Federal Management Regulation; Designation of Authority and Sustainable Siting, 72974-72985 [2023-23477]
Download as PDF
72974
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 204 / Tuesday, October 24, 2023 / Proposed Rules
FEDERAL PERMITTING
IMPROVEMENT STEERING COUNCIL
40 CFR Part 1900
[Docket Number 2023–001]
RIN 3121–AA04
Revising Scope of the Mining Sector of
Projects That Are Eligible for Coverage
Under Title 41 of the Fixing America’s
Surface Transportation Act
Federal Permitting
Improvement Steering Council.
ACTION: Extension of comment period.
AGENCY:
The Federal Permitting
Improvement Steering Council
(Permitting Council) is extending by 30
days the deadline for submitting
comments on its proposal to amend its
regulations to revise the scope of
‘‘mining’’ as a sector with infrastructure
projects eligible for coverage under Title
41 of the Fixing America’s Surface
Transportation Act (FAST–41) to: (1)
apply solely to critical minerals mining
projects; and (2) expand the scope of the
sector to include infrastructure
constructed to support critical minerals
supply chain activities, including
critical minerals beneficiation,
processing, and recycling.
DATES: Comments now must be
submitted on or before November 22,
2023.
SUMMARY:
You may send comments,
identified by Permitting Council Docket
Number 2023–001 or RIN 3121–AA04,
by any of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for sending comments.
• Mail: Federal Permitting
Improvement Steering Council, Office of
the Executive Director, 1800 M St. NW,
Suite 6006, Washington, DC 20036,
Attention: RIN 3121–AA04.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John
G. Cossa, General Counsel, Federal
Permitting Improvement Steering
Council, 1800 M St. NW, Suite 6006,
Washington, DC 20036, john.cossa@
fpisc.gov, or by telephone at 202–255–
6936.
Persons who use a
telecommunications device for the deaf
may call the Federal Information Relay
Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339 to
contact this individual during normal
business hours or to leave a message at
other times. FIRS is available 24 hours
a day, 7 days a week. You will receive
a reply to a message during normal
business hours.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
September 22, 2023, the Permitting
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
ADDRESSES:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:07 Oct 23, 2023
Jkt 262001
Council published in the Federal
Register a proposed rule that would
amend the Permitting Council’s
regulations at 40 CFR part 1900 to revise
the scope of the FAST–41 ‘‘mining’’
sector to: (1) apply solely to critical
minerals mining projects; and (2)
expand the scope of the sector to
include infrastructure constructed to
support critical minerals supply chain
activities, including critical minerals
beneficiation, processing, and recycling.
88 FR 65350. The proposal provided a
30-day comment period, which would
have expired on October 23, 2023.
On October 13, 2023, the Permitting
Council received a letter submitted on
behalf of various environmental and
Tribal entities requesting an extension
of the 30-day comment period by an
additional 60 days, through December
22, 2023. The Permitting Council has
reviewed the request and has
determined that an extension of 30 days
is warranted to provide the public
additional time to review the proposed
rule and prepare comments. The full 60day request was not granted given that
the proposed rule is administrative in
nature and does not make any critical
minerals mining or supply chain project
more or less likely to be approved or
implemented, or any environmental or
economic effect that may be associated
with a critical minerals infrastructure
project to occur. Accordingly, the
Permitting Council is extending the
comment period for this proposed
rulemaking from October 23, 2023, to
November 22, 2023. Comments on the
proposed rule now must be submitted
on or before November 22, 2023.
*
*
*
*
*
Eric Beightel,
Executive Director, Federal Permitting
Improvement Steering Council.
[FR Doc. 2023–23456 Filed 10–23–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820–PL–P
GENERAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
41 CFR Part 102–83
[FMR Case 2023–102–1; Docket No. GSA–
FMR–2023–0012; Sequence No. 1]
RIN 3090–AK69
Federal Management Regulation;
Designation of Authority and
Sustainable Siting
Office of Government-wide
Policy (OGP), General Services
Administration (GSA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
GSA, in furtherance of its
authority to furnish space to Federal
agencies, proposes to amend 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 application of
these regulations across Federal
agencies and regions.
DATES: Interested parties should submit
comments in writing on or before
December 26, 2023 to be considered in
the formulation of the final rule.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments in
response to FMR Case 2023–102–1 to
Regulations.gov at https://
www.regulations.gov via the Federal
eRulemaking portal by searching for
‘‘FMR Case 2023–102–1.’’ Select the
link ‘‘Comment Now’’ that corresponds
with ‘‘FMR Case 2023–102–1.’’ Follow
the instructions provided at the
‘‘Comment Now’’ screen. Please include
your name, company name (if any), and
‘‘FMR Case 2023–102–1’’ on your
attached document. If your comment
cannot be submitted using https://
www.regulations.gov, call or email the
points of contact in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
document for alternative instructions.
Instructions: Please submit comments
only and cite FMR Case 2023–102–1 in
all correspondence related to this case.
Comments received generally will be
posted without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal or business confidential
information, or both, provided. To
confirm receipt of your comment(s),
please check www.regulations.gov
approximately two-to-three days after
submission to verify posting.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
clarification of content, contact Mr.
Chris Coneeney, Office of Governmentwide 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:
SUMMARY:
I. Background
The Administrator of General Services
(Administrator) is authorized to acquire
E:\FR\FM\24OCP1.SGM
24OCP1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 204 / Tuesday, October 24, 2023 / Proposed Rules
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, 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 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 of General Services 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 preprocurement 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
location decisions that have been in
existence for almost 50 years. These
principles were first incorporated in 41
CFR part 101–17, Assignment and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:07 Oct 23, 2023
Jkt 262001
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’’ (80 FR 15871, 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.
