70878 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 221 / Wednesday, November 16, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

(1) The beginning point is on the 

Sonoma County, map in the town of 

Monte Rio at the intersection of the 

Russian River and a secondary highway 

(Bohemian Highway); 

(2) The boundary follows this 

secondary highway (Bohemian 

Highway), southeasterly parallel to 

Dutch Bill Creek, through the towns of 

Camp Meeker, Occidental, and 

Freestone, and then northeasterly to its 

intersection with an unnamed 

secondary highway designated as State 

Highway 12 (Bodega Road) at BM 214, 

as shown on the Valley Ford map. 

(3) The boundary follows Bodega 

Road northeasterly 0.9 miles on the 

Valley Ford map; then onto the Camp 

Meeker map to its intersection, at BM 

486, with Jonive Road to the north and 

an unnamed light duty road to the south 

(Barnett Valley Road), Township 6 

North, Range 9 West, on the Camp 

Meeker map. 

(4) The boundary follows Barnett 

Valley Road south 2.2 miles, then east 

crossing over the Valley Ford map and 

onto the Two Rock map, to Barnett 

Valley Road’s intersection with 

Burnside Road, section 17, Township 6 

North, Range 9 West. 

(5) The boundary follows Burnside 

Road southeast 3.3 miles to Burnside 

Road’s intersection with an unnamed 

medium duty road at BM 375, 

Township 6 North, Range 9 West. 

(6) The boundary follows a straight 

line southeast 0.6 mile to an unnamed 

610-foot elevation peak, 1.5 miles 

southwest of Canfield School, Township 

6 North, Range 9 West. 

(7) The boundary follows a straight 

line east-southeast 0.75 mile to an 

unnamed 641-foot elevation peak 1.4 

miles south-southwest of Canfield 

School, Township 6 North, Range 9 

West. 

(8) The boundary follows a straight 

line northeast 0.85 mile to its 

intersection with an unnamed 

intermittent stream and Canfield Road; 

then continues on the straight line 

northeast 0.3 mile to the line’s 

intersection with the common Ranges 8 

and 9 line, just west of an unnamed 

unimproved dirt road, Township 6 

North. 

(9) The boundary follows a straight 

line southeast 0.5 mile, crossing over 

the end of an unnamed, unimproved 

dirt road to an unnamed 524-foot 

elevation peak, Township 6 North, 

Range 8 West. 

(10) The boundary follows a straight 

line southeast 0.75 mile to the 

intersection of an unnamed unimproved 

dirt road (leading to four barn-like 

structures) and an unnamed mediumduty road (Roblar Road), Township 6 

North, Range 8 West. 

(11) The boundary follows a straight 

line south 0.5 mile to an unnamed 678- 

foot elevation peak, Township 6 North, 

Range 8 West. 

(12) The boundary follows a straight 

line east-southeast 0.8 mile to an 

unnamed peak with a 599-foot 

elevation, Township 5 North, Range 8 

West. 

(13) The boundary follows a straight 

line east-southeast 0.7 mile to an 

unnamed peak with a 604-foot 

elevation, Township 5 North, Range 8 

West. 

(14) The boundary follows a straight 

line east-southeast 0.9 mile, onto the 

Cotati map, to the intersection of a 

short, unnamed light-duty road leading 

past a group of barn-like structures and 

Meacham Road, Township 5 North, 

Range 8 West. 

(15) The boundary follows Meacham 

Road north-northeast 0.75 mile to 

Meacham Road’s intersection with 

Stony Point Road, Township 5 North, 

Range 8 West. 

(16) The boundary follows Stony 

Point Road southeast 1.1 miles to the 

point where the 200-foot elevation 

contour line intersects Stony Point 

Road, Township 5 North, Range 8 West. 

(17) The boundary follows a straight 

line north-northeast 0.5 mile to the 

point where an unnamed intermittent 

stream intersects U.S. 101, Township 5 

North, Range 8 West. 

