Federal Facilities Business and Property Value Research Update February 2019 Summary This research effort is an update and expansion of the research efforts conducted in 2016 to provide current, reliable business-related information for a subset of federal facility Superfund sites in reuse and continued use. EPA's Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Office (FFRRO) updated information for the 11 sites researched in 2016 and added five new sites to the research effort. It identified a total of 1,198 businesses that generate $8.2 billion in annual sales and provide 62,503 jobs and $4.4 billion in annual employment income. The properties identified are worth over $4 billion and generate nearly $24 million in total annual property tax. Table 1. Summary of Economic Totals in 2016 and 2018 Year Federal Facility Sites in Reuse with Economic Data Number of Businesses Annual Sales Jobs Annual Employment Income Total Property Value Total Annual Property Tax 2016 11 628 $5.5 billion 40,000 $3 billion $2 billion $9.5 million 2018 16 1,198 $8.2 billion 62,503 $4.4 billion $4.3 billion $24 million Approach EPA is working to expand the economic data collected and maintained for federal facility Superfund sites in reuse and continued use. The 11 sites originally studied in 2016 and updated in 2018 are: • Brunswick Naval Air Station • Fort Devens (Army) • Hanscom Field/Hanscom Air Force Base • Homestead Air Force Base • Loring Air Force Base • Naval Industrial Reserve Ordnance Plant (NIROP) • Oak Ridge Reservation (USDOE) • Otis Air National Guard Base/Camp Edwards • Pease Air Force Base • Savannah River Site (USDOE) • USN Air Station Cecil Field The four additional sites researched in this 2018 update are: • Fort Ord (Army) • McClellan Air Force Base (Ground Water Contamination) • Ogden Defense Depot (DLA) Federal Facilities Business and Property Value Research: 2018 Project Results Summary 1 ------- • USN Phila Naval Shipyard In addition, information is included for the Davisville Naval Construction Battalion Center site. This information was collected as part of a local beneficial effects case study in progress for EPA Region 1. Project research relied on the methods and processes developed under similar efforts conducted for EPA's Superfund Redevelopment Initiative (SRI). The update includes these primary components (see Appendix B for details): • Site selection: Determination of the suitability of additional sites for the project. Identification of sites in reuse and continued use that have on-site activities that support businesses, employ people or generate sales revenues. • Study area selection: Review of decision documents and consultation with EPA staff to identify the appropriate study area for each site. • Business and jobs research: Use of Internet and database sources to identify businesses operating within site boundaries and gathering available economic information for each business. Types of economic data gathered for site businesses included the number of jobs, annual sales revenue and annual employment income. These business-level data were then compiled to create site-level estimates of the beneficial economic effects of site reuse and continued use. Economic research followed the guidance established for the National SRI Economic Information Update. • Property value research: Identification of parcels within study area boundaries for each site and information gathering for property values and associated property taxes for each parcel using local government data sources. Research followed guidance in the Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) For Collection of Property Value and Tax Revenue Information for Use in Superfund Redevelopment Products. • Quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC): Economic and property research work underwent thorough QA/QC review to confirm accuracy and compliance with established research methodologies. Results This project updated information for the 11 sites researched in 2016 and added five new sites to the research effort. It identified a total of 1,198 businesses that generate $8.2 billion in annual sales and provide 62,503 jobs and $4.4 billion in annual employment income. The properties identified are worth over $4 billion that generate nearly $24 million in total annual property tax. The following tables present the estimates of economic benefits of reuse at the federal facility sites (see Appendix B for 2016-2018 comparison). Federal Facilities Business and Property Value Research: 2018 Project Results Summary 2 ------- Table 2. Annual Sales, Employment and Employment Income (2018) Number of Businesses Annual Site Annual Sales Jobs Employment Income Brunswick Naval Air Station 105 $682,587,470 1,130 $66,873,456 Davisville Naval Construction Battalion Center 72 $253,969,334 1,487 $63,744,876 Fort Devens (Army) 132 $1,614,246,924 