ART WHIM
i
ýD
A
to
14
it
i
r
r
Ed
s
TPOHNIAM
i
3
Ett
jFbKQTný
c
1
ft
ENGINEERING FIELD NOTES
NII
Volume
w
10
Number
1
It
contained
Information
a
l
in
this
cooperating
Federal
publication
Department
States
and State
of
The
of trade firm or
use
convenience
of any
The
that
or service
may be
text in the
ý
by
as
FSM
or policy
except
engineers
and engineering
not
intended
names
by the United
States
exclusively
the
represents
recommended
in this
by other than
publication
is
official
for
and
its
assumes no
its
own
employees.
the information
and
endorsement or approval
Department of Agriculture
personal
Because
references.
technicians
opinions
or approved
should
to the exclusion
of the respective
procedures
of the type
read each
issue
FOREST SERVICE
U.S.
mandatory instructions
however
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
D.C.
author and
of material in the publication
for engineers.
Washington
IS
contractors
its
suitable.
N1.
N
of employees
guidance
Department of Agriculture
of this information
corporation
publication
must not be construed
The
for
Service
Such use does not constitute an
of the reader.
product
of others
Agriculture-Forest
agencies.
for the interpretation or use
ý
has been developed
respon-sibility
of the
United
20013
this
publication
all
is
OPERATIONS
Harold L. Strickland
Assistant Director
A PROCESS
The
WO
FOR EVALUATION
Geometronics
AND REHABILITATION
Development
Group
is working
OF DISTURBED LANDS
on a process for using
graphic displays to
and
computer-assisted photogrammetry
computations
in the planning and execution of materials moving operations.
computer-assisted process is believed to be a more effective and
costly way of
The
aid
disturbances
1.
Visualizing the effects
existing terrain.
2.
Comparing design alternatives.
Estimating materials handling
3.
of
volumes
and/or
and
less
enhancements
in
haul.
Estimating costs.
4
Construction staking
project control.
Determining pay quantities for contract obligations.
Preparing graphic displays for describing the project
EIS public involvements etc.
5.
6.
and
de-signers
eval-uated
7.
Digital Terrain Model DTM of the existing site as a base
slope aspect contours perspective plots seen areas
will be prepared.
Using these tools a multidiscipline design team can
simulate modification of the terrain to conform with the prescribed use of
recreation development
wildlife and
the land for timber production
wild fowl habitat etc.
The existing and newly designed DTMs can then be
and alternatives explored to produce quantities and costs of the
compared
and haul.
The design can then be
materials excavation placement
if
it
the
final plans cost estimates
and
meets
prescribed criteria
control
and
be
A construction
construction
data
graphics
can
produced.
then
be
and
advertised.
contract can
prepared
Using
the
tools
The process briefly described above uses existing and newly designed data
coupled with previously developed software TOPAS DTIS MOSAIC etc.
for the comparison of digital terrain models for earthmoving and
except
materials handling.
Software packages will be developed to
1.
2.
Determine quantities of materials between two digital layers.
Determine haul distances from excavation to placement.
software.
Provide and interface with existing
responsi-bility
3.
Project Leader Dick Mahanf has
of developing software packages.
WO Geometronics
25
been
assigned the
fol-lowing
The development of this computer-assisted process was
two proposed demonstration projects
1.
prompted by
the
Corpo-ration
devel-opment
a
Mining SEAM Region 4 and Simplot
working on a cooperative effort to demonstrate
the uses of computer-assisted
photogrammetric and graphics tools
in mining operations on a site in Southern Idaho.
An area
plan a site-specific mining plan and a rehabilitation plan
Surface Environment
of
Idaho
and
are
will be
a more cost-effective way
produced-to demonstrate
using computers for gathering manipulating and displaying data
to the mining industry and
what
can be required from mining
operations when our land managers request FS approval for surface
disturbances on mineral lease National Forest lands.
The project
has begun and will continue for about
The Project Leader
a year.
b
of
Nelson of SEAM.
is Dayton
2.
a demonstration for rehabilitation of
mining lands on the Wayne National Forest in Ohio.
The Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act PL95-87 has
initial funding for such demonstrations on Federal lands with
possibilities of continuing rehabilitation projects on eastern
Forest lands.
Region
9
is proposing
orphaned
For
information on the
further
demonstration
projects
please contact
or Chuck Galbreath
585-6468
If you want information on
of digital terrain information
contact Dick Mahan WO
Geo-metronics
Dayton Nelson SEAM in Billing Montana
R-9 in Milwaukee Wisconsin FTS 362-3193.
applications
FTS
235-8184.
26
FTS
CONSULTATION
Walter
AND
E.
STANDARDS
Furen
Director
un-less
Con-tainers
Assistant
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
GUIDELINES
FOR
BEVERAGE
CONTAINERS
all beverage sales at installations under the
Forest
Service must be in returnable containers
jurisdiction
This requirement is in
the beverage is consumed on the premises.
accordance with the Solid Waste Management Guidelines for Beverage
40 CFR 244 which were promulgated in response to requirements
of the Solid Waste Disposal Act of 1965 as amended.
