 is a breakdown of the estimated annual cost to operate , the recommended alternative. Also the estimated capital cost for purchasing facilities, materials and equipment are depicted. As previously discussed these capital costs may be reduced if private contracts were let for providing some of the services. As depicted,the , county should budget approximately $103,760 per year for operation of the program. This equates to approximately $39.62 per equivalent residential unit per year. 1 5. Implementation Schedule To effectively and efficiently implement the recommended plan for the county,it is necessary to delineate and follow a detailed schedule. Included in Table VIII-3 is a general implementation and time schedule that may be appropriate. It is recommended that the local officials finalize this general schedule when arranging their final implemen- tation strategies. , 1 i 1 I 1 1 1 1 8.5 ' 1 TABLE VIII-2 JEFFERSON COUNTY BUDGET REQUIREMENTS I ' Initial Capital Annual Budget Item Requirements Requirements 1 I. Facilities, Equip. tic Labor $254,300 $84,420 2. Inflationary Factor(10%) 25,400 8,400 3. Legal and Consulting Services 20,000 2,000 (amortization 7.5% -20 yrs.) 4. Administrative Costs 4,000 Subtotal- $299,700 $98,820 ' Contingency (5%) - 15,000 4,940 Total Cost- $314,700 $103,760 Average Cost Per Unit�l) - $39.62/yr. (1) Based on 2,619 equivalent units. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 TABLE VIII-3 JEFFERSON COUNTY ' IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE I TASK ESTIMATED TIME FRAME , 1. Finalize implementation strategies. 04/01/80 -05/01/80 1 2. Select specific locations for transfer sites. 04/01/80 - 05/15/80 3. Conduct engineering investigations and prepare preliminary plans, specifications and operational criteria for necessary improvements. 05/15/80 -07/01/80 4. Obtain necessary licenses and permits for proposed , systems and facilities. 05/01/80 -07/01/80 5. Award contracts for the purchase and/or operation of necessary systems, equipment and facilities. 07/01/80 -08/15/80 6. Make necessary site improvements for transfer and disposal facilities. 08/15/80-10/01/80 , 7. Determine fmal user assessments. 10/01/80 - 12/01/80 8. Begin use of new system(s), equipment and facilities. 11/01/80 9. Close non-usable disposal sites. 11/01/80 -06/01/81 1 1 1 1 1 I C. BROADWATER COUNTY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN 1. Recommended Facilities Based on the analysis of the alternatives determined applicable for the county and the response obtained from several public meetings, recommendations were formulated by the county's local officials. The local officials determined that the recommended solution should include the use of five rural transfer sites, each of which would consist of a ramp and a 40-cubic-yard container. The approximate locations of these transfer sites are depic- ted on Figure VIII-2. Under the recommended plan, the containers would be picked up periodically and transported to either a landfill located in the Townsend area or to the Helena landfill. According to the local officials, the determination of whether the wastes would be disposed of at a county landfill located near Townsend or transported to the ' Helena landfill would be made during the initial steps of implementation. Because both fin- al disposal options were delineated as the potential recommended plan, the information included herein will summarize both options. ' 2. Design and Operational Criteria To determine an approximate cost to implement the recommended alternative, gen- ii capital and operational criteria were developed. A detailed discussion of the design criteria determined applicable for the alternatives that were evaluated is included in Part Four of this report. Included below is a summary of the capital and operational cri- teria as well as the assumptions that were determined applicable for the recommended al- ternatives. (a) Rural Transfer Sites 1 It was assumed that each of the three transfer sites would include a retaining wall constructed of railroad ties, an earthfilled ramp and a 40-cubic-yard container. ' Preliminary layouts and pictures of a typical transfer sites are illustrated in Exhibits IV-5 and IV-6. (b) Transportation of Containers It was assumed that all containers would be serviced through the use of a tilt- frame transfer vehicle specifically designed for this puupose. It was further assumed that each container would be picked up as waste generation dictated. However, it was assumed that each container would be picked up at least once per week during the summer months and at least once each three weeks during the winter months. 