4,394 $341,577,756 Fort Ord (Army) 132 $207,165,150 3,093 $170,549,912 Hanscom Field/Hanscom Air Force Base 2 - - - Homestead Air Force Base 21 $44,954,862 1,678 $120,879,772 Loring Air Force Base 36 $11,297,000 822 $29,166,280 McClellan Air Force Base (Ground Water Contamination) 160 $676,896,579 4,440 $308,247,628 Naval Industrial Reserve Ordnance Plant (NIROP) 7 $123,193,889 763 $58,265,116 Oak Ridge Reservation (USDOE) 78 $401,113,038 11,127 $938,820,376 Ogden Defense Depot (DLA) 106 $568,549,002 7,623 $404,730,872 Otis Air National Guard Base/Camp Edwards 12 $4,049,000 787 $65,934,856 Pease Air Force Base 269 $2,320,545,739 7,973 $637,323,284 Savannah River Site (USDOE) 15 $574,050,688 9,974 $728,437,840 USN Air Station Cecil Field 39 $780,495,140 3,941 $204,711,728 USN Phila Naval Shipyard 12 $783,000 3,271 $294,808,436 Totals: 1,198 $8.2 billion 62,503 $4,434,072,188 Note: A "-"indicates that there was no available data. Table 3. Property Values and Property Taxes (2018)1 Site Name Total Value Total Annual Tax Brunswick Naval Air Station $223,747,100 $1,689,883 Davisville Naval Construction Battalion Center $187,395,700 $822,931 Fort Devens (Army) $97,780,400 $489,403 Fort Ord (Army) $1,273,197,979 - Hanscom Field/Hanscom Air Force Base $90,764,800 $0 Homestead Air Force Base $246,686,384 $556,747 Loring Air Force Base $6,010,850 $68,593 McClellan Air Force Base (Ground Water Contamination) $351,952,084 $6,329,708 Naval Industrial Reserve Ordnance Plant (NIROP) $61,794,800 $944,108 Ogden Defense Depot (DLA) $173,494,834 $951,557 Otis Air National Guard Base/Camp Edwards $558,461,710 $0 Pease Air Force Base $507,105,864 $8,032,557 USN Air Station Cecil Field $510,814,436 $3,938,986 USN Phila Naval Yard $25,083,500 $0 Totals: $4,314,290,441 $23,824,474 Note: A "-"indicates that there was no available tax data whereas a value of$0 reflects a reported value. 1 No data available for Oak Ridge Reservation (USDOE) or the Savannah River Site (USDOE). Federal Facilities Business and Property Value Research: 2018 Project Results Summary 3 ------- Considerations for Future Research Several factors related to researching economic and property data for federal facility Superfund sites are important to consider if EPA decides to pursue research for additional sites. These factors are study area selection, level of effort and characteristics of federal facilities. Each is described in detail below. Study Area Selection Although EPA had GIS files for site boundaries that aided in the selection of appropriate study areas, it was necessary to consult site decision documents to confirm these areas were appropriate and accurate. In several cases, an additional level of effort was required to confirm differences in GIS files and site documents. Due to the scale and complexity of the federal facility sites, this factor is critical in ensuring research accuracy. Level of Effort Because federal facility sites are often larger, economic research for them can take more time and effort than for non-federal facility sites. This research is critical to accurately identify site businesses and calculate property values and tax revenues. Factors that necessitate this additional effort include: • Collecting data for sites located in two or more counties. This requires collection of property value data from multiple sources and calculation of wage data based on rates in multiple counties. • Identifying businesses and collecting business and economics data for businesses located on active federal facilities, which are often classified information. For example, the "streetview" tool is often used on a Google map to identify and research site businesses. This tool is often not available when a property is part of a secured military/federal installation. Similarly, parcel and property value were unavailable for some sites. • Exercising caution to ensure the results do not unintentionally double-count economic data for large military bases and businesses that often operate at federal facilities. Based on results from the 2016 effort and the 2018 project findings, it is reasonable to expect that early phases of such research will often take a significant amount of time and effort when researching federal facilities for the first time. Additional effort would be required each year to identify additional new site businesses and to perform additional phases of QA/QC review. Subsequent QA/QC reviews would likely require additional effort to compare economic data totals from year to year to identify data trends over time. The businesses and properties associated with federal facility Superfund sites are generally different in nature from the Superfund sites researched previously that are not federal facilities. Businesses at federal facilities can employ thousands of people. However, businesses owned and operated by federal government agencies