Rule2024-08452
Federal Management Regulation; Designation of Authority and Sustainable Siting
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
April 22, 2024
Issuing agencies
General Services Administration
Abstract
GSA, in furtherance of its authority to furnish space to federal agencies, hereby amends the Federal Management Regulation (FMR) to elaborate on the factors that are advantageous to the Government when planning for location decisions. In addition, the proposed revisions are necessary to bring the current regulation into compliance with updated terminology in statute and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) bulletins. The objective of these changes is to direct agencies to better integrate strategic, holistic analysis into planning for agency location decisions and to provide consistency in the application of these regulations across Federal agencies and regions.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 89 Issue 78 (Monday, April 22, 2024)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 78 (Monday, April 22, 2024)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 29261-29273]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2024-08452]
[[Page 29261]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
41 CFR Part 102-83
[FMR Case 2023-102-1; Docket No. GSA-FMR-2023-0012; Sequence No. 2]
RIN: 3090-AK69
Federal Management Regulation; Designation of Authority and
Sustainable Siting
AGENCY: Office of Government-wide Policy (OGP), U.S. General Services
Administration (GSA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: GSA, in furtherance of its authority to furnish space to
federal agencies, hereby amends the Federal Management Regulation (FMR)
to elaborate on the factors that are advantageous to the Government
when planning for location decisions. In addition, the proposed
revisions are necessary to bring the current regulation into compliance
with updated terminology in statute and Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) bulletins. The objective of these changes is to direct agencies
to better integrate strategic, holistic analysis into planning for
agency location decisions and to provide consistency in the application
of these regulations across Federal agencies and regions.
DATES: May 22, 2024.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For clarification of content, contact
Mr. Chris Coneeney, Office of Government-wide Policy, at 202-208-2956.
For information pertaining to status or publication schedules, contact
the Regulatory Secretariat Division (MVCB), 1800 F Street NW,
Washington, DC 20405, 202-501-4755. Please cite FMR Case 2023-102-1.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
This final rule amends the Federal Management Regulation (FMR) to
elaborate on the factors that are advantageous to the Government when
planning for location decisions. The U.S. General Services
Administration (GSA) published a proposed rule in the Federal Register
on October 24, 2023 (88 FR 72974).
The Administrator of General Services (Administrator) is authorized
to acquire real estate and interests in real estate to accommodate the
space needs of federal agencies. In particular, these authorities are
codified at 40 U.S.C. 301 note (specifically, the 1950 Reorganization
Plan No. 18), 113(d), 581(c)(1), 585, and 3304, and 28 U.S.C. 462(f).
In addition, 40 U.S.C. 584 requires the Administrator to assign space
to executive agencies in accordance with policies and directives the
President prescribes under 40 U.S.C. 121(a), after consultation with
the affected agency, and based on a determination by the Administrator
that the assignment or reassignment is advantageous to the Government
in terms of economy, efficiency, or national security.
There are several other statutory authorities that underlie federal
site location policy. The Rural Development Act of 1972, as amended (7
U.S.C. 2204b-1) (RDA), requires executive agencies to give first
priority to locating in rural areas.
The Federal Urban Land Use Act of 1949, as amended (40 U.S.C. 901-
905), requires GSA and other Federal agencies to consult and engage
with the unit of general local government exercising zoning and land
use jurisdiction so that Federal urban land acquisitions and uses are
developed in accordance with local zoning, land use practices and
planning and development objectives to the greatest extent practicable.
The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (54 U.S.C.
300101 et seq.) (NHPA), encourages the preservation and utilization of
all usable elements of the Nation's historic built environment. The
Competition in Contracting Act of 1984, as amended (41 U.S.C. 3301 et
seq.) (CICA), requires executive agencies to consider whether the
location decision or delineated area will provide for adequate
competition when acquiring leased space. Finally, 40 U.S.C. 121(c)
authorizes the Administrator to issue regulations that the
Administrator considers necessary to carry out the Administrator's
functions under, as relevant here, subtitle I of chapter 40 of the
United States Code. Thus, this rule implements the requirements of the
statutes described above and establishes factors to be considered in
the pre-procurement or acquisition process for federal agency location
decisions.
This rule updates the existing part 102-83 by incorporating new
terminology but continues to implement the underlying principles for
planning for location decisions that have been in existence for almost
50 years. These principles were first incorporated in 41 CFR part 101-
17, Assignment and Utilization of Space (45 FR 37200-37206, June 2,
1980), and continue to be the foundation for the factors elaborated on
today. The procedures for location decisions were eventually given a
separate part in the FMR in 2002, when 41 CFR part 102-83, Location of
Space, was issued. This part was last revised and published in the
Federal Register on November 8, 2005 (70 FR 67857-67860).
The rule continues to be guided by the longstanding Executive Order
(E.O.) 12072, ``Federal Space Management,'' which prescribes policies
and directives for the planning, acquisition, utilization, and
management of federal space facilities in accordance with 40 U.S.C.
121(a) (43 FR 36869, August 18, 1978). E.O. 12072 requires that
``serious consideration'' be given ``to the impact a site selection
will have on improving the social, economic, environmental, and
cultural conditions of the communities in the urban area.''
In addition, in accordance with the NHPA and consistent with E.O.
12072, E.O. 13006, ``Locating Federal Facilities on Historic Properties
in Our Nation's Central Cities'' (61 FR 26071, May 24, 1996), requires
Federal agencies to give first consideration to historic properties
within historic districts. If no such property is suitable, then
Federal agencies must consider other developed or undeveloped sites
within historic districts. If no suitable site exists within historic
districts, Federal agencies must then consider historic properties
outside of historic districts.
On May 15, 2023, GSA published a bulletin to the FMR (88 FR 30975,
May 15, 2023) to bring the regulation into alignment with current
terminology and concepts, and to attempt to provide consistency when
applying the existing regulation across Federal agencies. As these
concepts and associated terminology are incorporated into this final
rule, GSA will cancel the bulletin once this rule takes effect.
Other E.O.s and more recent administration policies further inform
this rule by providing new terminology to help understand and address
what it means to consider the impact of social, economic,
environmental, and cultural conditions. For example, E.O
11988,''Floodplain Management'' (42 FR 26951, May 25, 1977), as amended
by E.O 13690, ``Establishing a Flood Risk Management Standard and a
Process for Further Soliciting and Considering Stakeholder Input'' (80
FR 6425, Feb. 4, 2015), and E.O. 11990, ``Wetlands Protection'' (42 FR
26961, May 24, 1977), direct agencies to avoid locating in a floodplain
and disturbing wetlands. E.O. 14057, ``Catalyzing Clean Energy
Industries and Jobs Through Federal Sustainability'' (86 FR 70935,
December 13, 2021), its accompanying Implementing Instructions, dated
August 31, 2022, and the associated Office of Management and Budget
(OMB), White House Council on Environmental Quality and National
[[Page 29262]]
Climate Policy Office memorandum (M-22-06, 12/8/2021), direct Federal
agencies to promote sustainable locations for Federal facilities and
strengthen the vitality and livability of the communities in which
Federal facilities are located. These directives charge agencies with
advancing sustainable land use that promotes the conservation of
natural resources, reduces greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and increases
resilience to the impacts of climate change; efficient use of local
infrastructure; expanded public transportation use and access;
equitable development that promotes environmental justice and economic
opportunity for disadvantaged communities; and coordination and
alignment with the development plans of Tribal, State, and local or
regional governments that advance these and related goals. Note that
while E.O. 12072 and E.O. 13006 only address urban areas, E.O. 14057
applies many of the same goals to both urban and rural areas.
E.O. 14008, ``Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad'' (86
FR 7619, February 1, 2021), directs Federal agencies to employ a
Government-wide approach across a wide range of activities and goals
related to tackling the climate change crisis. Most relevant to this
part, it directs agencies to reduce climate pollution, increase
resilience to the impacts of climate change, and deliver environmental
justice, spur economic opportunity for disadvantaged communities that
have been historically marginalized, and overburdened by pollution and
underinvestment in housing, transportation, water and wastewater
infrastructure, and health care.
