Wert-Berater, Inc. is an independent bulk storage terminal feasibility study consultant preparing lender-, investor-, and agency-facing studies for liquid and dry-bulk terminals, tank farms, transloading facilities, and storage expansions serving fuel, chemical, agricultural, and industrial products. Terminal credits are lease-and-throughput credits: revenue comes from committed tank capacity and the fees earned moving product through it, so the analysis begins with the executed storage agreements and works outward to the modal connections that make the tankage worth leasing at all.
Fiduciary duty runs to the lender and the agency, never the borrower. Fixed fee quoted within one business day; standard delivery in ten to fifteen business days from a complete data room. 4,000+ engagements since 1998 covering $41.2 billion in evaluated project value. So far in 2026: 41 engagements and $1.54 billion evaluated — 17 SBA, 11 USDA.
Terminal feasibility is contracted-capacity analysis: tank or silo capacity against regional storage demand, the storage and throughput agreements behind the revenue model, rail, marine, and truck connectivity that defines the terminal's catchment, and the regulatory and containment capital the asset class requires. Liquid, dry-bulk, chemical, and grain terminals each carry their own contract structures and customer credit profiles, which the study evaluates individually.
The analysis combines regional storage-market surveys, contract and counterparty review, logistics-access assessment, and capital budgets benchmarked against comparable terminal construction. Coverage is tested on contracted revenue with renewal risk addressed explicitly.
Every Wert-Berater financial model is fully linked with no hardcoded values, so any reviewer can stress any input. Deliverables comprise a complete narrative report and the linked Excel model, with ten-year pro forma, sensitivity analysis at ±5, 10, and 15 percent, interest-rate stress from +0.5 to +3.0 percent, and ratio analysis benchmarked against RMA and IBISWorld data.
SBA engagements are prepared to SOP 50 10 8, including its debt-service-coverage minimums of 1.15x operating and 1.00x global. USDA engagements follow RD Staff Instruction 5001 across the Business & Industry, Community Facilities, REAP, and Value-Added Producer Grant programs. Conventional engagements are built to the lender's stated coverage standard, typically 1.20x. Oil, gas, and heavy-industrial projects reach us through conventional and institutional lending most commonly, with USDA B&I applicable to qualifying rural energy and processing assets and SBA programs serving owner-operator support businesses; each study is prepared to the corresponding compliance standard, with environmental and regulatory conditions precedent stated plainly.
Wert-Berater has not published a completed bulk liquid or dry-bulk terminal engagement as a public case study, and none is claimed here. The firm's published fuel-sector work is retail and convenience rather than terminal — for example a convenience store and fuel study in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida — and that is not offered as terminal experience. What transfers directly is the contract-revenue discipline the firm applies wherever cash flow depends on executed agreements rather than walk-in demand: committed capacity read from the storage agreement itself, lease expiry mapped against the amortization schedule, counterparty credit assessed on its own merits, and ancillary fee income admitted to the base case only where a contract or an operating history supports it. Independence is non-negotiable, and determinations are not revised under pressure.
A bulk storage terminal feasibility study consultant establishes how much of the tankage is committed under contract, at what rate and for how long, what throughput and ancillary fees that committed capacity generates, and whether the resulting cash flow services the debt once leases begin to roll. The work starts with the executed storage and throughput agreements rather than a capacity summary, because a terminal with full tanks on short leases is a materially different credit from one with the same tanks committed on long term.
The engagement is economic and financial. Wert-Berater does not perform tank, structural, mechanical, or civil engineering, does not conduct tank integrity inspections or issue API-standard inspection opinions, and does not prepare environmental site assessments. Engineering assessments, inspection reports, and environmental studies prepared by qualified firms are treated as inputs whose findings are carried into the capital and operating plan and tested for consistency with the financing structure.
A bulk storage & terminals feasibility study is not a generic market report. It is a contract-by-contract, tank-by-tank examination of whether projected revenue, at realistic throughput rates and storage fees, covers debt service under the lender's required coverage standard. The scope is built around the specific commodity handled—crude, refined products, liquefied gases, agricultural commodities, dry bulk, or industrial chemicals—because each carries distinct contract structures, customer credit profiles, and regulatory capital requirements.