(18) The boundary follows U.S. Route 

101 north 4.25 miles to the point where 

Santa Rosa Avenue exits U.S. Route 101 

to the east (approximately 0.5 mile 

north of the Wilfred Avenue overpass) 

Township 6 North, Range 8 West. 

(19) The boundary follows Santa Rosa 

Avenue north 1.1 miles to its 

intersection with Todd Road, crossing 

on to the Santa Rosa map, Township 6 

North, Range 8 West. 

(20) The boundary follows Santa Rosa 

Avenue generally north 5.8 miles, 

eventually becoming Mendocino 

Avenue, to Santa Rosa Avenue’s 

intersection with an unnamed 

secondary road (Bicentennial Way), 0.3 

mile north-northwest of BM 161 on 

Mendocino Avenue, section 11, 

Township 7 North, Range 8 West. 

(21) The boundary follows a straight 

line north 2.5 miles crossing over the 

906-foot elevation peak in section 35, 

T8N, R8W, crossing onto the Mark West 

Springs map, to the line’s intersection 

with Mark West Springs Road and the 

meandering 280-foot elevation line in 

section 26, Township 6 North, Range 8 

West. 

(22) The boundary follows the 

unnamed secondary highway, Mark 

West Springs Road, on the Sonoma 

County map, generally north and east, 

eventually turning into Porter Road and 

then to Petrified Forest Road, passing 

BM 545, the town of Mark West Springs, 

BM 495, and the Petrified Forest area, to 

Petrified Forest Road’s intersection with 

the Sonoma County-Napa County line. 

* * * * * 

Signed: April 14, 2011. 

John J. Manfreda, 

Administrator. 

Approved: July 21, 2011. 

Timothy E. Skud, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary (Tax, Trade, and 

Tariff Policy). 

[FR Doc. 2011–29519 Filed 11–15–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810–31–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Office of the Secretary 

32 CFR Part 174 

[Docket ID: DOD–2010–OS–0135] 

RIN 0790–AI67 

Revitalizing Base Closure 

Communities and Addressing Impacts 

of Realignment 

AGENCY: Office of the Under Secretary of 

Defense for Acquisition, Technology, 

and Logistics, DoD. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: Section 2715 of the National 

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 2010, Public Law 111–84, 

amended the Defense Base Closure and 

Realignment Act of 1990 to change the 

authority of the Department of Defense 

to convey property to a local 

redevelopment authority (LRA) for 

purposes of job generation on a military 

installation closed or realigned under a 

base closure law. Such a conveyance is 

known as an Economic Development 

Conveyance (EDC). Economic 

Development Conveyances were created 

by amendments to the Base Closure and 

Realignment law in 1993, creating a new 

tool for communities experiencing 

negative economic effects caused by the 

elimination of a significant number of 

jobs in the community. Congress 

recognized that the existing authority 

under the Federal Property and 

Administrative Services Act of 1949 (as 

amended and otherwise known as the 

Real Property Act) was not structured to 

deal with the unique challenges of 

assisting base closure communities with 

economic recovery and job creation, 

many with decaying or obsolete 

infrastructure and other redevelopment 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 221 / Wednesday, November 16, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 70879 

challenges. Under this revised authority, 

the Department is no longer required to 

seek fair market value for an EDC. An 

EDC may be for consideration at or 

below the estimated fair market value, 

including without consideration. The 

amendment expands the flexibility of 

the Department regarding the form of 

consideration it may accept, including 

the authority to accept consideration in 

the form of revenue sharing or so-called 

‘‘back-end’’ funding. Back-end funding 

is consideration consisting of a share of 

the revenues that the LRA receives from 

third-party buyers or lessees from sales 

and leases of the conveyed property, 

consideration in kind (including goods 

and services), real property and 

improvements, or such other 

consideration as the Secretary considers 

appropriate. 