E.O. 14091, ``Further Advancing Racial Equity and Support for
Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government'' (88 FR 10825,
February 22, 2023), directs Federal agencies to advance equity for all
communities, especially those populations that historically have
suffered from underinvestment and inequality, discrimination and
persistent poverty, and to give equitable treatment to all individuals
in a consistent and systematic manner. The order further promotes
efficiency by directing Federal agencies, when planning for Federally
owned and leased facilities, to consider locations near existing
employment centers and public transit so that a broad range of the
region's workforce and population may access the jobs and services at
those facilities. This enables the agencies for which GSA provides
space to more readily carry out their missions. Where the Federal
development may spur displacement of current community populations, the
E.O. instructs Federal agencies to engage further with those
communities and the relevant regional and local officials to address
displacement risks.
E.O. 14096, ``Revitalizing Our Nation's Commitment to Environmental
Justice for All'' (88 FR 25251, April 26, 2023), builds on the E.O.s
described above to reinforce agency use of data analysis in identifying
communities suffering environmental injustice, including related to
climate change and cumulative impacts, and targeting mitigation or harm
avoidance through Federal actions. GSA and other Federal agencies can
use various data sets and tools to identify if proposed locations for
Federally owned and leased facilities are in communities with
environmental justice concerns. For example, the Climate and Economic
Justice Screening Tool \1\ (CEJST) identifies geographically defined
disadvantaged communities, includes an interactive map, and uses
datasets that are indicators of burdens in eight categories: climate
change, energy, health, housing, legacy pollution, transportation,
water and wastewater, and workforce development. The tool uses this
information to identify disadvantaged communities that are experiencing
these burdens. These are the communities that are disadvantaged because
they are overburdened by pollution and marginalized by underinvestment.
The order also re-emphasizes consultation and engagement with members
of affected communities that allow meaningful participation for those
communities in agency decision-making, including individuals with
limited English proficiency and individuals with disabilities. This is
in keeping with the requirements of the Federal Urban Land Use Act. As
mentioned above, the principles that underlie this rule have been in
existence for decades and it is well established that GSA has broad
discretion regarding the substance of this regulation because it
involves managerial and economic choices that are dependent on GSA's
special expertise in this area. Moreover, when a project subject to 40
U.S.C. 3307 is contemplated, as part of the appropriations process, GSA
provides the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate
and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of
Representatives notice of the delineated area for locating the project
and a comprehensive plan that demonstrates that the project will
enhance the architectural, historical, social, cultural, and economic
environment of the locality. Thus, by adopting resolutions approving
the appropriation of the funds for the proposed project, there is a
presumption of congressional approval of the delineated area and the
process completed by which either GSA or the agencies operating under
GSA's authority, or both, establish the location decision. The
congressional approval of the future location decision is further
evidenced by a provision that Congress routinely includes in GSA's
annual appropriations act (See, for example, section 525 of title V of
division E of section 2 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023,
Pub. L. 117-328, 136 Stat. 4459, 4687). That provision requires the
Administrator to ensure that the delineated area of a prospectus-level
lease procurement is identical to the delineated area included in the
approved prospectus and, if the Administrator determines that the
delineated area of the procurement should not be identical to the
delineated area included in the prospectus, the Administrator must
provide an explanatory statement to GSA's authorizing and
appropriations committees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The CEJST tool is available at <a href="https://screeningtool.geoplatform.gov/en/">https://screeningtool.geoplatform.gov/en/</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For non-prospectus projects, GSA exercises its discretion in
accordance with the principles that underlie this rule.
It is important to note that these final rule changes work in
concert with, and not in lieu of, agency mission and physical security
needs, CICA, cost considerations, consolidation and reductions in
square footage, prioritizing Federally owned space, and other
procurement policies. In accordance with the statutes and policies
described above, the optimal Federal location decision is the one that
meets Federal agency mission needs, at an appropriate cost to
taxpayers, while achieving the necessary level of security and
leveraging Federal development in support of other Federal and local
goals.
This final rule will revise in its entirety 41 CFR part 102-83,
Location of Space. Federal agencies operating under or subject to the
real property authorities of the Administrator of General Services must
comply with the provisions of the FMR that cover real property (41 CFR
parts 102-71 through 102-85).
[[Page 29263]]
II. Discussion of the Final Rule
A. Summary of Major Changes
The following updates and clarification changes are incorporated
into the amended part 102-83:
<bullet<ls-thn-eq> Social, Economic, Environmental, and Cultural
factors in Location Decisions
The rule now more explicitly explains the factors associated with
social, economic, environmental, and cultural conditions to be
considered in location decisions.
<bullet<ls-thn-eq> Central Cities to Principal Cities
The term ``central cities'' has, for many years, been retired in
favor of the term ``principal cities,'' as published in the OMB ``2010
Standards for Delineating Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical
Areas'' (75 FR 37246, June 28, 2010) (the 2010 Standards). This term
reflects new consideration for how single or multiple urban centers
function as commuting destinations and population centers within a
single core-based statistical area (CBSA). This final rule updates the
terminology throughout the part accordingly.
<bullet<ls-thn-eq> Metropolitan Areas to Core-Based Statistical Areas
The shift from metropolitan areas (MA) to CBSAs reflects the change
that first appeared in the OMB ``2000 Standards for Delineating
Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas'' (65 FR 82228,
December 27, 2000) (the 2000 Standards) to recognize both MAs and
micropolitan statistical areas as having an urbanized core and
surrounding areas with a high degree of integration to that core. The
2000 Standards were replaced and superseded by the 2010 Standards, and
the most recent delineations for CBSA boundaries appeared in OMB
Bulletin No. 18-04 on September 14, 2018. This final rule updates the
term throughout the part accordingly.
<bullet<ls-thn-eq> Urban/Rural Definitions
The definitions for ``urban area'' and ``rural area'' in the
existing regulations are difficult to interpret because they draw on
two different sources, and these definitions are not necessarily
mutually exclusive from one another. The current part 102-83 has a
definition for urban that relies on the boundaries of MAs defined by
OMB.
The current definition for rural area comes not from the RDA, but
rather from the Consolidated Farmers Home Administration Act of 1961
(CFHA), as amended by the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of
2002, which identifies a rural area for general purposes of CFHA as any
area except a city or town with a population greater than 50,000 people
or adjacent urbanized areas. The original definition of rural area
applicable to the RDA was stricken from the statute and, subsequently,
GSA adopted the CFHA definition. The circularity of these current
definitions, however, makes the boundaries of urban and rural difficult
to interpret. Among the difficulties are the fact that the boundaries
established by the definitions do not relate to jurisdictional
boundaries and are measured at the fine grain of census blocks, meaning
that adjacent parcels within the same jurisdiction may be designated
one as rural and the other as urban. With urban and rural areas
immediately across the street from each other, making the case that an
agency can only meet its need in the parcel designated as urban rather
than the adjacent parcel designated rural, or vice versa, needlessly
opens the Federal space action to protest.
Given that subsequent revisions of the RDA have actually eliminated
the original definition of rural area, GSA has chosen a definition that
better meets the needs of the Federal location decision process, and
this final rule simplifies the definition to the boundaries of CBSAs,
which follow county lines. Those areas contained within the boundaries
are considered urban, and those outside the boundaries are considered
rural. As with the current definitions, agency mission need remains the
primary determinant of whether a Federal agency will seek space in an
urban or rural area.
<bullet> Considering Real Estate Cost and Efficiency Factors
Federal location policy has long advocated that Federal agencies
balance cost, mission and real estate efficiencies, as well as local
development goals, when making location decisions. This derives from
statute and related policies. This revised part enumerates these
factors to encourage agencies to reach balanced, holistic decisions,
and to clarify agency latitude to consider cost and other business
factors.