8.6 i (c) Final Disposal Site For the final disposal option, in which wastes generated in the county would be buried at a county landfill, it was assumed that the sanitary landfill would be located near Townsend and operated in accordance with all state and federal regulations and t criteria. For each day the disposal site was open a gate attendant would be on duty six hours to supervise dumping. At the end of each operating day, an equipment oper- , ator would utilized a used track-type dozer for two hours to compact and cover the waste deposited that day. It was also assumed that trenches would be excavated at the landfill site periodically by a private contractor. Based on the existing conditions in the county, it was determined that the landfill would be open two days per week. For the remaining five days of the week, the Townsend area residents would be able to utilize a 40-cubic-yard transfer site located near the landfill for disposal. For the final disposal option in which the City of Helena sanitary landfill would be utilized, it was assumed that all wastes deposited at the five county rural transfer sites would be transported as required to the Helena landfill. For this option the City of Helena would be reimbursed by Broadwater County on an equitable basis for the disposal of its wastes. Also, under this option it was assumed that the current Townsend landfill would be operated as a Class III disposal site. Under these conditions the site would be open one day per week to accept demolition debris and inert materials, with the periodic maintenance of the site to be contracted out. 3. Implementation Strategies (a) Organizational Strategy Based on the alternate strategies identified in Part Seven and the disposal facil- ities and services that have been delineated herein as being the most efficient and cost- effective, it is recommended that a county-wide refuse disposal district be utilized to administer the program. Currently, the county is utilizing a county district to admin- ister its present disposal program.Thus it is recommended that the county continue to utilize the existing district to administer the recommended program. (b) Operational Strategy As outlined in Part Seven of this report, there are several operational strategies that may apply for the county. It is the consultant's opinion that an operational strategy utilizing a combination of publically and privately owned facilities and services may be the least-cost solution. Under this strategy the refuse disposal district 8.7 , I I I IHelena I TO HELENA National KEY MAP BROADWATER I wwrra COUNTY 2 287 E II Helena Canyon Ferry Lake Forest I . It Notional • I • .-•-i Townsend I Forest r,■ i "°drab'"°• . „b.tan – -, LEGEND IMO U Alternate Final Disposal Site • 40 Cubic Yard Container Site O Excluded from County Refuse District ify I 1 FACILITY LOCATIONS FOR 1 or, RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE er Figure f-2 I ' may own and provide certain disposal facilities, while a private concern may provide the necessary equipment and manpower to properly supply the required daily services. Obviously, the other two operational strategies available are: 1) complete public ownership and operation of the necessary facilities, and 2) complete private owner- ship and operation of the required facilities. The operational strategy that is most suitable for the county should be determined after all facility, equipment and labor requirements have been evaluated in depth and finalized. (c) Financial Strategy Based on the analysis summarized in Part Seven, it is recommended that the op- eration and administration costs of the district be financed through a "service charge" ' that would be assessed on the general county taxes. The assessments should be equit- able and based on quantities of waste generated. Once the program has been put into effect, a detailed survey should be conducted to determine each individual commer- cial and residential unit's equitable assessment. Average equivalent unit assessments have been estimated for the recommended alternative and were utilized to determine the estimated equivalent residential cost. In regard to financing capital outlays re- quired by the district, it is recommended that revenue sharing or direct loans be util- ized. Funds to repay loans should be obtained through the district's "service charges". 