Waukesha County Recycling Waukesha County Recycling

Perry Lindquist, Land Resources Manager

Waukesha County Dept. of Parks & Land Use

Fall 2012

Looking Ahead Looking Ahead

Presentation OutlinePresentation Outline

• Background on current county recycling program/ Material Recycling Facility (MRF)

• Review of MRF studies & conclusions – 2007 Waukesha Co. MRF study– 2009 City of Milwaukee MRF study – 2010/11 Milwaukee MRF data (value/repairs)– 2010 Waukesha Co. Transportation study– 2012 Milw./Wauk. Co. Regional MRF study

• Implementing the recommendations

• Background on current county recycling program/ Material Recycling Facility (MRF)

• Review of MRF studies & conclusions – 2007 Waukesha Co. MRF study– 2009 City of Milwaukee MRF study – 2010/11 Milwaukee MRF data (value/repairs)– 2010 Waukesha Co. Transportation study– 2012 Milw./Wauk. Co. Regional MRF study

• Implementing the recommendations

Background on County ProgramBackground on County Program

• Waukesha County is “Responsible Unit” for 25 of 37 communities (since 1990)– Co. took the risk of investing in MRF/no tipping fee to communities– Co. receives state grant funds on behalf of 25 communities– Co. oversees MRF operation & building maintenance– Co. leads/coordinates recycling education program – Co. pays for blue recycling bins (used by 22/25 communities)

• County-owned/privately operated MRF– Dual-stream system (paper & containers separate)– Average 22,000 tons/year of recyclables– Very competitive for private operators – Last expansion in 1995

• Waukesha County is “Responsible Unit” for 25 of 37 communities (since 1990)– Co. took the risk of investing in MRF/no tipping fee to communities– Co. receives state grant funds on behalf of 25 communities– Co. oversees MRF operation & building maintenance– Co. leads/coordinates recycling education program – Co. pays for blue recycling bins (used by 22/25 communities)

• County-owned/privately operated MRF– Dual-stream system (paper & containers separate)– Average 22,000 tons/year of recyclables– Very competitive for private operators – Last expansion in 1995

25 Municipalities in the Waukesha County Recycling

Program

25 Municipalities in the Waukesha County Recycling

Program

Waukesha County Material Recycling

Facility

• 25 Participating Communities must:– Collect dual stream recyclables – 2012 Data:

• 89,300 households (pop. 270,000) • $11.4 million/yr. in private contracts ($3.6 mil. recycle)

– Deliver recyclables to county MRF – Report program costs to county/annual grants

• 25 Participating Communities must:– Collect dual stream recyclables – 2012 Data:

• 89,300 households (pop. 270,000) • $11.4 million/yr. in private contracts ($3.6 mil. recycle)

– Deliver recyclables to county MRF – Report program costs to county/annual grants

Background on County Program(continued)

Background on County Program(continued)

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

$0

$20

$40

$60

$80

$100

$120

$140

$160

$180

Year

Dol

lars

Per

Ton

Total Revenue Per Ton ShippedWaukesha County MRF 1991-2011

2007 MRF Study Used $78/ton

2012 MRF Study Used $100/ton

MRF Enterprise FundMRF Enterprise Fund• Self-sustaining – no tax levy or processing fees to

communities (up front County risk/loan - paid off)• Revenues (no fees to communities):

– Material sales (currently 50%)– State grants (approx. $1 million/yr.)– Operator processing fees (recent: up to $6.50/ton)

• Saves about $0.9 million per year in landfill fees (1/4 collection $)

• Available fund balance approx. $14 million – Good markets and competitive operating contracts– Community dividends of $10 million in the last 11 years

• Recent dividends cover about 1/3 of community collection $

• Self-sustaining – no tax levy or processing fees to communities (up front County risk/loan - paid off)

• Revenues (no fees to communities): – Material sales (currently 50%)– State grants (approx. $1 million/yr.)– Operator processing fees (recent: up to $6.50/ton)

• Saves about $0.9 million per year in landfill fees (1/4 collection $)

• Available fund balance approx. $14 million – Good markets and competitive operating contracts– Community dividends of $10 million in the last 11 years

• Recent dividends cover about 1/3 of community collection $

2007 MRF Study2007 MRF Study

• Can handle future dual stream program for the short term, however:

• Major issues need to be addressed:– Container sort line– Tipping floor– Bale storage

• All require space

• Can handle future dual stream program for the short term, however:

• Major issues need to be addressed:– Container sort line– Tipping floor– Bale storage

• All require space

Must expand MRF or build new in future

Plastic Containers Overwhelming Sort SystemPlastic Containers Overwhelming Sort System

Tipping Floor Space LimitedTipping Floor Space Limited

Bales Storage is InadequateBales Storage is Inadequate

Loading Dock

Existing MRF

Tip Floor

Entrance

Exit

Pra

irie

Ave

.

