[Senate Report 113-122]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
113th Congress Report
1st Session } SENATE { 113-122
} {
_______________________________________________________________________
Calendar No. 249
FEDERAL REAL PROPERTY ASSET MANAGEMENT REFORM ACT OF 2013
__________
R E P O R T
of the
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND
GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
to accompany
S. 1398
TO REQUIRE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO EXPEDITE THE SALE OF UNDERUTILIZED
FEDERAL REAL PROPERTY
November 19, 2013.--Ordered to be printed
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware Chairman
CARL LEVIN, Michigan TOM COBURN, Oklahoma
MARK L. PRYOR, Arkansas JOHN McCAIN, Arizona
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin
CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri ROB PORTMAN, Ohio
JON TESTER, Montana RAND PAUL, Kentucky
MARK BEGICH, Alaska MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming
TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin KELLY AYOTTE, New Hampshire
HEIDI HEITKAMP, North Dakota
Richard J. Kessler, Staff Director
John P. Kilvington, Deputy Staff Director
Beth M. Grossman, Chief Counsel
Troy H. Cribb, Chief Counsel for Governmental Affairs
Keith B. Ashdown, Minority Staff Director
Christopher J. Barkley, Minority Deputy Staff Director
Andrew C. Dockham, Minority Chief Counsel
Patrick J. Bailey, Minority Counsel
Laura W. Kilbride, Chief Clerk
Calendar No. 249
113th Congress
SENATE
Report
1st Session 113-122
======================================================================
FEDERAL REAL PROPERTY ASSET MANAGEMENT REFORM ACT OF 2013
_______
November 19, 2013.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Carper, from the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs, submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany S. 1398]
The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs, to which was referred the bill (S. 1398) to require
the Federal Government to expedite the sale of underutilized
Federal real property, having considered the same, reports
favorably thereon and recommends that the bill do pass.
CONTENTS
Page
I. Purpose..........................................................1
II. Background and Need for the Legislation..........................2
III. Legislative History.............................................10
IV. Section-by-Section Analysis of the Bill, as Reported............10
V. Evaluation of Regulatory Impact.................................13
VI. Congressional Budget Office Estimate............................13
VII. Changes to Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported...........16
I. Purpose and Summary
The purpose of S. 1398 is to improve the efficiency and
effectiveness of the federal government's management of real
property. It requires agencies to maintain an up-to-date
inventory of real property, establishes an interagency Federal
Real Property Council to develop guidance on real property
management and ensure its implementation, and authorizes a
pilot program to expedite the disposal of surplus real
property.
II. Background and Need for the Legislation
GENERAL BACKGROUND
The federal government owns and leases billions of dollars'
worth of ``real property,'' a term that encompasses both land
and any structures on it. Effectively and efficiently managing
the government's extensive real property holdings has posed
serious and long-standing challenges for the federal
government. Since 2003, the Government Accountability Office
(GAO) has placed real property management on its ``high risk
list,'' GAO's inventory of programs at high risk for waste,
fraud, or abuse, or that pose management challenges sufficient
to threaten crucial government services.\1\ Problems related to
real property management include ineffective management of
excess and underutilized property and an overreliance on costly
leasing. Compounding these management problems is the fact that
agencies that no longer need particular parcels of property
face a lengthy and costly disposal process, often causing
agencies to keep unneeded property. As a result, the federal
government as a whole continues to retain more real property
than it needs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\U.S. Government Accountability Office, High Risk Series: Federal
Real Property (Jan. 2003) (GAO-03-122).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since the first designation of real property management to
GAO's high risk list, the problem has received high level
attention from both the current and previous administrations. A
2004 Presidential Executive Order required agencies to
designate a senior real property officer to inventory property
managed by the agency (whether owned or leased) and develop a
property management plan. The Executive Order also established
the Federal Real Property Council (the Council), comprised of
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Controller and senior
real property officers from twenty-four landholding agencies,
and charged them with promoting reforms.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\Exec. Order No. 13327, 69 Fed. Reg. 5897 (Feb. 4, 2004). The
twenty-four agencies are those agencies covered by the Chief Financial
Officers Act (P.L. 101-576), and encompasses the largest agencies and
departments of the federal government.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although agencies have made progress in some areas of real
property management following the issuance of the 2004
Executive Order GAO concluded in January 2008 that the core
problems that led to the placement of real property management
on the high risk list remained unaddressed. In fact, GAO
reported that agencies' reliance on leasing property rather
than owning property (which commonly is more cost effective)
was increasing. For example, the General Services
Administration (GSA), which acts as the government's leasing
agent, increased its leased space from about 160 million square
feet to about 172 million square feet from fiscal year 2003
through fiscal year 2006. During that same time, GSA's owned
space decreased from about 180 million square feet to about 174
million square feet.\3\ In 2008, GSA predicted that in that
year it would, for the first time, lease more property than it
owned.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\U.S. Government Accountability Office, Federal Real Property:
Strategies Needed to Address Agencies' Long-Standing Reliance on Costly
Leasing, (Jan. 2008) (GAO-08-197) p. 13.
\4\Ibid. at 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In June 2010, President Obama issued a memorandum directing
agencies to identify and eliminate sufficient excess properties
to produce a $3 billion cost savings by the end of Fiscal Year
(FY) 2012. The memorandum directed agencies to find the cost
savings in increased proceeds from the sale of assets and
reduced operating, maintenance, and energy expenses from
disposals or other space consolidation efforts.\5\ In May 2012,
the Acting Director of OMB, Jeffrey Zients, issued a memorandum
stating that ``agencies shall not increase the size of their
civilian real estate inventory'' and ``any acquisition of new
federal building space . . . that increases an agency's total
square footage of civilian property must be offset through
consolidation, co-location, or disposal of space from the
inventory of that agency.''\6\ Most recently, in March 2013,
the OMB Controller, Daniel Werfel, issued guidance requiring
agencies to develop and submit a Revised Real Property Cost
Savings and Innovation Plan as well as an Annual Agency
Evaluation describing the agency's overall approach to managing
its real property usage and spending.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\White House, Presidential Memorandum--Disposing of Unneeded
Federal Real Estate (June 10, 2010). Can be found at http://
www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/presidential-memorandum-disposing-
unneeded-Federal -real-estate).
\6\The Office of Management and Budget, M-12-12: Memorandum to the
Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies, Promoting Efficient
Spending to Support Agency Operations (May 12, 2012), p. 5. Can be
found at http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/memoranda/
2012/M-12-12.pdf
\7\The Office of Management and Budget, Management Procedures
Memorandum No. 2013-02, Implementation of OMB Memorandum M-12-12
Section 3: Freeze the Footprint (March 14, 2013). Can be found at
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/financial/memos/
implementation-of-freeze-the-footprint-guidance.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE FEDERAL REAL PROPERTY COUNCIL AND CHALLENGES OF DATA ACCURACY AND
CONSISTENCY
Despite efforts by both the Obama and Bush Administrations,
real property management retained its spot on GAO's 2013 high
risk list, a designation with which the Committee agrees. Most
significantly and fundamentally, federal agencies still do not
have consistent, accurate, and useful data about their real
property holdings, which makes sound planning and decision
making about property use, acquisition, and disposition
virtually impossible. Under the 2004 Executive Order, GSA was
tasked with developing and managing ``a single, comprehensive,
and descriptive database of all real property under the custody
and control of all executive branch agencies, except when
otherwise required for reasons of national security.''\8\ The
Council and GSA then developed the Federal Real Property
Profile (FRPP) database to collect key inventory information on
the government's real property holdings. The goals of the FRPP
are to: (1) lead to an increased level of agency accountability
for real property management; (2) allow for comparing and
benchmarking across various types of real property assets; and
(3) give decision-makers the accurate and reliable data needed
to make asset management decisions, including disposing of
unneeded properties.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\Exec. Order No. 13327, 69 Fed. Reg. 5897 (Feb. 4, 2004).