4. Budget Requirements Detailed cost estimates for each alternative evaluated for this study are itemized in ' Part Four of this report. A summary of the capital and operational requirements that were determined applicable for the recommended facilities and services is summarized in Table VIII-4. As discussed in the text, the costs for the two final disposal options are illustrated in Tables VIII-4a and VIII-4b. As illustrated in Table VIII-4a, the total annual cost for im- plementing the 40-cubic-yard transfer system with the final disposal at the landfill located 1 near Townsend would be approximately $39,480. This cost includes the amortization as well as the annual operational costs associated with the 40-cubic-yard transfer system and ' the centrally located Townsend landfill. This cost also assumes that the county would con- tract out the collection and transportation of the 40-cubic-yard containers. As further in- dicated in the table's footnotes, the annual costs depicted in the table were based on gaso- line prices of$0.50 per gallon. It is estimated that a gasoline price of$1.50 per gallon 1 would increase the total system cost by $1,420, which represents only a 3.6 percent annual increase. 8.8 I ITABLE VIII-4 a I BROADWATER COUNTY CAPITAL AND ANNUAL COSTS (TOWNSEND LANDFILL OPTION) IAnnual Expenditures Initial Capital Amort. of Operation Item Requirements Capital Maint. & Labor TOTAL A. Townsend Sanitary $38,000 (1) $3,700 • $19,100(2) $22,800 I Landfill 25,000 (dozer) 4,000 4,000 Subtotal — $26,800 I B. Rural Transfer Station Sites (5 Sites) - 55,000 5,400 5,400 (3) 1 C. Tilt Frame Vehicle 1. Depreciation,Op. & Maint. (assume contract) 4,430 4,430 (4) 1 2. Labor (300 hrs/yr. @ $9.50/hr) (assume contract) 2,850 2,850 I 1 Total Cost - $118,800 $13,100 $22,380 $39,480 1 (1) See Table IV-1 for breakdown. (2) Includes trench excavation costs based on $2.00 per cubic yard as well as costs depicted in Table IV-1. I (3) See Exhibit IV-5 for breakdown. (4) Cost based on 5,680 miles per year and vehicle operating cost as indicated in Table IV-4. (Cost included in Table IV-4 assumes a gasoline price of $0.50 per gallon. A $1.50 per gallon gas price Iwould increase the indicated cost by approximately $1,420 per year.) 1 1 I 1 1 In regard to the alternate recommended plan of transporting the county's conventional , wastes to Helena, it is evident that this option is approximately 20 percent higher than the previously discussed alternate (see Table VIII-4b). Under this option, all Group II.wastes , (conventional household and municipal waste) would be transported by use of a 40-cubic- yard container to the City of Helena landfill. The larger demolition debris materials would be placed in the Townsend landfill, which would be open and supervised one day per week. As indicated in Table VIII-4b, the total annual cost for this option would be approximately $48,600. As depicted in the table's footnotes, this cost could conceivably be approximately $7,450 higher if based on a fuel cost of$1.50 per gallon, compared to the $0.50 per gallon price which was used in the original project analyses. It should also be noted that this alter- native assumes that the waste generated in the Townsend area would be dumped directly in- to a 40-cubic-yard container with no compaction conducted prior to transporting to Helena. Based on cost estimates made by the consultant, which are summarized in Part Four of this report, an increase in fuel costs or waste quantities would justify the use of a compacted transfer station in the Townsend area rather than a non-compacted system. At this time, the cost of using a non-compacted transfer station versus the use of a compacted transfer station in the Townsend area is very similar. It is recommended that during the implementation phase of this project, a more in-depth analysis be made to confirm the proper decision re- garding compaction or non-compaction of the Townsend wastes prior to transporting them to Helena. To determine the county's total anticipated annual cost, additional costs and expenses should be added to the facility capital and annual cost. Additional expenses that should be budgeted for include: I) inflationary costs(all costs are based on January, 1979 prices), 2) administrative costs, 3) legal and consulting services for preparation of plans, specifica- tions and contracts, and 4) a contingency factor for unforeseen costs and adjustments. Summarized in Table VIII-5 is a breakdown of the estimated annual cost to operate 1 the two alternate recommended plans. Also, the estimated capital costs for purchasing facil- ities, materials and equipment are depicted. As indicated in the table, the total county bud- get would vary from $47,280 to $57,810 per year, depending upon the final disposal option implemented. These annual costs would represent estimated average residential unit costs of approximately $36.42 to $44.54 per year. 5. Implementation Schedule To effectively and efficiently implement the recommended plan for the county, it is necessary to delineate and follow a detailed schedule. Included in Table VIII-6 is a general implementation and time schedule that may be appropriate. It is recommended that the lo- cal officials finalize this general schedule when arranging their final implementation strategy. 