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 24, 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, Jan. 30,
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
8, 2021), its accompanying
Implementing Instructions, dated
August 31, 2022, and the associated
OMB, White House Council on
Environmental Quality and National
Climate Policy Office memorandum (M–
22–06, 12/8/2021) direct Federal
agencies to promote sustainable
locations for Federal facilities and
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
72975
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,
reduced greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions and increased 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, January 27, 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 and increase
resilience to the impacts of climate
change, and seek environmental justice
and 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 16, 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
E:\FR\FM\24OCP1.SGM
24OCP1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
72976
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 204 / Tuesday, October 24, 2023 / Proposed Rules
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 21,
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, such as the Climate and Economic
Justice Screening Tool 1 (CEJST), to
identify if proposed locations for
federally owned and leased facilities are
in geographically defined disadvantaged
communities. The tool has 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
communities that are experiencing these
burdens. These are the communities
that are disadvantaged because they are
overburdened and underserved. The
order also re-emphasizes consultation
and engagement with members of
affected communities that allow
meaningful participation for those
communities in agency decisionmaking, 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
appropriation 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 potential
location of 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
1 The
CEJST tool is available at https://
screeningtool.geoplatform.gov/en/.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:07 Oct 23, 2023
Jkt 262001
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 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.
For non-prospectus projects, GSA
exercises its discretion in accordance
with the principles that underlie this
rule.
It is important to note that these
proposed 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 proposed 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
102–86).
II. Major Changes
The following updates and
clarification changes are proposed for
part 102–83:
• Social, Economic, Environmental, and
Cultural Factors in Location Decisions
The rule now more explicitly explains
the factors associated with social,
economic, environmental, and cultural
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
conditions to be considered in location
decisions.
• 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’’ (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 proposed rule
updates the terminology throughout the
part accordingly.
• 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’’ (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
proposed rule updates the term
throughout the part accordingly.
• 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 (CHSA), as
amended by the Farm Security and
Rural Investment Act of 2002, which
identifies a rural area for general
purposes of CSHA 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 CHSA
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
E:\FR\FM\24OCP1.SGM
24OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 204 / Tuesday, October 24, 2023 / Proposed Rules
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 proposed 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.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
• 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.
• Local Consultation Requirements
The various governing authorities and
directives for this part require that
Federal agencies consult 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 with local officials and
community leaders, including American
Indians, Native Alaskans, and Native
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:07 Oct 23, 2023
Jkt 262001
Hawaiian Organizations 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 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 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.
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 Section 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. The Office of
Management and Budget’s, Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs
(OIRA) has determined that this rule is
a significant regulatory action and,
therefore, it is subject to review under
section 6(b) of E.O. 12866.
IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act
GSA does not expect this proposed
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, new
construction members and leasing
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
72977
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 and the full fringe benefit cost
factor of 36.25%.2 3 4
GSA assumes the 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 9 active agencies using
delegated leasing authority. Numbers
and assumptions apply to delegated
leasing agencies as well.
1. Government Costs
a. New Construction
The Government must educate its
new construction 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 5 GSA
employees on average, with a GS–14
step 5 with an average hourly rate of
$86.12/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 $8,612 (= 5 × $86.12 GS–14
step 5 rate × 20 hours).
GSA estimates it will take 5 GSA
employees on average, with a GS–14
step 5 with an average hourly rate of
$86.12/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 $431 (= 5 × $86.12
GS–14 step 5 rate × 1 hour).
GSA estimates it will take 5 GSA
employees on average, with a GS–14
step 5 with an average hourly rate of
$86.12/hour, 1.5 hours each in years 1,
2 General
Schedule (opm.gov).
Memo M–08–13, dated March 11, 2008.
4 Computing Hourly Rates of Pay Using the 2,087Hour Divisor (opm.gov).
3 OMB
E:\FR\FM\24OCP1.SGM
24OCP1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
72978
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 204 / Tuesday, October 24, 2023 / Proposed Rules
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 $646 (= 5
× $86.12 GS–14 step 5 rate × 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 $72.88/
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 $11,259 (= 103 × $72.88 GS–
13 step 5 rate × 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
$86.12/hour, 4 hours each in year 1 to
develop new content for training for
client agencies. Therefore, GSA
estimates the total estimated cost for
this part of the rule to be $1,722 (= 5 ×
$86.12 GS–14 step 5 rate × 4 hours).
GSA estimates it will take 5 GSA
employees on average, with a GS–14
step 5 with an average hourly rate of
$86.12/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 $431 (= 5 × $86.12 GS–14 step 5
rate × 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 $86.12/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 $646 (= 5 × $86.12 GS–14 step
5 rate × 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 $72.88/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 $43,726 (= 400 × $72.88 GS–
13 step 5 rate × 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 $72.88/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 $802 (= 11 × $72.88 GS–13
step 5 rate × 1 hour).
GSA estimates it will take 400 client
agency regional office employees on
average, with a GS–13 step 5 with an
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:07 Oct 23, 2023
Jkt 262001
average hourly rate of $72.88/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 $14,575 (= 400 × $72.88
GS–13 step 5 rate × 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
$72.88/hour, 2 hours each in years 1, 3,
5, 7, and 9 to share GSA site selection
analysis information with community
organizations. Therefore, GSA estimates
the total annual estimated cost for this
part of the rule to be $292 (= 2 × $72.88
GS–13 step 5 rate × 2 hours).