\9\General Services Administration, Real Property Management
Policy, Asset Management, Federal Real Property Profile, Frequently
Asked Questions, accessed September 30, 2013,
http://www.gsa.gov/portal/content/104199.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Council has been collecting FRPP data on federal
properties since 2005, but problems relating to the
completeness and accuracy of the data submitted by agencies
have rendered the FRPP relatively useless. A June 2012 GAO
report noted that the Council has not followed sound data
collection practices when collecting FRPP data. Specifically,
GAO found the Council did not give agencies adequate guidance
in surveying property, leading to problems with data
consistency, performance measures, and data reporting.\10\ GAO
reported that agencies, for their part, have expressed concerns
about the data collection process, including the amount of data
collection required, the time they are given to implement new
requirements, and their ability to collect required data
accurately.\11\ Unfortunately, while agency concerns have
increased, the Council has stopped meeting regularly, limiting
opportunities to address these concerns and provide guidance to
agencies. GAO also raises questions about whether the Council
should publish more of the data it collects from agencies in
its FRPP summary reports\12\ in order to help decision makers
such as Congress, which generally does not have access to the
FRPP, make informed decisions regarding property
management.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\U.S. Government Accountability Office, Federal Real Property:
National Strategy and Better Data needed to Improve Management of
Excess and Underutilized Property (June 2012) (GAO-12-645) p. 23.
\11\Id. at 25.
\12\General Services Administration, Real Property Management
Policy, Asset Management, Federal Real Property Profile, Federal Real
Property Summary Report Library, accessed September 30, 2013,
www.gsa.gov/frppreports
\13\U.S. Government Accountability Office, Federal Real Property:
National Strategy and Better Data needed to Improve Management of
Excess and Underutilized Property (June 2012) (GAO-12-645) pp. 27-28.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
GAO found that flaws in data consistency and accuracy
extend to agencies' reporting of the extent to which property
in their inventory is being utilized fully, is underutilized,
or should be declared excess (that is, no longer needed by the
agency). For example, GAO visited a United States Department of
Agriculture (USDA) site with two houses listed on the FRPP as
utilized for 2009 and 2010 that, in reality, had been empty
since 2009.\14\ Additionally, one building owned by the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) was reported to have a
utilization rate of 39 percent in 2010 and a 45 percent
utilization rate in 2011 even though local officials GAO spoke
to said that the building has been fully occupied since 2008.
At the same time, a different building on the same VA site was
reported to be unutilized in 2010 and 59 percent utilized in
2011, but when GAO toured the building all but one of the rooms
in the building were vacant and local officials reported to GAO
that only 10 percent of the building was utilized.\15\ These
data anomalies occur both because guidance issued by the
Council on how agencies should evaluate their real property is
not always clear and because agencies sometimes do not follow
the guidance. When key data elements are not reported uniformly
across the government, the information provides little value
when inserted into a single database. Without an accurate and
consistent government-wide database of real property assets, it
will remain difficult to address additional challenges in
efficiently managing federal real property.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\Id. at 11.
\15\Id. at 10-11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LEASING
Compounding the federal government's property management
challenges is an over-reliance on costly leasing, even where
ownership would be more cost-effective in the long term. GAO
cited the federal government's heavy reliance on leasing as one
reason that federal real property management remains a high-
risk area.\16\ According to GAO, the federal government now
leases more property than it owns.\17\ Additionally, the
government often leases space from private landlords in the
same real estate market where it also owns underutilized
property. The effect of this is the federal government
overpaying for property. In some cases, federal agencies in the
same market could consolidate their offices into other
government-owned properties. However, as GAO notes, agencies
often do not have a clear understanding of real property held
by other agencies and may lack the authority or expertise to
identify underutilized federal property in the same market that
is suitable for co-location with other federal agencies.\18\
While leasing from the private sector may be a viable option
when an agency has a desire or need for flexibility or a short-
term need, studies have shown that building ownership options
through construction or purchase are generally the least
expensive ways to meet long-term occupancy needs.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\U.S. Government Accountability Office, High Risk Series: An
Update (Feb. 2013) (GAO-13-283).
\17\U.S. Government Accountability Office, Federal Real Property:
Overreliance on Leasing Contributed to High-Risk Designation (Aug.
2011) (GAO-11-879T), p. 1.
\18\U.S. Government Accountability Office, High Risk Series: An
Update (Feb. 2013) (GAO-13-283), p. 107.
\19\U.S. Government Accountability Office, Federal Real Property:
Reliance on Costly Leasing to Meet New Space Needs is an Ongoing
Problem (Oct. 2005) (GAO-06-136T), p. 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under current law, GSA is authorized to lease property for
itself and on behalf of many other agencies. Certain agencies,
however, have limited independent leasing authority, which
means they do not have to work with GSA to acquire leased
space. Some agencies with independent leasing authority, such
as the VA, have established in-house real estate expertise,
while other agencies with independent leasing authority have
not. For example, in 2010, the Securities and Exchange
Commission (SEC) executed a $557 million, 10-year lease for
900,000 square feet of office space, which the SEC's Inspector
General described as ``another in a long history of missteps
and misguided leasing decisions made by the SEC since it was
granted independent leasing authority by Congress in
1990.''\20\ The Committee believes that urgent action is needed
to consolidate federal operations onto government-owned sites,
where appropriate, thereby reducing the federal government's
leasing portfolio in a way that is advantageous for federal
agencies, stakeholders, and the clientele served by those
agencies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Office of Inspector
General, Improper Actions Relating to the Leasing of Office Space (May
2011) (Case No. OIG-553), p. 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PROPERTY MANAGEMENT AND DISPOSAL
The federal government continues to hold more real property
than it needs, leaving many buildings underutilized or vacant.
Vacant and underutilized federal properties are costly to
maintain. Every unneeded square foot of building space held by
the federal government requires annual funding for operations
and maintenance. This includes the costs of cleaning, heating,
lighting, landscaping, and security, as well as any costs
related to mortgage or lease payments. By holding onto unneeded
properties, agencies incur hidden opportunity costs because
unneeded buildings and land can be put to more cost-beneficial
uses, exchanged for other needed property, or sold to generate
revenue for the federal government. Additionally, when an
agency holds on to a property it no longer needs, that property
cannot be used by other entities such as private business or
non-profits to create jobs, spur innovation, increase local and
national prosperity, or meet other needs.