<bullet> Local Consultation and Engagement Requirements
The various governing authorities and directives for this part
require that Federal agencies consult and engage with local officials
when making real estate decisions and that they seek opportunities for
Federal action to support local development objectives. These
authorities and policies include the Federal Urban Land Use Act of 1949
(40 U.S.C. 901-905); the RDA; and E.O. 12072. For the Federal
Government to consider locating Federal facilities in a specific area
or jurisdiction in keeping with the goals of this part, the existing or
planned development composition for that area needs to be appropriate
both to meeting Federal agency mission and space needs and local
development goals.
Determining whether a specific area is appropriate for Federal
facilities calls for consultation and engagement with State and local
officials, Tribal governments, Alaska Native corporations, and Native
Hawaiian Organizations, and meaningful engagement with communities in
applicable geographies, to better understand local conditions and
development goals, including those related to sustainability, climate
change mitigation and resilience, and environmental justice. Further,
where Federal agencies determine through data analysis, including
through use of CEJST or other applicable Federal tools, and local
consultation and other engagement that displacement risks or other
environmental justice concerns exist for current populations in the
vicinity of a planned facility, Federal agencies are directed to engage
with the affected communities and relevant regional and local officials
to address mitigating those risks.
To encourage both effective long-term consultation and engagement
and efficient processes that are not overly burdensome to Federal
agencies, this revised part outlines the latitude that agencies have to
develop efficient internal policy and procedure.
B. Analysis of Public Comments
In response to the notice of public rulemaking, five commenters
submitted comments on the provisions of the proposed rule, including
three environmental advocacy groups, one individual and one anonymous
commenter.
GSA appreciates the thorough public response to the proposed rule,
and carefully considered all comments received. Commenters provided
feedback on several provisions of the proposed rule, but primarily
focused on the following topics: referencing the numerous statutory and
executive authorities governing the process by which the agency plans
for location decisions; providing an explanation on how to apply the
changes in the regulation; explaining the hard to quantify benefits of
the rule; and protection of floodplains and wetlands to avoid harming
these critical native ecosystems.
[[Page 29264]]
Citing Additional Authorities for This Rule
Some of the commenters requested GSA include additional authorities
that pertain to the selection of a specific site. GSA has based the
rule on the existing authorities pertaining to the factors that are
advantageous to the Government when planning for location decisions.
This rule establishes the process for determining the delineated area
and, once the delineated area is determined, helps to inform the
specific site selection decision. The references cited by commenters
are better addressed at the point in the process when specific sites
are under consideration.
Explain How To Apply Changes in the Rule
The FMR outlines, at a high level, what must be considered when
planning for location decisions to meet Federal space needs. The
comments regarding specific procedures to implement the changes in the
regulation will be addressed in subsequent implementation policies and
guidance to be published after the rule takes effect.
Explain the Non-Quantifiable Benefits of the Rule
GSA notes that when selecting a site to accommodate Federal space
needs, there are considerations, such as equity, environmental justice
and sustainability, whose benefits to society are difficult to
quantify. This rule outlines those factors that Federal agencies must
consider in location decisions, but it does not dictate outcomes. Even
if the specific location decision and the associated outcomes were
addressed in this rule, that decision would be very difficult to
anticipate, given that the Federal real estate inventory is highly
diverse in terms of geography, scale, and function. The scope of the
analysis is, therefore, limited to the processes of governments and
stakeholders rather than the outcomes of those processes.
Floodplain and Wetlands Protection
GSA made an edit to the rule to acknowledge the protection of the
natural environment by preserving ecosystems, including native
ecosystems, avoiding development of green space, and promoting climate
change adaptation planning. GSA reiterates, though, that mitigating the
impact to wetlands and floodplains largely occurs during the site
planning and design steps in the process, after the location decision
itself. Those steps are not the subject of this rule.
III. Executive Orders 12866, 13563 and 14094
Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review)
directs agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available
regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select
regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential
economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive
impacts, and equity). E.O. 13563 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review) emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and
benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. E.O. 14094 (Modernizing Regulatory Review) amends
subsection 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 and supplements and reaffirms
the principles, structures, and definitions governing contemporary
regulatory review established in E.O. 12866 and E.O. 13563. OMB's
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has determined that this
rule is a significant regulatory action and, therefore, it is subject
to review under subsection 6(b) of E.O. 12866.
IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act
GSA does not expect this final rule to have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities within the meaning of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.
V. Regulatory Impact Analysis
During the first and subsequent years after publication of the
rule, Federally owned new construction members and leasing acquisition
members (which include a combination of Planning Managers, Site
Acquisition Staff, Program Managers, Lease Contracting Officers, and
Lease Project Managers) will need to learn about GSA's government-wide
plan and compliance requirements. GSA estimates this cost by
multiplying the time required to review the regulations and guidance
implementing the rule by the estimated hourly compensation. GSA
calculates the estimated hourly compensation using the U.S. Office of
Personnel Management's 2023 General Schedule (GS) Rest of United States
Locality Pay Table, a full fringe benefit cost factor of 36.25% and an
overhead cost factor of 12%.<SUP>2 3 4 5</SUP>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ General Schedule (<a href="http://opm.gov">opm.gov</a>).
\3\ OMB Memo M-08-13, dated March 11, 2008.
\4\ OMB Circular-76.
\5\ Computing Hourly Rates of Pay Using the 2,087-Hour Divisor
(<a href="http://opm.gov">opm.gov</a>).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
GSA assumes the Federally owned new construction members and
leasing acquisition members will, on average, stay consistent in the
subsequent years. GSA also delegates leasing authority to several
agencies, which are required to follow GSA's policies. As of July 2023,
GSA has nine agencies actively using delegated leasing authority. The
numbers and assumptions also apply to agencies using delegated leasing
authority.
1. Government Costs
a. Federally Owned New Construction
The Government must educate its Federally owned new construction
members via a government-wide plan to heighten their familiarity with
the rule. GSA makes these assumptions based on historical
familiarization and subject matter expert judgment. Below is a list of
training and communication activities related to regulatory
familiarization and compliance that GSA anticipates will occur.
GSA estimates it will take 5 GSA employees on average, with a GS-14
step 5 with an average hourly rate of $93.70/hour, 20 hours each in
year 1 to develop new content for planning managers and site
acquisition staff training. Therefore, GSA estimates the total
estimated cost for this part of the rule to be $9,370 (= 5 x $93.70 GS-
14 step 5 rate x 20 hours).
GSA estimates it will take 5 GSA employees on average, with a GS-14
step 5 with an average hourly rate of $93.70/hour, 1 hour each in years
3, 5, 7, and 9 to update new content for planning managers and site
acquisition staff training. Therefore, GSA estimates the total annual
estimated cost for this part of the rule to be $469 (= 5 x $93.70 GS-14
step 5 rate x 1 hour).
GSA estimates it will take 5 GSA employees on average, with a GS-14
step 5 with an average hourly rate of $93.70/hour, 1.5 hours each in
years 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9 to deliver new training content to planning
managers and site acquisition staff. Therefore, GSA estimates the total
annual estimated cost for this part of the rule to be $703 (= 5 x
$93.70 GS-14 step 5 rate x 1.5 hours).
GSA estimates it will take 103 GSA planning managers and site
acquisition staff on average, with a GS-13 step 5 with an average
hourly rate of $79.29/hour, 1.5 hours each in years 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9
to receive new training content. Therefore, GSA estimates the total
annual estimated cost for this part of the rule to be $12,251 (= 103 x
$79.29 GS-13 step 5 rate x 1.5 hours).
GSA estimates it will take 5 GSA employees on average, with a GS-14
step 5 with an average hourly rate of $93.70/hour, 4 hours each in year
1 to
[[Page 29265]]
develop new content for training for client agencies. Therefore, GSA
estimates the total estimated cost for this part of the rule to be
$1,874 (= 5 x $93.70 GS-14 step 5 rate x 4 hours).
GSA estimates it will take 5 GSA employees on average, with a GS-14
step 5 with an average hourly rate of $93.70/hour, 1 hour each in years
3, 5, 7, and 9 to develop new content for training for client agencies.