Capacity is analyzed tank by tank rather than as a single shell-capacity total, because tanks differ in what they can hold and therefore in what they can earn. The study records capacity, product service and compatibility, construction type and any heating, mixing, coating, or vapour-control capability, and current lease status. Committed capacity, available capacity, and capacity unusable in its present condition are reported separately, since out-of-service tankage requiring capital before it can be leased is frequently counted as revenue-generating in a sponsor projection.
Rates are examined as contracted. Storage leases are scheduled by customer, capacity committed, rate per barrel or ton of capacity per month, term and expiry, escalation mechanism, and renewal or termination rights. Minimum throughput commitments and any deficiency provisions are modeled as written. The weighted average remaining lease term is compared directly against the loan amortization, and where leases expire first the study reports coverage on stated renewal and re-let assumptions rather than assuming full renewal at current rates.
Throughput fees depend on how frequently inventory cycles, and assumed turn rates are the most commonly overstated figure in a terminal pro forma. The study tests the projected turn rate against the physical capability of the connected infrastructure — truck rack loading positions and hours, rail spotting and unloading capacity, marine berth availability and vessel size limits, and pipeline receipt and delivery rates — and models throughput at the binding constraint rather than at the sponsor's assumption.
Ancillary revenue is examined for durability. Additive injection, blending, heating, mixing, transloading, drumming and packaging, laboratory services, and demurrage each carry different reliability, and each is admitted to the base case only where a contract or a demonstrated operating history supports it. Where ancillary services represent a material share of projected margin, that concentration is stated, since these revenues typically disappear faster than storage lease income when a customer leaves.
A terminal earns because of where it sits and what it connects to. The study documents the modal access the facility actually has — marine berth and draft, rail siding capacity and serving carriers, truck rack throughput, and pipeline connections and their direction of flow — and assesses which product movements those connections make economic. Multi-modal capability commands better rates because it gives customers optionality, and the study states plainly which modes are in service today versus which require capital to activate.
Competitive position is assessed against the other terminals serving the same product and the same catchment. The study identifies competing capacity in the market, any announced expansions where publicly known, and whether the subject facility holds a durable advantage in location, connectivity, or product capability. Where the terminal serves a concentrated set of customers or a single product market, that dependency is reported, because a terminal purpose-built for one customer has limited alternative use if that customer leaves.
Storage assets carry regulatory obligations and a maintenance capital burden that a purchase-price-based pro forma routinely understates. The study identifies the operating, air, water, and spill-prevention obligations applicable to the facility and its products, along with any required financial assurance, and quantifies the ongoing compliance cost in the operating model rather than as a contingency percentage.
Inspection and integrity cycles are treated as scheduled capital, not as an unlikely event. Where inspection reports prepared by qualified parties identify tanks requiring repair, recoating, floor replacement, or secondary containment work before return to service, that capital is placed in the year it must be spent and its effect on coverage is shown. Existing contamination or remediation obligations identified in environmental assessments are carried at the cost those assessments state, and where a required assessment has not been performed, the study reports the absence rather than assuming no liability.
Demand analysis for a storage terminal begins with the commodity market the terminal is designed to serve, not with a top-down industry growth rate. The analyst identifies the regional supply-and-demand balance for the specific product—refined fuels, grain, fertilizer, chemicals, or another bulk material—and then locates the terminal within that balance as either a relief valve for constrained capacity or a competitive entrant into an already-served market.
Primary data sources that genuinely apply to this asset class include: state environmental agency tank-registration databases, which enumerate permitted storage capacity by facility and product type; Surface Transportation Board waybill data and Class I railroad public filings, which reveal commodity flows by origin-destination pair; U.S. Army Corps of Engineers waterway traffic statistics for marine terminals; USDA Agricultural Marketing Service movement reports for grain and fertilizer facilities; and EIA petroleum supply data for liquid-fuel terminals. Trade association throughput surveys, port authority cargo statistics, and pipeline tariff filings on FERC’s electronic library supplement the public record.
Competitive supply is counted by identifying every permitted, operating, and under-construction terminal within the defined catchment area, then assessing each competitor’s available uncommitted capacity, contract expiration profile, and logistics advantages or disadvantages relative to the subject site. The study does not rely on a single data source; cross-referencing public filings against licensing registries and operator disclosures is the control against double-counting or omission.