GAO has cited several longstanding barriers that cause
agencies to hold on to underutilized or unneeded vacant
properties rather than disposing of them by demolition, sale,
or other means.\21\ The government's ability to dispose of
unneeded property in an effective manner is hampered by a
lengthy disposal process. Legislative mandates, for instance,
require federal agencies to determine whether a property can be
used for homeless assistance or for another kind of public
benefit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\U.S. Government Accountability Office, Federal Real Property:
The Government Faces Challenges to Disposing of Unneeded Buildings,
(Testimony before the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public
Buildings and Emergency Management, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, House of Representatives) (February 2011) (GAO-11-
370T).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Committee is deeply concerned about the hurdles created
by the current process for disposing of federal property. The
disposal process\22\ requires agencies to report excess
property to GSA, which in turn makes it available to other
federal agencies at market rates. However, if no federal agency
expresses interest, the property is deemed surplus and must
then go through a lengthy screening process to determine
whether it should be disposed of through the ``public benefit
conveyance'' process. Properties disposed of in this way can be
offered to state and local governments or qualified nonprofits
for use in accomplishing public purposes specified in law, such
as use as educational facilities or for providing services to
the homeless. Conveyances under these procedures are either
donated or made at values well below the fair market. The
process for determining whether a property is suitable can be a
lengthy one, and unneeded properties may remain in an agency's
possession for years and continue to accumulate maintenance and
operation costs.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\The disposal process is governed by 40 U.S.C. Sec. 5
subchapters III and IV, and under part 101 of Title 41 of the Code of
Federal Regulations
\23\U.S. Government Accountability Office, Federal Real Property:
Progress Made on Planning and Data, but Unneeded Owned and Leased
Facilities Remain (Testimony before the Subcommittee on Economic
Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management, Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure, House of Representatives) (April
2011) (GAO-11-520T) p. 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, stakeholders other than Congress, OMB, and
the real property-holding agencies, have an interest in how the
federal government carries out its real property acquisition,
management, and disposal practices.\24\ GAO notes that
competing stakeholder interest in how the federal government
carries out its real property management and disposal practices
exacerbates the government's inability to efficiently dispose
of unneeded property.\25\ As a result, decisions about real
property often do not reflect the most cost-effective or
efficient alternative, which would be in the interest of the
agency or the government as a whole, but instead reflect on
other priorities. In particular, this situation often arises
when the federal government attempts to consolidate facilities
or otherwise dispose of unneeded assets.\26\ For example, VA
officials reported to GAO that disposal is often not an option
for most properties because of political stakeholders and
constituencies, including historic building advocates or local
communities that want to maintain their relationship with VA.
Additionally, Interior officials reported to GAO that it faces
significant challenges in balancing the needs and concerns of
local and state governments, historical preservation offices,
political interests, and others, particularly when coupled with
budget constraints.\27\ The result is a process that is costly,
cumbersome, and counter-productive in terms of the incentives
it provides for agencies to keep unwanted property on their
books.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\These stakeholders include foreign governments, state and local
governments, business interests in the communities where the assets are
located, private sector construction and leasing firms, historic
preservation organizations, various advocacy groups, and the public in
general.
\25\Ibid. at 5.
\26\U.S. Government Accountability Office, Federal Real Property:
Progress Made Toward Addressing Problems, but Underlying Obstacles
Continue to Hamper Reform, (April 2007) (GAO-07-349) p. 38.
\27\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The cost of disposing of real property can also outweigh
the financial benefits that result from building demolition or
sale. Agencies often lack the financial resources necessary to
dispose of excess facilities. Vacant and underutilized
properties are often among the oldest, most deteriorated assets
in agencies' portfolios. Agencies must complete expensive
repairs and renovations before the properties are ready for
disposal. Without the budgetary resources available to
agencies, they do not have an incentive to invest money towards
preparing property for demolition or sale. For example, USDA
reported to GAO that the total annual cost of maintaining 1,864
USDA assets with annual operating costs less than $5,000 was $3
million. However, the cost of disposing of these assets equals
or exceeds their annual operating cost and therefore disposal
would not immediately result in cost savings. Therefore, USDA
has chosen not to dispose of the assets.\28\ In the long run,
the cost of maintaining and operating these assets will likely
be higher than the cost of disposing of those USDA finds it no
longer needs. However, because the upfront cost of disposal is
higher than the annual cost of operations and maintenance of
unneeded properties, USDA has chosen to keep those properties
on the books.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\U.S. Government Accountability Office, Federal Real Property:
National Strategy and Better Data needed to Improve Management of
Excess and Underutilized Property (June 2012) (GAO-12-645), pp. 37-38.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Meeting environmental requirements also adds costs that may
outweigh the financial benefit of disposing of unneeded
property. Federal agencies are required by law\29\ to assess
and pay for any environmental cleanup that may be needed before
disposing of a property--a process that may require years of
study and result in significant costs. In some cases, the cost
of the environmental cleanup may exceed the costs of continuing
to maintain unneeded property.\30\ In this case, agencies will
often choose not to dispose of unneeded property.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\42 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 4321-4347.
\30\U.S. Government Accountability Office, Federal Real Property:
The Government Faces Challenges to Disposing of Unneeded Buildings,
(Testimony before the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public
Buildings and Emergency Management, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, House of Representatives) (February 2011) (GAO-11-370T)
p. 5
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Further exacerbating the problem, current law requires most
agencies to return funds received from the sale of surplus
property to the Treasury, even though it can require a
significant upfront investment to get a building ready for
disposal for the reasons stated above.\31\ Therefore, an agency
that goes through the lengthy disposal process, using
significant budgetary and personnel resources in the process,
in most cases is not able to retain the proceeds from the sale.
With little incentive to spend the money and other resources
needed to dispose of the property, property managers often
decide to pay for continued maintenance of vacant or
underutilized property rather than to go through the trouble
and cost of disposing of it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\Ibid. at 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To address this problem, certain agencies have been granted
specific statutory authority to retain proceeds from the sale
of their property.\32\ Retention of proceeds has proven to be
an effective incentive for federal agencies to dispose of their
unneeded properties.\33\ In testimony before the Committee,
Robert Peck, the former Commissioner of the Public Buildings
Service at GSA, reported that proceeds retention authority has
spurred agencies to eliminate unneeded assets and provided an
important source of reinvestment funds.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\U.S. Government Accountability Office, Federal Real Property:
Authorities and Actions Regarding Enhanced Use Leases and Sale of
Unneeded Real Property (Feb. 2009) (GAO-09-283R), p. 4.
\33\Id.
\34\Testimony given to the Senate Subcommittee on Federal Financial
Management, Government Information, Federal Services and International
Security. Peck, Robert, General Services Administration, June 9, 2011,
p. 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agencies have consistently argued that these statutory
requirements slow down the disposal process, compelling
agencies to incur operating costs for extended periods of time
while the properties are being screened. For example, real
property officials at the VA have said the McKinney-Vento
Homeless Assistance Act,\35\ which mandates that all surplus
property be screened to assess its suitability for use by non-
profit organizations to assist the homeless population, can add
as much as two years to the disposal process.\36\ Because
public benefit conveyance requirements are set in law, agencies
do not have the authority to bypass these steps in the process,
even for surplus properties that cannot be realistically
conveyed, such as those that are uninhabitable due to
environmental concerns. Similarly, the Department of Energy
(DOE) informed auditors that it has properties that could be
disposed of only by demolition, due to their condition or
location, but were still subject to the screening process,
thereby forcing the agency to pay maintenance costs during the
lengthy screening period that could have been avoided.\37\
While undoubtedly well intentioned, these requirements have
created a patchwork of cumbersome and confusing rules. Their
net effect has been to discourage agencies from initiating
disposal actions, thereby depriving non-federal entities of the
opportunity to make more productive use of these properties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\Codified at 42 U.S.C. Sec. 11411
\36\U.S. Government Accountability Office, Federal Real Property:
Progress Made in Reducing Unneeded Property, but VA Needs Better
Information to Make Further Reductions (Sept. 2008) (GAO-08-939), p.
39.
