Citizen's Advisory Committee on Solid Waste
. . . . . . . . . .
May 9, 2002 Final Draft
Report to the Batavia City Council on a Proposal to Site a Waste Transfer Station in Batavia
. . . . . . . . . .
Report to the Batavia City Council on a Proposal to Site a Waste Transfer Station in Batavia
Citizen's Advisory Committee on Solid Waste
Introduction
This committee consists of 11 citizens of Batavia concerned with the issue of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW1). Committee members are: Ken Baruth, Thomas Carne, Mike Church, Yvonne Dinwiddie, Brian Lewis, Howard Miller, Kurt Miller, Greg Popovich, John Redden, Debra Reiter, and Darius Samsami. We met on 9 occasions formally with city officials and municipal waste experts and on 1 occasion informally to discuss issues among ourselves. Formal meeting agendas are included in Appendix A, and meeting notes may be obtained from Assistant City Administrator Randall Recklaus. Some committee members were also present at meetings last year in which engineering firms and legal firms were interviewed by city officials in connection with a Waste Transfer Station. In addition, several committee members toured operating Waste Transfer Stations in DuPage and Cook counties. The charge to this committee from the City of Batavia is: "To assist the Batavia City Council in the identification and discussion of issues to be considered and addressed in the decision to site a Solid Waste Transfer Station in Batavia. The Committee shall help ensure that the City Council makes an informed decision, based not only on the feasibility of the project, but its desirability as well." This report addresses this charge.
2
General Background
Currently, there are only 2 remaining landfills for MSW in Kane County: Woodland near Rt. 25 in St. Charles Township, and Settler's Hill in Geneva. Woodland is scheduled to be closed by the end of 2002 because it is approaching capacity, and Settler's Hill has been mandated by court order to be closed by the end of 2006. Furthermore, after attempts to site another landfill in Kane County failed, the Kane County Board is now opposed to siting any more landfills in unincorporated Kane County2. Landfills in Indiana, Illinois and Wisconsin which currently receive MSW from the Chicago metropolitan area are projected to be completely filled by 20093. What are the future options for MSW disposal for the citizens of Batavia?
a. Stop producing MSW. b. Incinerate the MSW. c. Transport the MSW directly to landfills outside Kane County. d. Transport the MSW to landfills outside Kane County via a local Waste
Transfer Station. Option a) seems unrealistic. Option b) may be expensive and technically difficult, and still requires that incineration residue be transported to a landfill. Option c) appears to be economically and environmentally unsound (inefficient trucks driving long distances). Option d) has already been largely adopted by DuPage and Cook counties and seems like the most favorable option for Kane county. Option d) is considered in this report, and in particular we discuss the pros and cons of siting a Waste Transfer Station in Batavia. Of course, this option assumes that more landfills will be sited and built within a distance to receive MSW economically from the Chicago metropolitan area after 2009. A Waste Transfer Station is a building in which MSW is transferred from "packer trucks" -the type that pick up the garbage at the curb -- to "transfer trailers" which haul the garbage over longer distances to landfills. Typically it takes 3-4 packer trucks to fill a single transfer trailer4. There are currently 2 Waste Transfer Stations near Batavia: Speedway, near Elburn, with a capacity of 600 ton/day; and DuKane, at Rt. 64 and Powis Rd. near West Chicago, with a capacity of 2300 ton/day5. Very recently a siting permit for a 1500 ton/day Waste Transfer Station has been applied for at the Woodland landfill, and local newspaper articles6 indicate that at least some nearby residents are opposed to siting a Waste Transfer Station at that location. For a sense of scale, the Settler's Hill landfill takes in 3000-3500 ton/day of MSW7 and Batavia generates ~118 ton/day of MSW8. The site being considered by the City of Batavia for a Waste Transfer Station is a 7.75 acre lot on Hubbard Rd. in the Batavia Business Park located south of Fabyan Parkway, east of Kirk Rd, and north of Fermilab. The city currently has an option to purchase this land. This site satisfies the Illinois State requirement for a Waste Transfer Station to be at least 1000' from any residence or residentially zoned property. This requirement greatly reduces the number of suitable sites available. This site also has railroad access. Although future options for MSW disposal is a problem shared by all Kane county residents, the Kane county government has decided not to solve this problem by applying for siting approval of Waste Transfer Stations at the county level9. They have left the siting application process to municipalities and private interests. It is not clear to this committee why the Kane county government has made this choice.