Therefore, GSA estimates the total annual estimated cost for this part
of the rule to be $469 (= 5 x $93.70 GS-14 step 5 rate x 1 hour).
GSA estimates it will take 5 GSA Central Office program managers on
average, with a GS-14 step 5 with an average hourly rate of $93.70/
hour, 1.5 hours each in years 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9 to provide training to
client agencies. Therefore, GSA estimates the total annual estimated
cost for this part of the rule to be $703 (= 5 x $93.70 GS-14 step 5
rate x 1.5 hours).
GSA estimates it will take 400 client agency employees on average,
with a GS-13 step 5 with an average hourly rate of $79.29/hour, 1.5
hours each in years 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9 to receive training. Therefore,
GSA estimates the total annual estimated cost for this part of the rule
to be $47,577 (= 400 x $79.29 GS-13 step 5 rate x 1.5 hours).
GSA estimates it will take 11 GSA regional office employees on
average, with a GS-13 step 5 with an average hourly rate of $79.29/
hour, 1 hour each in years 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9 to provide additional
communications from GSA regional offices to client agency regional
offices on the new training content. Therefore, GSA estimates the total
annual estimated cost for this part of the rule to be $872 (= 11 x
$79.29 GS-13 step 5 rate x 1 hour).
GSA estimates it will take 400 client agency regional office
employees on average, with a GS-13 step 5 with an average hourly rate
of $79.29/hour, 0.5 hours each in years 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9 to review the
GSA regional office communications on the new training content.
Therefore, GSA estimates the total annual estimated cost for this part
of the rule to be $15,859 (= 400 x $79.29 GS-13 step 5 rate x 0.5
hours).
GSA estimates it will take 2 GSA project managers on average, with
a GS-13 step 5 with an average hourly rate of $79.29/hour, 2 hours each
in years 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9 to share GSA location decision information
with community organizations. Therefore, GSA estimates the total annual
estimated cost for this part of the rule to be $317 (= 2 x $79.29 GS-13
step 5 rate x 2 hours).
Beyond the direct costs of educating users and stakeholders about
the policy changes associated with the rule, the location decisions
resulting from incorporating sustainability factors and engaging with
local stakeholders could be different from what they otherwise might
have been without this revised rule. GSA anticipates that changes in
outcomes will come with changes in costs and benefits. Inclusion of
those costs and benefits in the regulatory impact analysis are not
easily quantifiable. This rule guides processes in location decisions
but does not mandate outcomes. Outcomes, moreover, would be very
difficult to anticipate across the breadth of the Federal location
decisions, which are highly diverse in geography, scale, and function
and highly variable in quantity across a given time period. By
incorporating sustainability factors and local planning goals into
agency location decision making, GSA seeks to maximize benefits to the
Federal Government, the environment and local communities and minimize
negative externalities. Direct costs and indirect impacts associated
with location decisions will depend on the specific characteristics of
each decision and will more appropriately be addressed at the time an
agency makes such a decision. Lastly, while impossible to predict for
future projects, in GSA's experience the community engagement and
collaboration envisioned by the rule are more likely to lead to
outcomes that reduce rather than increase project costs for two
reasons:
(1) effective collaboration with local stakeholders and
coordination with local officials tends toward reducing risk of
opposition to a project along with attendant costs associated with
delay; and
(2) site selections that align with local goals are often supported
by local government through donation or discount to the Federal
Government or assistance with land assembly.
b. Leased Buildings
The Government must educate its leasing acquisition members via a
government-wide plan to heighten their familiarity with the rule. Below
is a list of training and communication activities related to
regulatory familiarization and compliance that GSA anticipates will
occur.
GSA estimates it will take 3 GSA employees on average, with a GS-14
step 5 with an average hourly rate of $93.70/hour, 5 hours each in year
1 to develop new contract language relating to location and
preferences. Therefore, GSA estimates the total estimated cost for this
part of the rule to be $1,406 (= 3 x $93.70 GS-14 step 5 rate x 5
hours).
GSA estimates it will take 3 GSA employees on average, with a GS-14
step 5 with an average hourly rate of $93.70/hour, 1 hour each in years
2 and 3 to develop new contract language relating to location and
preferences. Therefore, GSA estimates the total annual estimated cost
for this part of the rule to be $281 (= 3 x $93.70 GS-14 step 5 rate x
1 hour).
GSA estimates it will take 1 GSA employee on average, with an SES
Level 3 with an average hourly rate of $138.52/hour, 2 hours in year 1
to develop new contract language relating to location and preferences.
Therefore, GSA estimates the total estimated cost for this part of the
rule to be $277 (= 1 x $138.52 SES Level 3 rate x 2 hours).
GSA estimates it will take 1 GSA employee on average, with an SES
Level 3 with an average hourly rate of $138.52/hour, 1 hour in years 2
and 3 to develop new contract language relating to location and
preferences. Therefore, GSA estimates the total annual estimated cost
for this part of the rule to be $139 (= 1 x $138.52 SES Level 3 rate x
1 hour).
GSA estimates it will take 3 GSA employees on average, with a GS-14
step 5 with an average hourly rate of $93.70/hour, 5 hours each in year
1 to update existing locational policy guidance. Therefore, GSA
estimates the total estimated cost for this part of the rule to be
$1,406 (= 3 x $93.70 GS-14 step 5 rate x 5 hours).
GSA estimates it will take 3 GSA employees on average, with a GS-14
step 5 with an average hourly rate of $93.70/hour, 1 hour each in years
2 and 3 to update existing locational policy guidance. Therefore, GSA
estimates the total annual estimated cost for this part of the rule to
be $281 (= 3 x $93.70 GS-14 step 5 rate x 1 hour).
GSA estimates it will take 1 GSA employee on average, with an SES
Level 3 with an average hourly rate of $138.52/hour, 2 hours in year 1
to update existing locational policy guidance. Therefore, GSA estimates
the total estimated cost for this part of the rule to be $277 (= 1 x
$138.52 SES Level 3 rate x 2 hours).
GSA estimates it will take 1 GSA employee on average, with an SES
Level 3 with an average hourly rate of $138.52/hour, 1 hour in years 2
and 3 to update existing locational policy guidance. Therefore, GSA
estimates the total annual estimated cost for this part of the rule to
be $139 (= 1 x $138.52 SES Level 3 rate x 1 hour).
GSA estimates it will take 1 GSA employee on average, with a GS-13
step 5 with an average hourly rate of $79.29/hour, 1 hour in year 1 to
update training
[[Page 29266]]
for Lease Contracting Officers and Lease Project Managers. Therefore,
GSA estimates the total estimated cost for this part of the rule to be
$79 (= 1 x $79.29 GS-13 step 5 rate x 1 hour).
GSA estimates it will take 1 GSA employee on average, with a GS-13
step 5 with an average hourly rate of $79.29/hour, 1 hour in year 1 to
deliver training to Lease Contracting Officers and Lease Project
Managers. Therefore, GSA estimates the total estimated cost for this
part of the rule to be $79 (= 1 x $79.29 GS-15 step 5 rate x 1 hour).
GSA estimates it will take 650 GSA Lease Contracting Officers and
Lease Project Managers on average, with a GS-12 step 5 with an average
hourly rate of $66.68/hour, 1 hour each in year 1 to receive training.
Therefore, GSA estimates the total estimated cost for this part of the
rule to be $43,345 (= 650 x $66.68 GS-12 step 5 rate x 1 hour).
GSA estimates it will take 650 GSA Lease Contracting Officers and
Lease Project Managers on average, with a GS-12 step 5 with an average
hourly rate of $66.68/hour, 0.5 hours each in years 3, 5, 7, and 9 to
receive training. Therefore, GSA estimates the total annual estimated
cost for this part of the rule to be $21,672 (= 650 x $66.68 GS-12 step
5 rate x 0.5 hours).
