Rosebud, MT
Transparent derived index from EPA TRI / SDWIS / Superfund extracts: not an official EPA rating. Fixed caps: facilities ≤25 pts (50+ = max), log10 releases ≤25 pts, Superfund ≤25 pts (5/site), health-violation systems ≤15 pts (3/system), high-chemical facilities ≤10 pts. Bands: High ≥60, Moderate ≥30. See methodology. This is a different measure than the EJ Screening score for this county, which ranks it by percentile against other tracked counties rather than against these fixed caps.
Environmental data for Rosebud in Montana · Population: 8,236
TRI sites such as Colstrip Steam Electric Station; Colstrip Energy LP Rosebud Power Plant; SDWIS systems such as LAME DEER WATER SYSTEM; COLSTRIP CITY OF; FORSYTH CITY OF anchor Rosebud, MT's EPA extract. Derived burden score 44/100 (Moderate Risk) uses fixed national caps on density, log release volume, Superfund count, and health-flagged systems - not an official EPA rating.
Health-flagged SDWIS rows in Rosebud include LAME DEER WATER SYSTEM; COLSTRIP CITY OF; BUSBY COMMUNITY WATER SYSTEM, while Colstrip Steam Electric Station leads reported TRI pounds among local Form R filers. AQS median AQI 4 / peak 90 in 2024.
Burden score 44/100 (Moderate Risk) is the only weighted composite on this page. The tables below list every TRI facility, SDWIS system, and Superfund site EPA has on record for Rosebud -- not just the names called out above -- reproducing the disclosure history as filed, not a current-safety verdict. Extract current as of 2026-08-25.
Release-over-release change
What changed for Rosebud, MT: EPA TRI 2023 reporting year
Same facilities, both years
+10.0%
2 facilities that filed in 2022 and 2023
Whole inventory
+10.0%
8.6 million lb → 9.4 million lb, every facility that filed
- Rosebud, MT's total reported releases rose from 8.6 million lb in 2022 to 9.4 million lb in 2023, based on EPA TRI filings.
- Rosebud, MT's off-site transfers rose from 63 lb in 2022 to 1.5 thousand lb in 2023, based on EPA TRI filings.
- Rosebud, MT's land releases rose from 8.2 million lb in 2022 to 9.1 million lb in 2023, based on EPA TRI filings.
- Rosebud, MT's chemicals reported fell from 24 in 2022 to 22 in 2023, based on EPA TRI filings.
Air Quality History (2020–2024)
EPA Air Quality Index (AQI) data showing how many days per year fall into each air quality category.
| Year | Good | Moderate | Unhealthy (SG) | Max AQI |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 353 (96%) | 13 | 0 | 90 |
| 2023 | 279 (98%) | 5 | 1 | 132 |
| 2022 | 337 (100%) | 0 | 0 | 36 |
| 2021 | 266 (73%) | 83 | 12 | 155 |
| 2020 | 321 (88%) | 40 | 3 | 154 |
Source: EPA Air Quality System (AQS) Annual AQI by County AQI categories: Good (0-50), Moderate (51-100), Unhealthy for Sensitive Groups (101-150), Unhealthy (151-200), Very Unhealthy (201-300), Hazardous (301+)
For real-time air quality readings and pollutant breakdowns in Montana, see the EPA's AirNow.gov.
Water Systems (7)
| System | System pop (SDWIS) | Violations |
|---|---|---|
| LAME DEER WATER SYSTEM | 2,605 | 6 |
| COLSTRIP CITY OF | 2,350 | 6 |
| FORSYTH CITY OF | 2,260 | 0 |
| BUSBY COMMUNITY WATER SYSTEM | 535 | 5 |
| ASHLAND COMMUNITY WATER SYSTEM | 210 | 3 |
| MELSTONE TOWN OF | 170 | 0 |
| BIRNEY VILLAGE | 96 | 11 |
TRI Facilities (2)
| # | Facility | Total Releases |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Colstrip Steam Electric Station | 46.3M lbs |
| 2 | Colstrip Energy LP Rosebud Power Plant | 916.9K lbs |
Cities in Rosebud (4)
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the environmental risk level in Rosebud, Montana? ▼
Are there Superfund sites in Rosebud? ▼
How many toxic release facilities are in Rosebud? ▼
What is the air quality in Rosebud? ▼
Is the drinking water safe in Rosebud? ▼
What environmental agencies cover Rosebud? ▼
What does this county environmental profile show?
This county environmental profile rolls up EPA Toxics Release Inventory facility reports, Safe Drinking Water Information System public-water-system filings, and Superfund National Priorities List sites for the county boundary defined by the U.S. Census Bureau. Facility counts reflect facilities with a reporting address inside the county, not where downstream environmental effects may be observed. Population figures are from the most recent Census ACS 5-year estimate. The county detail page is updated whenever the upstream EPA programs publish revised data; see the methodology page for the documented ingest cadence and the editorial choices governing how aggregations are computed.
Read our methodology - how this data is sourced, computed, and verified.