3
Process and Legalities
The legal and procedural rules for siting, licensing, building, and operating a Waste Transfer Station are complex enough that it is worth stating a general outline here, just to make sure we "got it right".
1. It is prudent for a municipality to first approve a siting ordinance in order to
fully control the siting and operating of any Waste Transfer Station within its boundaries.
2. Any private or public institution, including the municipality itself, may
apply to the siting authority (the City of Batavia in this case) for siting approval. The Illinois Code under Section 39.2 establishes the criteria for this process. In particular, there are 9 conditions which must be satisfied, as listed in Appendix B. If the approval is granted, it must be submitted to the Illinois EPA for a State permit. The siting decision may be appealed to the Pollution Control Board by participants to the hearing process.
3. Once an EPA permit is approved, the city may solicit bids from private
firms to build and operate a Waste Transfer Station at the approved location. The conditions for approval should be stated in the siting ordinance.
Issues of Concern (Not in Order of Priority)
Location
This site satisfies the Illinois State requirement that it be at least 1000' from any residence or residentially zoned property. It is within the Batavia City limits, and therefore Batavia can control the siting, building, and operation of a Waste Transfer Station there. There are other sites near Batavia which could also satisfy the legal requirements for siting a Waste Transfer Station. However, in these cases Batavia would not control the siting process, and these sites, by their proximity to Batavia, could have a significant negative impact on Batavia. For example, there exists a possible site near Rt. 25 south of Batavia outside Batavia city limits,10 and traffic to and from this potential site would certainly have an effect in Batavia. The possible impacts (traffic, noise, dust, odor, …) of a Waste Transfer Station on other businesses in the Batavia Business Park should also be considered by the City Council.
4
Traffic
This is of major concern to committee members. Traffic around Batavia is becoming more and more congested, and a single truck has a larger impact than a single car. A calculation for the number of trucks/day for a 1000 ton/day facility is shown in the following table11.
Packer Trucks In 150 Packer Trucks Out 150 Total Packer Trucks 300 Transfer Trailers In 42 Transfer Trailers Out 42 Total Transfer Trailers 84 Total Trucks 384
Consider the following arithmetic: If all of the transfer trailers and half of the packer trucks drive on Kirk Rd., concentrated in 8 hours during the day, then there will be an additional 234/8=30 trucks/hour on Kirk Rd from 8AM to 4PM. Currently the total number of vehicles on Kirk Rd. is 31,000 vehicles/day. If these are concentrated in 16 hours then this amounts to 31,000/16=1,940 vehicles/hour. The 30 extra trucks/hour then amounts to a 1.5% increase in traffic, which seems insignificant. A traffic study in 2000 found that ~6% of the traffic on Kirk Rd is truck traffic12, therefore the 30 extra trucks/hour amounts to a 25% increase in truck traffic on Kirk Rd during 8 hours of the day. This is not insignificant -- a single truck causes more "wear and tear" on the roadway than a single car, and a single truck causes more congestion than a single car at intersections. This simple arithmetic does not account for the fact that Settler's Hill truck traffic will eventually cease, and that some other business (a warehouse?) at the site in question could possibly involve even more truck traffic than a Waste Transfer Station. Nevertheless, the City Council should insist on a very careful traffic analysis, not just on Kirk and Fabyan, but at associated intersections at Hubbard, Wilson, and Butterfield. The City Council should consider restricting transfer trailers to Kirk Rd. between Hubbard and I-88.