N

Scale

MRF – 2 Acre Site

MRF Expansion Options LimitedMRF Expansion Options Limited

• If 1 acre site to the north purchased, limited expansion is possible– Expand MRF for dual stream = $6.5 million +

property + business relocation costs– Expand MRF for single stream = $7 million +

property + business relocation costs

• If 1 acre site to the north purchased, limited expansion is possible– Expand MRF for dual stream = $6.5 million +

property + business relocation costs– Expand MRF for single stream = $7 million +

property + business relocation costs

Concept Drawing – North Expansion (single or dual stream)

Concept Drawing – North Expansion (single or dual stream)

New paper tipping (DS)

or single stream

processing

Sorting & bale storage

New container (DS) or single stream tipping

floor

300 ft.

13

0 f

t.2

90

ft.

Recyclables CollectionDual Stream vs. Single Stream

Recyclables CollectionDual Stream vs. Single Stream

Industry trend (cart)(automated/all recyclables mixed)

Existing program (blue bin)(manual/paper & containers separated)

Single Stream CollectionSingle Stream Collection

• Less workers comp.• Every other week

(more storage)• Faster/more efficient• Use same trucks• Higher recycling rates• Save money on

collection, but costs more/T to sort at MRF

• Less workers comp.• Every other week

(more storage)• Faster/more efficient• Use same trucks• Higher recycling rates• Save money on

collection, but costs more/T to sort at MRF

Trash Recycle (SS)

Yard waste

TrashRecycle (SS)

Collection TrendsCollection Trends

• Haulers are switching to SS to save $– Only one out of three private haulers locally still offers

dual stream collection (Veolia/ADS)– Trend is playing out nationwide (>50% SS MRFs)

• Lack of competition on community collection bids– Potential to save $ on collection & disposal costs with

single stream

• Haulers are switching to SS to save $– Only one out of three private haulers locally still offers

dual stream collection (Veolia/ADS)– Trend is playing out nationwide (>50% SS MRFs)

• Lack of competition on community collection bids– Potential to save $ on collection & disposal costs with

single stream

Scenarios for Future Projections:Scenarios for Future Projections:

• Tonnage (current vs. increased)• Single vs. Dual Stream• Market price for recyclables

• Tonnage (current vs. increased)• Single vs. Dual Stream• Market price for recyclables

Annual Tons Recycled (50,000 Tons)*Annual Tons Recycled (50,000 Tons)*

Waukesha Co. Milwaukee Wauwatosa0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

44%(22,000 T)

12%(6,000 T)

44%(22,000 T)

*Rounded from 2010 data (no other communities included with City of Milwaukee data)

Possible Regional MRF LocationsPossible Regional MRF Locations

Waukesha Co. MRF

Wauwatosa Site

Waukesha Co. MRF

Milw

au

kee

Co

un

ty

Milwaukee MRF

Wa

uke

sha

Co

un

ty

Wauwatosa site

18 miles

Key Findings & Recommendations2007 MRF Study

Key Findings & Recommendations2007 MRF Study

1. Switching to Single Stream is strongly recommended

• Could save partic. communities >$700,000/year in collection & disposal costs ($10.5 mil./15 yrs.)

2. Recycling tons will increase 25% with a switch to Single Stream (assumed)

• In-county data shows 45% increase/capita

1. Switching to Single Stream is strongly recommended

• Could save partic. communities >$700,000/year in collection & disposal costs ($10.5 mil./15 yrs.)

2. Recycling tons will increase 25% with a switch to Single Stream (assumed)

• In-county data shows 45% increase/capita

Key Study Findings & Recommendations (continued)

Key Study Findings & Recommendations (continued)

3. Doubling tonnage greatly improves the economics of Single Stream

• 10 times faster return on investment (2 shifts) Note: 5-year capital payback vs. 58 years (NET: $0.12 vs.$1.7 million/yr.)

• No room at current MRF site to double tonnage, even with the one-acre expansion

3. Doubling tonnage greatly improves the economics of Single Stream

• 10 times faster return on investment (2 shifts) Note: 5-year capital payback vs. 58 years (NET: $0.12 vs.$1.7 million/yr.)

• No room at current MRF site to double tonnage, even with the one-acre expansion

It’s all about the tons!

