United States General Accounting Office

GAO Report to the Chairman, Committee on

the Budget, House of Representatives

November 1998 DEPARTMENT OF

ENERGY

Management of Excess

Property

GAO/RCED-99-3

GAO United States

General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548

Resources, Community, and

Economic Development Division

B-280873 

November 4, 1998

The Honorable John R. Kasich

Chairman, Committee on the Budget

House of Representatives

Dear Mr. Chairman:

For fiscal year 1997, the Department of Energy reported that it had

$20.8 billion in property, some of which is no longer needed to carry out

the Department’s missions now that the Cold War has ended. The

Department reports, for example, that many of the buildings originally

designed and constructed to support its defense mission no longer have

any ongoing or planned mission. The Department acknowledges that it

needs to reduce its inventories of property and equipment and estimates

that, for its largest environmental management sites, it spends about

20 percent of its annual budget on maintaining the facilities and

infrastructure.

You requested that we review the Department of Energy’s efforts to

identify and dispose of property that is excess to its needs. Specifically,

you asked us to determine (1) the criteria the Department uses to guide

the identification and disposal of excess property, (2) the extent to which

the Department’s property records reflect what is no longer needed to

carry out its missions, and (3) the challenges the Department believes

exist in identifying excess property and the innovative approaches being

used to dispose of this property.

Results in Brief Federal property management regulations include criteria to determine

when real property1

 is excess to an agency’s needs. However, neither

federal property management regulations nor the Department of Energy’s

regulations and guidance include specific criteria to determine when

personal property is no longer needed. When property has been identified

as excess, guidelines for the disposal process are well defined for both real

and personal property. For example, the Department’s property

management regulations include guidelines for the screening of excess

personal property for reuse within the Department or other federal

agencies; for the transferring of lab equipment and computers to schools;

and for the sale of property to the public.

1

Real property includes land, improvements, structures, and permanent fixtures. Personal property

includes all other property except for real property and includes such things as government-owned

equipment, computers, and motor vehicles.

Page 1 GAO/RCED-99-3 DOE’s Excess Property
B-280873 

The Department of Energy’s property records do not consistently provide

information that would help identify property that is no longer needed.

Recent changes to the Department’s regulations require that property

records identify property that has already been determined to be excess.

In July 1998, the Department modified its real property records system to

identify property that has been determined to be excess. This system also

provides additional information, such as the percentage of a facility

currently in use, that could be used to identify other property that is no

longer needed. Similarly, in May 1998, the Department revised its personal

property management regulations to require that contractors’ records

include information on current usage, such as categorizing property as

active, in storage, or excess. However, these regulations do not provide

criteria for determining when personal property should be placed in these

categories.

The Department of Energy acknowledges problems with its identification

and disposal of excess real and personal property. Department officials

cited, for example, a lack of funding for the environmental cleanup of the

current inventory of excess real property and a lack of incentives to

identify property as excess. Because the costs associated with the

maintenance and storage of unneeded property are generally not

separately identified, little incentive exists to spend the resources

necessary to dispose of it. Regardless of the problems, field and program

offices have developed some innovative approaches to dispose of

property, such as including a performance-based incentive in the site

management contract to encourage the contractor operating the site to

dispose of excess property during the fiscal year.

Background Although most of the Department of Energy’s (DOE) real and personal

property is under the control of its contractors, several DOE offices have

the responsibility for managing this property. Overall, the office of Field

Management is responsible for real property management and field

oversight, and the office of Procurement and Assistance Management is

responsible for personal property. In addition, the Office of Worker and

Community Transition directs various efforts regarding the sale or

disposition of surplus assets and compiles reports for the Congress on

unneeded real and personal property and pilot projects relative to its

overall responsibilities. In addition, DOE’s program offices, such as the

office of Defense Programs, are responsible for declaring property excess

to their missions’ needs. One program office, Environmental Management,

is responsible for the cleanup of contaminated excess property before its

Page 2 GAO/RCED-99-3 DOE’s Excess Property
B-280873 

disposal. DOE’s field offices oversee the contractors’ efforts to manage the

property and maintain the property records.