Need
Is there enough local MSW within ~15 miles13 to support a 1000 ton/day Waste Transfer Station in Batavia? The following figures are projections for 2010 taken from the "Kane County Solid Waste Plan" published in 1997. The population projections in this publication are already out of date and significantly underestimate the current population. Nevertheless, we will use the figures reported therein. Batavia: 118 ton/day; Elburn: 32 ton/day; North Aurora: 58 ton/day; Geneva: 114 ton/day; Sugar Grove: 32 ton/day; Aurora: 1024 ton/day. Assuming St. Charles sends its MSW to the proposed Woodland Transfer Station, Elburn sends its MSW to Speedway, and half the Aurora MSW comes to Batavia, this amounts to 836 ton/day coming to the Batavia Waste Transfer Station. It is not clear how the overlapping service areas of the Dukane facility (on Rt. 64 and Powis) and the Batavia facility will split MSW. There is nothing preventing another agency from siting an additional Waste Transfer Station within the Batavia service area. This committee is concerned that the competition from another waste transfer station near Batavia might have a negative effect on the viability of a transfer station in Batavia. Population estimates more accurate than those supplied to this committee are required to fully assess need.
5
Economics
The Dukane facility processes 2300 ton/day of MSW and pays a host fee of $630,000/year to West Chicago and a host fee of $420,000/year to DuPage County based on a total host fee rate of $1.50/ton.14 (More recently, an estimate for the proposed Woodland facility is $1.90/ton15.) This rate scales to $460,000/year for a 1000 ton/day facility in Batavia, which amounts to ~$19/year for each person in Batavia. This is certainly not a negligible addition to the Batavia City general fund, but neither is it so extravagant that we should consider compromising quality-of-life issues in order to get it. We assume that the operator would also pay a leasing fee to cover the original capital cost for Batavia to purchase the land ($1.3M). We assume also that there would be additional city staff overhead associated with inspections, oversight, contract negotiation, etc. (1/2 FTE?) How large does the Waste Transfer Station need to be to attract a credible operator? A larger facility presumably means more profits for the operator, but what exactly drives these economics? One member of this committee (Greg Popovich) has experience in the field of waste management and has done a simple cost analysis (Appendix C) which indicates that a much smaller Waste Transfer Station could be profitable for an operator. The basis for this is that most of the profits in MSW are derived at the landfill.
Environment
A well designed and operated Waste Transfer Station can be environmentally sound. Careful design and operating procedures are required to minimize odors, rodents, litter, and birds. The SWANCC (Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County) Waste Transfer Station in Glenview was opened in 1994, has processed 1.4 million tons of garbage, and has not had a single "registered complaint."16 Water which comes in contact with the garbage and is not absorbed by the garbage is called leachate. Leachate is required by EPA regulations to be specially processed and is not permitted to enter the stormwater or wastewater stream. Groundwater contamination does not appear to be a serious threat if the leachate is handled properly.
Liability
"Waste management is a litigation-rich business."17 Batavia should insure that it is fully indemnified in any contract with the operator. The city should also make sure the contractor is financially viable and that the indemnification includes not only the subsidiary, its successors, and assigns, but with the parent company as well. Period.
Operation
This committee felt comfortable that a well-operated facility could be profitable, unobtrusive, and not detrimental to the environment. Our list of operating conditions in the "Conclusion and Recommendations" section of this report should be considered a minimum set of operating rules.
6
Image
The committee discussed this very subjective issue at length. Would a Waste Transfer Station give Batavia a "bad reputation?" Would Naperville consider letting Batavia ship garbage to their town? Furthermore, the Environmental Protection Agency has also considered the negative social impacts of Waste Transfer Stations in its public documents.18 The proposed site for the Waste Transfer Station is very much out of the way, unlike Settler's Hill. Most people would never suspect it was there, as long as it is not allowed to become too large. City Council members should consult with local realtors, property assessors, the Main Street Committee, and other community groups for an assessment of "image." City Council members should also consider the following question: would the money gained from the operation of a Waste Transfer Station sufficiently counteract any negative impacts to Batavia's image?