GSA estimates it will take 500 Lease Contracting Officers and Lease
Project Managers from delegated leasing agencies \6\ on average, with a
GS-12 step 5 with an average hourly rate of $66.68/hour, 1 hour each in
year 1 to receive GSA training. Therefore, GSA estimates the total
estimated cost for this part of the rule to be $33,342 (= 500 x $66.68
GS-12 step 5 rate x 1 hour).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ The GSA Office of Leasing provided this number as an
averaged total across delegated leasing agencies by surveying their
internal database.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
GSA estimates it will take 500 Lease Contracting Officers and Lease
Project Managers from delegated leasing agencies on average, with a GS-
12 step 5 with an average hourly rate of $66.68/hour, 0.5 hours each in
years 3, 5, 7, and 9 to receive GSA training. Therefore, GSA estimates
the total annual estimated cost for this part of the rule to be $16,671
(= 500 x $66.68 GS-12 step 5 rate x 0.5 hours).
GSA estimates it will take 9 employees from delegated leasing
agencies on average, with a GS-13 step 5 with an average hourly rate of
$79.29/hour, 1 hour each in year 1 to update delegated leasing agency
training for Lease Contracting Officers and Lease Project Managers.
Therefore, GSA estimates the total estimated cost for this part of the
rule to be $714 (= 9 x $79.29 GS-13 step 5 rate x 1 hour).
GSA estimates it will take 9 employees from delegated leasing
agencies on average, with a GS-13 step 5 with an average hourly rate of
$79.29/hour, 1 hour each in year 1 to deliver training to Lease
Contracting Officers and Lease Project Managers. Therefore, GSA
estimates the total estimated cost for this part of the rule to be $714
(= 9 x $79.29 GS-13 step 5 rate x 1 hour).
GSA estimates it will take 500 Lease Contracting Officers and Lease
Project Managers from delegated leasing agencies on average, with a GS-
12 step 5 with an average hourly rate of $66.68/hour, 1 hour each in
year 1 to receive delegated leasing agency training. Therefore, GSA
estimates the total estimated cost for this part of the rule to be
$33,342 (= 500 x $66.68 GS-12 step 5 rate x 1 hour).
GSA estimates it will take 500 Lease Contracting Officers and Lease
Project Managers from delegated leasing agencies on average, with a GS-
12 step 5 with an average hourly rate of $66.68/hour, 0.5 hours each in
years 3, 5, 7, and 9 to receive delegated leasing agency training.
Therefore, GSA estimates the total estimated cost for this part of the
rule to be $16,671 (= 500 x $66.68 GS-12 step 5 rate x 0.5 hours).
Total Government Costs
GSA estimates the total estimated Government costs to be $743,118
for years 1 through 10. A breakdown of total estimated Government costs
by year is provided in the table below.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Costs are rounded to the nearest thousand.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 29267]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR22AP24.800
2. Public Costs
Public costs associated with this rule include small entities of
community organizations in areas GSA is considering for Federally owned
new construction. GSA assumes, for each location decision, the agency
will engage with one small entity, which, on average, will have two
employees. Those employees would receive, review, and share GSA
location decision information. GSA estimates the average hourly rate of
$93.70 for the small entity employees as the private sector pay
equivalent of a GS-14 step 5. GSA estimates it will engage with 1 small
entity on average with 2 small entity employees on average, with a GS-
14 step 5 with an average hourly rate of $93.70/hour, 4 hours each in
years 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9 to receive, review and share GSA location
decision information. Therefore, GSA estimates the total annual
estimated cost for this part of the rule to be $750 (= 2 x $93.70 GS-14
step 5 rate x 4 hours).
Total Public Costs
GSA estimates the total estimated public costs to be $3,748 for
years 1 through 10. A breakdown of total estimated public costs by year
is provided in the table below.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Costs are rounded to the nearest thousand.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR22AP24.801
3. Overall Total Additional Costs
The overall total additional undiscounted cost of this rule is
estimated to be $746,866 over a 10-year period. GSA did not identify
any cost savings based on the impact of the rule. A breakdown of
overall total additional costs by year is provided in the table
below.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Costs are rounded to the nearest thousand.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 29268]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR22AP24.802
The following is a summary of the estimated costs calculated for a
10-year time horizon at a 3- and 7-percent discount rate:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR22AP24.803
VI. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act does not apply because the changes to
the FMR do not impose recordkeeping or information collection
requirements, or the collection of information from offerors,
contractors, or members of the public that require the approval of OMB
under 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
VII. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
This final rule is also exempt from congressional review prescribed
under 5 U.S.C. 801 since it relates solely to agency management and
personnel.
VIII. Severability
GSA is adding a new provision on severability at 41 CFR 102-83.150,
which states that all provisions included in part 102-83 are separate
and severable from one another.
Regulations concerning location policy do a number of things--from
identifying and elaborating upon the factors that are advantageous to
the Government when planning for location decisions, to outlining the
consultation and engagement requirements with local officials and the
communities potentially impacted by Federal location decisions, to
explaining the role of agencies when planning for such decisions.
Accordingly, if any particular term or provision in part 102-83, or
the application thereof to any agency or circumstance, is determined by
a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or unenforceable, the
remaining terms or provisions, or the application of such term or
provision to agencies or circumstances other than those to which it is
invalid or unenforceable, will not be affected thereby, and each term
and provision of this rule will be valid and enforced to the fullest
extent permitted by law. For example, if any location factor is
determined to be invalid, the other factors would remain in full force
and effect.
Further, any cross-references that appear throughout part 102-83
are duplicative and are intended only to make the regulations more
user-friendly. Invalidation of a particular provision that is cross-
referenced elsewhere will not materially alter the provision that
contains the cross-reference.
In summary, removal of any particular provision from part 102-83
would not render the entire regulatory scheme unworkable. Thus, GSA
considers each of the provisions in part 102-83 to be
[[Page 29269]]
separate and severable from one another. In the event of a stay or
invalidation of any particular provision, it is GSA's intention that
the remaining provisions will continue in effect.
List of Subjects in 41 CFR Part 102-83
Federal buildings and facilities, Government property management,
Rates and fares.
Robin Carnahan,
Administrator of General Services.
0
For the reasons stated in the preamble, GSA revises 41 CFR part 102-83
to read as follows:
PART 102-83--LOCATION OF SPACE
Authority: 40 U.S.C. 113(d), 121(c), 581(c)(1), 584, 585, and
901-905; section 1 of Reorganization Plan No. 18 of 1950, 15 FR
3177, 64 Stat. 1270 (40 U.S.C. 301 note); 28 U.S.C. 462(f); 7 U.S.C.
2204b; 41 U.S.C. 3301 et seq.; 54 U.S.C. 300101 et seq.; E.O. 12072,
43 FR 36869, 3 CFR, 1978., p. 213; and E.O. 13006, 61 FR 26071, 3
CFR, 1996 Comp., p. 195.
Subpart A--General Provisions
Sec.
102-83.05 What does this part cover?
102-83.10 What are the governing authorities for this part?
102-83.15 Which Federal agencies must comply with these provisions?
102-83.20 How does an agency request a deviation from the provisions
of this part?
102-83.25 Intentionally Omitted
Subpart A--General Provisions
Sec. 102-83.05 What does this part cover?
This part covers GSA's considerations when making location
decisions for Federal agencies in both Federally owned and leased space
and the considerations of those Federal agencies operating under or
subject to the real property authorities of the Administrator of
General Services (Administrator), including those using delegated real
property authority, when making their own location decisions. It
directs practices that foster the policies and programs of the Federal
Government and improve the management, efficiency, and effectiveness of
Government activities.
Sec. 102-83.10 What are the governing authorities for this part?
The authorities for this regulation are as follows:
(a) Rural Development Act of 1972, as amended (7 U.S.C. 2204b-1),
requires executive agencies to give first priority to locating in rural
areas.
(b) Federal Urban Land Use Act of 1949, as amended (40 U.S.C. 901-
905), requires GSA and other Federal agencies to consult and engage
with the unit of general local government exercising zoning and land
use jurisdiction. To the greatest extent possible, GSA must coordinate
Federal projects with local planning agencies to be in accordance with
zoning, land use practices and planning and development objectives.