Four inputs account for the majority of variance in a terminal’s projected debt-service-coverage ratio. Each is tested explicitly in the sensitivity analysis rather than held at a single point estimate, because lenders and reviewing agencies need to see where coverage breaks, not just where it holds at the base case.
Inputs resolve into a fully linked model with no hardcoded values, producing a ten-year pro forma, annual and period debt-service coverage, and the coverage minimum applicable to the financing program. Contracted storage income, throughput fees, ancillary revenue, and re-let assumptions are reported as separate layers, so a credit officer can see immediately how much coverage rests on capacity legally committed today versus capacity the sponsor expects to lease.
Sensitivity is run on committed capacity and utilization, storage lease rate at renewal, tank turns and throughput volume, loss of the largest customer, ancillary revenue attrition, integrity and compliance capital, and interest rate. The study identifies the occupancy and rate combination at which coverage reaches the lender's minimum, expressed as a percentage of current committed capacity. Tank inspection reports and environmental assessments prepared by qualified firms are used as inputs; this study does not replace engineering or environmental assessment.
Bulk storage and terminal projects present a specific underwriting profile that differs from most commercial real estate or operating-business loans. The asset is illiquid, commodity-specific, and heavily regulated; its value in a distressed scenario depends almost entirely on whether another operator can assume existing contracts or re-permit the site for a different use. Lenders therefore focus on contract quality before they focus on appraisal value.
Under SBA SOP 50 10 8, the study must demonstrate 1.15x operating coverage and 1.00x global coverage, with the global calculation incorporating all obligations of the borrowing entity and its principals. For terminal projects, the agency also requires that environmental conditions precedent be stated plainly—an incomplete SPCC plan or a pending air-permit modification is a material condition, not a footnote.
USDA Business & Industry lenders applying RD Staff Instruction 5001 to rural energy or agricultural-commodity terminals will examine whether the terminal serves a qualifying rural area and whether the off-taker base supports the long-term employment and community-benefit findings the program requires. Contract concentration—a single off-taker representing the majority of revenue—is a recurring concern under both programs.
Conventional lenders typically require 1.20x coverage on a stressed basis and will scrutinize the remaining weighted-average contract term, the credit rating or financial strength of each counterparty, and the environmental indemnification structure. The feasibility study addresses each of these points directly so the credit memo can reference the analysis without restating it.
Every Wert-Berater engagement begins with a fixed, quoted fee returned within one business day of the initial inquiry. The fee does not change based on the outcome of the study, and no portion of it is contingent on a finding of feasibility or on loan approval. That structure is the operational expression of the firm’s fiduciary duty to the lender and reviewing agency rather than to the borrower.
Standard delivery is ten to fifteen business days from the date a complete data room is received. For bulk storage and terminal projects, a complete data room includes executed or draft storage and throughput agreements, site control documentation, the capital budget with contractor bids or estimates, environmental permit status, logistics-access documentation (rail agreements, marine lease, truck-access study), and three years of operating history for existing terminals or comparable operator financials for greenfield projects. Rush delivery is available when the lending timeline requires it.
Once the engagement is open, the financial model is published to a secure client portal where it remains live. Because every cell is linked and no values are hardcoded, a reviewer—whether a credit officer, an SBA analyst, or a USDA state office reviewer—can change any input and watch every output recalculate in real time. This eliminates the version-control problems that arise when static PDF exhibits are the only deliverable. The bound narrative report, the ten-year pro forma, sensitivity tables, interest-rate stress output, and the explicit conditions statement are all delivered together at the same time.
Terminals serve producers, refiners, and distributors, and are commonly financed alongside them. These engagements cover the assets on either side of the tank gate.
Wert-Berater quotes a fixed fee within one business day of inquiry. The fee is stated before the engagement opens, does not change based on the outcome, and is never contingent on a finding of feasibility or on loan approval. Scope complexity—number of storage agreements, commodity types, and logistics modes—affects the quote; contact the firm directly for a same-day estimate.
Standard delivery is ten to fifteen business days from receipt of a complete data room. For terminal projects, the data room must include executed or draft storage and throughput agreements, the capital budget, environmental permit status, and logistics-access documentation. Rush delivery is available. Incomplete data rooms are the most common cause of delay; the firm identifies gaps at intake.