The amendment also provides that the 

Department’s determination of the 

consideration may account for the 

economic conditions of the local 

affected community and the estimated 

costs to redevelop the property. 

This final rule amends the existing 

regulation on reutilization of 

installations closed under the base 

closure process to conform to the 

amendment to the Defense Base Closure 

and Realignment Act of 1990 and makes 

other improvements that encourage 

expedited property transfers for job 

creation that allow for the Department 

to recover a share of the revenues 

obtained. 

DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is 

effective December 16, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Robert Hertzfeld, (703) 604–6020. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

This final rule implements statutory 

changes and enables the military 

departments to expedite the EDC 

process. Closed military bases represent 

a potential engine of economic activity 

and job creation for the local affected 

communities. When disposing of 

property using an EDC, the military 

departments should use the full breadth 

of their authority to structure 

conveyances that respond to the job 

creation and redevelopment challenges 

of the individual community. 

The amended law no longer requires 

the Department to seek fair market value 

when conveying property to eligible 

recipients. Accordingly, a transfer may 

be made below estimated fair market 

value or without consideration if the 

LRA agrees to reinvest sale or lease 

proceeds for not less than seven years 

and to take title to the property within 

a reasonable timeframe. This rule also 

amends the regulation to delete the 

requirement for the Department to 

obtain an appraisal of the property as 

part of an EDC conveyance, and instead 

allows the military departments to 

conduct the type of analysis it deems 

appropriate to protect the interest of the 

Government and to make an informed 

decision. The analysis should be based 

on the uses identified in the community 

reuse plan, rather than an independent 

analysis of highest and best use. This 

regulation emphasizes the use of EDCs 

to best promote the economic 

redevelopment of the former 

installation. With this change, the 

Department has the option to pursue 

property value by obtaining a share of 

the revenues obtained from the 

redevelopment of the property. 

Experience has shown that estimates of 

fair market value for property at closing 

installations, especially those requiring 

substantial future investment in 

redevelopment, can vary widely due to 

the uncertainties inherent in significant 

long-term redevelopment projects and 

different projections of costs and 

revenues over a potential 20–30 year 

development cycle that may occur on a 

large closing installation. Elimination of 

the requirement to estimate the fair 

market value, along with related 

appraisal requirements, should expedite 

the conveyance process and remove 

what has been a common source of 

conflict and delay between the 

community and the Department. 

Accordingly, the final rule establishes as 

DoD policy a requirement that, for every 

EDC, the LRA must reinvest sale or lease 

proceeds for at least seven years after 

transfer and take title to the property 

within a reasonable timeframe. This 

makes the determination of fair market 

value of the property unnecessary for 

purposes of establishing EDC terms and 

conditions. It also eliminates the need to 

establish a process by which the fair 

market value of property to be conveyed 

by EDC must be determined. The final 

rule does allow the Secretary concerned 

to obtain and use any information 

deemed appropriate, which may include 

economic and market analysis, 

construction estimates, a r pro forma 

cash flow analysis, and appraisals, to 

ensure that decisions regarding property 

disposal are properly informed. If the 

proposed conveyance does not meet the 

requirements for an EDC, or if the LRA 

does not agree to reinvest sale or lease 

proceeds for at least seven years and to 

take title to the property within a 

reasonable timeframe, the Secretary 

concerned may pursue a negotiated sale 

to a public entity at fair market value, 

including a negotiated sale for economic 

development purposes, under 

regulations at 41 CFR 102–75.880, et 

seq, or competitive public sale. 

This rule streamlines the disposal 

process by separating the eligibility 

criteria for an EDC from the criteria 

guiding the negotiation of the terms and 

conditions. It also makes the application 

more concise and incorporates 

adjustments to reflect current market 

conditions and to recognize local 

community investment and risk. This 

final rule implements the revised EDC 

authority in a manner intended to 

clarify and streamline the Economic 

Development Conveyance process and 

assist affected communities in job 

generation. As explained below in the 

response to public comments, 

additional changes have been made to 

address those comments and to better 

clarify the Department’s intent. 