Recycling Program Similarities:Waukesha County & City of Milwaukee

Recycling Program Similarities:Waukesha County & City of Milwaukee

• Publicly-owned/private operated MRFs– Dual stream / Tonnage processed (22,000/yr.)– Aging facilities facing costly updates

• Pressures to improve program efficiencies and to switch to Single Stream:– Reduce collection & landfill disposal costs+ Increase recycling rate– Concerns about future price stability

• 15-year history of coordinating education efforts

• Publicly-owned/private operated MRFs– Dual stream / Tonnage processed (22,000/yr.)– Aging facilities facing costly updates

• Pressures to improve program efficiencies and to switch to Single Stream:– Reduce collection & landfill disposal costs+ Increase recycling rate– Concerns about future price stability

• 15-year history of coordinating education efforts

Milwaukee Recycling Study 2009Milwaukee Recycling Study 2009

Recommended to switch to single stream:1. Convert existing Milwaukee MRF to transfer

station & haul recyclables to private MRF; or

2. Convert existing Milwaukee MRF to single stream and partner with Waukesha Co.

Note:– Ruled out Tosa MRF site due to high capital costs

for new building ($6 million)

Recommended to switch to single stream:1. Convert existing Milwaukee MRF to transfer

station & haul recyclables to private MRF; or

2. Convert existing Milwaukee MRF to single stream and partner with Waukesha Co.

Note:– Ruled out Tosa MRF site due to high capital costs

for new building ($6 million)

Milwaukee MRF LocationMilwaukee MRF Location

Milwaukee MRF Site (7.69 acres)Milwaukee MRF Site (7.69 acres)13

th Street

16th S

treet

Menomonee River

Mt. Vernon Ave.

Milwaukee MRFMilwaukee MRF

• Large enough for combined tonnage• Needs $3.15 million in upgrades to blg./grounds

Milwaukee MRF Tipping FloorMilwaukee MRF Tipping Floor

Milwaukee MRF – Processing AreaMilwaukee MRF – Processing Area

2010 Transportation Study(Waukesha County)

2010 Transportation Study(Waukesha County)

Three options for regional MRF:1. Direct haul all recyclables to Milwaukee

MRF by municipalities

2. Build new regional MRF in New Berlin

3. Convert Waukesha MRF to a transfer station and haul compacted trailers to Milw. MRF

Three options for regional MRF:1. Direct haul all recyclables to Milwaukee

MRF by municipalities

2. Build new regional MRF in New Berlin

3. Convert Waukesha MRF to a transfer station and haul compacted trailers to Milw. MRF

2010 Trans. Study Results2010 Trans. Study Results

• Not a huge cost difference between the three options (+/- $96,000 “system”/year)– Direct haul is most cost-effective, but it would cost

communities $183,000 more per year & traffic issues– New Berlin location requires $6 million more in capital

costs and Milwaukee will not support it

• Recommend to convert Waukesha MRF to a transfer station & haul to Milwaukee– Same hauling costs, flexible hours, control of product

stream, verify municipal tonnage

• Not a huge cost difference between the three options (+/- $96,000 “system”/year)– Direct haul is most cost-effective, but it would cost

communities $183,000 more per year & traffic issues– New Berlin location requires $6 million more in capital

costs and Milwaukee will not support it

• Recommend to convert Waukesha MRF to a transfer station & haul to Milwaukee– Same hauling costs, flexible hours, control of product

stream, verify municipal tonnage

2012 Regional MRF Study Scope(Milwaukee & Waukesha County)

2012 Regional MRF Study Scope(Milwaukee & Waukesha County)

• Update previous studies & cost estimates

• Prepare preliminary layout & business plan for a MRF partnership

• Update previous studies & cost estimates

• Prepare preliminary layout & business plan for a MRF partnership

MRF Design CapacityMRF Design Capacity

A. City of Milwaukee: 27,000 tons/year

B. Waukesha County: 27,000 tons/year

C. Third Party (Tosa): 6,000 tons/year

Total: 60,000 tons/year

2080 hrs./yr. = 29 tons/hour

Design for 30 tons/hour

A. City of Milwaukee: 27,000 tons/year

B. Waukesha County: 27,000 tons/year

C. Third Party (Tosa): 6,000 tons/year

Total: 60,000 tons/year

2080 hrs./yr. = 29 tons/hour

Design for 30 tons/hour

Operating CostsOperating Costs

• Processing O&M cost estimate: $30/ton- 30 tons per hour rate

- One train (processing line)

• MRF Transfer station O&M- $410,400/yr. incl. hauling $

- $19/ton

- Assume 20% direct haul

• Processing O&M cost estimate: $30/ton- 30 tons per hour rate

- One train (processing line)

• MRF Transfer station O&M- $410,400/yr. incl. hauling $

- $19/ton

- Assume 20% direct haul

Preliminary Regional MRF Layout

Tip Floor

Processing AreaBale

Storage

Capital CostsCapital Costs• $10 million in new equipment (shared)• $3.15 million upgrade Milw. MRF/grounds

– paving, roof, doors, fence, sand blasting/painting, etc.