In its fiscal year 1997 financial statements, DOE reported that it held

property, plant, and equipment valued at $20.8 billion2

—$12.0 billion of

real property and $5.2 billion of personal property, with construction work

in progress, natural resources, and software accounting for the remaining

$3.6 billion. The property amounts include only those items costing

$25,000 or more. Items that cost less than $25,000 are expensed for

financial statement purposes; DOE contractors held an additional

$3.4 billion of such personal property at the end of fiscal year 1997.

In DOE’s fiscal year 1997 Federal Managers’ Financial Integrity Act report

accompanying its financial statements, the Department indicated that it

had extensive inventories of real and personal property that is no longer

necessary and that disposal of this property could save future storage,

security, and maintenance costs. In addition, DOE reported problems with

the management of personal property. For example, the Rocky Flats Field

Office in Colorado identified problems that included a contractor’s

inadequate property records systems, incomplete inventory records, and

requests made for new work space while comparable space at the site was

being designated as excess. (See the bibliography for a list of GAO and

Inspector General reports on DOE property management issues.)

Federal Regulations

Provide Guidelines for

Real Property but

DOE’s Guidance Does

Not Include Criteria

for Determining When

Personal Property Is

Excess

The federal property management regulations specify that executive

agencies should dispose of real and personal property that is excess to

their needs and include guidelines for determining when real property is

unneeded or underutilized. However, neither the federal regulations nor

DOE’s guidance includes similar specific guidelines for determining when

personal property is excess. In the absence of criteria in the federal

regulations, it is left up to each agency to develop guidelines. DOE

implements the overall federal regulations for its real property and has

issued supplemental regulations for managing personal property.

However, DOE’s regulations for personal property include no criteria for

determining when property is excess.

Real Property The federal property management regulations for the utilization and

disposal of real property state that each executive agency should survey

the real property under its control at least annually to identify property

2

This represents the depreciated value of the property, plant, and equipment; the acquisition costs

were $46.9 billion.

Page 3 GAO/RCED-99-3 DOE’s Excess Property
B-280873 

that is not needed, is underutilized, or is not being put to optimum use.

The regulations also include a list of 15 guidelines to be used by executive

agencies in these annual reviews, including whether operating and

maintenance costs are excessive compared with those of other similar

facilities, whether all of the property is essential for program

requirements, and whether federal use of the property would be justified if

a rental charge equivalent to commercial rates were added to the program

costs for the occupants. Federal agencies are to maintain their inventory

of real property at the absolute minimum consistent with economical and

efficient operations and promptly report to the General Services

Administration any real property determined to be excess. The regulations

then describe the disposal process to be used for any property determined

to be excess. At many of DOE’s facilities, the excess property is

contaminated by radiation or other hazardous waste and must be cleaned

up before the disposal process can begin.

In addition to the federal property management regulations, DOE’s

guidance on life cycle asset management requires the Department to use

formal planning methods for real property, including a method to declare

property excess. The guidance further defines “excess” as physical assets

that are not required for DOE’s needs and for carrying out its missions but

does not include any additional criteria for making that determination.

According to officials in DOE’s office of Field Management, the field and

program offices are to use the guidelines in the federal property

management regulations in their planning process and in determining

when real property is excess to their needs.

Personal Property Unlike for real property, neither the federal property management

regulations nor DOE’s regulations and guidance include specific criteria for

determining when personal property is excess. The federal property

management regulations define excess personal property as that which is

not required for an agency’s needs and the discharge of its responsibilities.

The regulations further state that when property is determined to no

longer be required for the “purpose of the appropriation from which it was

purchased or for the use to which it has been applied,” an executive

agency should reassign the property within its activities.

DOE’s supplemental property management regulations state that

management practices are to ensure the best possible use of personal

property and that supplies and equipment should generally be limited to

those items essential for carrying out DOE’s programs efficiently. DOE’s

Page 4 GAO/RCED-99-3 DOE’s Excess Property
B-280873 

regulations also state that DOE offices and designated contractors are

responsible for continuously surveying property under their control to

ensure maximum use and promptly identify property that is excess to their

needs. In addition, for laboratory and research equipment, the regulations

require a management walk-through of all operating and storage areas at

least every 2 years to identify idle and unneeded personal property.

Equipment identified as idle and unneeded is to be made available to

others or listed as excess. However, there are no guidelines to be used in

making these determinations.