Public Comments 

The Department of Defense published 

a proposed rule on December 17, 2010 

(75 FR 78946) and received comments 

from four individuals/organizations. All 

comments were generally supportive of 

the revised regulation, particularly the 

increased flexibility and promotion of 

community reuse and redevelopment 

efforts. Following is a summary of the 

individual comments and the 

Department’s responses. 

Comment: One comment addressed 

the reporting requirements contained in 

paragraph 174.9(d)(8); specifically the 

requirement to maintain separate 

reinvestment reporting requirements for 

each transfer when property is 

transferred in phases. The person 

making the comment thought that this 

proposed requirement would result in a 

‘‘difficult, expensive and time 

consuming process for both local 

jurisdiction and the Department’’. The 

commenter suggested that the reporting 

requirement should be at least seven 

years from the date of the initial 

transfer. 

Response: The Department agrees 

that, as proposed, the requirement for 

keeping track of separate reporting 

timelines for individual parcels 

conveyed would create a confusing and 

burdensome requirement. The 

Department thinks a simple solution to 

meet the congressional intent of the 

reinvestment requirement is to have the 

reinvestment requirement extend for at 

least seven years after the last transfer. 

This requirement should simplify the 

process and ensure that funds are 

dedicated to the redevelopment of the 

former installation to promote its 

successful redevelopment. The 

Department recognizes that some 

parcels may have beneficial use 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
70880 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 221 / Wednesday, November 16, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

transferred before physical title through 

the use of a lease in furtherance of 

conveyance, and the final rule treats 

such property as a transfer for 

determining the start of the 

reinvestment period. The rule has been 

changed accordingly. 

Comment: One comment addressed 

the requirement contained in paragraph 

174.9(d)(9) that requires the Local 

Redevelopment Authority to accept 

control of the property within a 

reasonable time after the date of the 

property disposal record of decision. 

The commenter was concerned that this 

requirement does not fully address the 

circumstances of the transfer and asks 

the Department to add ‘‘under the 

circumstances’’ after ‘‘in a reasonable 

time’’. 

Response: The Department does not 

believe a change is necessary. It is 

assumed that all parties act reasonably 

with regard to the individual facts and 

circumstances of each property. The 

property will only be ready for transfer 

after a property disposal record of 

decision is issued. No change was made 

to the rule to address this comment. 

Comment: One comment was very 

supportive of the removal of the 

requirement to conduct an appraisal in 

all circumstances and was generally 

supportive of the language contained in 

paragraph 174.9(k) which provides that 

the consideration should be based on a 

business plan and development pro 

forma that assumes the uses in the 

redevelopment plan. The commenter 

suggests that the basis of consideration 

should be required to be a business plan 

and development pro forma. This would 

be accomplished by changing the word 

‘‘should’’ to ‘‘shall’’. 

Response: The Department believes 

that the military departments should 

have the flexibility to treat each EDC 

application on an individual basis and 

create a transaction that is both fair to 

the Government and to the local 

community. For most large 

redevelopment projects, the basis of 

consideration needs to be a business 

plan and development pro forma due to 

the uncertainties inherent in large, long 

term redevelopment projects. Not all 

properties subject to this regulation are 

large, long term redevelopment projects 

and the Department needs to maintain 

flexibility for differing circumstances. 

The use of the word ‘‘should’’ maintains 

needed flexibility, but denotes a policy 

preference for use in most 

circumstances. No change in the final 

rule was made to address this comment. 

Comment: One comment expressed 

concern over the inclusion of 

environmental clean-up savings when 

evaluating an EDC application, as 

provided for in paragraph 174.9(f)(8). 

The commenter thought that 

consideration of this factor would 

transfer the burden of clean-up costs to 

the local community. 