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
$86.12/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 $1,292 (=
3 × $86.12 GS–14 step 5 rate × 5 hours).
GSA estimates it will take 3 GSA
employees on average, with a GS–14
step 5 with an average hourly rate of
$86.12/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 $258 (= 3 × $86.12 GS–14 step
5 rate × 1 hour).
GSA estimates it will take 1 GSA
employee on average, with an SES Level
3 with an average hourly rate of
$127.31/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 $255 (= 1
× $127.31 SES Level 3 rate × 2 hours).
GSA estimates it will take 1 GSA
employee on average, with an SES Level
3 with an average hourly rate of
$127.31/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 $127 (= 1 × $127.31 SES Level
3 rate × 1 hour).
GSA estimates it will take 3 GSA
employees on average, with a GS–14
step 5 with an average hourly rate of
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
$86.12/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 $1,292 (= 3 × $86.12 GS–14
step 5 rate × 5 hours).
GSA estimates it will take 3 GSA
employees on average, with a GS–14
step 5 with an average hourly rate of
$86.12/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 $258 (= 3 × $86.12 GS–
14 step 5 rate × 1 hour).
GSA estimates it will take 1 GSA
employee on average, with an SES Level
3 with an average hourly rate of
$127.31/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 $255 (= 1 × $127.31 SES Level
3 rate × 2 hours).
GSA estimates it will take 1 GSA
employee on average, with an SES Level
3 with an average hourly rate of
$127.31/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 $127 (= 1 × $127.31 SES
Level 3 rate × 1 hour).
GSA estimates it will take 1 GSA
employee on average, with a GS–13 step
5 with an average hourly rate of $72.88/
hour, 1 hour in year 1 to update training
for Lease Contracting Officers and Lease
Project Managers. Therefore, GSA
estimates the total estimated cost for
this part of the rule to be $73 (= 1 ×
$72.88 GS–13 step 5 rate × 1 hour).
GSA estimates it will take 1 GSA
employee on average, with a GS–13 step
5 with an average hourly rate of $72.88/
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 $73 (= 1 ×
$72.88 GS–15 step 5 rate × 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
$61.29/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 $39,836 (= 650
× $61.29 GS–12 step 5 rate × 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
$61.29/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
E:\FR\FM\24OCP1.SGM
24OCP1
72979
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 204 / Tuesday, October 24, 2023 / Proposed Rules
to be $19,918 (= 650 × $61.29 GS–12
step 5 rate × 0.5 hours).
GSA estimates it will take 500 Lease
Contracting Officers and Lease Project
Managers from delegated leasing
agencies 5 on average, with a GS–12 step
5 with an average hourly rate of $61.29/
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 $30,643 (= 500 × $61.29
GS–12 step 5 rate × 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 $61.29/
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 $15,322 (= 500 × $61.29 GS–12
step 5 rate × 0.5 hours).
GSA estimates it will take 9
employees from delegated leasing
Year
1
2
3
4
5
Total Government Costs
GSA estimates the total estimated
Government costs to be $682,967 for
years 1 through 10. A breakdown of
total estimated Government costs by
year is provided in the table below.6
6
7
8
9
10
Part a New Construction ........................
Part b Leased Buildings .......................
$82,000
................
$73,000
................
$73,000
................
$73,000
................
$73,000
................
106,000
1,000
51,000
................
51,000
................
51,000
................
51,000
................
Total Government Costs ....
188,000
1,000
124,000
................
124,000
................
124,000
................
124,000
................
2. Public Costs
Public costs associated with this rule
include small entities of community
organizations in areas GSA is
considering for new construction. GSA
assumes for each site selection
transaction, the agency will engage with
1 small entity which on average will
have two employees. Those employees
would receive, review and share GSA
site selection analysis information. GSA
Year
1
Total Public Costs ....
2
$1,000
Therefore, GSA estimates the total
annual estimated cost for this part of the
rule to be $689 (= 2 × $86.12 GS–14 step
5 rate × 4 hours).
estimates the average hourly rate of
$86.12 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 $86.12/hour, 4
hours each in years 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9 to
receive, review and share GSA site
selection analysis information.
3
................
$1,000
4
5
................
$1,000
Total Public Costs
GSA estimates the total estimated
public costs to be $3,445 for years 1
through 10. A breakdown of total
estimated public costs by year is
provided in the table below.7
6
7
................
The overall total additional
undiscounted cost of this rule is
8
$1,000
estimated to be $686,412 over a 10-year
period. GSA did not identify any cost
savings based on the impact of the rule.
3. Overall Total Additional Costs
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
delegated leasing agency training.
Therefore, GSA estimates the total
estimated cost for this part of the rule
to be $30,643 (= 500 × $61.29 GS–12
step 5 rate × 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 $61.29/
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 $15,322 (= 500 × $61.29 GS–
12 step 5 rate × 0.5 hours).
agencies on average, with a GS–13 step
5 with an average hourly rate of $72.88/
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 $656 (= 9 ×
$72.88 GS–13 step 5 rate × 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 $72.88/
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 $656 (= 9
× $72.88 GS–13 step 5 rate × 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 $61.29/
hour, 1 hour each in year 1 to receive
9
................
$1,000
10
................
A breakdown of overall total additional
costs by year is provided in the table
below.8
Year
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Total Government
Costs .....................
Total Public Costs ....
$188,000
1,000
$1,000
................
$124,000
1,000
................
................
$124,000
1,000
................
................
$124,000
1,000
................
................
$124,000
1,000
................
................