\37\U.S. Government Accountability Office, Federal Real Property:
Progress Made Toward Addressing Problems, but Underlying Obstacles
Continue to Hamper Reform, (April 2007) (GAO-07-349), p. 40.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Committee is particularly concerned about the dilatory
effect of provisions requiring the screening of property for
use by homeless groups. While thousands of properties are
screened every year for homeless use, very few are deemed
suitable for transfer to groups assisting the homeless
population, and even fewer are actually donated to those
groups. According to data provided to the Committee by GSA,
since the inception of the McKinney-Vento program in 1987
through the end of fiscal year 2010, only 108 properties have
been conveyed to groups assisting the homeless although tens of
thousands of properties are estimated to have been screened
during this time. From 2001 through 2011, only 39 properties
were conveyed to homeless assistance providers, an average of
less than four properties each year. In 2011, only one property
was given to a homeless assistance provider. Meanwhile both
taxpayer dollars and energy resources go to maintain the excess
assets in line to be screened.
In summary, the challenge of federal real property
management highlights the need for a new national strategy. As
noted by GAO, a national strategy can provide a clear path
forward to help federal agencies manage excess and
underutilized property in the long term, guide federal agencies
and other stakeholders to systematically identify risks and
resources needed to address those risks, and help agencies
determine investment priorities when managing federal
portfolios.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\Id. at 42.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
S. 1398 addresses this need by codifying the Federal Real
Property Council and directing it to establish a national real
property management plan to include goals for reducing surplus
property and achieving better utilization of underutilized
property. The Council is made up of key property management
officials from around government. It is tasked with ensuring
that the strategy is implemented so that Congress and the heads
of agencies will be able to track progress in achieving real
property management objectives on a government-wide basis.
The Committee also believes that many of the obstacles that
contribute to poor property management can be addressed by
requiring agencies to maintain better data on their real
property, prohibiting agencies from acquiring new real property
without disposing of underutilized properties, and offering
agencies incentives to dispose of unneeded property. S. 1398
first does this by requiring each agency to regularly survey
its real property assets and report them to the Council. The
legislation also requires agencies to seek more efficient use
of existing space, including through co-location with other
federal agencies, where appropriate. Further, S. 1398 puts in
place a strategy for reducing the amount of leased space used
for long-term needs. Finally, the bill facilitates the disposal
of unneeded properties by establishing a pilot program for
expedited property disposal. The pilot disposal program also
provides agencies with an incentive to dispose of unneeded
property by allowing agencies to retain 18 percent of the
proceeds of any sale to use towards real property asset
management and disposal of unneeded real property.
In a letter to the Committee, the National Law Center on
Homelessness and Poverty expressed their concern that S. 1398
would eliminate the ability of homeless service providers to
receive federal property at no cost that was established under
the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act. However, the bill
does not eliminate any provision under the McKinney-Vento
Homeless Assistance Act. Rather, S. 1398 establishes a pilot
disposal program for which properties in the program are not
subject to the public benefit conveyance process. The pilot
disposal program is limited to 200 surplus properties per year
and would expire after five years. During this time, homeless
assistance groups would still be able to apply for and receive
the surplus properties deemed suitable for use in assisting the
homeless population that are not a part of the pilot program.
Given the twenty-five year record discussed above, the
Committee has concluded that Congress should consider changing
the McKinney-Vento mandate. The pilot program would allow
Congress to study whether waiving certain provisions in the
McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act would indeed expedite
disposal of surplus federal property and whether there is a
more efficient and cost-effective way for the federal
government to support the homeless population other than
holding up, often for years, the disposal of each piece of
federal surplus property so that a minute subset of those
properties can go to serve the homeless. To that end, the bill
dictates that 2 percent of proceeds from the properties sold
under the pilot program be directed to a grant program to be
distributed to homeless providers for purchase or
rehabilitation of other properties. The Committee believes that
contributing a percentage of proceeds from the sale of surplus
federal property to homeless assistance grants would be more
beneficial to the homeless than donating only a handful of
properties each year to homeless assistance providers
nationwide.
III. Legislative History
S. 1398 was introduced by Senators Carper and Coburn on
July 30, 2013, with Senators Ayotte, Begich, Portman, Pryor,
and Tester as co-sponsors. The Committee considered the bill at
a business meeting on July 31, 2013, and ordered the bill
reported favorably by a voice vote, with Senator Levin asking
to be recorded as voting against the bill. Members present for
the vote on the bill were Senators Carper, Levin, McCaskill,
Tester, Begich, Baldwin, Coburn, Johnson, Ayotte, and Chiesa.
IV. Section-by-Section Analysis of the Bill, as Reported
Section 1. Short title
This section gives the bill the short title of the
``Federal Real Property Asset Management Reform Act of 2013.''
Section 2. Purpose
This section states that the bill's purpose is to increase
the efficiency and effectiveness of the federal government in
managing its real property by (1) requiring agencies to
maintain an up-to-date inventory of real property; (2)
establishing a Federal Real Property Council to develop
guidance and ensure the implementation of strategies for better
managing federal real property; and (3) authorizing a pilot
program to expedite the disposal of surplus real property.
Section 3. Property management and expedited disposal of real property
The first part of this section defines important terms for
the bill.
It defines ``excess property'' as property under the
control of a federal agency that the head of the agency
determines is not required to meet the agency's needs or
responsibilities.
``Surplus property'' is defined as excess property that is
not required to meet the needs or responsibilities of any
federal agency. The term surplus property does not include: (1)
any military installation; (2) Indian and Native Eskimo
property held in trust by the federal government; (3) real
property operated and maintained by the Tennessee Valley
Authority; (4) any real property the Director of the Office of
Management and Budget excludes for reasons of national
security; (5) any public lands administered by the Secretary of
Interior through the Director of the Bureau of Land Management,
the Director of the National Park Service, the Commissioner of
Reclamation, or the Director of the United States Fish and
Wildlife Service; (6) any public lands administered by the
Secretary of Agriculture acting through the Chief of the Forest
Service; and, (7) any property operated and maintained by the
United States Postal Service.
``Underutilized property'' is defined in the legislation as
an entire property or portion thereof, with or without
improvements which is used (1) irregularly or intermittently by
the accountable federal agency for program purposes of that
agency or (2) for program purposes that can be satisfied only
with a portion of that property.
The term ``disposal'' is defined as any action that
constitutes the removal of any real property from the federal
inventory, including sale, deed, demolition, or exchange.
The term ``Administrator'' is defined as the Administrator
of the General Services Administration (GSA).
The term ``Director'' refers to the Director of the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB).
The second part of this section details actions agencies
must take in order to improve the management of their real
property. Under this section each agency must conduct an
inventory of real property under its control and provide
detailed information about the inventoried property to the GSA
Administrator and the Federal Real Property Council (the
Council). Additionally, agencies are required to continuously
survey their real property to identify excess and underutilized
property, report any excess or underutilized property to the
GSA Administrator, identify opportunities for colocation with
other federal agencies where appropriate, and establish goals
that will lead to a reduction of the agency's excess and
underutilized real property. Agencies must also provide the
Council and the GSA Administrator information on their real
property assets to be used for the establishment and
maintenance of a government-wide real property database.
The third part of this section allows the Postmaster
General of the U.S. Postal Service to identify a list of postal
properties with space available for use by federal agencies and
submit that list to the Council. Under this provision, agencies
must review this list and recommend colocations if appropriate.