After property has been determined to be excess, the regulations state that

the property must first be screened for reuse or transfer to others before

offering it for sale to the public. Personal property is first screened for

reuse within DOE, then for transfers to the Math and Science Education

Gift Program (under Executive Order 12821) and to the Community Reuse

Organizations/Economic Development program (under P.L. 103-160).

Subsequent steps include making property available to educational

institutions such as colleges and universities under the Used Energy

Related Laboratory Equipment Grant Program (P.L. 101-510) and to other

federal agencies and state donation programs. Personal property that

remains after the screening process can be sold to the public or discarded.

DOE’s Property

Records Do Not

Consistently Reflect

When Property Is

Excess

DOE’s recently revised guidance on property records requires contractors

to record property already identified as excess. For real property, the

information contained in the property records could be used to determine

when additional real property may be excess. However, for personal

property, without further guidance, these records will not provide

information to help identify other personal property that is no longer

needed.

Real Property DOE currently maintains approximately 22,500 facilities, including

buildings, production facilities, and other structures. Property records for

these facilities are maintained in DOE’s Facilities Information Management

System and contain detailed information on each facility. The field offices

are responsible for entering all data into the system, which was

implemented as DOE’s agencywide database. This database contains

information such as the location, size, age, and acquisition cost of the

property and the percentage of a facility being used. It also reflects

building status as determined by the DOE field offices, such as operational,

standby, or shutdown pending decontamination and decommissioning.

Page 5 GAO/RCED-99-3 DOE’s Excess Property
B-280873 

In July 1998, DOE added a new requirement to its real property records

system by adding an “excess indicator” to show whether a property has

been determined to be excess. In addition, there is a new requirement to

include “deferred maintenance” costs for each facility, which are those

costs necessary to restore a facility to its operating condition. Employing

the federal property management guidelines, DOE field offices and program

managers can use information in the database, such as the percentage of a

facility being used and its deferred maintenance costs, to identify other

facilities that may be excess.

Personal Property DOE’s contractors hold approximately 95 percent of the Department’s

personal property. Of the approximately 744,000 items of personal

property held by the contractors, about 89,000 items cost $25,000 or more;

the remaining 655,000 items cost less than $25,000 each and are expensed

for the purposes of DOE’s financial statements. Contractors are required to

maintain property control records for every accountable item of personal

property and individual item records for each sensitive item (i.e., those

items of personal property considered susceptible to being stolen, such as

portable computers or portable power tools).

A contractor’s property records system must be approved by a DOE

contracting office. DOE’s May 1998 property management regulations

specify the minimum requirements for a property records system. For

example, the individual property record for each item should include such

information as a description, acquisition cost, physical location, and the

status of the item. Status is defined as “active, [in] storage, excess, etc.,”

but no further explanation of these terms is given. However, in the

absence of criteria, the information in these records such as date of

purchase and cost do not aid in determining what personal property is

excess.

While DOE Faces

Challenges, Some

Field and Program

Offices Have Initiated

Local Solutions

According to DOE officials, the Department faces challenges in identifying

and disposing of excess property. The challenges cited by DOE officials

include a lack of funding for the decontamination and decommissioning of

excess real property and the existence of few incentives for program and

field offices to identify property as excess. Nevertheless, field and program

offices have made some innovative efforts to dispose of excess real and

personal property.

Page 6 GAO/RCED-99-3 DOE’s Excess Property
B-280873 

Challenges in the

Identification and Disposal

of Excess Property

In January 1996, DOE issued a report on 10 categories of nuclear and

nonnuclear materials in inventory, including uranium, lead, and chemicals.3

DOE reported that it had large quantities of the materials that no longer

had clearly defined or immediate uses; if left unattended, much of the

material could present environmental, safety, and health risks; and

maintaining these materials in a safe condition cost millions of dollars

annually, although the exact cost was unknown. Although this report

specifically addressed materials, the Director of the Office of Policy

Analysis, Environmental Management, told us that the concerns about the

identification and disposal of excess materials should also be applied to

real and personal property. Among the problems noted in the report were

that (1) DOE lacks policies and criteria for determining when materials are

excess to the Department’s needs and (2) the function of declaring

materials excess usually rests with program managers at DOE’s sites, who

have little or no incentive to address the problem and who lack the

resources and funding to identify and dispose of excess materials.