I
I
5 The GSA Office of Leasing provided this
number as an averaged total across delegated
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:07 Oct 23, 2023
Jkt 262001
I
I
I
I
leasing agencies by surveying their internal
database.
6 Costs are rounded to the nearest thousand.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
I
7 Costs
8 Costs
E:\FR\FM\24OCP1.SGM
I
I
are rounded to the nearest thousand.
are rounded to the nearest thousand.
24OCP1
72980
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 204 / Tuesday, October 24, 2023 / Proposed Rules
Year
1
Overall Total Additional Costs
2
189,000
3
1,000
125,000
4
................
5
125,000
................
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
Total
make the regulations more user-friendly.
Summary
costs
Invalidation of a particular provision
Present Value (3 percent) ............ $601,071 that is cross-referenced elsewhere will
Annualized Costs (3 percent) .......
70,464 not materially alter the provision that
Present Value (7 percent) ............
512,057 contains the cross-reference.
Annualized Costs (7 percent) .......
72,905
In summary, removal of any particular
provision from part 102–83 would not
VI. Paperwork Reduction Act
render the entire regulatory scheme
unworkable. Thus, GSA considers each
The Paperwork Reduction Act does
of the provisions in part 102–83 to be
not apply because the changes to the
separate and severable from one
FMR do not impose recordkeeping or
another. In the event of a stay or
information collection requirements, or
invalidation of any particular provision,
the collection of information from
it is GSA’s intention that the remaining
offerors, contractors, or members of the
provisions will continue in effect.
public that require the approval of the
Office of Management and Budget
List of Subjects in 41 CFR Part 102–83
(OMB) under 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.
Federal buildings and facilities,
VII. Small Business Regulatory
government property management, rates
Enforcement Fairness Act
and fares.
This proposed rule is also exempt
Krystal J. Brumfield,
from congressional review prescribed
Associate Administrator, Office of
under 5 U.S.C. 801 since it relates solely Government-wide Policy.
to agency management and personnel.
Therefore, GSA proposes to revise 41
VIII. Severability
CFR part 102–83 to read as follows:
GSA is proposing to add a new
provision on severability at 41 CFR 102– PART 102–83—LOCATION OF SPACE
83.150, which states that all provisions
Subpart A—General Provisions
included in part 102–83 are separate
Sec.
and severable from one another.
102–83.05 What does this part cover?
Regulations concerning location
102–83.10 What are the governing
policy do a number of things—from
authorities for this part?
identifying and elaborating upon the
102–83.15 Which Federal agencies must
factors that are advantageous to the
comply with these provisions?
Government when planning for location 102–83.20 How does an agency request a
decisions, to outlining the consultation
deviation from the provisions of this
requirements with local officials and the
part?
communities potentially impacted by
102–83.25 Intentionally Omitted
Federal location decisions, to explaining
Subpart B—Location of Space
the role of agencies when planning for
102–83.30 What basic location of space
such decisions.
policy governs a Federal agency?
Accordingly, if any particular term or
102–83.35 Is there a general hierarchy of
provision in part 102–83, or the
consideration that agencies must follow
application thereof to any agency or
in their utilization of space?
circumstance, is determined by a court
102–83.40 What is a delineated area?
of competent jurisdiction to be invalid
102–83.45 What is a Core-Based Statistical
or unenforceable, the remaining terms
Area?
or provisions, or the application of such 102–83.50 How is a Core-Based Statistical
Area defined?
term or provision to agencies or
circumstances other than those to which 102–83.55 What is a rural area?
102–83.60 What is an urban area?
it is invalid or unenforceable, will not
102–83.65 What is a principal city?
be affected thereby, and each term and
102–83.70 What are centralized community
provision of this rule will be valid and
business areas and centralized business
be enforced to the fullest extent
districts?
permitted by law. For example, if any
102–83.75 What is environmental justice?
location factor is determined to be
102–83.80 What is equitable development?
The following is a summary of the
estimated costs calculated for a 10-year
time horizon at a 3- and 7-percent
discount rate:
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
6
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:07 Oct 23, 2023
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
7
8
125,000
................
9
125,000
10
................
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 with
local officials to comply with the
consultation elements of this part?
102–83.100 What flexibility do Federal
agencies have to implement this part 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 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 C—Severability
102–83.150 What portions of this part are
severable?
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.s 12072
and 13006.
Subpart A—General Provisions
§ 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
E:\FR\FM\24OCP1.SGM
24OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 204 / Tuesday, October 24, 2023 / Proposed Rules
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.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
§ 102–83.10 What are the governing
authorities for this part?
The authorities for this regulation
are—
(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 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; and
(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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:07 Oct 23, 2023
Jkt 262001
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 Governmentowned 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 (43 FR
36869, August 18, 1978).
(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 (80 FR 15871,
May 24, 1996).
§ 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
72981
§ 102–83.20 How does an agency request
a deviation from the provisions of this part?
Refer to §§ 102–2.60 through 102–
2.110 of this chapter for information on
how to obtain a deviation from this part.
§ 102–83.25
Intentionally Omitted.
Subpart B—Location of Space
§ 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.
§ 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 of the
FMR (41 CFR 102–79), Assignment and
Utilization of Space, Federal agencies
must follow the hierarchy of
consideration, giving first priority to
Government-owned and Governmentleased buildings. When no existing
Government-owned or Governmentleased space meets the space need,
Federal agencies must follow the
hierarchy of geographic consideration in
§ 102–83.95 when obtaining new space
as identified in this subpart.
§ 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.
§ 102–83.45 What is a Core-Based
Statistical Area?