• Transfer station/Waukesha County– $160,000 to convert/install compactor

• $10 million in new equipment (shared)• $3.15 million upgrade Milw. MRF/grounds

– paving, roof, doors, fence, sand blasting/painting, etc.

• Transfer station/Waukesha County– $160,000 to convert/install compactor

RevenuesRevenues

• Material sales: $100/ton– Assume 80% split with Milw.

• Third party sales (Tosa, etc.):– Assume $16/ton x 6,000 tons/year– Split with Milwaukee 50/50– Not included in business plan

• Assumed no state grants

• Material sales: $100/ton– Assume 80% split with Milw.

• Third party sales (Tosa, etc.):– Assume $16/ton x 6,000 tons/year– Split with Milwaukee 50/50– Not included in business plan

• Assumed no state grants

Saved $40/ton in landfill fees

Costs & Revenue SummaryRegional MRF

Costs & Revenue SummaryRegional MRF

(54,000 tons/year for Waukesha Co. & Milwaukee)Waukesha

CountyCity of

Milwaukee

Capital Costs (one time)

MRF Building/Grounds Improvements $0 -$3,150,000

MRF Equipment Capital Cost ($10 million) -$5,000,000 -$5,000,000

Transfer Station Capital Costs -$160,000 $0

Annual Operation & Maintenance Costs

MRF O&M Costs ($30/ton) -$810,000 -$810,000

Transfer Station O&M / Hauling Costs ($19/ton) $410,000 $0

Capital reserve – equipment replacement ($6/T) $162,000 $162,000

Annual Revenue

Recyclable sales – Milw. & Wauk. Co. ($80/ton) $2,160,000 $2,160,000

15-Year Fiscal Analysis(P.W. = Present Worth)

15-Year Fiscal Analysis(P.W. = Present Worth)

WaukeshaCounty

City of Milwaukee

P.W. Total Capital Costs (15 yrs. x 3.5% interest) -$6,720,000 -$10,614,000

P.W. Total Annual Costs (15 yrs.) -$20,736,000 -$14,580,000

P.W. Total Annual Revenue (15 yrs.) $32,400,000 $32,400,000

NET Present Worth $4,944,000 $7,206,000

• No building value/costs/rental included for use of Milwaukee MRF building • Assumed same tonnage/no state grants/no 3rd party tonnage• Reminder: 2012 recyclable collection costs = $3,641,000

2012 Study Recommendations2012 Study Recommendations

• City of Milwaukee and Waukesha County should develop an agreement for a Regional Single Stream MRF

• Backup plan: explore private MRF option

• City of Milwaukee and Waukesha County should develop an agreement for a Regional Single Stream MRF

• Backup plan: explore private MRF option

Why Work with City of Milwaukee?(Regional Single Stream MRF)

Why Work with City of Milwaukee?(Regional Single Stream MRF)

• Both MRFs outdated/need switch to SS • We need each others tonnage to:

– Lower costs/ton - capital and O & M – Better return on investments/reduced risk– Stabilize prices long-term (regionally)

• Good example of intergovern. cooperation• Both MRFs already publicly-owned and

privately operated - No threat to private sector

• Both MRFs outdated/need switch to SS • We need each others tonnage to:

– Lower costs/ton - capital and O & M – Better return on investments/reduced risk– Stabilize prices long-term (regionally)

• Good example of intergovern. cooperation• Both MRFs already publicly-owned and

privately operated - No threat to private sector

Steps to Make it HappenSteps to Make it Happen

• Negotiate intergovernmental agreement– Finalize joint business plan– Research design/build/operate options

• Community outreach – MRF plans– Single stream collection contracts

• Current schedule:– RFP process in 2013– Construction late 2013 - early 2014– Goal: operational by July 2014

• Negotiate intergovernmental agreement– Finalize joint business plan– Research design/build/operate options

• Community outreach – MRF plans– Single stream collection contracts

• Current schedule:– RFP process in 2013– Construction late 2013 - early 2014– Goal: operational by July 2014