The fourth part of this section establishes the Federal
Real Property Council, to be comprised of senior real property
officers from each of 24 designated federal agencies, the
Controller at the Office of Management and Budget, and the GSA
Administrator. The Deputy Director for Management at OMB will
chair the Council and designate an Executive Director to assist
the Council in carrying out its duties. This part of this
section requires the Council to establish an annual real
property asset management plan and to include in that plan
performance measures that will enable Congress to track
progress in achieving real property goals government-wide and
compare the performance of landholding agencies against
industry and other public sector agencies. Additionally, this
section directs the Council to develop a strategy to reduce
federal agencies' reliance on leasing when building ownership
would be more cost-effective. Finally, the Council is expected
to provide guidance to agencies so that property assessments
can be uniform across the government.
The fifth part of this section directs the GSA
Administrator to establish and maintain a single,
comprehensive, and descriptive database of all real property
under the custody and control of federal agencies. The database
must contain the results of agencies' inventory of their real
property as described in the first part of this section as well
as a list of real property disposals that have been completed
within the past year. The Administrator is required to make the
database accessible to the public at no cost within three years
of the date of enactment of this bill.
Although GSA is responsible for leasing property on behalf
of most federal agencies, certain agencies have independent
leasing authority, under which they may enter into leases on
their own. The sixth part of this section imposes a reporting
requirement on such agencies so that the executive branch and
the Congress can better monitor whether those agencies' leases
reflect the best use of federal resources. Agencies with
independent leasing authority would be required to submit a
yearly report to the Council providing detailed information
regarding their leasing activity. This section would not apply
to the United States Postal Service, the Department of Veterans
Affairs, or any other property the President excludes for
reasons of national security.
The sixth part of this section establishes a pilot program
to expedite the disposal of surplus properties. Under this
section, the Director of OMB may authorize the disposal of up
to 200 surplus properties each year with priority going to
those properties that have the highest fair market value and
the greatest potential for disposal. Agencies must make
property available for sale within 18 months after receiving a
determination from the OMB Director that the property is
surplus and has been selected for the pilot program. Failure to
do so would prevent the agency from acquiring additional
property unless the square footage of the increase is offset
through consolidation, colocation, or disposal of another
building space from the inventory of that agency. Under the
pilot program, after GSA is reimbursed for the costs of
identifying and preparing property for disposal, any proceeds
will be distributed as follows: 80 percent would be returned to
the Treasury for debt reduction; the lesser of 18 percent or
the share of proceeds otherwise authorized to be retained under
law would be retained by the agency that owned the property;
and up to two percent would be used to fund homeless assistance
grants. This section would permit the Secretary of the
Department of Housing and Urban Development to use funds made
available through sales proceeds for grants to eligible private
non-profit organizations through the continuum care program
established under title IV of the McKinney-Vento Homeless
Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 11381 et seq.). If a
property that has been selected for disposal under the pilot
program has not been disposed of after two years in the
program, it may be conveyed to state and local governments or
non-profit organizations for certain public purposes, unless
the predominant use of the property is not for housing, the
area of the property is not less than 25,000 square feet, or
the appraised fair market value of the property is greater than
$1 million.
Section 4. Report of the Comptroller General
This section requires the Comptroller General of the United
States, within five years of enactment, to submit a report to
Congress on the expedited disposal program established in this
legislation.
Section 5. Technical and conforming amendments
This section contains a technical and conforming amendment
to the table of contents for chapter 5 of subtitle I of Title
40, United States Code.
V. Evaluation of Regulatory Impact
Pursuant to the requirements of paragraph 11(b) of rule
XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee has
considered the regulatory impact of this bill. The Committee
agrees with the Congressional Budget Office that the bill
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as
defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would impose no
costs on state, local, or tribal governments, or private
entities. The enactment of this legislation would not have
significant regulatory impact.
VI. Congressional Budget Office Estimate
November 1, 2013.
Hon. Tom Carper,
Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, U.S.
Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 1398, the Federal
Real Property Asset Management Reform Act of 2013.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact for this
estimate is Matthew Pickford.
Sincerely,
Douglas W. Elmendorf.
Enclosure.
S. 1398--Federal Real Property Asset Management Reform Act of 2013
Summary: S. 1398 would amend the Federal Property and
Administrative Services Act (property act) to facilitate the
disposal of federal real property. The legislation would expand
the duties and responsibilities of the Federal Real Property
Council (FRPC), provide new authorities to the General Services
Administration (GSA), and establish a five-year pilot program
with the goal of expediting the disposal of surplus federal
property.
CBO estimates that enacting the bill would increase direct
spending by $10 million over the 2014-2023 period because, for
five years, it would authorize GSA to spend proceeds from the
sale of federal property that are expected to be collected, but
not spent, under current law. Because the legislation would
affect direct spending, pay-as-you-go procedures apply. In
addition, CBO estimates that, assuming the availability of
appropriated funds, implementing S. 1398 would cost $3 million
over the 2014-2018 period for additional administrative and
reporting costs related to property disposal. Enacting S. 1398
would not affect revenues.
S. 1398 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal
governments.
Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated
budgetary impact of S. 1398 is shown in the following table.
The costs of this legislation fall within budget function 800
(general government).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
-------------------------------------------------------
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2014-2018
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHANGES IN DIRECT SPENDING
Estimated Budget Authority.............................. 2 2 2 2 2 10
Estimated Outlays....................................... 2 2 2 2 2 10
CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
Estimated Authorization Level........................... 1 * * * * 3
Estimated Outlays....................................... 1 * * * * 3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: * = less than $500,000.
Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that S.
1398 will be enacted in early 2014, that the necessary funds
will be provided for each year, and that spending will follow
historical patterns for the affected programs.
Direct spending
The legislation would establish a five-year program to
expedite the disposal of surplus properties. Under that
program, up to 200 properties annually could be sold without
completing some of the administrative processes and
determinations that must occur under current law. Up to 20
percent of the proceeds from those sales would be available to
be spent by agencies or provided as grants for the homeless,
subject to future appropriation. The Director of the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) would be responsible for
identifying the federal properties available for disposal under
this expedited program, which would terminate five years after
enactment. Under the bill, agencies would be prohibited from
acquiring or leasing new property until they have disposed of
all of their underutilized property.
Under the property act, GSA currently manages the disposal
of surplus federal property for most agencies. The act allows
GSA to spend 12 percent of any proceeds from the sale of
federal buildings to cover its direct costs related to
preparing the property for sale; such costs include auction
fees and the cost of obtaining appraisals. The remaining
proceeds from surplus property sales are deposited in the
Treasury as offsetting receipts and, for the most part, cannot
be spent without further appropriation. Under current law, CBO
estimates that GSA's net receipts from the sale of surplus
federal property will total about $20 million per year.
Under the program that would be established in S. 1398, GSA
would be allowed to spend additional proceeds from property
sales to pay for the indirect costs related to preparing
properties for sale. Such costs would include conducting market
research and cost/benefit analyses and other activities to
identify and prepare for disposal properties that have not yet
been declared excess to the government's needs. The legislation
would not cap the portion of sales proceeds that could be spent
on indirect costs. CBO estimates that authorizing GSA to spend
additional proceeds from property sales to pay for such
indirect costs would increase direct spending by $2 million a
year from the receipts from property sales anticipated to occur
under current law. The increase in spending could be as much as
$20 million a year, however, depending on how GSA would use
this new authority.
In addition, based on an analysis of information from the
Government Accountability Office, OMB, GSA, and other federal
landholding agencies, CBO expects that little additional
property would be sold under this program. Many of the largest
federal agencies that manage significant numbers of properties
would probably opt to continue using their enhanced-use-leasing
authorities rather than GSA's property disposition services to
leverage value from underused real property. The financial
incentive that would be provided to non-GSA agencies to
participate in the program would not be large. Furthermore,
since June 2010, the President has directed agencies to
accelerate efforts to dispose of unneeded property, reduce
facility operating costs, and adopt more efficient real estate
management practices. Thus, it is not clear how the program
authorized in the bill would significantly accelerate disposal
efforts beyond what will occur under current law.