A Core-Based Statistical Area (CBSA)
is a geographic area established by
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
E:\FR\FM\24OCP1.SGM
24OCP1
72982
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 204 / Tuesday, October 24, 2023 / Proposed Rules
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.
§ 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 2010 Standards for Delineating
Metropolitan and Micropolitan
Statistical Areas (75 FR 37246, June 28,
2010), or succeeding OMB publication.
§ 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.
§ 102–83.60
What is an urban area?
An urban area is any area contained
within the geographic boundaries of a
CBSA.
§ 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
2010 Standards for Delineating
Metropolitan and Micropolitan
Statistical Areas (75 FR 37246, June 28,
2010), or succeeding standards. 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.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
§ 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 with local officials to
understand the current boundaries of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:07 Oct 23, 2023
Jkt 262001
these areas. As described in E.O. 12072,
these areas may include other specific
areas that are recommended by local
officials.
§ 102–83.75
justice?
What is environmental
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; 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
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.
§ 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.
§ 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?
(a) In addition to agency mission,
security, and program requirements,
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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, 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 of environmentally
sustainable development, reduced
greenhouse gas emissions, increased
resilience to the impacts of climate
change, and stewardship of regional
natural resources. Maximizing the use of
existing resources by leveraging
investment in existing infrastructure;
prioritize 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),
E:\FR\FM\24OCP1.SGM
24OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 204 / Tuesday, October 24, 2023 / Proposed Rules
greyfields (previously developed land
that is underutilized) and infill
development; avoid development in
floodplains or impacts to wetlands to
the extent practicable, and promote the
preservation of historic resources and
other existing buildings. Fostering
protection of the natural environment
by preserving existing ecosystems,
avoiding development of green space
and promoting climate change
adaptation planning;
(3) Advancing environmental justice
and equitable development;
(4) Advancing Federal and local
historic preservation objectives; and
(5) Seeking location-efficient sites that
provide a variety of transportation
options for employees and the public,
while maximizing use of existing
infrastructure and minimizing employee
and visitor travel by car. Prioritize
central business districts, existing
employment centers and rural town
centers; prioritize locations that
promote transportation choice,
especially walking, biking and public
transit options; and locate 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.
(c) The factors listed in paragraphs (a)
and (b) of this section must be
considered when applying the hierarchy
of geographic consideration in § 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.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
§ 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 § 102–83.85 and use these
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:07 Oct 23, 2023
Jkt 262001
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 § 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 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 § 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 § 102–78.60.
§ 102–83.95 How must agencies consult
with local officials and communities to
comply with the consultation elements of
this part?
Agencies have wide latitude to
develop their own internal policies for
engaging in consultation 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
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 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
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 actively with local
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
72983
officials and communities, as
appropriate, to discuss development
goals well ahead of specific space
actions.
(a) Under multiple guiding
authorities, acquiring agencies must
consult with local officials to apply the
principles outlined in this part properly.
Consultation and consideration of local
input must occur in urban areas, and
agencies are encouraged to perform
similar consultation in rural areas, as
appropriate.
(b) Where a Federal location decision
will include, be adjacent to or in a
reasonable radius of, or occur in a state
containing Tribal lands of federallyrecognized American Indians or Native
Alaskans, or where the location decision
affects a property or place of traditional
religious and cultural importance to
Native Hawaiian Organizations, Federal
agencies must consult their agency
Tribal consultation policies to
determine the appropriate level of
engagement with the Tribal
governments and organizations,
including official offers to consult,
listening sessions, or notifications.
(c) Where communities are likely to
face displacement risks associated with
a Federal location decision, based on
agency analysis of existing data and
consultation 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.
§ 102–83.100 What flexibility do Federal
agencies have to implement this part 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
E:\FR\FM\24OCP1.SGM
24OCP1
72984
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 204 / Tuesday, October 24, 2023 / Proposed Rules
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 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
§ 102–83.10, and they must incorporate
their applicable process into their
internal policies and procedures.
§ 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 § 102–
73.30 of this chapter for additional
guidance.
§ 102–83.110 Does GSA provide
assistance to Federal agencies by
consulting with local officials to establish
recommended delineated areas?
Yes. GSA may, at its discretion, assist
agencies by consulting with local
officials to establish recommended
delineated areas for use in Federal
location decisions. These GSArecommended 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.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
§ 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 with
local officials. Federal agencies must
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:07 Oct 23, 2023
Jkt 262001
continue to include the preferred area in
such expanded areas.
facility or facilities involved and the
convenience of the public being served.
§ 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?
§ 102–83.135 How will GSA negotiate
changes to the final delineated area with
requesting agencies?
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
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.
§ 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.
§ 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 this subpart. 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
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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 § 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.
§ 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.
§ 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 in 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
E:\FR\FM\24OCP1.SGM
24OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 204 / Tuesday, October 24, 2023 / Proposed Rules
housing of Federal agencies within the
National Capital Region.
Subpart C—Severability
§ 102–83.150
severable?
What portions of this part are
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. 2023–23477 Filed 10–23–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820–14–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
43 CFR Part 2360
[BLM_HQ_FRN_MO4500175868]
RIN 1004–AE95
Management and Protection of the
National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska;
Extension of Comment Period
AGENCY:
Bureau of Land Management,
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of
comment period.
On September 8, 2023, the
Bureau of Land Management (BLM)
published in the Federal Register a
proposed rule that would revise the
framework for designating and assuring
maximum protection of Special Areas’
significant resource values and protect
and enhance access for subsistence
activities throughout the National
Petroleum Reserve in Alaska (NPR–A).