Similarly, other DOE officials with the Office of Contract and Resource

Management and the office of Field Management told us that with real and

personal property, the Department faces challenges because of a lack of

funding and incentives.

Cleaning up excess facilities represents a funding challenge for DOE. Since

the Department’s Environmental Management program was created in

1989 to clean up and dispose of contaminated excess facilities, a backlog

of over 10,000 facilities has developed. Because of funding concerns,

Environmental Management stopped accepting new facilities about 2 years

ago and has had to set cleanup priorities based on such criteria as relative

risk. According to DOE’s fiscal year 1997 financial report, the cleanup

program for Environmental Management facilities and “legacy” wastes

represents an unfunded liability of $141 billion. While the Environmental

Management program seeks to complete its long-term cleanup strategy for

those facilities, DOE anticipates that by the year 2006, up to another 1,500

facilities will be declared excess, almost half of them contaminated.

As with materials, program managers have little or no incentive to identify

real and personal property as excess. According to DOE officials in the

office of Procurement and Assistance Management and in the Defense

Programs, Environmental Management, and Energy Research program

offices, managers are reluctant to commit scarce program funding to

identify excess property. Program managers do not see all of the costs

3

Taking Stock: A Look at the Opportunities and Challenges Posed by Inventories From the Cold War

Era (DOE/EM-0275, Jan. 1996).

Page 7 GAO/RCED-99-3 DOE’s Excess Property
B-280873 

associated with unneeded property because some of the costs to maintain

and store unneeded property are included in overhead costs and are not

separately identified. DOE estimates that for its largest Environmental

Management sites, it is spending about 20 percent of its overall budget on

maintenance and surveillance of facilities and infrastructure. However,

without the program managers’ knowing the actual costs to maintain their

property, there is little incentive to spend the resources necessary to

dispose of it. In addition, DOE noted that declaring property excess may

require initiating costly programs to decontaminate or decommission the

property. Funds for such programs are not generally available because

mission or compliance requirements are funded first.

Examples of Innovative

Approaches to Identifying

and Disposing of Excess

Property

Innovative approaches to the identification and disposal of excess

property have been developed at the field and program office levels.

Examples include requiring a contractor to reduce surplus property at a

site, establishing a group to dispose of excess property and funding its

efforts through the sale of that property, creating a computer-based

system to facilitate the reuse of materials within DOE, and establishing pilot

projects that sought to allow the proceeds from property sales to be

retained to fund future disposal efforts.

The most recent contract for the management of the Hanford site in

Washington State includes provisions for reducing the site’s overall

infrastructure to support its current missions and states that the

contractor is expected to use innovative approaches to accomplish this

objective. In addition, several of the contract’s performance-based

incentives required the contractor to increase the utilization of the space

in its facilities; reduce inventory management costs, including carrying

costs; and dispose of $50 million of excess personal property.4

The contractor at the Hanford site established a group to dispose of excess

property through donation programs, transfers to other sites or agencies,

and public auctions and negotiated sales. In addition, this group opened a

retail store that sells such items as surplus computers and office

equipment to the public; sales at this store average $5,000 per week. The

proceeds from the public auctions, negotiated sales, and retail store must

cover the group’s costs of operation; it receives no additional funding from

DOE. Any proceeds that exceed the group’s costs are returned to DOE.

4

Personal property is carried in the contractors’ property records at its acquisition cost, which is what

the $50 million figure represents. Because of the age, condition, or possible obsolescence of the excess

property, its current value is likely to be much less.

Page 8 GAO/RCED-99-3 DOE’s Excess Property
B-280873 

The office of Energy Research has developed an innovative system to

better reuse materials within DOE. Although the system currently covers

only materials, program officials told us they plan to expand it to include a

link to the personal property system. This computer-based system, called

the Exchange, is accessible to DOE program personnel on the Internet. By

sharing information about materials that are excess at various sites or

needed by other sites, the Exchange allows materials to be reused more

efficiently. For example, the Idaho Falls site needed sturdy packing boxes

in Idaho to ship instruments for repair and calibration, and the Pantex site

had about 250 excess boxes in Texas that met this need. The Idaho Falls

site estimated that using the Exchange saved it about $50,000 over the cost

of new boxes.