For those reasons, CBO expects that gross proceeds from
federal property sales would not increase significantly under
the bill, and this cost estimate incorporates no increase in
such proceeds. However, if the new program and new spending
authority to cover indirect costs related to property sales
were to result in a 10 percent increase in sales proceeds, that
amount would be sufficient to offset CBO's estimate of new
direct spending under the bill.
Spending subject to appropriation
S. 1398 would codify and expand the duties of the FRPC,
increase the reporting responsibilities of landholding
agencies, and require GSA to improve its database of federal
real property. Under the legislation, the FRPC would need to
develop new measures to analyze the use of government
facilities, a strategy to reduce the need to lease buildings, a
list of excess, surplus, and underultized property, as well as
a list of properties available for co-locating federal
agencies. In addition, agencies would have to report new
information, including property sales costs, capital
expenditures per building, and the number of federal employees
using each facility. Based on information from GSA and some
landholding agencies, CBO estimates that implementing those
provisions would cost about $3 million over the 2014-2018
period.
Better information about federal real property holdings, in
conjunction with additional funds for GSA to dispose of surplus
facilities, could result in additional property disposals, thus
reducing the need for annual appropriations to operate and
maintain those facilities. On one hand, GAO has reported that
operation and maintenance costs typically account for between
60 percent and 85 percent of the lifetime costs of owning a
building. On the other hand, GAO has also reported that the
Federal Real Property Profile (the single comprehensive
inventory system that contains data on all federal real
property assets) often overstates a property's condition and
annual operating costs. Those uncertainties make any estimate
of the potential savings from disposing of federal property
unreliable.
Pay-As-You-Go considerations: The Statutory Pay-As-You-Go
Act establishes budget-reporting and enforcement procedures for
legislation affecting direct spending or revenues. The net
changes in outlays that are subject to those pay-as-you-go
procedures are shown in the following table. Enacting the
legislation would have no effect on revenues.
CBO ESTIMATE OF PAY-AS-YOU-GO EFFECTS FOR S. 1398, THE FEDERAL REAL PROPERTY ASSET MANAGEMENT REFORM ACT OF 2013, AS ORDERED REPORTED BY THE SENATE
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS ON JULY 31, 2013
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2014-2018 2014-2023
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NET INCREASE OR DECREASE (-) IN THE DEFICIT
Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Impact.............................. 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 10 10
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: S. 1398
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as
defined in UMRA and would impose no costs on state, local, or
tribal governments.
Previous CBO estimates: On July 16, 2013, CBO transmitted a
cost estimate for H.R. 328, the Excess Federal Building and
Property Disposal Act of 2013, as ordered reported by the House
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform on March 20, 2013.
Both bills are similar in that they deal with the selling of
federal property, but they have several different provisions,
primarily regarding the length of time for which the new
authorities would be granted to GSA. The cost estimates reflect
those differences.
Estimate prepared by: Federal Spending: Matthew Pickford;
Impact on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Paige Piper/
Bach; Impact on the Private Sector: Elizabeth Cove Delisle.
Estimate approved by: Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
VII. Changes to Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported
In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by
S. 1398 as reported are shown as follows (existing law proposed
to be omitted is enclosed in brackets, new matter is printed in
italic, and existing law in which no change is proposed is
shown in roman):
UNITED STATES CODE
TITLE 40--PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 5--PROPERTY MANAGEMENT
* * * * * * *
Subchapter VII--Expedited Disposal of Real Property
Sec. 621. Definitions
In this subchapter:
(1) Administrator.--The term `Administrator' means
the Administrator of General Services.
(2) Council.--The term `Council' means the Federal
Real Property Council established by section 623(a).
(3) Director.--The term `Director' means the Director
of the Office of Management and Budget.
(4) Disposal.--The term `disposal' means any action
that constitutes the removal of any real property from
the Federal inventory, including sale, deed,
demolition, or exchange.
(5) Excess property.--The term `excess property'
means any real property under the control of a Federal
agency that the head of the Federal agency determines
is not required to meet the needs or responsibilities
of the Federal agency.
(6) Federal agency.--The term `Federal agency'
means--
(A) an executive department or independent
establishment in the executive branch of the
Government; or
(B) a wholly owned Government corporation.
(7) Field office.--The term `field office' means any
office of a Federal agency that is not the headquarters
office location for the Federal agency.
(8) Postal property.--The term `postal property'
means any building owned by the United States Postal
Service.
(9) Surplus property.--
(A) In general.--The term `surplus property'
means excess real property that is not required
to meet the needs or responsibilities of any
Federal agency.
(B) Exclusions.--The term `surplus property'
does not include--
(i) any military installation (as
defined in section 2910 of the Defense
Base Closure and Realignment Act of
1990 (10 U.S.C. 2687 note; Public Law
101-510));
(ii) any property that is excepted
from the definition of the term
`property' under section 102;
(iii) Indian and native Eskimo
property held in trust by the Federal
Government as described in section
3301(a)(5)(C)(iii);
(iv) real property operated and
maintained by the Tennessee Valley
Authority pursuant to the Tennessee
Valley Authority Act of 1933 (16 U.S.C.
831 et seq.);
(v) any real property the Director
excludes for reasons of national
security;
(vi) any public lands (as defined in
section 203 of the Public Lands Corps
Act of 1993 (16 U.S.C. 1722))
administered by--
(I) the Secretary of the
Interior, acting through--
(aa) the Director of
the Bureau of Land
Management;
(bb) the Director of
the National Park
Service;
(cc) the Commissioner
of Reclamation; or
(dd) the Director of
the United States Fish
and Wildlife Service;
or
(II) the Secretary of
Agriculture, acting through the
Chief of the Forest Service; or
(vii) any property operated and
maintained by the United States Postal
Service.
(10) Underutilized property.--The term `underutilized
property' means a portion or the entirety of any real
property, including any improvements, that is used--
(A) irregularly or intermittently by the
accountable Federal agency for program purposes
of the Federal agency; or (B) for program
purposes that can be satisfied only with a
portion of the property.
Sec. 622. Duties of Federal agencies
Each Federal agency shall--
(1) maintain adequate inventory controls and
accountability systems for real property under the
control of the Federal agency;
(2) develop current and future workforce projections
so as to have the capacity to assess the needs of the
Federal workforce regarding the use of real property;
(3) continuously survey real property under the
control of the Federal agency to identify excess
property, underutilized property, and other real
property suitable to be used for--
(A) colocation with other Federal agencies;
or
(B) consolidation with other facilities;
(4) promptly report excess property and underutilized
property to the Administrator;
(5) establish goals that will lead the Federal agency
to reduce excess property and underutilized property in
the inventory of the Federal agency;
(6) submit to the Council a report on all excess
property and underutilized property in the inventory of
the Federal agency, including--
(A) whether underutilized property can be
better utilized; and
(B) the extent to which the Federal agency
believes that the underutilized property serves
the needs of the Federal agency to retain
underutilized property;
(7) adopt workplace practices, configurations, and
management techniques that can achieve increased levels
of productivity and decrease the need for real property
assets;
(8) assess leased space to identify space that is not
fully used or occupied;
(9) on an annual basis and subject to the guidance of
the Council--
(A) conduct an inventory of real property
under control of the Federal agency; and (B)
make an assessment of each real property, which
shall include--
(i) the age and condition of the
property;
(ii) the size of the property in
square footage and acreage;
(iii) the geographical location of
the property, including an address and
description;
(iv) the extent to which the property
is being utilized;
(v) the actual annual operating costs
associated with the property;
(vi) the total cost of capital
expenditures associated with the
property;
(vii) sustainability metrics
associated with the property;
(viii) the number of Federal
employees and functions housed at the
property;
(ix) the extent to which the mission
of the Federal agency is dependent on
the property;
(x) the estimated amount of capital
expenditures projected to maintain and
operate the property over each of the
next 5 years after the date of
enactment of this subchapter; and
(xi) any additional information
required by the Administrator to carry
out section 624; and
(10) provide to the Council and the Administrator the
information described in paragraph (9)(B) to be used
for the establishment and maintenance of the database
described in section 624.