Conclusions and Recommendations
This committee makes the following recommendations to City Council members:
1. Do not rush into this endeavor. Do it right. Perhaps the best outcome is to
have a well run Waste Transfer Station profitable to the city of Batavia. The worst outcome is to have a poorly run, costly facility that is a detriment to Batavians' quality of life. A middle outcome is to have some other agency site the facility, and Batavians pay somewhat more for future MSW disposal.
2. Consider the possible disadvantages of not siting a Waste Transfer Station
here.
3. Determine if other businesses in the Batavia Industrial Park would be
adversely affected by a Waste Transfer Station at this site.
4. Insist on a very complete traffic analysis and examine it closely. 5. Consider the possibility of using rail traffic to export MSW from the Waste
Transfer Station.
6. Restrict loaded transfer trailers to head south on Kirk Rd. to I-88 only. 7. Maintain a diligent program to ticket truck drivers who do not properly tarp
their loads and who disperse litter along Kirk Rd.
8. Specify in the contract that litter cleanup along the approved truck routes be
part of the operating procedures.
9. Carefully assess the need for MSW processing in this area. In particular,
consider the effects of overlapping service areas with other Waste Transfer Stations. Get up-to-date population figures and waste generation figures.
7
10. Make the Waste Transfer Station as small as possible but still large enough
to attract a credible operator. This committee has reached a consensus that a Waste Transfer Station should be kept under 1000 ton/day (for analysis, see Appendix C). We need to solve Batavia's future MSW disposal problem, but we do not need to become a "dumping site" for the larger communities in the area. We would like to minimize the amount of truck traffic on our local roads.
11. The capital cost of the property should not be assessed to the taxpayer. 12. Negotiate a favorable host fee. 13. Determine if siting a Waste Transfer Station would require an increase in
Batavia city staff.
14. Do not use the host fee to lower curbside pickup costs. This discourages
recycling. Rather, negotiate a contract which guarantees MSW disposal for Batavia citizens at a favorable rate.
15. Commission a careful and detailed cost analysis in order to judge what is an
appropriate size for a Waste Transfer Station in Batavia.
16. Visit other Waste Transfer Stations to see first-hand what they are like. 17. Train a city staff member to inspect the facility regularly and also make it
possible for Batavia citizens to inspect the facility on request.
18. The contract with the operator should provide full indemnification for
Batavia.
19. Any future expansion in either tonnage or size of a Waste Transfer Station
should require City Council approval.
20. Recommendations for operational restrictions are:
• • • • • • • •
The building should be fully enclosed. The traffic patterns should be carefully laid out such that there is adequate queuing space for trucks. The facility should not be a baling type, as that is expensive, uses more electricity, and requires a landfill that accepts baled waste. There should be contingency for power failures. There should be an odor control system. Waste should not be allowed to remain overnight except in extenuating circumstances (snowstorm, …). Hours of operation should be reasonable and restricted to weekdays and Saturday half-days. Recycling should not be included at the facility.
8
• •
If at all possible, Batavians should be allowed to bring truckloads of garbage themselves. Special waste should not be allowed at the facility.
21. Encourage the operator to hire Batavia city residents and use contractors
from Batavia.
22. Investigate why Kane County officials have left waste disposal to the
municipalities and private interests and are not pursuing a county-wide solution.
23. Consider the effect such a facility would have on Batavia's self-image. Get
opinions from local realtors, property assessors, the Main Street Committee, and other community groups.
24. Consider the following question: would the money gained from the
operation of a Waste Transfer Station sufficiently counteract any negative impact to Batavia's image?
Acknowledgments
Committee members would like to thank Randy Recklaus for moderating meetings and being helpful in many ways.