8.9 1 I ITABLE VIII Ab I BROADWATER COUNTY CAPITAL AND ANNUAL COSTS (HELENA LANDFILL OPTION) I Annual Expenditures I Initial Capital Amort of Operation Item Requirements Capital Maint.& Labor TOTAL I A. Sanitary Landfills 1. Helena Drop Charge $7,000 $7,000 (1) 2. Class III Site I (Townsend) $9,300 910 4,550 5,460 (2) Subtotal — $9,300 $910 $11,550 $12,460 I B. Rural Transfer Station Sites (5 Sites) $55,000 $5,400 $5,400 (3) I C. Tilt-Frame Vehicle 1. Depreciation, Oper. & Maint. (assume contract) $23,240 $23,240 (4) I 2. Labor (790 hrs./hr. @ $9.50/hr.) (assume contract) $7,500 $7,500 ITotal Cost- $64,300 $6,310 $42,290 $48,600 I (1) Based on 1,400 tons/year with a drop charge of$5.00/ton. I (2) See Table IV-2 for breakdown. (3) See Exhibit IV-5 for breakdown. (4) Cost based on 29,800 miles per year and vehicle operating cost as indicated in Table I IV-4. (Cost included in Table IV-4 assumes a gasoline price of$0.50 per gallon. A $1.50 per gallon gas price would increase the indicated cost by approximately $7,450 per year.) 1 I I I 1 I TABLE VIII-5 , BROADWATER COUNTY BUDGET REQUIREMENTS Initial Capital Annual Budget Requirements Requirements Townsend Helena Townsend Helena ' Disposal Disposal Disposal Disposal Item Option Option Option Option 1. Facilities, Equip. & Labor $118,000 $64,300 $39,480 $48,600 I 2. Inflationary Factor(10%) 11,800 6,400 3,950 4,860 3. Legal& Consulting Services 6,000 6,000 600 600 (amortization 7'/z%- 20 yrs.) ' 4. Administrative Costs — — 1,000 1,000 Subtotal — $135,800 $76,700 $45,030 $55,060 Contingency (5%) — 6,800 3,800 2,250 2,750 ' Total Costs — $142,600 $80,500 $47,280 $57,810 Average Cost Per Unit(1) — — $36.42 $44.54 I (1) Based on 1,298 equivalent units. ' I I I I I I I TABLE VIII-6 BROADWATER COUNTY IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE 1 TASK ESTIMATED TIME FRAME 1. Finalize implementation strategies. 04/01/80 -05/01/80 2. Select specific locations for transfer sites. 04/01/80-05/15/80 3. Conduct engineering investigations and prepare preliminary plans, specifications and operational criteria for necessary improvements. 05/15/80 - 07/01/80 4. Obtain necessary licenses and permits for proposed systems and facilities. 05/01/80 1 5. Award contracts for the purchase and/or operation of necessary systems, equipment and facilities. 07/01/80-08/15/80 6. Make necessary site improvements for transfer and disposal facilities. 08/15/80 - 10/01/80 7. Determine fmal user assessments. 10/01/80 - 12/01/80 1 8. Begin use of new system(s), equipment and facilities. 11/01/80 9. Close non-usable disposal sites. 11/01/80 -06/01/81 I 1 I I 1 D. LEWIS & CLARK COUNTY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN 1. Recommended Facilities Based on the analysis of the alternatives determined applicable for the county and the I response obtained from several public meetings, recommendations were formulated by the county's local officials. Basically, the following recommendations were made: (a) For those areas included in the Augusta, Lincoln and Scratch Gravel refuse disposal districts, the recommendations are to maintain the current system of providing and properly operating one sanitary landfill in each district. The recom- mendations also indicate that in the three respective districts, each situation should be continually evaluated as to the feasibility of participating in a rural container system. (b) For the incorporated communities of East Helena and Helena, the recommenda- tions are to maintain the current disposal practice of utilizing the City of Helena's sanitary landfill for the disposal of both cities'Class II wastes with the City of East Helena also properly operating a Class III landfill for the disposal of the inert and demolition materials. (c) For the area of the county that is not included in the three refuse disposal dis- 1 tricts and two incorporated communities, the recommendation is to create a new refuse disposal district. The services and facilities to be provided are to include a I 40-cubic-yard rural transfer system with the wastes transported to either the City of Helena or Scratch Gravel landfill. The areas that are included in this recommendation are Craig, Wolf Creek, Marysville, York and Canyon Ferry. Summarized in Figure VIII-3 are general indications of the areas that have been 1 delineated in the recommendations as well as the locations of the facilities described. Included in the following narrative and tables is a summary of the facilities and budgets , required to provide the recommended services for the proposed new refuse disposal district. Because no significant modifications are being recommended for the three ' existing refuse disposal districts and two incorporated communities, no budgets or further narrative is included herein. It should be noted that in section 3(d) of Part Four, estimated costs of the existing facilities and services for these areas are included for further reference. 