Three factors distinguish this asset class: revenue depends on contract quality and counterparty credit rather than market rents; the asset is illiquid and commodity-specific, so distressed-sale value is uncertain; and environmental and regulatory conditions—SPCC plans, air permits, FERC tariffs—can constitute material contingencies that affect both closing timing and long-term operating cost. A credible feasibility study addresses all three explicitly.
SBA programs most commonly reach terminal projects through owner-operator support businesses adjacent to fuel infrastructure. When an SBA engagement is appropriate, the study is prepared to SOP 50 10 8, including the 1.15x operating and 1.00x global debt-service-coverage minimums, with environmental and regulatory conditions precedent stated plainly in the conditions section. The lender determines program eligibility; the study is prepared to the applicable compliance standard.
The study reviews each storage and throughput agreement for rate per unit per period, minimum volume commitment, contract term and renewal options, termination provisions, and counterparty credit quality. Contracts expiring within the loan term are stress-tested for non-renewal and rate compression. Revenue from spot or uncommitted capacity is separated from contracted revenue and treated conservatively in the base-case model.
Yes. Environmental and regulatory conditions are stated as explicit conditions precedent rather than background narrative. The study identifies the status of SPCC plan approval, applicable air permits, secondary-containment compliance, and any FERC or state tariff filing requirements. Incomplete or pending regulatory approvals are flagged as material conditions that the lender should track to closing and, where relevant, to initial draw.
The consultant establishes committed tank capacity from the executed storage agreements, the rate and term of each, the throughput and ancillary fees that capacity generates, and the modal connections that make the tankage leasable. Integrity and compliance capital are then loaded before coverage is measured. Tank engineering and environmental assessment are separate disciplines used as inputs.
Tank by tank rather than as a single shell-capacity total, because tanks differ in product service, construction, and capability. Committed capacity, available capacity, and capacity unusable in its present condition are reported separately, since out-of-service tankage requiring capital before it can be leased is frequently counted as revenue-generating in a sponsor projection.
Projected turn rates are tested against the physical capability of the connected infrastructure: truck rack loading positions and hours, rail spotting and unloading capacity, marine berth availability and draft limits, and pipeline receipt and delivery rates. Throughput is then modeled at the binding constraint rather than at the sponsor's assumed turn rate.
The weighted average remaining lease term is compared directly against the amortization schedule. Where leases roll first, coverage is reported on stated renewal and re-let assumptions rather than assuming full renewal at current rates, and the year in which contracted income begins to fall away is identified as a structural finding for the lender.
Only where a contract or a demonstrated operating history supports it. Additive injection, blending, heating, transloading, drumming, laboratory services, and demurrage each carry different reliability. Where ancillary services represent a material share of projected margin, that concentration is stated, because these revenues typically disappear faster than storage income when a customer leaves.
No. Wert-Berater does not conduct tank integrity inspections, issue API-standard inspection opinions, or perform tank, structural, or civil engineering. Where inspection reports from qualified parties identify repair, recoating, floor replacement, or containment work, that capital is placed in the year it must be spent and its effect on coverage is shown.
Existing contamination or remediation obligations identified in environmental assessments are carried at the cost those assessments state, and ongoing compliance is quantified in the operating model rather than as a contingency percentage. Where a required environmental assessment has not been performed, the study reports the absence rather than assuming no liability exists.
Qualify a project. Tell us about the project and the program. We will tell you the truth about it — scope, timeline, and fee confirmed before work begins.
Schedule a Zoom Call →Legal disclosure. Wert-Berater, Inc. offices are mailing addresses only. Following the COVID-19 pandemic the firm has elected to work remotely; its office locations receive mail and are not staffed for visitors or in-person meetings. Headquarters mailing address: 1968 South Coast Hwy, Ste 2382, Laguna Beach, CA 92651.
Wert-Berater, Inc. is an independent provider of feasibility studies and other related services. The firm does not provide financing or equity investment advice, and does not arrange, broker, or place debt or equity capital of any kind.
All appraisal assignments are performed by Bruce E. Jones, MAI, ASA-GC, BCA, CMEA, a member of the Appraisal Institute since 2006, a staff member of Wert-Berater, Inc. and owner of Special Purpose Realty Valuation.