Prepared for lenders, CDCs, and federal agencies to SBA SOP 50 10 8, USDA 7 CFR Part 5001, and conventional underwriting standards. Fiduciary duty runs to the lender and the agency, never the borrower. 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.
Manufacturing feasibility joins market demand to production economics. The study establishes demand for the plant's output — contracted, identified, or market-derived — then tests the production model: capacity and utilization ramp, input cost structure, labor availability at the required skill level, and the capital budget against industry benchmarks. Chemical and specialty-products plants add regulatory and environmental permitting analysis, feedstock supply and pricing exposure, and the EHS capital that the category's compliance regime requires. Because USDA and SBA reviewers read manufacturing studies against job-creation and rural-impact criteria as well as repayment, the study documents employment, wage levels, and local economic effect to the standard the program requires.
Methodology combines industry production and pricing data, chemical industry pricing and capacity data, RSMeans location-adjusted facility budgets, BLS occupational wage data for the staffing model, and RMA and IBISWorld operating benchmarks. The financial model carries the utilization ramp, input-cost sensitivity, and program coverage tests across the firm's standard stress discipline, with every assumption sourced.
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. Manufacturing reaches us predominantly through USDA B&I — where rural plant economics and job creation align with program purpose — alongside SBA 504 for owner-occupied facilities and conventional lending; Value-Added Producer Grant studies are prepared to 7 CFR Part 5001 where agricultural producers integrate forward into processing.
The firm's manufacturing and processing record spans USDA B&I and SBA engagements nationwide, including cold-chain, food-system, and industrial projects; manufacturing studies are prepared with the same fully linked financial models and stress discipline as every Wert-Berater engagement. Independence is non-negotiable: determinations follow the evidence and are not revised under pressure, and studies are built to pass lender, agency, and third-party review without exception items.
Screening the industrial market before committing to a full engagement? Manufacturing Market Risk Intelligence is a report prepared by our analysts to a published structure: supply, demand and the operating conditions in one market, with coverage shown before the order is taken. It is a market risk view, not a feasibility determination on your project, and it does not replace the study described on this page.
A chemical or specialty products plant presents a layered scope that a single-page market study cannot satisfy. The engagement opens with a site and process review: feedstock sourcing geography, utility requirements (power load, process water, wastewater discharge), and the production technology selected or under evaluation. From that foundation the study builds outward to market demand, competitive supply, and the financial model that ties both to a specific capital structure.
Demand analysis for a chemical or specialty products plant is not a single-source exercise. The study distinguishes between contracted demand — offtake agreements or letters of intent already in hand — identified demand from named prospective buyers, and market-derived demand supported by independent data. Each category carries different underwriting weight, and the study is explicit about which portion of projected revenue falls into each bucket.
Supply-side analysis maps existing and announced production capacity for the relevant product or product family. Sources include EPA Toxic Release Inventory facility records, state environmental permit databases, trade association capacity surveys, and public filings from publicly traded producers. Announced capacity additions are drawn from trade press and regulatory pre-application filings, not assumed away. The competitive analysis tests whether the proposed plant can reach its target utilization rate against that supply backdrop.
Pricing evidence is assembled from industry pricing services, publicly available contract indices where they exist for the product category, and RMA and IBISWorld gross-margin benchmarks for the NAICS code. Where a specialty product commands a premium over commodity alternatives, the study documents the technical or regulatory basis for that premium rather than accepting the sponsor’s assertion. End-market demand drivers — downstream industry output, substitution trends, and import competition — are reviewed using federal trade and production data to establish whether the market is growing, stable, or contracting.
A small number of inputs account for most of the variance in a chemical plant’s projected debt-service coverage. The study identifies those inputs explicitly, sources each one, and tests each across the firm’s standard stress range so a reviewer can see exactly where coverage breaks.
Every assumption is sourced in the narrative. No hardcoded values appear in the Excel model.