8.10 I I I A i • I _ _ _ LEWIS & CLARK COUNTY 2 _, . -, I� .. �I.. KEY MAP to .. Au ,f,n,a, LS AUGUSTA DIS1;RICT I• 1 Nauonm ro,fsl 5[OFa9ae1 Wilae�naas Nangwl _0l0 N nay ' ` 0 n�; wig 1 I L 1L LINCOLN DISTRICT- Nnl— 0 f` 1 . 1 ,,nfo,n s,..e - roiq Wolf Creek Dm n ,r , 1 Haan .., Y Nllana nlrpnol Fortal Feref! `...; ��on. SCRATCH LEGEND RAVEL IDISTRICT Sanitary Landfill Site _3 • � � 1 DOM I * Class III Disposal Site �r � 40 Cubic Yard Container Site #r f j� Existing Refuse Disposal District Hatonal 1_. 1 FAC I L I TY LOCATIONS Faef! I FOR RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE IFigure MI - 3 I 2. New Refuse Disposal District (a) Recommended Facilities Based on the analysis of the alternatives determined applicable for this area of the county and the response obtained from several public meetings, recommendations were formulated by the county officials. The reconunended alternative includes the use of the City of Helena Sanitary landfill for the disposal of the area's waste. The recommended alternative also includes the location of seven rural transfer sites, each of which consist of a ramp and a 40 cubic yard container. These containers would be picked up periodically and transported to the nearest of the three landfill sites for ' disposal. The containers would be loaded,transported and emptied by a tilt-frame vehicle. The approximate location of the disposal and transfer sites included in the recommended alternative are depicted in Figure VIII-3. (b) Design and Operational Criteria To determine an approximate cost to implement the recommended alternative, general facility capital and operational criteria were developed. A detailed discussion of the design criteria determined applicable for the alternatives that were evaluated is included in Part Four of this report. Included below is a summary of the capital and operational criteria and assumptions that were determined applicable for the recommended alternative. 1) Sanitary Landfill It was assumed that all wastes collected from the rural transfer sites would be hauled to the City of Helena landfill. The city would be compensated on a per-ton basis. This cost would be negotiated between the city and the local offic- ials responsible for the recommended program. 2) Rural Transfer Sites It was assumed that each of the seven transfer sites would include a retaining wall constructed of railroad ties, an earthfilled ramp and a 40 cubic yard container. Preliminary layouts and pictures of a typical transfer site are illustrated in Exhibits IV-5 and IV-6. 3) Transportation of Containers It was assumed that all containers would be serviced through the use of a tilt- frame transfer vehicle specifically designed for this purpose. It was further 8.11 1 assumed that each container would be picked up at least once per week during the summer months and at least once each 3 weeks during the winter months. It was estimated that it would take on the average 12 hours per week to pick up and dump the containers. D'uing the summer months the average time needed I would be approximately 18 hours per week where the winter months would only require approximately 10 hours per week. It is estimated that a total of 12,860 miles would be driven annually to service the containers. (c) Implementation Strategies 1) Organizational Strategy Based on the alternate strategies identified in Part Seven and the disposal facilities and services that have been delineated herein as being the most efficient and cost effective,it is recommended that a refuse disposal district be utilized to administer the program. Included in Part Seven are the procedures required to create a refuse disposal district. Basically it is required that the county com- missioners initiate the action for the district formation. 2) Operational Strategy As outlined in Part Seven of this report, there are several operational strate- gies that may apply for the area. It is the consultant's opinion that an operational strategy utilizing a combination of publically and privately owned facilities and services may be the least cost solution. Under this strategy the refuse disposal district may own and provide certain disposal facilities where a private concern may provide the necessary equipment and manpower to properly supply the re- quired daily services. Obviously,the other two operational strategies available are: 1) complete public ownership and operation of the necessary facilities and 2) complete private ownership and operation of the required facilities. The opera- tional strategy that is most suitable for the area should be determined after all facility, equipment and labor requirements have been evaluated indepth and finalized. 