Sec. 623. Colocation among United States Postal Service properties
(a) Identification of Postal Property.--Each year, the
Postmaster General may--
(1) identify a list of postal properties with space
available for use by Federal agencies; and
(2) submit the list to the Council.
(b) Submission of List of Postal Properties to Federal
Agencies.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 30 days after the
completion of a list under subsection (a), the Council
shall provide the list to each Federal agency.
(2) Review by federal agencies.--Not later than 90
days after the receipt of the list submitted under
paragraph (1), each Federal agency shall--
(A) review the list;
(B) identify real property assets under the
control of the Federal agency; and (C)
recommend colocations if appropriate.
(c) Terms of Colocation.--On approval of the
recommendations under subsection (b) by the Postmaster General
and the applicable agency head, the Federal agency or
appropriate landholding entity may work with the Postmaster
General to establish appropriate terms of a lease for each
postal property.
``Sec. 624. Establishment of a Federal Real Property Council
(a) Establishment.--There is established a Federal Real
Property Council.
(b) Purpose.--The purpose of the Council shall be--
(1) to develop guidance and ensure implementation of
an efficient and effective real property management
strategy;
(2) to identify opportunities for the Federal
Government to better manage real property assets; and
(3) to reduce the costs of managing real property,
including operations, maintenance, and security.
(c) Composition.--
(1) In general.--The Council shall be composed
exclusively of--
(A) the senior real property officers of each
Federal agency;
(B) the Deputy Director for Management of the
Office of Management and Budget;
(C) the Controller of the Office of
Management and Budget;
(D) the Administrator; and
(E) any other full-time or permanent part-
time Federal officials or employees, as the
Chairperson determines to be necessary.
(2) Chairperson.--The Deputy Director for Management
of the Office of Management and Budget shall serve as
Chairperson of the Council.
(3) Executive director.--
(A) In general.--The Chairperson shall
designate an Executive Director to assist in
carrying out the duties of the Council.
(B) Qualifications; full-time.--The Executive
Director shall--
(i) be appointed from among
individuals who have substantial
experience in the areas of commercial
real estate and development, real
property management, and Federal
operations and management; and
(ii) serve full time.
(d) Meetings.--
(1) In general.--The Council shall meet subject to
the call of the Chairperson.
(2) Minimum.--The Council shall meet not fewer than 4
times each year.
(e) Duties.--The Council, in consultation with the Director
and the Administrator, shall--
(1) not later than 1 year after the date of enactment
of this subchapter, establish a real property
management plan template, to be updated annually, which
shall include performance measures, specific
milestones, measurable savings, strategies, and
government-wide goals based on the goals established
under section 622(5) to reduce surplus property or to
achieve better utilization of underutilized property,
and evaluation criteria to determine the effectiveness
of real property management that are designed--
(A) to enable Congress and heads of Federal
agencies to track progress in the achievement
of real property management objectives on a
government-wide basis;
``(B) to improve the management of real
property; and
``(C) to allow for comparison of the
performance of Federal agencies against
industry and other public sector agencies in
terms of performance;
(2) develop standard use rates consistent throughout
each category of space and with nongovernmental space
use rates;
(3) develop a strategy to reduce the reliance of
Federal agencies on leased space for long-term needs if
ownership would be less costly;
(4) provide guidance on eliminating inefficiencies in
the Federal leasing process;
(5) compile a list of real property assets that are
field offices that are suitable for colocation with
other real property assets; and
(6) not later than 1 year after the date of enactment
of this subchapter and annually during the 4 year
period beginning on the date that is 1 year after the
date of enactment of this subchapter and ending on the
date that is 5 years after the date of enactment of
this subchapter, the Council shall submit to the
Director a report that contains.--
(A) a list of the remaining excess property,
surplus property, and underutilized properties
of each Federal agency;
(B) the progress of the Council toward
developing guidance for Federal agencies to
ensure that the assessment required under
section 622(9)(B) is carried out in a uniform
manner; and
(C) the progress of Federal agencies toward
achieving the goals established under section
622(5).
(f) Consultation.--In carrying out the duties described in
subsection (e), the Council shall also consult with
representatives of.--
(1) State, local, tribal authorities, and affected
communities; and
(2) appropriate private sector entities and
nongovernmental organizations that have expertise in
areas of.--
(A) commercial real estate and development;
(B) government management and operations;
(C) space planning;
(D) community development, including
transportation and planning; and
(E) historic preservation.
(g) Council Resources.--The Director and the Administrator
shall provide staffing, and administrative support for the
Council, as appropriate.
Sec. 625. Federal real property inventory and database
(a) In General.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this subchapter, the Administrator shall establish
and maintain a single, comprehensive, and descriptive database
of all real property under the custody and control of all
Federal agencies.
(b) Contents.--The database shall include--
(1) information provided to the Administrator under
section 622(9)(B); and
(2) a list of real property disposals completed,
including--
(A) the date and disposal method used for
each real property;
(B) the proceeds obtained from the disposal
of each real property;
(C) the amount of time required to dispose of
the real property, including the date on which
the real property is designated as excess
property;
(D) the date on which the property is
designated as surplus property and the date on
which the property is disposed; and
(E) all costs associated with the disposal.
(c) Accessibility.--
(1) Committees.--The database established under
subsection (a) shall be made available on request to
the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs and the Committee on Environment and Public
Works of the Senate and the Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform and the Committee on Transportation
and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives.
(2) General public.--Not later than 3 years after the
date of enactment of this subchapter and to the extent
consistent with national security, the Administrator
shall make the database established under subsection
(a) accessible to the public at no cost through the
website of the General Services Administration.
Sec. 626. Limitation on certain leasing authorities
(a) In General.--Except as provided in subsection (b), not
later than December 31 of each year following the date of
enactment of this subchapter, a Federal agency with independent
leasing authority shall submit to the Council a list of all
leases, including operating leases, in effect on the date of
enactment of this subchapter that includes--
(1) the date on which each lease was executed;
(2) the date on which ease lease will expire;
(3) a description of the size of the space;
(4) the location of the property;
``(5) the tenant agency;
``(6) the total annual rental rate; and
``(7) the amount of the net present value of the
total estimated legal obligations of the Federal
Government over the life of the contract.
(b) Exception.--Subsection (a) shall not apply to--
(1) the United States Postal Service;
(2) the Department of Veterans Affairs; or
(3) any other property the President excludes from
subsection (a) for reasons of national security.
Sec. 627. Expedited disposal pilot program
(a) Establishment.--The Director shall establish a pilot
program to dispose of, by sale, transfer, or other means of
disposal, any surplus property.