The proposed rule would also
incorporate aspects of the NPR–A
Integrated Activity Plan approved in
April 2022. The BLM has determined
that it is appropriate to extend the
comment period for the proposed rule
by 10 days, until November 17, 2023, to
allow for additional public comment.
DATES: The comment period for the
proposed rule that originally was
published on September 8, 2023, at 88
FR 62025 ends on November 7, 2023.
Under this extension, comments must
now be submitted on or before
November 17, 2023. The BLM need not
consider or include in the
administrative record for the final rule
comments that the BLM receives after
the close of the comment period or
comments delivered to an address other
than those listed in the ADDRESSES
section.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
SUMMARY:
Mail, personal, or
messenger delivery: U.S. Department of
ADDRESSES:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:07 Oct 23, 2023
Jkt 262001
72985
the Interior, Director (HQ–630), Bureau
of Land Management, 1849 C St. NW,
Room 5646, Washington, DC 20240,
Attention: 1004–AE80. Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. In the Search-box,
enter ‘‘RIN 1004–AE95’’ and click the
‘‘Search’’ button. Follow the
instructions at this website.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
James Tichenor, Advisor—Office of the
Director, at 202–573–0536 or jtichenor@
blm.gov with a subject line of ‘‘RIN
1004–AE95.’’ For questions relating to
regulatory process issues, contact Faith
Bremner at fbremner@blm.gov.
Individuals in the United States who are
deaf, blind, hard of hearing, or have a
speech disability may dial 711 (TTY,
TDD, or TeleBraille) to access
telecommunications relay services.
Individuals outside the United States
should use the relay services offered
within their country to make
international calls to the point-ofcontact in the United States.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
hours (7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. EST),
Monday through Friday, except
holidays. Before including your address,
telephone number, email address, or
other personal identifying information
in your comment, be advised that your
entire comment—including your
personal identifying information—may
be made publicly available at any time.
While you can ask us in your comment
to withhold from public review your
personal identifying information, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so.
Public Comment Procedures
Laura Daniel-Davis,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Land
and Minerals Management.
If you wish to comment on this
proposed rule, you may submit your
comments to the BLM, marked with the
number RIN 1004–AE95, by mail,
personal or messenger delivery, or
through https://www.regulations.gov
(see the ADDRESSES section). Please note
that comments on this proposed rule’s
information collection burdens should
be submitted to the OMB as described
in the ADDRESSES section. Please make
your comments on the proposed rule as
specific as possible, confine them to
issues pertinent to the proposed rule,
and explain the reason for any changes
you recommend. Where possible, your
comments should reference the specific
section or paragraph of the proposal that
you are addressing. The comments and
recommendations that will be most
useful and likely to influence agency
decisions are:
1. Those supported by quantitative
information or studies; and
2. Those that include citations to, and
analyses of, the applicable laws and
regulations.
The BLM is not obligated to consider
or include in the Administrative Record
for the final rule comments that we
receive after the close of the comment
period (see DATES) or comments
delivered to an address other than those
listed above (see ADDRESSES).
Comments, including names and street
addresses of respondents, will be
available for public review at the
physical location listed under
ADDRESSES during regular business
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Background
The proposed rule was published on
September 8, 2023 (88 FR 62025), with
a 60-day comment period closing on
November 7, 2023. Since publication,
the BLM has received requests for
extension of the comment period on the
proposed rule. The BLM has determined
that it is appropriate to extend the
comment period for the docket until
November 17, 2023, to allow for
additional public comment.
[FR Doc. 2023–23427 Filed 10–23–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4331–27–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 27
[GN Docket No. 18–122; DA 23–958; FR ID
179691]
Wireless Telecommunications Bureau
Seeks Comment on the C-Band RPC’s
Final Claims Submission Deadline
Proposal
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Notification, request for
comments.
AGENCY:
In this document, the
Wireless Telecommunications Bureau
(WTB or Bureau) of the Federal
Communications Commission
(Commission) seeks comment on the Cband Relocation Payment
Clearinghouse’s (RPC) proposal to set
final claims submission deadlines as
part of the ongoing transition of the 3.7
GHz band. WTB also seeks comment on
any other steps that the Bureau should
take pursuant to its delegated authority
to facilitate the conclusion of the C-band
transition reimbursement program and
wind down of the RPC’s operations in
an efficient and timely manner and in
keeping with its remit to prevent fraud,
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\24OCP1.SGM
24OCP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 204 (Tuesday, October 24, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 72974-72985]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-23477]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
41 CFR Part 102-83
[FMR Case 2023-102-1; Docket No. GSA-FMR-2023-0012; Sequence No. 1]
RIN 3090-AK69
Federal Management Regulation; Designation of Authority and
Sustainable Siting
AGENCY: Office of Government-wide Policy (OGP), General Services
Administration (GSA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: GSA, in furtherance of its authority to furnish space to
Federal agencies, proposes to amend 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 application
of these regulations across Federal agencies and regions.
DATES: Interested parties should submit comments in writing on or
before December 26, 2023 to be considered in the formulation of the
final rule.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments in response to FMR Case 2023-102-1 to
Regulations.gov at https://www.regulations.gov via the Federal
eRulemaking portal by searching for ``FMR Case 2023-102-1.'' Select the
link ``Comment Now'' that corresponds with ``FMR Case 2023-102-1.''
Follow the instructions provided at the ``Comment Now'' screen. Please
include your name, company name (if any), and ``FMR Case 2023-102-1''
on your attached document. If your comment cannot be submitted using
https://www.regulations.gov, call or email the points of contact in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for
alternative instructions.