3) Financial Strategy Based on the analysis summarized in Part Seven,it is recommended that the operational and administrative costs of the district be financed through a "service charge" that would be assessed on the general county taxes. The assessments should be equitable and based on quantities of waste generated. Once the program has been put into effect, a detailed survey should be conducted to deter- mine each individual commercial and residential unit's equitable assessment. ' 8.12 1 I Average equivalent unit assessments have been estimated for the recommended alternative and were utilized to determine the estimated equivalent residential unit cost. In regard to financing capital outlays required by the district, it is recommended that revenue sharing or direct loans be utilized. Funds to repay loans should be obtained through the district's "service charges". (d) Budget Requirements Detailed cost estimates of each alternative evaluated for this study are itemized in Part Four of this report. A summary of the capital and operational requirements that were determined applicable for the recommended facilities and services are summarized in Table VIII-7. It should be noted that the capital and annual costs may vary considerably depending on the operational strategy implemented. For example, 1 if the services for maintaining the landfills and/or transporting the 40-cubic-yard con- • tainers are contracted to a private firm, the costs may vary when compared to the county owning and operating the necessary equipment. Also,the costs can vary sub- stantially if used equipment is utilized versus new equipment. To determine the district's total anticipated annual cost,additional costs and expenses should be added to the facility capital and annual cost. Additional expenses that should be budgeted for include: 1) inflationary costs(all costs are based on Jan- uary, 1979 prices), 2) administrative costs, 3) legal and consulting services for pre- paration of plans, specifications and contracts and 4) a contingency factor for unfore- seen costs and adjustments. Summarized in Table VIII-8 is a breakdown of the estimated annual cost to operate the recommended alternative . Also the estimated capital cost for purchasing facilities, materials and equipment are depicted. As previously discussed these capital costs could be reduced if private contracts were let for providing some of the services. As depicted, the district should budget approximately $34,880 per year for operation of the program. This equates to approximately $37.55 per equivalent residential unit per year. 1 (e) Implementation Schedule To effectively and efficiently implement the recommended plan for the area it is necessary to delineate and follow a detailed schedule. Include in Table VIII-9 is a general implementation and time schedule that may be appropriate. It is recom- mended that the local officials finalize this general schedule when arranging their Ifinal implementation strategy. 8.13 I TABLE VIII-7 I LOWER LEWIS ANC CLARK COUNTY CAPITAL AND ANNUAL COSTS I Annual Expenditures I Initial Capital Amort. of Operation Item Requirements Capital Maint. &labor TOTAL I A. Sanitary Landfill - - $4,150 $4,150 (City of Helena Drop Charge) B. Rural Transfer Station Sites (7 Sites)- 77,000 $7,560 - $7,560(2) C. Tilt-Frame Vehicle 1. Depredation,Op. & Maint. 30,000(used) 4,000 (1) 6,030(1) 10,030(3) 2. Labor (603 hrs/yr. @ 9.50/1u) - - 5,730 5,730 Subtotal - $30,000 $4,000 $11,760 $15,760 1 Total Cost - - $11,560 15,910 $27,470 I (1) Based on 12,860 miles per year(See Table IV-4 for vehicle cost breakdown). (2) See Exhibit IV-5 for breakdown. I (3) Cost based on 12,858 miles per year and vehicle operating cost as indicated in Table IV-4. (Cost included in Table 1V-4 assumes a gasoline price of$0.50 per gallon. A $1.50 per gallon gas price would increase the indicated cost by approximately $3,210 per year.) I I I I I I I 1 • TABLE VIII-8 LOWER LEWIS AND CLARK COUNTY BUDGET REQUIREMENTS I Initial Capital Annual Budget Item Requirements Requirements 1. Facilities,Equip. & Labor $107,000 $27,470 2. Inflationary Factor(10%) 10,700 2,750 3. Legal&Consulting Services 10,000 1,000 (amortization 7.5% -20 yrs.) 4. Administrative Costs 2,000 Subtotal - $127,700 $33,220 Contingency (5%) - 6,300 1,660 Total Cost - $134,000 $34,880 Average Cost Per Unit (1) - $37.55/yr. (1) Based on 929 equivalent units. I i I I I I 1 TABLE VIII-9 LOWER LEWIS& CLARK COUNTY IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE TASK ESTIMATED TIME FRAME 1. Form refuse disposal district 09/01/79-04/01/80 2. Elect Chairman and Board of Directors for district 04/01/80 -04/15/80 3. Finalize implementation strategies 04/01/80 - 05/01/80 4. Select specific locations for transfer sites 04/01/80- 05/15/80 5. Conduct engineering investigations