(c) Competition in Contracting Act of 1984, as amended, (41 U.S.C.
3301 et seq.) (CICA), requires executive agencies to consider whether
the delineated area will provide for adequate competition when
acquiring leased space.
(d) 40 U.S.C. 113(d) authorizes the Administrator to provide space
to the Senate, the House of Representatives, and the Architect of the
Capitol upon their request.
(e) 40 U.S.C. 121(c) authorizes the Administrator to issue
regulations that the Administrator considers necessary to carry out the
Administrator's functions under subtitle I of title 40 of the United
States Code.
(f) National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, 54
U.S.C. 300101 et seq., encourages, among other things, the public and
private preservation and utilization of all usable elements of the
Nation's historic built environment.
(g) 40 U.S.C. 584 authorizes the Administrator to assign and
reassign space for an executive agency in any Federal Government-owned
or leased building.
(h) 40 U.S.C. 581(c)(1) authorizes the Administrator to acquire, by
purchase, condemnation or otherwise, real estate and interests in real
estate.
(i) 40 U.S.C. 585 authorizes the Administrator to enter into a
lease agreement for the accommodation of a federal agency in a building
or improvement that is in existence or being erected by the lessor to
accommodate the federal agency, and to assign and reassign the leased
space to a federal agency.
(j) Section 1 of Reorganization Plan No. 18 of 1950, 15 FR 3177, 64
Stat. 1270 (40 U.S.C. 301 note), which, with certain exceptions,
transferred all function with respect to acquiring space in buildings
by lease, and all functions with respect to assigning and reassigning
space in buildings for use by agencies (including both space acquired
by lease and space in Government-owned buildings) to the Administrator.
(k) 28 U.S.C. 462(f) authorizes the Administrator to provide space
to the judicial branch upon request from the Director of the
Administrative Office of the United States Court.
(l) E.O. 12072 encourages Federal agencies to locate and use real
estate in ways that serve to strengthen the Nation's cities and make
them attractive places to live and work, conserve existing urban
resources, and encourage the development and redevelopment of cities.
Toward this end, the E.O. requires executive agencies to give first
consideration to centralized community business areas and other areas
recommended by local officials as possible locations for Federal
facilities when locating in urban areas.
(m) E.O. 13006 requires that, when operationally appropriate and
economically prudent, and subject to the RDA and E.O. 12072, when
locating Federal facilities, Federal agencies must give first
consideration to historic properties within historic districts. If no
such property is suitable, then Federal agencies must consider other
developed or undeveloped sites within historic districts. Federal
agencies must then consider historic properties outside of historic
districts, if no suitable site within a district exists.
Sec. 102-83.15 Which Federal agencies must comply with these
provisions?
All Federal agencies operating under or subject to the real
property authorities of the Administrator, including those using
delegated real property authority, must comply with these provisions.
Refer to 41 CFR 102-71.20 for the definition of Federal agency. Federal
agencies using independent authority must still comply with statutory
requirements and E.O.s (consistent with such authority), but this part
does not apply to these agencies. Agencies with independent authority
may use these provisions at agency discretion.
Sec. 102-83.20 How does an agency request a deviation from the
provisions of this part?
Refer to Sec. Sec. 102-2.60 through 102-2.110 of this chapter for
information on how to obtain a deviation from this part.
Sec. 102-83.25 Intentionally Omitted.
Subpart B--Location of Space
Sec.
102-83.30 What basic location of space policy governs a Federal
agency?
102-83.35 Is there a general hierarchy of consideration that
agencies must follow in their utilization of space?
102-83.40 What is a delineated area?
102-83.45 What is a Core-Based Statistical Area?
102-83.50 How is a Core-Based Statistical Area defined?
102-83.55 What is a rural area?
102-83.60 What is an urban area?
102-83.65 What is a principal city?
102-83.70 What are centralized community business areas and
centralized business districts?
102-83.75 What is environmental justice?
102-83.80 What is equitable development?
[[Page 29270]]
102-83.85 In addition to Federal agency mission, security and
program requirements, what other factors and principles must
agencies consider when establishing a potential delineated area?
102-83.90 What hierarchy of geographic consideration must agencies
apply to location decisions for new Federal facilities or leased
locations?
102-83.95 How must agencies consult and engage with local officials
to comply with the consultation and engagement elements of part 102-
83?
102-83.100 What flexibility do Federal agencies have to implement
part 102-83 in high cost areas?
102-83.105 Are Federal agencies required to give preference to
historic properties when acquiring leased space?
102-83.110 Does GSA provide assistance to Federal agencies by
consulting and engaging with local officials to establish
recommended delineated areas?
102-83.115 Are Federal agencies required to consider whether the CBA
or other areas recommended by local officials will provide for
adequate competition when acquiring leased space?
102-83.120 What information and data must agencies provide to the
Administrator of General Services, or other acquiring agency head,
to comply with the provisions of this part?
102-83.125 Who must approve the final delineated area?
102-83.130 When is written justification for a delineated area in
urban areas required?
102-83.135 How will GSA negotiate changes to the final delineated
area with requesting agencies?
102-83.140 Where may Federal agencies appeal GSA decisions and
recommendations concerning the delineated area?
102-83.145 Do these regulations apply in GSA's National Capital
Region?
Subpart B--Location of Space
Sec. 102-83.30 What basic location of space policy governs a Federal
agency?
(a) All Federal agencies when planning for location decisions under
the authorities of the Administrator, including those using delegated
real property authority, are required to apply the applicable laws,
regulations, and E.O.s outlined in this part to their activities. This
applies to agencies using the space and to agencies acquiring a
leasehold interest or a new site to accommodate a space requirement.
(b) Federal agencies intending to use space under this part are
responsible for identifying the geographic area within which to locate
their activities (i.e., the delineated area) to support their mission
and program requirements. Agencies must define delineated areas that
support the applicable laws, regulations, and E.O.s outlined in this
part. In addition to these responsibilities, agencies conducting a
space acquisition have certain additional specific responsibilities as
outlined in this part.
Sec. 102-83.35 Is there a general hierarchy of consideration that
agencies must follow in their utilization of space?
Yes. In accordance with part 79, Assignment and Utilization of
Space, Federal agencies must follow the hierarchy of consideration,
giving first priority to Government-owned and Government-leased
buildings. When no existing Government-owned or Government-leased space
meets the space need, Federal agencies must follow the hierarchy of
geographic consideration in Sec. 102-83.95 when obtaining new space as
identified in this subpart.
Sec. 102-83.40 What is a delineated area?
The delineated area is the specific geographic boundary within
which space will be obtained to satisfy a Federal agency space
requirement.
Sec. 102-83.45 What is a Core-Based Statistical Area?
A Core-Based Statistical Area (CBSA) is a geographic area
established by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Current CBSAs
are listed in OMB Bulletin No. 20-01, ``Revised Delineations of
Metropolitan Statistical Areas, Micropolitan Statistical Areas, and
Combined Statistical Areas, and Guidance on Uses of the Delineations of
These Areas,'' dated March 6, 2020, or succeeding OMB Bulletin. In this
part, the CBSA designation is used to distinguish between urban and
rural areas, which have different directives associated with them.
Sec. 102-83.50 How is a CBSA defined?
A CBSA is defined by OMB using U.S. Census data as an area that has
at its core an urban center and includes the adjacent areas that are
socioeconomically tied to the urban center by commuting patterns
pursuant to the Standards for Delineating Metropolitan and Micropolitan
Statistical Areas, as updated periodically and published in the Federal
Register, pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 1104(d) and 44 U.S.C. 3504.
Sec. 102-83.55 What is a rural area?
A rural area is any area that is not contained within the
geographic boundaries of a CBSA.
Sec. 102-83.60 What is an urban area?
An urban area is any area contained within the geographic
boundaries of a CBSA.
Sec. 102-83.65 What is a principal city?
(a) A principal city is an incorporated place or census designated
place within a CBSA that meets certain employment and population-based
criteria. Major metropolitan areas typically have several principal
cities.