Instructions: Please submit comments only and cite FMR Case 2023-
102-1 in all correspondence related to this case. Comments received
generally will be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov,
including any personal or business confidential information, or both,
provided. To confirm receipt of your comment(s), please check
www.regulations.gov approximately two-to-three days after submission to
verify posting.
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
The Administrator of General Services (Administrator) is authorized
to acquire
[[Page 72975]]
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, 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 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 of General Services 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
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'' (80 FR 15871, 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.
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 24, 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, Jan. 30, 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 8, 2021), its accompanying Implementing Instructions, dated
August 31, 2022, and the associated OMB, White House Council on
Environmental Quality and National 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, reduced greenhouse
gas (GHG) emissions and increased 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, January 27, 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 and increase
resilience to the impacts of climate change, and seek environmental
justice and 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 16, 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
[[Page 72976]]
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 21, 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, such as the Climate and Economic
Justice Screening Tool \1\ (CEJST), to identify if proposed locations
for federally owned and leased facilities are in geographically defined
disadvantaged communities. The tool has 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 communities that are experiencing these
burdens. These are the communities that are disadvantaged because they
are overburdened and underserved. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The CEJST tool is available at https://screeningtool.geoplatform.gov/en/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 appropriation 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 potential location of 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 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.
For non-prospectus projects, GSA exercises its discretion in
accordance with the principles that underlie this rule.
It is important to note that these proposed 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 proposed 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 102-86).
II. Major Changes
The following updates and clarification changes are proposed for
part 102-83:
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.
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'' (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 proposed rule updates the terminology throughout the part
accordingly.
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'' (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 proposed
rule updates the term throughout the part accordingly.
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
(CHSA), as amended by the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of
2002, which identifies a rural area for general purposes of CSHA 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 CHSA 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
[[Page 72977]]
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 proposed 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.
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.
Local Consultation Requirements
The various governing authorities and directives for this part
require that Federal agencies consult 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 with local officials and community
leaders, including American Indians, Native Alaskans, and Native
Hawaiian Organizations 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 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 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.
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 Section
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. The Office
of Management and Budget's, Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs (OIRA) has determined that this rule is a significant
regulatory action and, therefore, it is subject to review under section
6(b) of E.O. 12866.
IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act
GSA does not expect this proposed 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, 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 and the full fringe
benefit cost factor of 36.25%.2 3 4
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ General Schedule (opm.gov).
\3\ OMB Memo M-08-13, dated March 11, 2008.
\4\ Computing Hourly Rates of Pay Using the 2,087-Hour Divisor
(opm.gov).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
GSA assumes the 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 9 active
agencies using delegated leasing authority. Numbers and assumptions
apply to delegated leasing agencies as well.
1. Government Costs
a. New Construction
The Government must educate its new construction 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 5 GSA employees on average, with a GS-14
step 5 with an average hourly rate of $86.12/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 $8,612 (= 5 x $86.12 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 $86.12/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 $431 (= 5 x $86.12 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 $86.12/hour, 1.5 hours each in
years 1,
[[Page 72978]]
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 $646 (= 5 x $86.12 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 $72.88/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 $11,259 (= 103 x
$72.88 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 $86.12/hour, 4 hours each in year
1 to develop new content for training for client agencies. Therefore,
GSA estimates the total estimated cost for this part of the rule to be
$1,722 (= 5 x $86.12 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 $86.12/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 $431 (= 5 x $86.12 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 $86.12/
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 $646 (= 5 x $86.12 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 $72.88/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 $43,726 (= 400 x $72.88 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 $72.88/
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 $802 (= 11 x
$72.88 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 $72.88/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 $14,575 (= 400 x $72.88 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 $72.88/hour, 2 hours each
in years 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9 to share GSA site selection analysis
information with community organizations. Therefore, GSA estimates the
total annual estimated cost for this part of the rule to be $292 (= 2 x
$72.88 GS-13 step 5 rate x 2 hours).
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 $86.12/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 $1,292 (= 3 x $86.12 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 $86.12/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 $258 (= 3 x $86.12 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 $127.31/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 $255 (= 1 x $127.31 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 $127.31/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 $127 (= 1 x $127.31 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 $86.12/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
$1,292 (= 3 x $86.12 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 $86.12/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 $258 (= 3 x $86.12 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 $127.31/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 $255 (= 1 x
$127.31 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 $127.31/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 $127 (= 1 x $127.31 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 $72.88/hour, 1 hour in year 1 to
update training for Lease Contracting Officers and Lease Project
Managers. Therefore, GSA estimates the total estimated cost for this
part of the rule to be $73 (= 1 x $72.88 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 $72.88/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 $73 (= 1 x $72.88 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 $61.29/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 $39,836 (= 650 x $61.29 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 $61.29/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
[[Page 72979]]
to be $19,918 (= 650 x $61.29 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 \5\ on average, with a
GS-12 step 5 with an average hourly rate of $61.29/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 $30,643 (= 500 x $61.29
GS-12 step 5 rate x 1 hour).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ 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 $61.29/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 $15,322
(= 500 x $61.29 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
$72.88/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 $656 (= 9 x $72.88 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
$72.88/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 $656
(= 9 x $72.88 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 $61.29/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
$30,643 (= 500 x $61.29 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 $61.29/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 $15,322 (= 500 x $61.29 GS-12 step 5 rate x 0.5 hours).