and prepare pre- liminary plans, specifications and operational criteria for necessary improvements 05/15/80 -07/15/80 6. Obtain necessary licenses and permits for proposed systems and facilities 06/01/80-08/01/80 7. Finalize design plans and specifications for necessary facilities 08/01/80- 10/01/80 8. Finalize contracts for the purchase and/or operation I of necessary systems and equipment 08/01/80- 10/01/80 9. Make necessary site improvements for transfer and disposal facilities 10/01/80 - 06/01/81 10. Award contracts and/or receive necessary equipment 10/01/80 -06/01/81 11. Determine final user assessments 01/01/81 -06/01/81 12. Begin use of new system(s), equipment and facilities 06/01/81 13. Close non-usable disposal sites 06/01/81 t I I I I I I I I I APPENDIX "A" I LETTERS OF RECOMMENDATION I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I COMMISSIONERS: JEFFERSON COUNTY JOANNE P. McFARLANE County Clerk and Recorder Vicent M.Capp,Chairman.Whitehall Leslie J.Sodortf.Clancy CLERIC and RECORDER CARLA MATLACK Delbert M.Bullock,Basin Deputy IIBoulder, Montana 59632 I April 23, 1979 ■ i Southwest Montana Solid Waste Planning Committee II 201 South Last Chance Gulch Helena, Montana 59601 ICommittee Member: We the Board of County Commissioners of Jefferson County, I after having reviewed the Solid Waste disposal alternatives which have been presented to, and evaluated by the technical committee, hereby recommend the following alternatives: 11 The the northern area of Jefferson County go to 3 - 40 yard container sites with a central disposal at Helena landfill. 11 That the central area of Jefferson County go to 3 - 40 yard container sites with a central disposal at Boulder. II That the southern area of Jefferson County go to 3 - 40 yard container sites with central disposal at Whitehall. We are also willing to work with the Madison County Commissioners I concerning the possibility of the joint use of the Whitehall facilities for disposal. 11 Sinceyely; J/ ✓ a i f p 11 Chairman, Board of County .Commissioners ICommissioner ; ft a I Commissioner Copy - Sanitarian 11 VMC/jj I I BROADWATER COUNTY Bona of (lnnntg (&nmmtnntnnrre TOWNSEND, MONTANA April 12, 1979 1 1 Southwest Montana Solid Waste Planning Committee 201 South Last Chance Gulch Helena, Montana 59601 BE: Letter of Intent Committee Members: We the Board of County Commissioners of Broadwater County after having received the solid waste disposal alternatives which have been presented to, and evaluated..by,the technical committee herby recommend the following alternative: That Broadwater County go to a county wide container program utilizing three (3) forty yard (40) container sites with final disposal located at the present landfill West of Townsend. We also feel that the alternative of closing the Townsend Landfill and transporting wastes to the City of Helena disposal site must be continually evaluated and considered. Sincerely, Broadwater County Board of,C / ounty Commissioners Imss H. Hensley, Chai y� Milli E. Lluede Irvin G. Riffs I jd I I I IIMEMORANDUM MAY 2 1979 1 TO: Will Selser, Chairman Southwest Montana Solid Waste Management Technical Committee 11 FROM: Board of County Commissioners, Lewis $ Clark County ui DATE: April 27, 1979 RE: Recommendations on Solid Waste The Board of County Commissioners in reviewing the study completed ' I by the Southwest Montana Areawide Solid Waste Committee offers the follow- ing recommendations for improving solid waste disposal methods for Lewis and Clark County. 1 1) Maintain the Lincoln and Augusta Landfill Districts under their current status. However, their operations should be evaluated on an ongoing basis as to the feasibility 1 of participating in some form of container system. 2) Maintain the Scratch Gravel Landfill District under the current status. Again, the possibility of participation in one of the suggested container programs deserves con- II tinued and serious consideration. I/ 3) Creation of a new refuse district not served by the Lincoln, Augusta, Helena, Scratch Gravel, or East Helena Landfill Districts. These areas would be served by a container 1 system and would generally include the areas of Craig, Wolf Creek, Marysville and York. Disposal would occur at the Helena Landfill and Scratch Gravel Landfill sites • Ithrough a contracted arrangement with that district. In conformance with the statutes concerning the creation of a landfill district, the Commissioners would be required to 1. describe the district, pass a resolution of intent, notify area residents, and have public hearings prior to establishing this district. Please advise us if the preceeding recommendations are satisfactory. We are anxious to cooperate in any possible way in implementing these recommendations. 1 JW/kc I II ietuts anb Clark Countp , 1