Response: Paragraph 174.9(f)(8) does 

not transfer clean-up costs to local 

communities. The Department retains 

the responsibility for environmental 

restoration to meet all applicable 

standards. This paragraph allows the 

Department to take into account the 

benefit of phasing clean-up schedules 

with planned reuse when negotiating 

the consideration paid by the Local 

Redevelopment Authority. No change 

was made in the final rule to address 

this comment. 

Comment: One comment raised a 

concern about complying with the 

provisions of the McKinney Act with 

regard to the needs of the homeless as 

part of a community economic 

development strategy. 

Response: The Base Closure 

Community Redevelopment and 

Homeless Assistance Act exempted Base 

Closure communities from the 

McKinney Act and substituted an 

alternative process for evaluating the 

needs of the homeless in the base 

property disposal process. This rule 

only effects Local Redevelopment 

Authorities that have already complied 

with the requirements of the Base 

Closure Community Redevelopment and 

Homeless Assistance Act, since a 

requirement of making an EDC 

application is an approved 

redevelopment plan. No change was 

made to the final rule to address this 

comment. 

II. Regulatory Procedures 

Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory 

Planning and Review’’ and Executive 

Order 13563, ‘‘Improving Regulation 

and Regulatory Review’’ 

It has been certified that 32 CFR part 

174 does not: 

(1) Have an annual effect on the 

economy of $100 million or more or 

adversely affect in a material way the 

economy; a section of the economy; 

productivity; competition; jobs; the 

environment; public health or safety; or 

State, local, or tribunal governments or 

communities; 

(2) Create a serious inconsistency or 

otherwise interfere with an action taken 

or planned by another Agency; 

(3) Materially alter the budgetary 

impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, 

or loan programs, or the rights and 

obligations of recipients thereof; or 

(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues 

arising out of legal mandates, the 

President’s priorities, or the principles 

set forth in these Executive Orders. 

Sec. 202, Public Law 104–4, ‘‘Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act’’ 

It has been certified that 32 CFR part 

174 does not contain a Federal mandate 

that may result in the expenditure by 

State, local and tribunal governments, in 

aggregate, or by the private sector, of 

$100 million or more in any one year. 

Public Law 96–354, ‘‘Regulatory 

Flexibility Act’’ (5 U.S.C. 601) 

It has been certified that 32 CFR part 

174 is not subject to the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601) because it 

would not, if promulgated, have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

Public Law 96–511, ‘‘Paperwork 

Reduction Act’’ (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) 

It has been certified that 32 CFR part 

174 does not impose reporting or 

recordkeeping requirements under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. 

Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism’’ 

It has been certified that 32 CFR part 

174 does not have federalism 

implications, as set forth in Executive 

Order 13132. This rule does not have 

substantial direct effects on: 

(1) The States; 

(2) The relationship between the 

National Government and the States; or 

(3) The distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of Government. 

List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 174 

Community development; 

Government employees; Military 

personnel; Surplus Government 

property. 

Accordingly, 32 CFR part 174 is 

amended as follows: 

PART 174—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 174 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 10 U.S.C. 113 and 10 U.S.C. 

2687 note. 

■ 2. Section 174.9 is revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 174.9 Economic development 

conveyances. 

(a) The Secretary concerned may 

transfer real property and personal 

property to the LRA for purposes of job 

generation on the former installation. 

Such a transfer is an Economic 

Development Conveyance (EDC). 

(b) An LRA is the only entity eligible 

to receive property under an EDC. 

(c) The Secretary concerned shall use 

the completed application, along with 

other relevant information, to decide 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 221 / Wednesday, November 16, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 70881 

whether to enter into an EDC with an 

LRA. An LRA may submit an EDC 

application only after it adopts a 

redevelopment plan. The Secretary 

concerned shall establish a reasonable 

time period for submission of an EDC 

application after consultation with the 

LRA. 