List of Appendices
Meeting Agenda 9 Criteria for Site Approval of a Waste Transfer Station (in brief) Financial Analysis of Batavia Transfer Station Project
9
Endnotes
MSW includes residential, construction, and commercial waste, but does not include recyclables, yardwaste, sludge from sewage treatment plants, or hazardous waste. 2 "Kane County Solid Waste Plan", 1997. 3 Tim Harbaugh, Kane County Director of Environmental Services, CAC meeting 1/16/2002; however, see IEPA report "Nonhazardous Solid Waste Management and Landfill Capacity in Illinois: 1998" (http://www.epa.state.il.us/land/landfill-capacity/1998/index.html/) which claims current capacity is sufficient through 2015. 4 Tim Harbaugh, Kane County Director of Environmental Services, CAC meeting 1/16/2002. 5 Phil Kowalski, Envirogen, CAC meeting 3/7/2002. 6 T. O'Konowitz, "Landfill's Neighbor Poised to Fend Off Transfer Station Plan" in Daily Herald, 2/2002. 7 Michael Werthman, KLOA Inc., CAC meeting 3/7/2002. 8 "Kane County Solid Waste Plan", 1997. 9 Ibid. 10 Envirogen, CAC meeting 1/30/2002. 11 Michael Werthman, KLOA Inc., CAC meeting 3/7/2002. 12 from Randy Recklaus, 2000 Kane County traffic study. 13 Devin Moose, Envirogen, CAC meeting 2/11/2002, reports that a typical service area radius for a Waste Transfer Station is 15 miles. 14 Randy Recklaus, Batavia City staff, CAC meeting 4/4/2002. 15 Ibid. 16 Brooke Beal, SWANCC, CAC meeting 3/21/2002 17 Ibid. 18 EPA 530-R-95-041, (http://www.epa.gov)
1
10
City of Batavia Citizens’ Advisory Committee on Solid Waste
Agenda
January 16, 2002 7:00pm
1. Introduction-Randy Recklaus, Assistant City Administrator 2. Presentation-Solid Waste Transfer Stations- Tim Harbaugh, Director of Environmental Services, Kane County 3. Overview of the Application Process and Steps taken to Date 4. The Role of the Citizens’ Advisory Committee 5. Next Steps-Upcoming Meeting Schedule 6. Conflict of Interest Form 7. Other Business 8. Adjournment
City of Batavia Citizens’ Advisory Committee on Solid Waste
Agenda
January 30, 2002 7:00pm
1. Review of Minutes of 1/16/02 Meeting 2. Introduction 3. Facilitated Discussion Session 4. Discussion of Next Steps 5. Selection of Chairperson 6. Other Business 7. Adjournment
City of Batavia Citizens’ Advisory Committee on Solid Waste
Agenda
February 11, 2002 7:00pm
1. Review of Minutes of 1-30-02 Meeting 2. Presentation by Envirogen on concerns raised at 1/30/02 Facilitated Session 3. Discussion 4. Questions/Issues to be Addressed at next meeting 5. Other Business 6. Adjournment
City of Batavia Citizens’ Advisory Committee on Solid Waste
Agenda
March 7, 2002 7:00pm
1. Review of Minutes of 2-11-02 Meeting 2. Presentation Michael Werthman, KLOA Inc., on Traffic Issues relating to Waste Transfer Stations 3. Discussion 4. Presentation by Phil Kowalski, Envirogen, on Needs Criteria for Waste Transfer Stations 5. Envirogen Review of Issues Raised at Facilitated Discussion Session on 1/30 6. Questions/Issues to be Addressed at next meeting 7. Other Business 8. Adjournment
City of Batavia Citizens’ Advisory Committee on Solid Waste
Agenda
March 21, 2002 7:00pm nd (2 Floor Meeting Room)
1. Review of Minutes of 3-7-02 Meeting 2. Presentation by Brooke Beal, Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County, Contract issues relating to Waste Transfer Stations 3. Discussion 4. Continued Review of Issues Raised at Facilitated Discussion Session on 1/30 by Envirogen (if needed) 5. Discussion 6. Other Business 7. Adjournment
City of Batavia Citizens’ Advisory Committee on Solid Waste
Agenda
April 4, 2002 7:00pm (2nd Floor Meeting Room)
1. Review of Minutes of 3-20-02 Meeting 2. Discussion of Next Steps in the Process 3. Discussion of Report Requirements 4. Other Business 5. Adjournment
City of Batavia Citizens’ Advisory Committee on Solid Waste
Agenda
April 23, 2002 7:00pm (2nd Floor Meeting Room)
1. Review of Minutes of 4-4-02 Meeting 2. Discussion/Review of 2nd Draft of Committee Report 3. Discussion 4. Next Steps 5. Adjournment
City of Batavia Citizens’ Advisory Committee on Solid Waste
Agenda
April 29, 2002 7:00pm (2nd Floor Meeting Room)
1. Review of Minutes of 4-23-02 Meeting 2. Discussion of Report 3. Other Business 4. Adjournment
City of Batavia Citizens’ Advisory Committee on Solid Waste
Agenda
May 9, 2002 7:00pm (2nd Floor Meeting Room)