Total Government Costs
GSA estimates the total estimated Government costs to be $682,967
for years 1 through 10. A breakdown of total estimated Government costs
by year is provided in the table below.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Costs are rounded to the nearest thousand.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Part a New Construction................... $82,000 ......... $73,000 ......... $73,000 ......... $73,000 ......... $73,000 .........
Part b Leased Buildings................... 106,000 1,000 51,000 ......... 51,000 ......... 51,000 ......... 51,000 .........
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Government Costs................ 188,000 1,000 124,000 ......... 124,000 ......... 124,000 ......... 124,000 .........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Public Costs
Public costs associated with this rule include small entities of
community organizations in areas GSA is considering for new
construction. GSA assumes for each site selection transaction, the
agency will engage with 1 small entity which on average will have two
employees. Those employees would receive, review and share GSA site
selection analysis information. GSA estimates the average hourly rate
of $86.12 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 $86.12/hour, 4 hours each in
years 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9 to receive, review and share GSA site selection
analysis information. Therefore, GSA estimates the total annual
estimated cost for this part of the rule to be $689 (= 2 x $86.12 GS-14
step 5 rate x 4 hours).
Total Public Costs
GSA estimates the total estimated public costs to be $3,445 for
years 1 through 10. A breakdown of total estimated public costs by year
is provided in the table below.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Costs are rounded to the nearest thousand.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Public Costs........................ $1,000 ......... $1,000 ......... $1,000 ......... $1,000 ......... $1,000 .........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Overall Total Additional Costs
The overall total additional undiscounted cost of this rule is
estimated to be $686,412 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.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Costs are rounded to the nearest thousand.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Government Costs.................... $188,000 $1,000 $124,000 ......... $124,000 ......... $124,000 ......... $124,000 .........
Total Public Costs........................ 1,000 ......... 1,000 ......... 1,000 ......... 1,000 ......... 1,000 .........
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 72980]]
Overall Total Additional Costs........ 189,000 1,000 125,000 ......... 125,000 ......... 125,000 ......... 125,000 .........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following is a summary of the estimated costs calculated for a
10-year time horizon at a 3- and 7-percent discount rate:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total
Summary costs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Present Value (3 percent).................................... $601,071
Annualized Costs (3 percent)................................. 70,464
Present Value (7 percent).................................... 512,057
Annualized Costs (7 percent)................................. 72,905
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.
VII. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
This proposed 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 proposing to add 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 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 be 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 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.
Krystal J. Brumfield,
Associate Administrator, Office of Government-wide Policy.
Therefore, GSA proposes to revise 41 CFR part 102-83 to read as
follows:
PART 102-83--LOCATION OF SPACE
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 B--Location of Space
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?
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 with local officials to comply
with the consultation elements of this part?
102-83.100 What flexibility do Federal agencies have to implement
this part 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 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 C--Severability
102-83.150 What portions of this part are severable?
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.s 12072
and 13006.
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
[[Page 72981]]
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--
(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 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; and
(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 (43 FR 36869, August 18, 1978).
(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 (80 FR 15871,
May 24, 1996).
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?
(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 of the FMR (41 CFR 102-79),
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 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
[[Page 72982]]
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 2010 Standards for Delineating Metropolitan and
Micropolitan Statistical Areas (75 FR 37246, June 28, 2010), or
succeeding OMB publication.
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 2010 Standards for Delineating Metropolitan and Micropolitan
Statistical Areas (75 FR 37246, June 28, 2010), or succeeding
standards. 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.
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 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; 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 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?
(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,
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 of environmentally sustainable development, reduced
greenhouse gas emissions, increased resilience to the impacts of
climate change, and stewardship of regional natural resources.
Maximizing the use of existing resources by leveraging investment in
existing infrastructure; prioritize 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),
[[Page 72983]]
greyfields (previously developed land that is underutilized) and infill
development; avoid development in floodplains or impacts to wetlands to
the extent practicable, and promote the preservation of historic
resources and other existing buildings. Fostering protection of the
natural environment by preserving existing ecosystems, avoiding
development of green space and promoting climate change adaptation
planning;
(3) Advancing environmental justice and equitable development;
(4) Advancing Federal and local historic preservation objectives;
and
(5) Seeking location-efficient sites that provide a variety of
transportation options for employees and the public, while maximizing
use of existing infrastructure and minimizing employee and visitor
travel by car. Prioritize central business districts, existing
employment centers and rural town centers; prioritize locations that
promote transportation choice, especially walking, biking and public
transit options; and locate 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.
(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 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 with local officials and
communities to comply with the consultation elements of this part?
Agencies have wide latitude to develop their own internal policies
for engaging in consultation 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 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 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
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 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 with local officials to apply the principles outlined in this
part properly. Consultation and consideration of local input must occur
in urban areas, and agencies are encouraged to perform similar
consultation in rural areas, as appropriate.
(b) Where a Federal location decision will include, be adjacent to
or in a reasonable radius of, or occur in a state containing Tribal
lands of federally-recognized American Indians or Native Alaskans, or
where the location decision affects a property or place of traditional
religious and cultural importance to Native Hawaiian Organizations,
Federal agencies must consult their agency Tribal consultation policies
to determine the appropriate level of engagement with the Tribal
governments and organizations, including official offers to consult,
listening sessions, or notifications.
(c) Where communities are likely to face displacement risks
associated with a Federal location decision, based on agency analysis
of existing data and consultation 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 this part 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
[[Page 72984]]
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 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 with local officials to establish recommended delineated
areas?
Yes. GSA may, at its discretion, assist agencies by consulting 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 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 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 this subpart. 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 in 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
[[Page 72985]]
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. 2023-23477 Filed 10-23-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820-14-P