(b) The principal city designation is established by OMB pursuant
to the Standards for Delineating Metropolitan and Micropolitan
Statistical Areas, as updated periodically and published in the Federal
Register, pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 1104(d) and 44 U.S.C. 3504(e). OMB
regularly publishes an updated list of Principal Cities (OMB Bulletin
No. 20-01, and succeeding). In this part, the principal city
designation is used to help the Federal agency focus local consultation
and engagement.
Sec. 102-83.70 What are centralized community business areas and
centralized business districts?
A centralized community business area (CBA) or centralized business
district, also commonly referred to as a central business district, is
an area of concentration of commercial real estate and activity within
a principal city, including other specific areas of similar character
that may be recommended by local officials. The CBA may be part of a
traditional downtown area or part of another area that local government
officials have identified as supportive of their long-term economic
development objectives. CBAs are designated by local governments and
not by Federal agencies, so Federal agencies must consult and engage
with local officials to understand the current boundaries of these
areas. As described in E.O. 12072, these areas may include other
specific areas that are recommended by local officials.
Sec. 102-83.75 What is environmental justice?
Environmental justice is the just treatment and meaningful
involvement of all people, regardless of income, race, color, national
origin, Tribal affiliation, or disability, in agency decision-making
and other Federal activities that affect human health and the
environment so that people are fully protected from disproportionate
and adverse human health and environmental effects including risks and
hazards, such as those related to climate change and cumulative impacts
of environmental and other burdens on communities with environmental
justice concerns; and have equitable access to a healthy, sustainable,
and resilient environment. Advancing environmental justice further
requires Federal agencies to provide opportunities for meaningful
engagement of the public, including communities with environmental
justice concerns who are potentially affected by
[[Page 29271]]
Federal activities. When planning for location decisions, which is the
federal activity for purposes of this rule, Federal agencies must be
especially mindful of how proposed locations would impact communities
with environmental justice concerns. As appropriate and consistent with
applicable law, Federal agencies should seek to minimize negative and
maximize positive impacts in these areas, using available data and
meaningful engagement with local stakeholders to identify such
communities, and identify, analyze, and address adverse human health
and environmental effects (including risks) and hazards of the Federal
activity.
Sec. 102-83.80 What is equitable development?
Equitable development is a positive development approach that
employs processes, policies, and programs that aim to meet the needs of
all communities and community members, with a particular focus on
underserved communities and populations. When seeking Federal
locations, agencies should, to the extent consistent with applicable
law, consider the needs of communities, including those communities
that are underserved, through policies and actions that reduce
disparities while fostering communities that are healthy and vibrant.
Sec. 102-83.85 In addition to Federal agency mission, security and
program requirements, what other factors and principles must agencies
consider when establishing a potential delineated area and planning for
location decisions?
(a) In addition to agency mission, security and program
requirements, Federal agencies also must give serious consideration to
the impact a location decision will have on improving the social,
economic, environmental, and cultural conditions of communities,
including those that have been historically harmed by environmental
injustice and inequality, as well as avoiding harm to such communities,
while at the same time promoting efficient and cost-effective
Government real estate management. These factors and principles derive
from the relevant authorities in this part and include the following:
(1) Cost to the Government, including both upfront real estate
acquisition as well as long-term operating costs;
(2) Opportunities to reduce the Federal real estate footprint and
optimize agency space usage;
(3) Ability to manage the local Federal real estate portfolio
strategically to optimize effective operations over the long term; and
(4) Consideration of the competition requirements under CICA, if
applicable to the site location decision.
(b) In addition to agency mission, security and program
requirements, Federal agencies also must consider a series of factors
meant to promote Federal investment that supports larger Federal
program goals and local development objectives. These factors include
the following:
(1) Compatibility with State and local economic development
objectives, such as local and regional comprehensive plans, housing and
transportation plans, neighborhood scale plans and local plans covering
sustainability and resilience goals. When planning for location
decisions, agencies should align, where possible, with local and
regional planning goals. Agencies should meaningfully engage with local
officials and community members potentially impacted by a location
decision and consider their recommendations in light of Federal mission
needs and equitability and sustainability goals, including where
affected populations have experienced historic and ongoing harms due to
environmental injustice and inequality;
(2) Promoting environmentally sustainable development, reduced
greenhouse gas emissions, increased resilience to the impacts of
climate change, and stewardship of regional natural resources;
(3) Maximizing the use of existing resources by leveraging
investment in existing infrastructure;
(4) Prioritizing development of brownfields (properties, the
expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may be complicated by the
presence or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or
contaminant), greyfields (previously developed land that is
underutilized) and infill development;
(5) Locating facilities along transportation corridors to encourage
the use of alternate modes of transportation, and seeking efficient
locations that provide a variety of transportation options for
employees and the public, especially walking, biking and public transit
options, while maximizing use of existing infrastructure and minimizing
employee and visitor travel by car;
(6) Prioritizing central business districts, existing employment
centers and rural town centers, and locating in areas that are
accessible by public transit, where it exists, to a broad range of the
workforce and population, such as those seeking services or needing to
visit Federal space locations;
(7) Avoiding development in floodplains or impacts to wetlands to
the extent practicable;
(8) Fostering protection of the natural environment by preserving
ecosystems, including native ecosystems, avoiding development of green
space, and promoting climate change adaptation planning;
(9) Advancing environmental justice and equitable development; and
(10) Advancing Federal and local historic preservation objectives
and promoting the preservation of historic resources and other existing
buildings.
(c) The factors listed in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section
must be considered when applying the hierarchy of geographic
consideration in Sec. 102-83.90. The optimal Federal location decision
is the choice that meets Federal agency mission, security and program
requirements and is cost effective, while leveraging Federal
development in support of these other Federal programs policies and
goals, as well as local development objectives.
Sec. 102-83.90 What hierarchy of geographic consideration must
agencies apply to location decisions?
(a) Agencies must develop policies and procedures for applying the
goals of this part in their business practices. These policies and
procedures must include methods for applying the hierarchy outlined in
paragraph (b) of this section.
(b) When making new location decisions, agencies must give
preference to geographic areas in the following order:
(1) Agencies must give first priority to locating in a rural area
in accordance with the Rural Development Act of 1972 (RDA). As with
other elements of this part, acquiring agencies must develop their own
policies and procedures for implementing the goals of the RDA. Agencies
must consider the objectives outlined in Sec. 102-83.85 and use these
principles and factors to differentiate among potential locations.
Agencies are encouraged to seek a location that best meets these
factors or meet multiple factors. If an agency's mission cannot be
accomplished in a rural area, the agency may locate in an urban area.
(2) When an agency's mission requires location in an urban area,
the agency must give priority to the CBA within a principal city of a
CBSA or other areas as recommended by local officials. Agencies must
consider the objectives outlined in Sec. 102-83.85 and use these
principles and factors to differentiate among potential locations.
Agencies are encouraged to seek a location that best
[[Page 29272]]
meets these factors or meets multiple factors.
(3) If an agency mission cannot be met within a principal city, or
where areas, such as existing employment centers, outside the principal
city offer better opportunities to advance the objectives outlined in
Sec. 102-83.85, in accordance with their established policies and
procedures, agencies may proceed to seek space in those areas.
(4) Once an agency has set a delineated area in a rural or urban
area, agencies must comply with the requirements for consideration of
historic properties and districts set forth in Sec. 102-78.60.
Sec. 102-83.95 How must agencies consult and engage with local
officials and communities to comply with the consultation and
engagement elements of part 102-83?
Agencies have wide latitude to develop their own internal policies
for consulting and engaging in ways that are both effective and
efficient based upon the intent of this part, the relevant development
context and the agency's core business practices. Agencies must develop
internal policies and procedures that guide consultation and engagement
using different methods for actions of varying scale or scope. Location
decisions to support fee simple acquisition and Federal construction in
most cases will require direct consultation and engagement with local
officials during the location evaluation process to meet the intent of
this part. Conversely, for acquisition of existing space through a
lease contract, agencies may develop internal procedures that apply the
hierarchy outlined in this part such that no transaction-specific
consultation or engagement with local officials would be required if
the delineated area is within a recognized CBA or other area
recommended by local officials. To expedite effective and efficient
implementation of this part, where appropriate, agencies are encouraged
to pursue consultation and engagement actively with local officials and
communities, as appropriate, to discuss development goals well ahead of
specific space actions.