often do not have, or report, annual sales data. Thus, the total annual sales values for such sites may be lower than total income values; this was the case at six of the 15 sites researched. These sites include Homestead Air Force Base, Loring Air Force Base, Oak Ridge Reservation (USDOE), Otis Air National Guard Base/Camp Edwards, Savannah River Site (USDOE) and USN Phila Naval Shipyard. In addition, property at federal facilities is often owned by local, state or federal government agencies. Property values, therefore, are often assessed as $0 by local municipalities or are unavailable. Federal Facilities Business and Property Value Research: 2018 Project Results Summary 4 ------- Government-owned parcels are also exempt from local property tax, so property tax revenues associated with these sites are often low. Next Steps Based on these findings, recommended next steps include identifying additional federal facility sites for business and property value data in 2019. The total number of sites can be expanded each year, as resources allow. In addition, updating the 2018 data collected as part of this effort on an annual basis is recommended, beginning in spring/summer 2019 and concluding by October 2019. This timing would allow coordination with the National Economic Update completed by SRI on non-federal facility sites. In addition, the sites with federal facility data could be used to update the economic section of site profile pages in SEMS. Finally, conducting site visits and case studies at complex sites can provide an opportunity for more in-depth research and more complete collection of economic data (see Appendix C). Federal Facilities Business and Property Value Research: 2018 Project Results Summary 5 ------- Appendix A: Methodology The primary economic information collected includes the names of businesses operating at sites, the number of people employed at site businesses, wage and income data, and annual business sales. In addition, where available, FFRRO collected property value and property tax revenue information. Business Research After selection of the study area, this work generally includes the following major steps: • Business and jobs research: use of Internet and database sources to identify businesses operating within site boundaries and gathering of available economic information for each business. Types of economic data gathered for site businesses include the number of jobs, annual sales revenue and annual employment income. These business-level data are then compiled to create site-level estimates of the beneficial economic effects of site reuse and continued use. • QA/QC: economic research undergoes thorough QA/QC review to confirm accuracy and compliance with established research methodologies. The following pieces of economic data and information are collected for each site business (when available) during the update process: • DUNS Number • DUNS Data Year • Number of Employees and Source ID • Annual Income2 • AWE and Source ID • Annual Sales and Source ID • Business Name • Business Description • NAICS • County • Address Jobs and Annual Sales Information: The sources used to obtain jobs and annual sales information are listed below, in the order the sources are used. • Dun & Bradstreet (D&B)/Hoovers: This company collects and publishes information, such as number of employees, industry codes, and annual sales, on over 85 million businesses worldwide; 23 million of them are in the United States. The Hoovers database reports actual numbers of employees and does not provide information on full-time equivalents or whether 2 Annual income values for individual businesses are not collected. EPA calculates estimated annual income values for each business, using the business-specific number of employees and industry-specific wage data, provided by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. A-l ------- employees are part time or full time (examples of Hoovers business listing pages can be found in Appendix B). Data and information are accessible through a database subscription. This database is the primary source of economic data collected during data collection. o Sales revenue values can be presented by Hoovers in different ways - as an actual annual sales figure reported by the business, or as an estimated annual sales figure, o If Hoovers provides a total employee number and total annual sales value for all business locations (as opposed to the site-specific branch only), and an employee number for the site-specific business location, a "sales per employee" method can be employed to estimate annual sales at the site-specific branch of a business. This method involves dividing the company-wide sales value provided by Hoovers by the number of employees that work at all branches/locations of the business. That value equals an estimated business sales value per employee. That