1. Review of Minutes of 4-29-02 Meeting 2. Discussion of Report 3. Vote on Endoresement of Report 4. Adjournment
Appendix B: 9 Criteria for Site Approval of a Waste Transfer Station (in brief) 1) The facility is necessary. 2) The facility is not hazardous to the Public. 3) The facility does not have adverse impact on surrounding property values. 4) The facility is flood-proof. 5) The operation of the facility is safe and environmentally sound. 6) The facility does not adversely affect local traffic. 7) The facility has an effective emergency response plan. 8) The facility is consistent with the county Solid Waste Management Plan 9) The facility satisfies the requirements of a Regulated Recharge Area
Financial Analysis of Batavia Transfer Station Project
Including Various Limits of Transfer Station Capacity
Introduction
This analysis is a general overview of the revenue, expenses, and potential monetary benefits to the city of Batavia. It is based on the Kane County Solid Waste Plan estimate of 9,032 taxpaying residential households in Batavia. It does not assume any financial benefits to commercial businesses in the city, nor does it take into consideration the additional costs to the city for road maintenance or financial impacts to additional city staff to oversee this project and its impact. A detailed financial Pro Forma for the project was never considered as part of the Citizens Advisory Committee mandate. Table 1 utilizes data from the Kane County Solid Waste Plan and projects waste generation rates for Batavia and the surrounding communities. Table 2 examines the results of a simple financial analysis and the potential revenue and EBITDA (Earnings before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation & Amortization) that a transfer station might generate for an operator. This analysis uses simple CPI growth assumptions, (5 to 7 percent) and does not take into consideration the EBITDA margin on the collection side. Table 3 projects possible financial benefits that could accrue to the City of Batavia through the operation of a transfer station, based on the analysis in Table 2.
1
Findings
The key point from the analysis is that a large volume transfer station (1500 ton/day) is not required to generate a large return or a break-even point for an operator. The more tonnage that goes into a transfer station the more EBITDA is generated. Likewise, there is also a financial benefit (Table 3) to City of Batavia (and the residents), although small when compared to the potential benefit to an operator. When evaluating the financial position and performance of publicly traded companies (i.e. WMI, AW, RSG), financial investors use EBITDA. The goal of a transfer station is to improve internalization, i.e., to pay to one’s self the fee that is charged to dispose of waste that is picked-up/collected, rather than pay a 3rd party . Table 2 examines three snapshots in time (Year 1, Year 5 & Year 10) and shows that for every ton of waste taken in an operator will look to break even at the 0%-5% EBITDA level for this type of project. However, an operator will strive to achieve a 40%-45% EBITDA margin at the landfill or a 20% EBITDA margin for the overall integrated transfer station/landfill business. Year 1 of the project indicates:
• • • • • • • • •
The City purchases 7.5 acres for $1.3M and makes a down payment of $1M, 835 tons per day or 236,000 tons per year will enter the transfer station and it generates $9.36M in revenue ($40/ton fee), $4.115M (45% EBITDA) will be internalized and paid to the landfill, $0.465M in a host fee ($2.00/ton) will be paid to the City and $0.048M paid to the city in the form of a lease fee, Residential trash collection will cost a residential tax-paying household (2 bags per week) $208/year (assuming no discounting), Total benefit to the City before and after lease payments are made are $0.411M/year and $0.258M/year, respectively, Benefit to a tax-paying residential household is $57/year before transfer station property payments are made, The benefit to a tax-paying household after lease payments for residential garbage collection is $162 for a savings of $46 or $14.69 per resident, The potential revenue and EBITDA to the landfill is $4.11M/year and $1.933M/year (20% of the transfer station project revenue), respectively.