(a) Under multiple guiding authorities, acquiring agencies must
consult and engage with local officials to apply the principles
outlined in this part properly. Consultation and engagement and
consideration of local input must occur in urban areas, and agencies
are encouraged to perform similar consultation and engagement in rural
areas, as appropriate.
(b) Federal agencies should refer to their agency Tribal
consultation policies and applicable legal requirements, and confer if
needed with agency counsel, to determine whether consultation with
Tribal governments, Alaska Native corporations, Native Hawaiian
Organizations, or other entities is required, such as if the Federal
location decision may include or affect Tribal trust or reserved lands,
and natural resources, and if so conduct such consultation.
(c) Where communities are likely to face displacement risks
associated with a Federal location decision, based on agency analysis
of existing data and consultation and engagement with local officials,
or where communities have been harmed historically by inequity, such as
persistent poverty or underinvestment, or environmental injustice,
agency engagement should occur not only with relevant regional and
local officials but also with members of the affected communities.
(d) Meaningful engagement with local stakeholders outside of
government or those who have been historically left out of community
and economic development planning requires agencies to identify and
include community members in federal location planning activities early
enough in the process for them to have insight into and for their input
to be reflected in the decision making process. This includes
opportunities for significant participation through modes that reduce
known barriers to participation, such as plain language use,
translation, transportation, digital and non-digital access, culture,
time of day, and availability of childcare and other supportive
services.
Sec. 102-83.100 What flexibility do Federal agencies have to
implement part 102-83 in high cost areas?
Agencies have flexibility in considering the differing costs among
principal cities within a single CBSA and in setting delineated areas
to incorporate lower-cost markets.
There may be some instances where the head of the responsible
acquiring agency or the head of the agency's designee determines that
cost and security issues take precedence over the hierarchy of
consideration in this part. Federal agencies may deviate from the
hierarchy only where doing so would represent significant cost savings
or security advantages to the Government. In such cases, agencies must
consult and engage with and consider the recommendations of local
officials, review and affirm this determination, and document the file
accordingly.
In every instance, agencies must seek to meet the intent of the
governing authorities described in Sec. 102-83.10, and they must
incorporate their applicable process into their internal policies and
procedures.
Sec. 102-83.105 Are Federal agencies required to give preference to
historic properties when acquiring leased space?
Yes. Federal agencies must give a price preference to historic
properties when acquiring leased space. See Sec. 102-73.30 of this
chapter for additional guidance.
Sec. 102-83.110 Does GSA provide assistance to Federal agencies by
consulting and engaging with local officials to establish recommended
delineated areas?
Yes. GSA may, at its discretion, assist agencies by consulting and
engaging with local officials to establish recommended delineated areas
for use in Federal location decisions. These GSA-recommended delineated
areas may be proactively developed independent of a specific space
requirement. These recommended delineated areas will take into
consideration the factors discussed in this part. The final delineated
area used in the space acquisition may differ from these recommended
areas, depending on the agency mission requirements, CICA and other
factors relevant to a specific space action.
Sec. 102-83.115 Are Federal agencies required to consider whether the
CBA or other areas recommended by local officials will provide for
adequate competition when acquiring leased space?
Yes. In accordance with CICA, Federal agencies must consider
whether restricting the delineated area for obtaining leased space to
CBAs or other areas recommended by local officials will provide for
adequate competition when acquiring space. If a Federal agency
determines that the delineated area must be expanded beyond the
preferred areas to provide adequate competition, the agency may expand
the delineated area in consultation and engagement with local
officials. Federal agencies must continue to include the preferred area
in such expanded areas.
Sec. 102-83.120 What information and data must agencies provide to
the Administrator of General Services, or other acquiring agency head,
to comply with the provisions of this part?
Efficient and effective space management of Federally owned and
leased facilities through the activities described in this part
requires that Federal agencies cooperate with acquiring agencies and
furnish any related data and information requested by the acquiring
agencies, to the extent
[[Page 29273]]
not prohibited by law. This includes information or data that allows
for:
(a) Selecting, acquiring, managing, and disposing of Federal space
in a manner that will foster the policies and programs of the Federal
Government and improve the management and administration of Government
activities;
(b) Issuing regulations, standards and criteria for the selection,
acquisition and management of Federally owned and leased space;
(c) Surveying space requirements, space utilization and daily
occupancy data of executive agencies;
(d) Meeting essential space requirements in a manner that is
economically feasible and prudent; and
(e) Making maximum use of existing Federally controlled facilities
that, in the acquiring agency head's judgment, are adequate or
economically adaptable to meeting the space needs of executive
agencies.
Sec. 102-83.125 Who must approve the final delineated area?
The Federal agency conducting the space acquisition must approve
the final delineated area for the site acquisition or action. The
acquiring agency must confirm that the final delineated area complies
with all applicable laws, regulations and E.O.s.
Sec. 102-83.130 When is written justification for a delineated area
in urban areas required?
If the delineated area identified is outside the CBA in a principal
city, or differs from a GSA-recommended delineated area that has been
developed in accordance with the guiding authorities in this part, an
agency must demonstrate, in writing, that preference has been given to
the CBA of a principal city or GSA's recommended delineated area, and
that the agency considered the environmental and socioeconomic factors
in subpart B, Location of Space, of this part. The agency justification
also must address, at a minimum, the efficient performance of the
mission(s) and program(s) of the agency, the nature and function of the
facility or facilities involved, and the convenience of the public
being served.
Sec. 102-83.135 How will GSA negotiate changes to the final
delineated area with requesting agencies?
For space acquisitions conducted by GSA, if, based on its review of
a requesting agency's identified delineated area, GSA concludes that
the requesting agency's identified delineated area should be modified,
GSA will discuss its recommended changes with the requesting agency.
If, after discussions, the requesting agency does not agree with GSA's
delineated area recommendation, the requesting agency may appeal GSA's
determination in accordance with Sec. 102-83.140. If a requesting
agency elects to ask for a review of GSA's delineated area
recommendation, GSA will continue to work on the requirements
development and other activities related to the requesting agency's
space request. GSA will not issue a solicitation to satisfy an agency's
space request until a final delineated area is determined through the
appeal process.
Sec. 102-83.140 Where may Federal agencies appeal GSA decisions and
recommendations concerning the delineated area?
Agencies may appeal decisions and recommendations, in writing, to
the GSA Regional Commissioner of Public Buildings in the region where
the space acquisition is to take place or to the GSA Regional
Commissioner's designee. The written request for review must include
all relevant facts and other considerations and must justify the
alternative delineated area identified by the requesting agency with
regard to the location requirements set forth in all applicable
statutes, E.O.s and regulations. Once submitted to the Regional
Commissioner or the Regional Commissioner's designee, the requesting
agency's appeal will proceed according to the process established
internally by GSA.
Sec. 102-83.145 Do these regulations apply in GSA's National Capital
Region?
The presence of the Federal Government in the National Capital
Region is such that the distribution of Federal facilities has been,
and will continue to be, a major influence on the character and extent
of development in the National Capital Region. In view of the special
nature of the National Capital Region and the preponderance of Federal
space contained therein, these regulations will be applied in the
National Capital Region in conjunction with regional plans and will
guide the development of strategic plans for the housing of Federal
agencies within the National Capital Region.
Subpart C--Severability
Sec. 102-83.150 What portions of this part are severable?
All provisions of this part are separate and severable from one
another. If any provision is stayed or determined to be invalid, it is
GSA's intention that the remaining provisions will continue in effect.
[FR Doc. 2024-08452 Filed 4-19-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820-14-P
</pre></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on April 22, 2024.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.