value can then be multiplied by the number of employees at the on-site business location to calculate an estimated annual sales value for the site-specific business location. This method can be used to calculate estimated annual sales values for both on-site business branches and on-site company headquarters. • ReferenceUSA: This Internet-based reference service/information database is provided by ReferenceGroup, a division of InfogroupTM. ReferenceGroup is a company that collects and publishes information such as business names, complete business addresses, key executive names, phone numbers, number of employees, industry codes and annual sales on over 44 million U.S. businesses. The company obtains data by directly contacting businesses and local, state and federal governmental agencies, accessing publicly available business publications and reports, business journals and yellow-page directories, and by businesses directly reporting information. The ReferenceUSA database reports actual numbers of employees and does not provide information on full-time equivalents or whether employees are part time or full time. Data and information are accessible through a database subscription. • Manta.com: This web-based directory of small business is accessible to the public. Manta collects and publishes information such as number of employees, industry codes, year established, annual revenue estimates and company contact information. The Manta website reports actual numbers of employees and does not provide information on full-time equivalents or whether employees are part time or full time. Manta typically provides an estimated range of annual sales figures for a given business. The lowest value in the range will be used to present conservative values. Due to the less-specific nature of the data sometimes presented by Manta (ranges of values instead of specific reported values), Manta.com is used as a tertiary data source if data are not available in D&B/Hoovers or ReferenceUSA. • Publication data collection: Accessing a variety of documents and reports that are published online, with a preference for publications rather than individual websites. Examples of these publications include annual reports from on-site businesses and reports from local development companies and organizations that analyze projects. In addition, EPA publications such as Five- Year Reviews may provide information and data. A-2 ------- Wage and Income Information: • Wage data are acquired from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (http://www.bls.gov/cew) and are used to calculate annual income based on the businesses operating at Superfund sites. BLS typically finalizes the annual data in September of each year. o The NAICS code from the D&B/Hoovers or ReferenceUSA databases, or Manta.com, for each business is matched to the greatest number of digits possible for the city or county BLS data. The greater the number of digits that match the NAICS code, the more specific the industry classification and the more accurate the data. When city or county data are not available, state data are used, again to the maximum number of NAICS digits available. o BLS wage data are provided in the form of average weekly earnings and take into consideration the average number of hours per week worked by employees in the industry. BLS average weekly earnings account for whether the industry usually employs people part time or full time. o The annual income from on-site jobs is calculated by multiplying the number of jobs by the average weekly wage obtained from the BLS for the primary NAICS code at the business and then multiplying by 52 weeks per year as follows: Total Income [$/year] = Number of Jobs * Average Weekly Wage [$/week] * 52 [weeks/year] Business Research QA/QC: Several rounds of QA/QC were completed to verify that all data collected are for businesses located within site boundaries, and to confirm that data accurately reflect source information. All sites researched were reviewed. At least 15 percent of businesses were randomly selected using a random number generator and then checked by recreating research steps to ensure each site was correctly researched and correct data were obtained. The reviewer completed the following tasks as part of Round 1 of the QA/QC process: • Checked to make sure that all necessary data source information was recorded. • Checked to make sure that copies of all applicable database pages and data information sources accessed were saved and maintained. Examples of database pages and data information sources include any non-D&B/Hoovers information source and the following types of D&B/Hoovers business pages: businesses with 500 and more employees, businesses with $1 billion or more in estimated annual sales, headquarters and branch businesses where the sales per employee method is used, and any businesses