In summary, by locating a transfer station within city limits the residents of Batavia could save $46/year (cost of $208/year reduced to $162/year) for residential collection. An operator could possibly generate $9.0M/year (based on 835 ton/day, 280 working days and $40/ton gate fee) in revenue at the transfer station and recognize a landfill EBITDA of $1.933M and positive earnings per share, thus increasing the value of share price.
2
Table 1: Waste Generation Rates for Batavia and Surrounding Communities (data from Kane County, IL Solid Waste Plan)
City Aurora (assumes half population) Batavia Elburn Geneva North Aurora St. Charles Sugar Grove TOTAL Generation Rate (ppc) 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.4 Projections 2010 Households 39,486 9,032 2,472 8,743 4,447 2,461 2010 Population 122,407 27,299 7,524 27,103 13,786 7,629 Total Waste (lbs/day) 1,028,219 235,192 227,665 115,802 64,084 Total Waste (tons/day) 514 118 114 58 32 835
Table 2: Analysis of Potential Revenue & EBITDA to Operator of an Integrated Transfer Station/Landfill Project
Item Residential Households Bags of Trash per Household Cost per Sticker (Today) Pick-ups per Year Cost per Year per Household total contract Tons per Day Vol Adj @ 7% Gate Rate @ T-Station (Adj 5%) Working Days Host Fee Revenue - T-Station Disposal Trucking Operating Exp. & SG&A Host Fee Lease (Paid to City) EBITDA Revenue - Landfill Operating Exp. & SG&A EBITDA @ Landfill EBITDA @ Landfill as Percent of T-Station Revenue 7% 5% $40 $280 $2.00 $9,357,385 ($4,114,880) ($1,402,800) ($3,179,680) ($467,600) ($48,000) $144,425 $4,114,880 ($2,180,886) $1,933,994 $1,933,994 100% 44% 15% 34% 5% 1% 2% 100% 53% 47% 21% 49 $280 $2.00 $15,092,000 ($6,640,480) ($2,263,800) ($5,131,280) ($616,000) ($54,000) $386,440 $6,640,480 ($3,519,454) $3,121,026 $3,121,026 100% 44% 15% 34% 4% 0% 3% 44% 53% 47% 21% 62 $280 $2.00 $20,832,000 ($9,166,080) ($3,124,800) ($7,082,880) ($672,000) ($60,000) $726,240 $9,166,080 ($4,858,022) $4,308,058 $4,308,058 100% 44% 15% 34% 3% 0% 3% 100% 53% 47% 21% Today (Year 0) 9,032 2 $1.47 52 $152.88 $1,380,812 Year 1 9,032 2 $2.00 52 $208.00 $1,878,656 835 Year 5 9,032 2 $3.25 52 $338.00 $3,052,816 1100 Year 10 9,032 2 $4.50 52 $468.00 $4,226,976 1200
3
Table 3: Income to the City of Batavia, IL & Benefit to a Residential Property Tax Payer
Year 1 Gross Income to City from a Transfer Station Project Annual Payment for Transfer Station Property Net Income to City Benefit to Residential Property Taxpayer Before Loan Payment Benefit to Residential Property Taxpayer after Loan Payment Benefit to Individual Resident Cost of Garbage Service to a Residential Property Taxpayer $515,600 ($104,330) $411,270 $57 $46 $14.69 $162 Year 5 $670,000 ($104,330) $565,670 $74 $63 $20.20 $275 Year 10 $732,000 ($104,330) $627,670 $81 $69 $22.42 $399
4