As part of its responsibility for the disposition of excess assets, the Office

of Worker and Community Transition proposed six pilot projects for fiscal

year 1998 to dispose of excess real and personal property. Under these

pilot projects, DOE sought to overcome its funding constraints by asking

for congressional approval to retain the proceeds generated by the pilot

projects and to use them to fund further disposal efforts. These projects

included the sale of heavy water5

 at the Savannah River site in South

Carolina; the sale of precious metals at Oak Ridge in Tennessee; the

leasing of facilities at the Hanford and Savannah River sites; the sale of

approximately 100,000 pieces of machinery, tools, and equipment at Rocky

Flats in Colorado; and a program at Oak Ridge to refurbish and sell excess

electronic equipment. Although DOE’s request was denied, the conference

report accompanying DOE’s appropriations urged the Department to

proceed with implementation under the current guidelines that allow DOE

to retain proceeds from the sales and leases to the extent needed to cover

the administrative costs associated with the sales or leases. DOE will

evaluate these pilot projects at the end of the fiscal year and report the

results to the Congress.

Agency Comments We sent a draft of this report to the Department of Energy for its review

and comment. The Department’s primary comments related to our

characterization of the criteria for determining when personal property is

no longer needed. DOE generally disagreed with our assessment of the

extent to which criteria exist. The Department cited several references to

regulations that it believes provide specific criteria for identifying

unneeded personal property. However, these regulations are general in

5

Heavy water contains deuterium, a naturally occurring isotope of hydrogen, and is used in production

reactors.

Page 9 GAO/RCED-99-3 DOE’s Excess Property
B-280873 

nature and do not provide any specific guidance similar to that found in

the real property regulations. For example, one of the references cited by

DOE states that equipment identified as idle and unneeded should be

redeployed or declared excess, as appropriate. However, this does not

provide program managers any guidance that defines when an item is to

be classified as idle and unneeded. For real property, program managers

have 15 guidelines to be used in their annual reviews to help determine

when property is not needed, underutilized, or not put to its optimal use.

Because the personal property regulations do not provide specific

guidance to program managers, we therefore did not revise the report.

DOE also noted that the cleanup of its excess facilities is actually broader in

scope than reflected by the $141 billion in its annual report, which

represented Environmental Management facilities and legacy wastes. Total

environmental liabilities reported in the financial statements were

$181 billion. Because our report addresses the environmental cleanup of

real property, we did not revise it to reflect the broader environmental

costs. DOE also noted a new effort to collect individual facility maintenance

and deferred maintenance cost information at the headquarters level that

is designed to enable program managers to identify costs to maintain their

real property. We did not revise our report because this effort is just

getting under way and is not to be completed until fiscal year 2000.

DOE also offered several technical corrections that were incorporated.

DOE’s comments are included in appendix I.

Scope and

Methodology

To determine what criteria DOE uses to guide the identification and

disposal of excess property and whether DOE’s property records reflect

what is no longer needed to carry out its missions, we reviewed the federal

property management regulations and DOE’s property management

regulations and guidance. In addition, we interviewed officials from DOE’s

offices of Worker and Community Transition, Procurement and Assistance

Management, Field Management, Environmental Management, Energy

Research, and Defense Programs, and we reviewed documentation

provided by them. We also interviewed officials from DOE and contractor

property management organizations at the Hanford site and reviewed their

procedures.

To determine what challenges DOE encounters in identifying excess

property and to identify innovative approaches being used to dispose of

this property, we reviewed DOE’s fiscal year 1997 Federal Managers’

Page 10 GAO/RCED-99-3 DOE’s Excess Property
B-280873 

Financial Integrity Act report and supporting documentation, reports from

DOE’s Office of the Inspector General, and the January 1996 materials in

inventory report. We interviewed officials from DOE’s offices of Worker

and Community Transition, Procurement and Assistance Management,

Field Management, Environmental Management, Energy Research, and

Defense Programs. We also interviewed officials from DOE and contractor

property management organizations at the Hanford site and reviewed

documentation they provided.

We performed our review from July 1998 through September 1998 in

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.

As arranged with your office, unless you publicly announce its contents

earlier, we plan no further distribution of this report until 30 days after the

date of this letter. At that time, we will send copies to the Secretary of

Energy. We will also make copies available to others on request.