marked as closed or flagged as having limited marketability in D&B/Hoovers. • Verified that copies of site boundary maps used to perform economic research were saved. • Verified that identified site businesses are located within site boundaries. Site boundary images are compared to Google map images of the site to facilitate identification of businesses located within the site boundary. • Performed a D&B/Hoovers zip code search of site businesses to make sure that all on-site businesses identified using the Hoovers zip code search method were included. A-3 ------- • Used a cited source (e.g., D&B/Hoovers, BLS, Manta.com, ReferenceUSA) to check and verify the accuracy of all economic data and information. Specifically, numeric data were reviewed to make sure numbers were transposed or otherwise entered incorrectly. Qualitative information was reviewed to make sure that it was accurately recorded. • Made sure that economic data were not included for businesses marked as closed or flagged in D&B/Hoovers as having limited marketability. • Verified the accuracy of sales per employee calculations. • Verified that data-entry fields for employee numbers and annual sales were left empty if no value was reported. • Verified that data-entry fields for employee numbers and annual sales included the value of "0" if the information source reported a value of "0." • Verified that all attempts were made to capture annual sales values. For example, if an annual sales value was not included for a site business, determining if it was possible to perform a sales per employee calculation for the branch location. If Round 1 of the QA/QC review process identified substantial inaccuracies, a second round of QA/QC was performed for an additional 10 percent of businesses. The triggers for a second round of QA/QC review include: • Discovering systematic errors in following guidance that need to be corrected throughout work performed for a site. • Discovering data-entry mistakes for 10 percent or more of business entries reviewed. • Finding questionable results regarding selection of correct business information at more than 10 percent of the businesses checked. Following completion of the site-specific QA/QC process, a large-scale review of all economic data was completed. To facilitate this review, all economic data was compiled in an Excel spreadsheet. This review included a comparison of data between 2016 and 2018 for any unusual or unexpected changes. Property Value and Property Tax Research After selection of the study area, this work generally includes the following major steps: • Property value and property tax research: identification of parcels within study area boundaries for each site and information gathering for property values and associated property taxes for each parcel using local government data sources. In some cases, property taxes must be calculated and estimated based on available tax rates. • For sites where manual research of property and tax values is impractical, either due to the number of parcels or the ability to view parcel boundaries, property and tax values are collected from tabular data sets offered by the local government. For sites with a small number of parcels, property and tax values are researched using county and city websites, such as the county assessor's or the tax collector's office websites. In some cases, these data sources will provide property value data, but will not include tax data. Tax data are then researched using the local A-4 ------- government website. If the tax bills are not available to the public, calculations are made using the property value and the current property tax rates for the city or county. Property Value and Property Tax QA/QC QA/QC: property value and property tax revenue research undergo thorough QA/QC review to confirm accuracy and compliance with established research methodologies: • QA/QC Review Step #1 (for all records): o Confirm that, for sites without tax data, the tax year column is blank. o Verify that Os are true Os and that they should not be blank instead ($0 value versus no data is an important distinction). o Verify that there are no duplicate records. o Check the combined land and improvement value against the total value to ensure that they are equal. o Compare tax value as a percentage of total value to identify any outliers that could be an indication of incorrect data entry (tax rates are typically between 1 and 6 percent). • QA/QC Review Step #2 (for data obtained through GIS): o Review visual summary maps to make sure that the parcels selected are appropriate. o Check site boundary source information to make sure the visual summary correlates properly. o Check the total number of records in the parcel shapefile against the records in the research. o Check the accuracy of formulas used to bring tabular data from local government sources to