(d) The application shall include: 

(1) A copy of the adopted 

redevelopment plan. 

(2) A project narrative including the 

following: 

(i) A general description of the 

property requested. 

(ii) A description of the intended 

uses. 

(iii) A description of the economic 

impact of closure or realignment on the 

local community. 

(iv) A description of the economic 

condition of the community and the 

prospects for redevelopment of the 

property. 

(v) A statement of how the EDC is 

consistent with the overall 

redevelopment plan. 

(3) A description of how the EDC will 

contribute to short- and long-term job 

generation on the installation, including 

the projected number and type of new 

jobs it will assist in generating. 

(4) A business/operational plan for 

development of the EDC parcel, 

including at least the following 

elements: 

(i) A development timetable, phasing 

schedule, and cash flow analysis. 

(ii) A market and financial feasibility 

analysis describing the economic 

viability of the project, including an 

estimate of net proceeds over the 

planned life of the redevelopment 

project, but in no event for less than 

fifteen years after the initial transfer of 

property, and the proposed 

consideration or payment to the 

Department of Defense. The proposed 

consideration should describe the 

methodology for payment and include 

draft documents or instruments 

proposed to secure such payment. 

(iii) A cost estimate and justification 

for infrastructure and other investments 

needed for redevelopment of the EDC 

parcel. 

(iv) A proposed local investment and 

financing plan for the development. 

(5) A statement describing why an 

EDC will more effectively enable 

achievement of the job generation 

objectives of the redevelopment plan 

regarding the parcel requested for 

conveyance than other federal real 

property disposal authorities. 

(6) Evidence of the LRA’s legal 

authority to acquire and dispose of the 

property. 

(7) Evidence that: 

(i) The LRA has authority to perform 

the actions required of it, pursuant to 

the terms of the EDC, and 

(ii) That the officers submitting the 

application and making the 

representations contained therein on 

behalf of the LRA have the authority to 

do so. 

(8) A commitment from the LRA that 

the proceeds from any sale or lease of 

the EDC parcel (or any portion thereof) 

received by the LRA during at least the 

first seven years after the date of the 

initial transfer of property, except 

proceeds that are used to pay 

consideration to the Secretary 

concerned under paragraph (h) of this 

section, shall be used to support 

economic redevelopment of, or related 

to, the installation. In the case of phased 

transfers, the Secretary concerned shall 

require that this commitment apply 

during at least the first seven years after 

the date of the last transfer of property 

to the LRA. For the purposes of 

calculating this reinvestment period, a 

lease in furtherance of conveyance shall 

constitute a transfer. The use of 

proceeds to pay for, or offset the costs 

of, public investment on or related to 

the installation for any of the following 

purposes shall be considered a use to 

support the economic redevelopment of, 

or related to, the installation— 

(i) Road construction; 

(ii) Transportation management 

facilities; 

(iii) Storm and sanitary sewer 

construction; 

(iv) Police and fire protection 

facilities and other public facilities; 

(v) Utility construction; 

(vi) Building rehabilitation; 

(vii) Historic property preservation; 

(viii) Pollution prevention equipment 

or facilities; 

(vix) Demolition; 

(x) Disposal of hazardous materials 

and hazardous waste generated by 

demolition; 

(xi) Landscaping, grading, and other 

site or public improvements; and 

(xii) Planning for or the marketing of 

the development and reuse of the 

installation. 

(9) A commitment from the LRA to 

execute the agreement for transfer of the 

property and accept control of the 

property within a reasonable time, as 

determined by the Secretary concerned 

after consultation with the LRA, after 

the date of the property disposal record 

of decision. The determination of 

reasonable time should take account of 

the ability of the Secretary concerned to 

provide the deed covenants, or covenant 

deferral, provided for under section 

120(h)(3) and (4) of the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 

(42 U.S.C. 9620(h)(3) and (4)). 