SBA reviewers applying SOP 50 10 8 to a chemical manufacturing credit are focused on repayment from operations, not collateral liquidation. The study must demonstrate 1.15x operating coverage and 1.00x global coverage under the base case and show that coverage does not collapse under the standard stress scenarios. For a chemical plant, reviewers pay particular attention to whether the utilization ramp is realistic, whether feedstock supply is secured or speculative, and whether EHS capital has been fully budgeted — an underestimated compliance cost line is a common basis for a study being returned.
USDA Business & Industry reviewers add a rural-impact lens. Job creation, wage levels relative to the local median, and the plant’s effect on the agricultural or rural supply chain are documented to the standard RD Staff Instruction 5001 requires. Value-Added Producer Grant engagements require additional documentation of the agricultural commodity linkage and the producer-ownership structure. REAP engagements involving chemical processes that use agricultural waste or biomass feedstocks require the energy production or efficiency calculation alongside the standard financial model.
Conventional lenders typically require 1.20x coverage and place greater weight on management experience in chemical operations, environmental liability exposure, and the quality of offtake arrangements. The study addresses each of these directly: operator credentials are documented, known environmental conditions are noted, and offtake agreements are characterized by term and counterparty.
The fee is fixed and quoted in writing within one business day of receiving a project summary. It does not change based on the finding, and no portion is contingent on a favorable conclusion. Wert-Berater’s fiduciary duty runs to the lender and the reviewing agency; the borrower’s interest in a particular outcome does not influence the determination.
Standard delivery is 10 to 15 business days from a complete data room. For chemical and specialty products projects, a complete data room includes the process description or engineering summary, the capital budget with EHS line items identified, feedstock supply documentation, any offtake agreements or letters of intent, the site lease or ownership evidence, and the permit status for each required approval. Incomplete submissions extend the timeline; the engagement letter specifies what is required.
Rush delivery is available and quoted at the time of engagement. The fixed fee covers the bound narrative report, the ten-year pro forma, sensitivity analysis at plus and minus 5, 10, and 15 percent, interest-rate stress from plus 0.5 to plus 3.0 percent, ratio analysis benchmarked against RMA and IBISWorld data, and the explicit conditions statement.
On completion, the fully linked Excel model is published to a secure client portal where it remains live. A reviewer can change any input — feedstock price, utilization rate, interest rate — and the model recalculates immediately. No hardcoded values limit what can be tested. The portal is available to the lender and agency throughout the credit review period.
The fee is fixed, quoted in writing within one business day of receiving a project summary, and does not change based on the finding. Because chemical and specialty products projects vary in process complexity, permit burden, and data availability, the quote is project-specific. No portion of the fee is contingent on a favorable conclusion.
Standard delivery is 10 to 15 business days from a complete data room. For chemical plants, the data room must include the process description, capital budget with EHS line items, feedstock supply documentation, any offtake agreements, site control evidence, and permit status. Rush delivery is available and quoted at engagement. Incomplete submissions extend the timeline.
Three factors distinguish this project type: feedstock cost exposure that can move independently of output pricing, EHS and regulatory compliance capital that is easy to underestimate in early-stage budgets, and utilization ramps that depend on commissioning performance and market penetration simultaneously. A credible study addresses all three explicitly, with sourced assumptions and stress tests that show where coverage breaks.
The two programs have different coverage thresholds and documentation requirements. SBA requires 1.15x operating and 1.00x global coverage; USDA B&I adds rural-impact and job-creation documentation. Where a project is being evaluated under both programs, the study is structured to satisfy the more demanding requirements of each, with program-specific sections clearly identified for the respective reviewer.
Sources include EPA facility permit databases, state environmental permit registries, trade association capacity surveys, public filings from producers, federal trade and production statistics, industry pricing indices where available for the product category, and RMA and IBISWorld benchmarks for the relevant NAICS code. Sponsor-provided projections are tested against independent evidence; assertions of pricing premium are documented, not accepted at face value.
No. A feasibility study is an independent analytical determination of whether projected cash flows support debt service under defined assumptions. Loan approval is the lender’s and agency’s decision, based on the full credit file. The study is built to withstand lender, agency, and third-party review, but it does not predetermine or guarantee any credit outcome.
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.