the workbook. • QA/QC Review Step #3 (spot check): Check 15 percent of all records where manual data entry was used to confirm data accuracy. The 15 percent of sites chosen for QA/QC Review Step #3 will be randomly selected using a random number generator. o Ensure the records are accurate by verifying data from the original source. • QA/QC Review Step #4: Following completion of the parcel-level QA/QC, summarize parcel data by site. Compare site-level data to the previous year's site-level summary data, if available (number of parcels, acreage, land value, improvement value, total value, tax value and value type) to identify, research and explain any substantial differences across years. Have a second reviewer check the details and explanations for any discrepancies. A-5 ------- Appendix B: 2016-2018 Site-Level Comparison Table B-l. Annual Sales, Employment and Employment Income (2016 and 2018) Site Number of Businesses (2016) Number of Businesses (2018) Annual Sales (2016) Annual Sales (2019) Jobs (2016) Jobs (2018) Annual Employment Income (2016) Annual Employment Income (2018) Brunswick Naval Air Station 65 105 $54,493,500 $682,587,470 274 1,130 $12,357,696 $66,873,456 Davisville Naval Construction Battalion Center - 72 - $253,969,334 - 1,487 - $63,744,876 Fort Devens (Army) 110 132 $866,174,631 $1,614,246,924 2,989 4,394 $227,281,392 $341,577,756 Fort Ord (Army) - 132 - $207,165,150 - 3,093 - $170,549,912 Hanscom Field/Hanscom Air Force Base 64 2 $664,385,469 - 4,579 - $416,140,400 - Homestead Air Force Base 21 21 $15,281,260 $44,954,862 1,122 1,678 $52,808,496 $120,879,772 Loring Air Force Base 26 36 $35,964,110 $11,297,000 1,236 822 $75,748,920 $29,166,280 McClellan Air Force Base (Ground Water Contamination) - 160 - $676,896,579 - 4,440 - $308,247,628 Naval Industrial Reserve Ordnance Plant (NIROP) 1 7 $82,703,081 $123,193,889 550 763 $44,473,000 $58,265,116 Oak Ridge Reservation (USDOE) 36 78 $229,195,762 $401,113,038 10,444 11,127 $843,396,580 $938,820,376 Ogden Defense Depot (DLA) - 106 - $568,549,002 - 7,623 - $404,730,872 Otis Air National Guard Base/Camp Edwards 10 12 $2,744,000 $4,049,000 195 787 $13,365,508 $65,934,856 Pease Air Force Base 247 269 $2,537,423,276 $2,320,545,739 6,142 7,973 $461,631,040 $637,323,284 Savannah River Site (USDOE) 14 15 $821,580,401 $574,050,688 9,675 9,974 $690,561,300 $728,437,840 USN Air Station Cecil Field 34 39 $222,190,079 $780,495,140 2,571 3,941 $152,447,204 $204,711,728 USN Phila Naval Shipyard - 12 - $783,000 - 3,271 - $294,808,436 Totals: 628 1,198 $5,532,135,569 $8,263,896,815 39,777 62,503 $2,990,211,536 $4,434,072,188 Note: A "-"indicates that there was no available data. ------- Table B-2. Property Values and Property Taxes (2016 and 2018)3 Site Name Total Value (2016) Total Value (2018) Total Annual Tax (2016) Total Annual Tax (2018) Brunswick Naval Air Station $173,031,600 $223,747,100 $1,548,592 $1,689,883 Davisville Naval Construction Battalion Center - $187,395,700 - $822,931 Fort Devens (Army) $94,213,000 $97,780,400 $24,496 $489,403 Fort Ord (Army) - $1,273,197,979 - - Hanscom Field/Hanscom Air Force Base $104,310,301 $90,764,800 $205,518 $0 Homestead Air Force Base $207,070,328 $246,686,384 $13,324 $556,747 Loring Air Force Base $6,010,850 $6,010,850 $69,393 $68,593 McClellan Air Force Base (Ground Water Contamination) - $351,952,084 - $6,329,708 $29,407,500 $61,794,800 $634,960 $944,108 nfCI Ogden Defense Depot (DLA) - $173,494,834 - $951,557 Otis Air National Guard Base/Camp Edwards $554,518,610 $558,461,710 $4 $0 Pease Air Force Base $447,728,800 $507,105,864 $5,185,790 $8,032,557 USN Air Station Cecil Field $400,061,658 $510,814,436 $1,807,014 $3,938,986 USN Phila Naval Yard - $25,083,500 - $0 Totals: $2,016,352,647 $4,314,290,441 $9,489,091 $23,824,474 Note: A "-"it idicates that there was no available tax data whereas a value of$0 reflects a reported value. 3 No data available in 2018 for Oak Ridge Reservation (USDOE) or the Savannah River Site (USDOE). B-2 ------- Appendix C: Local Beneficial Effects Case Studies These case studies typically include gathering information on the reuse story at a site as well as conducting the economic research. Economic research includes creating a comprehensive list of site businesses, the number of jobs at those businesses, sales revenues and property values, where available. These case studies can sometimes include traveling to the site for a half day to obtain site photographs. At this time, FFRRO is not conducting any case studies. However, Region 1 is currently working on the following case studies: • Brunswick Naval Air Station • Davisville Naval Construction Battalion • Loring Air Force Base Once these case studies are finalized, FFRRO would like to include one as an appendix to this summary document. These case studies are currently going through an EPA site team and regional review. C-l ------- |