(1) Properties for expedited disposal.--
(A) In general.--On an annual basis, the
Director may authorize the expedited disposal
of not more than 200 surplus properties.
(B) Priority.--In determining which
properties to dispose of, the Director shall
give priority to surplus properties that have
the highest fair market value and the greatest
potential for disposal.
(C) Costs associated with disposal.--
(i) In general.--The Administrator
may obligate an amount to pay any
direct and indirect costs under section
572 related to identifying and
preparing properties to be reported as
excess property by a Federal agency.
(ii) Reimbursement.--An amount
obligated under clause (i) shall be
paid from the proceeds of any sale of
real property under this subsection.
(iii) Net Proceeds.--Net proceeds
shall be distributed under subsection
(b).
(D) Maximum net proceeds.--Any real property
authorized to be disposed of by sale of under
subparagraph (A) shall disposed of in a manner
that, as determined by the Administrator in
consultation with the head of the applicable
Federal agency, is structured and marketed to
maximize the value to the Federal Government.
(E) Monetary proceeds requirement.--Surplus
property may be disposed of under this section
only if disposal of the property will generate
monetary proceeds to the Federal Government
that--
(i) exceed the costs of disposal of
the property; and
(ii) are not less than 90 percent of
fair market value.
(2) Applicability of certain law.--Any expedited
disposal of real property conducted under this section
shall not be subject to--
(A) any section of An Act Authorizing the
Transfer of Certain Real Property for Wildlife,
or other Purposes (16 U.S.C. 667b);
(B) sections 107 and 317 of title 23;
(C) sections 545(b)(8), 550, 553, 554, and
1304(b);
(D) section 501 of the McKinney-Vento
Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11411);
(E) section 47151 of title 49; or
(F) section 13(d) of the Surplus Property Act
of 1944 (50 U.S.C. App. 1622(d)).
(3) Effect.--Except as provided in paragraph (2),
nothing in this subchapter terminates or in any way
limits the authority of any Federal agency under any
other provision of law to dispose of real property.
(b) Use of Proceeds.--
(1) In general.--Of the proceeds received from the
disposal of any real property under this subchapter.--
(A) not less than 80 percent shall be
returned to the general fund of the Treasury
for debt reduction;
(B) the lesser of 18 percent or the share of
proceeds otherwise authorized to be retained
under law shall be retained by the Federal
agency that has custody and is accountable for
the real property, subject to paragraph (2);
(C) not greater than 2 percent shall be made
available to carry out section 627, subject to
annual appropriations; and
(D) any remaining share of the proceeds shall
be returned to the general fund of the Treasury
for Federal budget deficit reduction.
(2) Limitation on use of proceeds.--Any proceeds
retained by Federal agencies under this section shall
be--
(A) deposited into the appropriate real
property account of the Federal agency that had
custody and accountability for the real
property, with the funds expended only as
authorized in annual appropriations Acts;
(B) used--
(i) by not later than 2 years after
the date of disposal of the real
property; and
(ii) only for activities relating to
Federal real property asset management
and disposal; and
(C) if not used by the date described in
subparagraph (B)(i), shall be deposited in the
Treasury and used for Federal budget deficit
reduction.
(c) Public Benefit.--
(1) Conveyance.--Except as provided in paragraph (2),
if a real property authorized to be disposed of under
subsection (a) has not been disposed of by the date
that is 2 years after the date the property is listed
for sale, the Director, in consultation with the
Administrator and the Secretary of Housing and Urban
Development, may consider a request from the disposing
Federal agency that the real property be conveyed to
State and local governments or nonprofit organizations
for various public purposes or uses as permitted by
applicable law.
(2) Predominant use and size standards.--
(A) In general.--Any real property authorized
to be disposed of under subsection (a) shall
not be conveyed under paragraph (1) if--
(i) the predominant use of the
property is not for housing; and
(ii)(I) the area of the property is
not less than 25,000 square feet; or
(II) the appraised fair market value
of the property is greater than
$1,000,000.
(B) Appraised fair market value.--The
appraised fair market value described in
subparagraph (A)(ii)(II) shall be determined by
the Federal agency with custody or control of
the property, in consultation with the
Administrator and standard appraisal practice.
(d) Enforcement.--
(1) Increase in size of inventory.--Except as
provided in paragraph (2), if a Federal agency fails to
make available for public sale the real property
authorized to be disposed of under subsection (a) by
the date that is 18 months after the date on which the
authorization is made under subsection (a), that
Federal agency, except for specific exceptions
promulgated by the Director, shall not increase the
size of the civilian real property inventory, unless
the square footage of the increase is offset, within an
appropriate time as determined by the Director, through
consolidation, colocation, or disposal of another
building space from the inventory of that Federal
agency.
(2) Exception.--Paragraph (1) shall not apply to a
Federal agency that acquires any real property not
under the administrative jurisdiction of the Federal
Government, by sale or lease, until the Director
submits a certification to Congress of the disposal of
all of those surplus properties.
(e) Termination of Authority.--The authority provided by
this section terminates on the date that is 5 years after the
date of enactment of this subchapter.
Sec. 628. Homeless assistance grants
(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Eligible nonprofit organization.--The term
`eligible nonprofit organization' means a nonprofit
organization that is a representative of the homeless.
(2) Homeless.--The term `homeless' has the meaning
given the term in section 103 of the McKinney-Vento
Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11302), except that
subsection (c) of that section shall not apply.
(3) Permanent housing.--The term `permanent housing'
has the meaning given the term section 401 of the
McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C.
11360).
(4) Private nonprofit organization.--The term
`private nonprofit organization' has the meaning given
the term in section 401 of the McKinney-Vento Homeless
Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11360).
(5) Representative of the homeless.--The term
`representative of the homeless' has the meaning given
the term in section 501(i) of the McKinney-Vento
Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11411(i)).
(6) Secretary.--The term `Secretary' means the
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development.
(7) Transitional housing.--The term `transitional
housing' has the meaning given the term in section 401
of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42
U.S.C. 11360).
(b) Grant Authority.--
(1) In general.--To the extent amounts are made
available under section 626(b)(1)(B) for use under this
section, the Secretary shall make grants to eligible
private nonprofit organizations through the continuum
of care program established under subtitle C of title
IV of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42
U.S.C. 11381 et seq.), to purchase real property
suitable for use to assist the homeless in accordance
with subsection (c).
(2) Terms and conditions.--Except as otherwise
provided in this section, a grant under this section
shall be subject to the same terms and conditions as a
grant under the continuum of care program established
under subtitle C of title IV of the McKinney-Vento
Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11381 et seq.).
(c) Use of Properties for Housing or Shelter for the
Homeless.--
(1) Eligible uses.--An eligible private nonprofit
organization that receives a grant under subsection (b)
shall use the amounts received only to purchase or
rehabilitate real property for use to provide permanent
housing, transitional housing, or temporary shelter to
the homeless.
(2) Term of use.--The Secretary may not make a grant
under subsection (b) to an eligible private nonprofit
organization unless the eligible private nonprofit
organization provides to the Secretary such assurances
as the Secretary determines necessary to ensure that
any real property purchased or rehabilitated using
amounts received under the grant is used only for the
uses described in paragraph (1) for a period of not
less than 15 years.
(d) Preference.--In awarding grants under subsection (b),
the Secretary shall give preference to eligible private
nonprofit organizations that operate within areas in which
Federal real property is being sold under the disposal program
authorized under section 626.
(e) Regulations.--The Secretary may promulgate such
regulations as are necessary to carry out this section.