Effective
December
of
1977
the
Theuidelines
require that Federal facilities establish a system for the
the
to achieve
beer
and soft drink beverage containers hiuLch-t
ret rn
environmental benefits of reduced solid waste and litter and to conserve
As an incent
ve to the consumer to return
energy and material resources.
to
the
retail
the
Guidelines
require that the
empty containers
dealer
minimum
five
on
each
consumer pay a
cents
beverage container
deposit of
refund
the
hen
the
consumer
returns the container.
the dealer is to
deposit
of
dis-tributor
On-premise sales are excluded from this returnable container requirement
however empty refillable beverage containers must be returned to the
refilling and empty non-refillable beverage containers must
The returnable
be recycled if facilities for recycling are available.
marked
label
to
with a
identify the container
beverage containers will be
the
and to remind
consumer to return
as a refundable container
FEDERAL
This message will
the labels
will read
SALE
5Q REFUND.
or an
be either lithographed or embossed lettering on the container
affixed to
insoluble
ink
will
be
adhesive-backed
label
lettered with water
be
will
or an ink-stamped label
also water insoluble
the container
for
thecon-tainer
re-turnable
fore-runner
Al-though
nat-tional
printed on
the
container.
There has been some speculation that the required sale of beverages in
containers at all Federal facilities and installations is a
of a national law controlling returnable beverage containers.
there.has been Congressional resistance to the enactment of a
bottle bill four States and several political subdivisions have
adopted returnable beverage container requirements. Also the container
industry appears to be softening its opposition to the returnable container
especially when viewed as an alternative to the
product charge which is currently being considered.
concept
waste
27
proposed
solid
signifi-cant
beverage
take
place on Federal facilities consist of only
national
percent
beverage sales the achievement of
environme tal benefits resulting from reduced solid waste and litter
and the conserv tion of energy and material resources will be difficult.
However the gui elines may become an effective means for providing
and an e ample in national implementation of the returnable
Since
sales
that
lead-ership
contain-er
2
to
of
4
the
concept.
Perhaps the best known legislation concerning returnable containers is the
law passed by the State of Oregon which became effective in October 1972.
Some major results of the Oregon Bottle
BiZZ
have been reported and are
summarized as follows
1.
Roadside
litter was reduced overall 26 percent on a piece count
35 percent on a volume basis the first year after
the
Bill went into effect.
During the second
year the reduction
increased to 39 percent overall by piece count and 47 percent by
basis
and
sec-ond
volume.
2.
and
Beer
percent
soft drink beverage container litter was reduced by
during the first year and by 83 percent during the
72
year.
3.
beer
returnable bottles captured 96 percent of the market
Bill was implemented
compared to 36 percent before
Nonreturnable bottles which previously had held 31 percent of
the market were eliminated and can sales dropped from 33 percent
For
after the
to
4.
percent.
4
For soft drinks returnable bottles moved from 53 percent of the
market before the Bill was implemented
to 88 percent the year
Non-returnable bottles
following and 91 percent 2 years after.
which had held 7 percent of the market were removed from the
market.
Cans moved from 40 percent to 12 percent 1 year later
and
9
percent of
the
sales
2
years later.
11-oz.
the return rate for the certified compact
96
bottle
93
return
was
percent
stubby
percent compared to a
As a result trippages for beer
rate for soft drink bottles.
and soft drink refillables are 15 and 24 respectively.
of the enactment of the bottle bill were
Direct consequences
estimated to have caused
an operating income change ranging
a negative 6.8 percent to apositive 3.1 percent based on
total retail sales.
Energy savings as a result of a move from
43 percent refillables to 94 percent are significant--1.4 trillion
BTUs are saved annually enough to provide the home heating needs
years
5.
After
6.
be-tween
for
2
50000 people
electricity worth
or
to
generate 130 million kilowatt hours of
$2800000
annually.
28
-U.S.
GOVERNMENT
PRINTING
OFFICE
1978
0-261-474/16
TO READERS OF
INVITATION
FIELD NOTES
Every reader
is
a
author
potential
you would
of an article for Field Notes.
If
you have
news
a
item or
accu-rate
short
article
publication
in
Service
we
engineers
you
invite
to send
it
for
Field Notes.
submitted
Material
to share with
like
to
the
Office
Washington
for
should
publication
be reviewed
by the
Washing-ton
respective
Office
Regional
and of
informative
may
material
submitted
however
short articles
Field
and white
black
Notes
is
mailing
the
ask
number
Each
or news
short
all
FSM
sentences
items are preferred.
timely technically
current
Service-wide
engineers
several
is
7113.
several
to
material submitted
All
be
should
illustrations
The
length
of
pages
typewritten
to the
original
drawings
or
photos.
your Office
and Forest
Manager
Office directly
Service retirees.
or the
sent to your office.
Regional
to
you
If
Information
Regional Station
all
are not
currently
Coordinator
Copies of back issues are also
and
on the
to increase
available
from the
Office.
Region
questions
vary
Forests
of copies
Washington
to
from
information
distributed from the Washington
Area Headquarters
list
interest
the
be typed double-spaced
Office should
glossy
to see that
has
an Information
whom
Coordinator to
and material for publication.
The
Coordinators
R-1
Melvin
R-4
Ted Wood
R-2
Royal M.Ryser
R-5
Jim
R-3
Juan
R-6
Kjell
R-8
Bob Bowers
Coordinators
Dittmer
Gomez
should
direct
questions
field
McCoy
Bakke
concerning
personnel
USDA
Forest
Fred Hintsala
R-10
F.
WO
format editing
Washington
Telephone
Rm. 1108 RP-E
L.
Rome
D.C.
20013
Attn Gordon
P.O. Box 2417
Area Code
or Rita E. Wright
703-235-8198
W. Baxandall
Al Colley
publishing dates and other
Service
Staff
submit both
R-9
problems to
Engineering
should
are