Please call me at (202) 512-7106 if you or your staff have any further

questions. Major contributors to this report were Jeffrey E. Heil, Carole J.

Blackwell, and Kathleen A. Gilhooly.

Sincerely yours,

Susan D. Kladiva

Associate Director, Energy, Resources,

 and Science Issues

Page 11 GAO/RCED-99-3 DOE’s Excess Property
Appendix I 

Comments From the Department of Energy

Page 12 GAO/RCED-99-3 DOE’s Excess Property
Appendix I 

Comments From the Department of Energy

Now on p.1.

Now on p. 2.

Now on p. 2.

Now on p. 2.

Page 13 GAO/RCED-99-3 DOE’s Excess Property
Appendix I 

Comments From the Department of Energy

Now on p. 7.

Now on p. 7.

Now on p. 8.

Now on p. 1.

Now on p. 7.

Now on p. 8.

Page 14 GAO/RCED-99-3 DOE’s Excess Property
Appendix I 

Comments From the Department of Energy

Page 15 GAO/RCED-99-3 DOE’s Excess Property
Bibliography

General Accounting

Office

Department of Energy: Property Management Has Improved at DOE’s

Rocky Flats Site (GAO/RCED-96-39, Dec. 28, 1995).

Energy Downsizing: Criteria for Community Assistance Needed

(GAO/RCED-96-36, Dec. 27, 1995).

Managing DOE: Government Property Worth Millions of Dollars Is Missing

(GAO/T-RCED-94-309, Sept. 19, 1994).

Department of Energy: Status of DOE’s Property Management Program

(GAO/RCED-94-154FS, Apr. 7. 1994).

Department of Energy: The Property Management System at the Rocky

Flats Plant Is Inadequate (GAO/RCED-94-77, Mar. 1, 1994).

Inspector General,

Department of Energy

The U.S. Department of Energy’s Facility Reuse at the Rocky Flats

Environmental Technology Site (DOE/IG-0425, Aug. 20, 1998).

Personal Property at the Oak Ridge Operations Office and the Office of

Scientific and Technical Information (ER-B-98-07, Apr. 6, 1998).

Audit of the Deactivation, Decontamination, and Disposal of Surplus

Facilities at the Savannah River Site (ER-B-98-01, Oct. 23, 1997).

Audit of the Use of Hanford Site Railroad System (WR-B-97-04, Mar. 20,

1997).

Audit of the U.S. Department of Energy’s Identification and Disposal of

Nonessential Land (DOE/IG-0399, Jan. 8, 1997).

Special Audit Report on the Department of Energy’s Arms and

Military-Type Equipment (DOE/IG-0385, Feb. 1996).

Audit of Light Vehicle Fleet Management in the Department of Energy

(DOE/IG-0362, Dec. 1994).

Audit of the Transfer of Government-Owned Property at the Mound and

Pinellas Plants (DOE/IG-0360, Nov. 1994).

Summary Report on DOE’s Management of Personal Property (DOE/IG-0344,

Mar. 1994).

(141221) Page 16 GAO/RCED-99-3 DOE’s Excess Property
Ordering Information

The first copy of each GAO report and testimony is free.

Additional copies are $2 each. Orders should be sent to the

following address, accompanied by a check or money order

made out to the Superintendent of Documents, when

necessary. VISA and MasterCard credit cards are accepted, also.

Orders for 100 or more copies to be mailed to a single address

are discounted 25 percent.

Orders by mail:

U.S. General Accounting Office

P.O. Box 37050

Washington, DC 20013

or visit:

Room 1100

700 4th St. NW (corner of 4th and G Sts. NW)

U.S. General Accounting Office

Washington, DC

Orders may also be placed by calling (202) 512-6000 

or by using fax number (202) 512-6061, or TDD (202) 512-2537.

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available reports and

testimony. To receive facsimile copies of the daily list or any

list from the past 30 days, please call (202) 512-6000 using a

touchtone phone. A recorded menu will provide information on

how to obtain these lists.

For information on how to access GAO reports on the INTERNET,

send an e-mail message with "info" in the body to:

info@www.gao.gov

or visit GAO’s World Wide Web Home Page at:

http://www.gao.gov

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
United States

General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548-0001

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use $300

Address Correction Requested

Bulk Rate

Postage & Fees Paid

GAO

Permit No. G100