(e) The Secretary concerned shall 

review the application and, to the extent 

practicable, provide a preliminary 

determination within 30 days of receipt 

as to whether the Military Department 

can accept the application for 

negotiation of terms and conditions, 

subject to the following findings: 

(1) The LRA submitting the 

application has been duly recognized by 

the DoD Office of Economic 

Adjustment; 

(2) The application is complete. With 

respect to the elements of the 

application specified in paragraph (d)(6) 

and (d)(7)(i) of this section, the 

Secretary concerned may accept the 

application for negotiation of terms and 

conditions without this element, 

provided the Secretary concerned is 

satisfied that the LRA has a reasonable 

plan in place to provide the element 

prior to transfer of the property; and 

(3) The proposed EDC will more 

effectively enable achievement of the 

job generation objectives of the 

redevelopment plan regarding the parcel 

requested than the application of other 

federal real property disposal 

authorities. 

(f) Upon acceptance of an EDC 

application, the Secretary concerned 

shall determine if the proposed terms 

and conditions are fair and reasonable. 

The Secretary concerned may propose 

and negotiate any alternative terms or 

conditions that the Secretary considers 

necessary. The following factors shall be 

considered, as appropriate, in 

evaluating the terms and conditions of 

the proposed transfer, including price, 

time of payment, and other relevant 

methods of compensation to the Federal 

government: 

(1) Local economic conditions and 

adverse impact of closure or 

realignment on the region and potential 

for economic recovery through an EDC. 

(2) Extent of short- and long-term job 

generation. 

(3) Consistency with the entire 

redevelopment plan. 

(4) Financial feasibility of the 

development and proposed 

consideration, including financial and 

market analysis and the need and extent 

of proposed infrastructure and other 

investments. 

(5) Extent of state and local 

investment, level of risk incurred, and 

the LRA’s ability to implement the 

redevelopment plan. Higher risk 

assumed and investment made by the 

LRA should be recognized with more 

favorable terms and conditions, to 

encourage local investment to support 

job generation. 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
70882 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 221 / Wednesday, November 16, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

(6) Current local and regional real 

estate market conditions, including 

market demand for the property. 

(7) Incorporation of other Federal 

agency interests and concerns, 

including the applicability of other 

Federal surplus property disposal 

authorities. 

(8) Economic benefit to the Federal 

Government, including protection and 

maintenance cost savings, 

environmental clean-up savings, and 

anticipated consideration from the 

transfer. 

(9) Compliance with applicable 

Federal, state, interstate, and local laws 

and regulations. 

(g) The Secretary concerned shall 

negotiate the terms and conditions of 

each transaction with the LRA. The 

Secretary concerned shall have the 

discretion and flexibility to enter into 

agreements that specify the form of 

payment and the schedule. 

(h)(1) The Secretary concerned may 

accept, as consideration, any 

combination of the following: 

(i) Cash, including a share of the 

revenues that the local redevelopment 

authority receives from third-party 

buyers or lessees from sales and leases 

of the conveyed property (i.e., a share of 

the revenues generated from the 

redevelopment project); 

(ii) Goods and services; 

(iii) Real property and improvements; 

and 

(iv) Such other consideration as the 

Secretary considers appropriate. 

(2) The consideration may be 

accepted over time. 

(3) All cash consideration for property 

at a military installation where the date 

of approval of closure or realignment is 

before January 1, 2005, shall be 

deposited in the account established 

under Section 2906(a) of the Defense 

Base Closure and Realignment Act of 

1990 (part A of title XXIX of Pub. L. 

101–510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note). All cash 

consideration for property at a military 

installation where the date of approval 

of closure or realignment is after January 

1, 2005, shall be deposited in the 

account established under Section 

2906A(a) of the Defense Base Closure 

and Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of 

title XXIX of Pub. L. 101–510; 10 U.S.C. 

2687 note). 

(4) The Secretary concerned may use 

in-kind consideration received from an 

LRA at any location under control of the 

Secretary concerned. 

(i) The LRA and the Secretary 

concerned may agree on a schedule for 

sale of parcels and payment 

participation. 

(j) Additional provisions shall be 

incorporated in the conveyance 

documents to protect the Department’s 

interest in obtaining the agreed upon 

consideration, which may include such 

items as predetermined release prices, 

accounting standards, or other 

appropriate clauses designed to ensure 

payment and protect against fraudulent 

transactions. Every agreement for an 

EDC shall contain provisions allowing 

the Secretary concerned to recoup from 

the LRA such portion of the proceeds 

from a sale or lease by the LRA as the 

Secretary concerned determines 

appropriate if the LRA does not use the 

proceeds to support economic 

redevelopment of or related to the 

installation during the period specified 

in paragraph (d)(8) of this section. The 

Secretary concerned and an LRA may 

enter into a mutually agreed 

participation agreement which may 

include input by the Secretary 

concerned on the LRA’s disposal of EDC 

parcels. 

(k) The Secretary concerned should 

take account of property value but is not 

required to formally determine the 

estimated fair market value of the 

property for any EDC. The consideration 

negotiated should be based on a 

business plan and development proforma that assumes the uses in the 

redevelopment plan. The Secretary 

concerned may determine the nature 

and extent of any additional information 

needed for purposes of an informed 

negotiation. This may include, but is not 

limited to, an economic and market 

analysis, construction estimates, a real 

estate pro forrma analysis, or an 

appraisal. To the extent not prohibited 

by law, information used should be 

shared with the LRA. 

(l) After evaluating the application 

based upon the criteria specified in 

paragraph (f) of this section, and 

negotiating terms and conditions, the 

Secretary concerned shall present the 

proposed EDC to the Deputy Under 

Secretary of Defense (Installations and 

Environment) for formal coordination 

before announcing approval of the 

application. 

§ 174.10 [Removed and Reserved] 

■ 3. Section 174.10 is removed and 

reserved. 

Dated: November 10, 2011. 

Aaron Siegel, 

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison 

Officer, Department of Defense. 

[FR Doc. 2011–29533 Filed 11–15–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket No. USCG–2011–0842] 

Safety Zones; Annual Firework 

Displays Within the Captain of the 

Port, Puget Sound Area of 

Responsibility 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Final rule; correction. 

SUMMARY: This document corrects a 

final rule published in the Federal 

Register on October 4, 2011, for the 

Safety Zones; Annual Firework Displays 

Within the Captain of the Port, Puget 

Sound Area of Responsibility. That 

document contained an inaccurate 

Docket Number, USCG–2010–0842. The 

correct Docket Number is USCG–2011– 

0842. 

DATES: Effective November 16, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this rule, call or 

email Ensign Anthony P. LaBoy, USCG 

Sector Puget Sound Waterways 

Management Division, Coast Guard; 

telephone (206) 217–6323, email 

SectorPugetSoundWWM@uscg.mil. If 

you have questions on viewing the 

docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program 

Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 

(202) 366–9826. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Correction 

The heading of the final rule 

published in the Federal Register of 

October 4, 2011, in FR Doc. 2011– 

25344, on page 61263, contained an 

incorrect Docket Number, USCG–2010– 

0842. The correct Docket Number is 

USCG–2011–0842. To advise the public 

of this error, we are publishing this 

notice of correction. 

Correction of Publication 

Accordingly, the final rule Safety 

Zones; Annual Firework Displays 

Within the Captain of the Port, Puget 

Sound Area of Responsibility published 

in the Federal Register of October 4, 

2011, in FR Doc. 2011–25344, is 

corrected as follows: On page 61263, in 

the heading, ‘‘Docket No. USCG–2010– 

0842’’ is corrected to read ‘‘Docket No. 

USCG–2011–0842.’’ 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES