Federal Building Management: Building Disposal Authorities Provide Varying Degrees of Flexibility and Opportunities for Use
Published: 2016-12-08T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: Federal property management has been on GAO's High-Risk list since 2003, in part because the government maintains too much excess and underutilized property. GSA has the authority to dispose of property for all federal entities under the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949, as amended. However, some federal entities (either departments or departmental components) have been provided with independent statutory authority to dispose of buildings and other types of property and, in some cases, retain proceeds from such disposals.
GAO was asked to review the extent to which federal entities have disposal authority independent of the Property Act, including the authority to retain proceeds. This report examines (1) the scope of building disposal authorities held by civilian Chief Financial Officer Act (CFO Act) agencies and USPS; (2) the results of these federal entities' use of their disposal authorities during fiscal years 2011 through 2015; and (3) the factors that drive building disposal decisions, and what additional authorities officials at selected federal entities believe could help facilitate these disposals. GAO surveyed 22 CFO Act agencies, interviewed officials from 12 federal entities that reported having disposal authority, reviewed statutory authorities and guidance materials, and analyzed disposal data from fiscal years 2011 through 2015 for these entities.
GAO provided a draft of this product to 15 agencies for comment and 8 provided technical comments, which were incorporated as appropriate.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: Twenty civilian federal entities reported they have at least one statutory authority that allows them to dispose of federally owned buildings under their control. Fifteen entities reported the authority to retain proceeds from building disposals. However, most of these federal entities reported limited use of their independent authorities during fiscal years 2011 through 2015. Seven entities that reported having disposal authority used it during this time frame, and 5 entities that reported having authority to retain proceeds did so (see figure below). The scope of disposal authorities varies among entities; about half have broad authority but these entities only account for about 9 percent of domestic federal buildings. Other authorities are limited, for example, to specific types of facilities or methods of disposal. In addition, statutory authorities to retain proceeds also vary, with most restricting how a federal entity may use the proceeds.
Five of the 7 entities that reported using their independent disposal authority reported using it for only about 8 percent of the buildings they disposed of in fiscal year 2015. The General Services Administration (GSA) and the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) have broad authorities that were used for all of their disposals. The five federal entities that retained proceeds reported about $557 million from all building sales, not just those in which they used their authority from fiscal years 2011 through 2015. Of this amount, USPS's building disposals accounted for $446 million, GSA for $89 million, and the other 3 entities accounted for the remaining $22 million.
Officials from most of the federal entities GAO interviewed said building disposal decisions are mainly based on mission needs rather than the authorities. Officials from 5 entities said they would like the authority to use proceeds from building sales to cover costs of preparing buildings for disposal, such as the cost of environmental remediation. Currently, up-front disposal costs compete with ongoing operations and maintenance costs for budget resources.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: The federal government’s real estate portfolio is vast and diverse,  including approximately 112,000 civilian agency buildings in the United  States. Federal real property management has been on our High-Risk  list since 2003, in part because we have found that the government  maintains too much excess and underutilized property. In addition,  agencies continue to face long-standing challenges in disposing of  buildings. In recent years the federal government has taken steps to  improve the management of its real property. In 2013, the Office of  Management and Budget (OMB) implemented the “Freeze the Footprint”  policy, which instructed federal agencies to not increase total square  footage of their domestic office and warehouse inventory. Subsequently,  in March 2015 OMB issued the National Strategy for the Efficient Use of  Real Property, which included OMB’s “Reduce the Footprint” policy. This  policy aims to reduce the amount of property held by the government. In  addition, since 2012, a number of bills have been introduced in Congress  that have sought to reduce the cost of federal real estate by expediting  the disposal of excess and underutilized property.
The Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949, as  amended, (the Property Act) provides the General Services  Administration (GSA) the authority to dispose of property for all federal  entities. In addition, some federal entities have independent statutory  authority to dispose of buildings and other types of property, and in some  cases, retain proceeds from such disposals. You asked us to review the  extent to which federal agencies have disposal authority independent of  the Property Act, including the authority to retain proceeds. This report  examines: (1) the scope of building disposal authorities held by civilian  Chief Financial Officer (CFO) Act agencies and the United States Postal  Service (USPS); (2) the results of these federal entities’ use of their  disposal authorities from fiscal years 2011 through 2015; and (3) the  factors that drive federal entities’ building disposal decisions, and what  additional authorities officials at selected federal entities believe could  help facilitate disposals.
To identify the scope of disposal authorities, we surveyed 22 civilian CFO  Act agencies regarding their authority to dispose of owned buildings and  retain any proceeds resulting from those disposals. We reviewed the  authorities these entities reported, as well as the authorities provided to  GSA and USPS to dispose of buildings, and summarized the  characteristics and scopes of these authorities. For example, we  reviewed disposal authorities to determine what if any limitations they  imposed. We excluded authorities that we determined to be a directed  authority, which are authorities provided in law that direct an entity to  dispose of a particular facility or facilities and, in some cases, also identify  a specific recipient of the property.
To determine the results of the entities’ use of their disposal authority,  using the same survey instrument to ask responding entities to report the  extent to which they used their authorities to dispose of buildings during  the fiscal year 2011 through 2015 time frame and, if applicable, the extent  to which the authority to retain proceeds was used. We also analyzed the  Federal Real Property Profile (FRPP) database maintained by GSA for  the same time frame to corroborate responses, identify the disposal  methods that entities reported during that time, and identify the proceeds, if any, from building disposals. To assess the reliability of FRPP data, we  (1) reviewed existing documentation related to the data, (2) conducted  electronic testing of the data to identify problems with completeness and  accuracy, and (3) interviewed knowledgeable agency officials about the  data. We determined that the data were sufficiently reliable for the  purposes of this report.
To obtain additional information on the results of these disposals, and  how disposals are prioritized, we interviewed officials from 11 of the 14  federal entities that reported having authority to both dispose of buildings  and retain proceeds from such disposals and officials from one agency  with the authority to dispose of buildings but not retain proceeds. We also  interviewed officials at an additional entity that reported having the  authority to dispose of buildings but not to retain proceeds. With all of  these entities, we discussed the scope and use of their authorities for  building disposals from fiscal years 2011 through 2015. We also asked  officials from these entities how they prioritized building disposals, how  their disposal authority may have influenced their decisions, and what  additional disposal authorities they believe could facilitate additional  disposals.
To obtain more detailed information about specific building disposals, we  reviewed documents for three to five disposals from four federal entities  that used their disposal authority during fiscal years 2011 through 2015.  From each of the four federal entities, we selected three to five disposals  that varied in building value, size, location and year of sale. We used this  information to help characterize the entities’ disposal priorities and  processes, gather information on proceeds retained from disposals, and  to identify challenges to conducting building disposals. The information  from these specific building disposals is not generalizable to all disposals.
We conducted this performance audit from February 2016 to December  2016 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing  standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to  obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for  our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe  that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings  and conclusions based on our audit objectives.
subsections: section_title: Background
paragraphs: Federally owned civilian buildings range from multi-story buildings located  in urban centers to remotely located storage facilities in national parks or  national forests. Federally owned buildings are used for offices,  warehouses, schools, hospitals, housing, data centers, and laboratories,  among others uses. Similarly, the value of federal buildings varies  significantly, ranging from nothing for buildings in poor condition to  millions of dollars for former postal facilities.
Within the executive branch, OMB and GSA provide leadership managing  federal real property. As the chief management office for the executive  branch, OMB is responsible for overseeing how federal entities devise,  implement, manage, and evaluate programs and policies. OMB also  develops and provides direction to federal entities on real property  management matters. GSA has two key leadership responsibilities  related to managing the federal government’s real property. First, GSA  acquires, manages, and disposes of federally owned real property for  which it has custody and control. This function is commonly referred to as  the landlord role since GSA performs these services on behalf of other  federal entities that occupy the properties. Second, GSA’s Office of  Government-wide Policy is tasked with, among other things, identifying,  evaluating, and promoting best practices to improve the efficiency of  management processes. In this policy role, GSA also provides guidance  for federal entities, publishes performance measures, and maintains the  FRPP database.
The FRPP was created in accordance with Executive Order 13327 and  contains data on federal real property assets worldwide, including  information on disposals of federally-owned buildings. Real property data  is collected and reported to the FRPP on an annual basis by all CFO Act  agencies and others that have control and responsibility for federal real  property. They report, among other things, how and when buildings were  disposed of and, if applicable, proceeds generated from the disposal.  FRPP is maintained at the asset level for land, buildings, and structures.  Some disposals include multiple assets in a transaction. For example, a  disposal may include multiple buildings and the land on which they were  built. In that scenario, each land parcel, building, and structure is  recorded separately as a disposed asset.
GSA plays a central role in disposing of unneeded property for the federal  government. The Property Act gives GSA the authority to dispose of  property for most federal entities and mandates the process to be used.  This activity is conducted by GSA’s Public Building Service (see fig. 1).  GSA initiates its disposal process when a federal entity determines it no  longer needs a building and notifies GSA. As illustrated in figure 1,  federally owned buildings may be disposed of through several different  methods depending on the particular circumstances. These methods  include transfer to another federal entity, conveyance to another public  entity for public benefit uses, such as homelessness assistance or  education, and sale. We have found in the past that the disposal process  can be time consuming.
Some federal entities have statutory authority to dispose of buildings  independent of the Property Act. Federal entities with independent  disposal authority are not required to notify or use the services of GSA to  complete the disposal; however, federal entities with disposal authority  may choose to hire GSA to act as its agent or broker for building disposal  purposes. In such cases, the entity pays GSA for the services it performs  in disposing of a building. In addition, a federal entity with independent  disposal authority may request GSA to dispose of a building under the  Property Act.
Federal entities are also authorized in certain circumstances, to dispose  of buildings through demolition and donation whether or not they have  independent disposal authority. Specifically, federal entities that have  control of real property are authorized to demolish or donate to a public  body buildings that have no commercial value or for which the estimated  cost of continued care and handling exceeds the estimated proceeds  from the sale.
OMB has undertaken several initiatives and issued guidance to federal  entities to improve the management of federal real property and address  long-standing issues. In March 2015, OMB introduced the National  Strategy for Efficient Use of Real Property to improve federal utilization of  the real property portfolio. The National Strategy adopts a three-pronged  policy framework to improve the cost effectiveness and efficiency of the  federal real property portfolio. First, it aims to freeze federal real property  growth. Second, it identifies policy actions to measure the cost and  utilization of real property assets. Finally it identifies actions to reduce the  size of the federal property portfolio. Specifically, OMB issued the  “Reduce the Footprint” policy which directed each federal entity to  establish reduction targets for office space, warehouse space, and the  disposal of federally owned buildings beginning in fiscal year 2016.
In addition, several real property reform bills were introduced in Congress  in recent years. For example, during the 114th Congress, two bills were  introduced and passed by the House of Representatives, but have not  been enacted. The proposed Federal Asset Sale and Transfer Act of  2016 would establish a Public Buildings Reform Board to identify  opportunities for the federal government to reduce its inventory of civilian  real property and reduce its costs. The proposed Public Buildings  Report and Savings Act of 2016 would promote consolidation and  disposal by requiring, among other things, that GSA justify to Congress  any new or replacement building space beyond a specified value,  including reasons that it cannot be consolidated or collocated into other  owned or leased space.
section_title: The Scope of Both Disposal and Retention of Proceeds Authorities Varies Widely
subsections: section_title: Twenty Federal Entities Reported Having Building Disposal Authority and 15 Reported Having Authority to Retain Proceeds from Building Disposals
paragraphs: In all, 20 federal entities in our review reported having at least one  statutory disposal authority that allowed them to dispose of domestic  buildings. Some independent disposal authorities apply at the agency or  department level, such as those held by the Department of Veterans  Affairs (VA), while others apply at a component level, such as the  authority provided to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), within the  Department of Transportation. Fourteen of these 20 entities, plus Federal  Prison Industries, reported having statutory authority to retain proceeds  from building disposals. (See app. II). The following nine CFO Act  agencies reported having neither disposal authority nor the authority to  retain proceeds: The Departments of Commerce, Education, Housing and  Urban Development, and the Interior; the National Aeronautics and Space  Administration; Office of Personnel Management; Small Business  Administration; Social Security Administration; and the United States  Agency for International Development. Figure 2 shows the federal entities  that reported having disposal authority, and those that reported having  the authority to retain proceeds.
Eight of the federal entities reported having multiple statutory authorities  to dispose of buildings and retain proceeds applicable to different  situations. For example, the Indian Health Service, within the Department  of Health and Human Services, reported having three statutory authorities  to dispose of buildings that can be used under different circumstances.
Disposal authorities for two of the federal entities included sunset  provisions. One authority for the Forest Service, which was enacted as a  provision within an appropriations act, expired at the end of fiscal year  2016, and one of VA’s authorities expires on December 31, 2018.  Some authorities do not have sunset provisions but were established  decades ago and are now very rarely, if ever used. For example, one of  DOE’s disposal authorities was established in 1955 to support local  governance of atomic energy communities that had previously been  managed by the federal government. According to DOE officials, this  authority has not been used for over 15 years.
section_title: The Scope of Disposal Authorities Varies, with Some Providing Broad Authority While Others Are Narrow
paragraphs: About half of the federal entities have broad authority to dispose of  buildings, an authority that applies to the entities’ entire portfolios, but  those portfolios only account for about 9 percent of the federally owned  civilian buildings reported to FRPP.  USPS does not report into FRPP,  and was the only entity in our review with more than 100 buildings that  had no restrictions on its authority to dispose of buildings or on its  authority to retain proceeds from disposals. The other federal entities’  authorities are limited based on factors such as facility type or program.  Buildings that are excess to a federal entity’s needs and that are not  covered by the entity’s disposal authorities must be disposed of by GSA  under the Property Act, unless the entity chooses to dispose of the  buildings through demolition or donation. Some federal entities have  multiple authorities that may have differently defined scopes.  Figure 3  identifies if at least one of a federal entity's disposal authorities is  restricted to certain circumstances or factors, and if at least one authority  for the use of sales proceeds also has a statutory restriction.
Some disposal authorities are limited to the disposal of specific types of  facilities, or facilities associated with specific programs. One of FAA’s  disposal authorities, for example, is limited to airport or airway property,  and the Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) authority is limited  to disposal of service processing centers and detention facilities. DOE  reported having three disposal authorities but none provides far-reaching  authority for all DOE buildings. One authority is derived from the Atomic  Energy Act of 1946, as amended, and only applies to specific activities  conducted under that act, as amended. One is specific to buildings  located in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, and Richland, Washington, while the  third relates to buildings held by DOE’s Bonneville Power Administration.
In addition, some authorities prescribe a specific method of disposal or  exempt an entity from certain legal requirements that generally pertain to  disposals. Authorities provided to the Indian Health Service (IHS), for  example, are intended to support tribal entities and authorize IHS to  donate excess property to tribes, tribal organizations, and urban Indian  organizations at no cost, under certain circumstances but do not  authorize other disposal methods such as sale. Most federal entities with  disposal authority must follow the requirements of the McKinney-Vento  Homeless Assistance Act (McKinney-Vento Act). The Act created a  program to assist the homeless, in part, by identifying unused federal real  property and making it available to homeless assistance providers.  However, some entities’ disposal authorities exempt them from such  requirements and thus simplify the disposal process. For example,  according to Coast Guard officials, one of their disposal authorities  exempts them from the McKinney-Vento Act requirements as well as from  the requirement to report to GSA excess real property for potential use by  other federal entities. USPS has independent disposal authority, and its  own authorities exempt it from the McKinney-Vento Act requirements as  well as reporting excess property to GSA.
Statutory authorities to retain proceeds from building disposals also vary.  Some authorities require congressional action for the use of proceeds  while others do not. For example, the Maritime Administration must  deposit sales proceeds into a Treasury fund, and the funds are not  available to the agency until a subsequent appropriation is enacted; in contrast, the St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation is broadly  authorized to use proceeds from building disposals toward mission  activities without express restriction or limitation. Other authorities limit  the use of sales proceeds to specific programs. The Department of Labor,  for example has the authority to retain proceeds from the sales of Job  Corps center facilities, but restricts the use of those proceeds to carry out  the Job Corps’ programs. Some entities, such as VA, also noted that their  proceeds from building disposals would be off-set; that is, their  appropriation is subject to a reduction equal to the amount of the  proceeds; thus, the proceeds do not increase funds available to the entity.
section_title: Most Federal Entities Reported Limited Opportunities to Use Their Authorities to Dispose of Buildings and Retain Proceeds
subsections: section_title: About One-Third of Federal Entities Reported Using Their Disposal Authorities during Fiscal Years 2011 through 2015 but for a Minority of Their Total Building Disposals
paragraphs: From fiscal years 2011 through 2015, 7 of the 20 federal entities that  reported having building disposal authority reported using that authority.  The remaining 13 federal entities reported that they did not use their  authority during that time frame. Among the 15 federal entities that  reported having authority to retain proceeds, 5 reported using that  authority. Figure 4 shows reported use of these authorities within our  selected time frame.
Five of the 7 federal entities that reported using their disposal authority  during the selected time frame of our review indicated that they did so  infrequently. As discussed earlier, some federal entities’ disposal  authorities are narrowly framed to apply only to certain programs or  facilities and thus apply to a limited number of the entities’ federally  owned buildings. All 5 of these entities’ disposal authorities have use  restrictions, and consequently many buildings may have been ineligible  for disposal under the entities’ disposal authorities. We requested data on  building disposals by these five entities on the use of their own disposal  authority for the selected time frame, but we were only able to obtain  information from all five entities for fiscal year 2015. These five federal  entities reported disposing of 801 buildings in fiscal year 2015, but only  used their authority for 67 (about 8 percent) of their total building  disposals. (See table 1). The other two entities, GSA and USPS, which  have very broad disposal authority, used their disposal authority for all of  the buildings they disposed of that year—which was 12 and 15 buildings,  respectively.
VA officials told us that they had never used two of their independent  disposal authorities in part due to statutory limitations. Under one of the  entity’s disposal authorities, all proceeds from building disposals must be  deposited into the VA Capital Asset Fund, and VA may not obligate these  funds without further congressional action. In addition, according to VA  officials, these collections are off-set, meaning that increases to the fund  balance from sales result in identical reductions in VA’s appropriation.  Further, this authority requires VA to first determine whether the property  is suitable for use by another entity under its enhanced-use lease (EUL)  authority before using its disposal authority. VA officials said it was  advantageous to enter into EUL agreements to manage underused and  unutilized buildings in their portfolio rather than disposal. Officials stated  that a long-term EUL (as long as 75 years) effectively functions like a  disposal because VA has no day-to-day responsibility for the building  over an extended period of time. Further, VA officials said that their EUL  authority offers more flexibility to use the proceeds that may result from  lease arrangements. Specifically, VA’s EUL authority allows funds to be  available for furnishing medical care without fiscal year limitation.   Although entering into an EUL does not constitute a disposal, VA’s EUL  authority does allow for the potential disposal of property leased under  that authority.  If during the term of the EUL or within 30 days of its  termination, it is determined that the property is no longer needed, VA  may initiate action to transfer the property to the lessee.  According to VA  officials, this disposal authority has been used in the past, but not during  the 5-year time frame included in our review.
Another condition limiting some federal entities’ use of their building  disposal authorities was the location of unneeded buildings within federal  campuses or secure facilities, particularly when the entity was not  disposing of the underlying land. In these situations, the building is  typically made available for “offsite use only,” i.e. the conveyee or  purchaser would have to remove the building from the site at their own  cost. For example, the buildings eligible for disposal under FAA’s disposal  authority were often located within the secure area of an airport and  tended to be small sheds enclosing technical equipment. According to  FAA officials, these smaller buildings were notably different from common  perceptions of federal buildings such as courthouses, post offices, and  agency headquarters, which are large and sometimes designed to serve  symbolic, ceremonial, and other purposes of government. Figure 5 shows  a prefabricated concrete building located on airport property that FAA  sold to a private company for $500 in 2014.
section_title: Entities with Disposal Authority Disposed of Most Buildings through Demolition Rather Than through Sale, from Fiscal Years 2011 through 2015
paragraphs: The results of building disposal by federal entities with disposal authority  are directly related to the method of disposal. According to FRPP data,  the 20 federal entities with disposal authority disposed of more than 5,400  buildings during fiscal years 2011 through 2015. The total includes all  buildings disposed of by those entities during the 5-year period,  regardless of the authority used (i.e., a disposal could have been  pursuant to an independent building authority, the Property Act, or a  demolition authorized by statute). The most frequent method these  entities used to dispose of buildings was demolition (57 percent), while  disposal by “other” means (25 percent) and by sale (14 percent) were the  second and third most frequent methods of disposal (see fig. 6).  Demolition was one of five methods of building disposal that FRPP  allowed federal entities to report prior to fiscal year 2015; other methods  included federal transfer, public benefit conveyance, sale, and “other.”  Beginning in fiscal year 2015, FRPP expanded to 12 the number of  disposal methods agencies could report such as loss due to disaster,  abandonment, deterioration, exchange, return to host nation/tribe, or  reversion to prior owner.
Demolition: Landholding agencies may demolish low value buildings  or buildings where the estimated cost of continued care and handling  exceeds any projected proceeds that might result from sale. For  example, the Coast Guard reported that 56 percent of its disposals  were through demolition. Its Shore Divestiture Program directed local  managers during fiscal years 2011 through 2015 to focus on  disposing of real property that no longer met mission needs and  determining the most appropriate method, including demolition, for  buildings with no commercial value.
Other: Building disposals using methods not falling within the  categories in the FRPP reporting guidance are reported as “other.”  We asked officials from federal entities we met with to identify the  actual methods for building disposals that they had reported to FRPP  as “other.” Generally, agency officials were either unable to identify  the specific disposal methods for these buildings or only able to  identify the specific disposal methods for a small portion of these  building disposals. The expanded number of reporting categories  added is fiscal year 2015 should reduce the percentage of disposals  reported as “other” and provide more understanding of the disposal  methods being used.
Sale: Federal entities may dispose of buildings through two types of  sale: (1) a negotiated sale to state or local governments or (2) a public  sale to a non-government entity. Public sales are competitive and  generally conducted through a sealed bid or auction. USPS’s disposal  authority allows it to dispose of buildings through sale without  considering other forms of disposal as required for most federal  entities, and all of its disposals were done through sales. The small  fraction of buildings the other 20 entities disposed of by sale suggests  that many buildings held by these entities may not have been suitable  for sale. For example, Forest Service officials said that the age,  location, and condition of many of the buildings they disposed of–– along with the lack of practical or economic value––made demolition  the preferred disposal method rather than sale.
Federal Transfer: When buildings become excess to the needs of a  federal entity’s mission, the building is generally first offered for use by  another federal entity. If another federal entity identifies a need, the  property may be transferred to that federal entity.
Public Benefit Conveyance: Various statutes authorize conveyance of  surplus federal buildings to state and local governments, and in some  cases, to nonprofits at up to 100 percent discount for public benefit  use. These statutes include conveyance for public health, homeless  assistance, education, parks and recreation, and law enforcement,  among others.
section_title: Five Federal Entities That Reported Having Authority to Retain Proceeds Reported Gross Proceeds from Buildings Disposed of by Sale
paragraphs: Five federal entities that reported having authority to retain proceeds from  buildings disposed of by sale reported gross proceeds of about $557  million from these sales during the selected 5-year time frame of our  review. USPS and GSA retained proceeds from all of their building sales  but GSA’s use of those proceeds was restricted to specific purposes. Of  these five federal entities, USPS reported the highest aggregate proceeds  of $446 million and retained proceeds from all 111 of its building  disposals. GSA reported a total of about $89 million in proceeds from its  68 building sales during the 5-year period. FRPP does not require federal  entities to report which authority under which they disposed of buildings.  As a result, the other three agencies could not easily provide information  on the proceeds retained from disposals using their authority but reported  about $22 million in proceeds from the 448 building sales over the 5 year  period. (See fig. 7).
Figure 7 compares gross proceeds from three federal entities’ building  disposal sales with those of USPS and GSA during the same time frame  and shows that, in general, sales of USPS buildings resulted in larger  gross proceeds than those of the other four federal entities combined.  Accordingly, USPS’s reported aggregate gross proceeds for its 111  buildings sales was more than four times greater than the aggregate  gross proceeds reported by the other four federal entities for their  collective 516 disposals during the same time period.
We found that in some cases FRPP data could not be used to quantify  proceeds for individual buildings. For 194 building sales in our 5-year time  frame, the reported gross proceeds field in FRPP was recorded as zero.  However, if a building disposal sale involved a facility comprised of  multiple buildings, the disposing entity may have been unable to  disaggregate the facility’s sales price by asset. In such cases, the  reported gross proceeds of the sale could be assigned to one of the  buildings while entering the gross proceeds for the others as zero. For  example, in one instance, the Coast Guard assigned the $185,101 in  gross proceeds resulting from one disposal transaction that included 2  housing units and 6 other land and structure assets to one of the housing  units, while the other housing unit and other assets were assigned zero  gross proceeds. As a result it is not possible to determine the results of  buildings disposed of by sale on an asset-by-asset level using FRPP  data.
The variation among the amount of gross proceeds and the number of  disposals among the federal entities may generally reflect the type of real  estate portfolio the federal entity held. For example, among the federal  entities included in figure 7, the Forest Service, with its portfolio of  smaller, remotely located buildings, accounted for 55 percent of all  buildings disposed of by sale but only 2 percent of the proceeds. The  buildings USPS disposed of, on the other hand, were mostly located in  urban areas and accounted for 18 percent of buildings sold but 80  percent of total gross proceeds.
Most statutes that authorize federal entities to retain proceeds from  building disposals specify the account or fund into which sales proceeds  must be deposited. The proceeds are generally co-mingled with other  funds that meet the purpose of the specified account, and each account  has its own statutory requirements for obligation of the funds. For this  reason, officials from federal entities were generally unable to report how  the proceeds they retained from a specific sale were used beyond the  purpose of the fund or account.
section_title: Selected Federal Entities Reported That Mission Needs Drive Building Disposal Decisions and That Their Disposal Authorities Did Not Address Their Disposal Challenges
paragraphs: Officials from the 10 of the 12 federal entities that reported having  disposal authority that we interviewed said that the decision to keep or  dispose of a building is largely based on mission needs as determined by  the entity. In most cases, these federal entities identify buildings for  disposal before they consider which disposal method is most appropriate  and which, if any, of its disposal authorities could be used. Federal  entities we contacted generally did not indicate that having disposal  authority was factored into their real property decisions, although many  acknowledged that the authority was a tool that could facilitate disposals.  Likewise, those federal entities that reported using their authority to retain  proceeds generally indicated that their authority to do so did not play a  role in determining which building to dispose. Forest Service officials  indicated that their disposal decisions might also be influenced by the  ability to retain and obligate proceeds if they had a building with the  potential to generate significant sales proceeds.
Ten of the 12 federal entities indicated that disposals are driven by  mission need. Some of these entities have implemented a formal  mechanism to identify mission needs. For example, USPS is adjusting the  size of its building portfolio to meet changing market conditions. As part of  an effort to optimize its operations, USPS has conducted area mail  processing reviews and node studies to identify buildings that are excess  to its needs. Similarly, DOE guidance for real property asset  management emphasizes that real property must be necessary to meet  program missions, and that real property assets, including buildings, that  are excess to mission needs should be identified for reuse or disposal.  According to this guidance, plans for real property assets are to be  documented and kept current by DOE sites in 5-year real property  planning and budgeting documentation.
Other officials discussed how the disposal decisions may be initiated by  program or local offices of the federal entity. For example, FAA officials  stated that program offices identify buildings for disposal based on  mission need and that some of these decisions are made at the local  level, though approved through headquarters. Likewise, Forest Service  officials indicated that disposal decisions about buildings of little or no  value are sometimes made at the local or district level.
In some cases, a federal entity is not making the disposal decision  because it is directed in law to dispose of property. For example, in 2013,  DOE conveyed land and 76 buildings to a non-profit organization in New  Mexico for research, education and scientific purposes, as provided in the  Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009.
Officials from 5 of the 12 federal entities we interviewed told us that  funding to initiate the disposal process would be helpful to address the  upfront costs of disposal, including those related to maintenance and  environmental remediation. Officials from these 5 entities said that  broader authority to retain and use proceeds from disposals may help  address these disposal costs. When a federal entity other than GSA  disposes of a building, the proceeds are typically deposited into the U.S.  Treasury as miscellaneous receipts, unless a specific authority provides  otherwise. As such, although an entity invested financial resources to  initiate and execute the disposal process, proceeds generated by a  building sale are generally not available to the entity to recover those  costs. Those costs may include remediation of environmental issues such  as lead paint and hazardous waste contamination prior to disposing of a  building and can be very costly. Other upfront costs can include studies to  determine historic preservation requirements and improvements to the  physical conditions of buildings to make them marketable. Many of the  retention authorities identified by the 15 federal entities do not address  upfront costs, such as maintenance or other work necessary to put the  property on the market or to transfer it to another entity. These funds  generally come from the entity’s operations and maintenance account,  meaning that preparing a building for disposal competes with ongoing  program requirements for funding. Officials at one federal entity noted  that they have delayed the disposal of such buildings if it meant less  funding for higher priorities. Legislation introduced in the 114th Congress  could address entities’ concerns about upfront costs.  If enacted, the  Federal Assets Sale and Transfer Act of 2016 would authorize OMB to  dispose of real property recommended for disposal by a Public Buildings  Reform Board.  As proposed, that act would authorize appropriations, as  well as proceeds from disposal, subject to appropriations, to be used to  cover upfront costs related to disposal, among other things.
Disposal authorities themselves do little to address the other most cited  disposal challenge, a building’s location, which may limit the interest in  the property or the ability to dispose of it. As discussed earlier, some  excess buildings on federal lands must be relocated by the acquiring  party if the underlying land is not sold. Likewise, landlocked buildings  inside a federal campus such as a VA medical center draw limited private  sector interest—in some cases because the land cannot be disposed of  with the building. Having independent statutory disposal authority does  not address the challenges faced by federal entities when disposing of  buildings in landlocked or remote locations, where buyer interest is  limited.
DOE officials indicated that they would like to have additional authority to  lease federally-owned buildings under DOE’s control to other parties.  This authority would provide them with the opportunity to generate  revenue from facilities that are currently underutilized or unutilized, but  which they do not consider eligible for disposal because the facilities may  be needed for mission-related activities in the future.  Similarly, VA  officials indicated that expanding its EUL authority beyond the current  limitation of supportive housing would provide additional opportunities for  reuse and repurposing of underutilized and unutilized buildings, though  this expansion may not result in additional disposals.
section_title: Agency Comments
paragraphs: We provided copies of the draft report to GSA and USPS for comment  prior to finalizing the report. In addition we provided copies to the  Departments of Agriculture, Energy, Health and Human Services,  Homeland Security, Justice, Labor, State, the Treasury and Veterans  Affairs; the Environmental Protection Agency; National Science  Foundation; and Nuclear Regulatory Commission. We received technical  comments, which we incorporated as appropriate, from GSA, USPS, the  Departments of Homeland Security, Labor, State, Transportation, the  Treasury, and Veterans Affairs.
We are sending copies of this report to the Administrator of General  Services, and the Secretaries of Agriculture, Energy, Health and Human  Services, Homeland Security, Justice, Labor, State, the Treasury, and  Veterans Affairs.  We are also sending copies to the Environmental  Protection Agency, National Science Foundation, and Nuclear Regulatory  Commission. In addition, the report is available at no charge on GAO’s  website at http://www.gao.gov.
If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact  me at (202) 512-2834 or wised@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices  of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last  page of this report. GAO staff who made major contributions to this report  are listed in appendix IV.
section_title: Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology
paragraphs: Our objectives were to examine: (1) the scope of disposal authorities held  by civilian CFO Act agencies and the United States Postal Service  (USPS); (2) the results of these federal entities’ use of their disposal  authorities during fiscal years 2011 through 2015; and (3) the factors that  drive building disposal decisions, and what additional authorities selected  officials at selected federal entities believe could help facilitate these  disposals.
To identify those federal entities with disposal authority and determine the  scope of those authorities—including the authority to retain the proceeds  from disposals––we surveyed 22 of the 23 civilian CFO Act Agencies,  asking if they possessed statutory authority to dispose federally owned  buildings and to retain any proceeds resulting from those disposals.  Because some disposal authority statutes apply at the CFO Act agency  level and others apply at a component level, we used 2014 FRPP data to  identify which components of CFO Act agencies’ owned buildings. In  total, we identified 59 components of the 22 agencies surveyed that  owned buildings, and therefore could have disposal authority. The CFO  Act agencies completed the survey for the components we identified.
For those entities reporting disposal authorities, we asked for the legal  citations granting these authorities. We then reviewed and analyzed these  statutory authorities. We also reviewed the Property Act and the  authorities provided to the United States Postal Service. We only  reviewed authorities reported by surveyed entities. We did not verify if  additional authorities might exist. We used this analysis to determine  which federal entities fell within the scope of the review. In addition, we  also analyzed the content of the authorities reported through the survey to  identify the scope of the reported authorities and categorize them into  several broad categories, particularly in terms of any limitations they may  include regarding disposal and retention of proceeds such as specific  programs, locations or use of retained proceeds, among others. We also  interviewed agency officials about the scope and applicability of these  authorities, and the extent to which they were utilized during the fiscal  year 2011 through 2015 time frame. We summarized these authorities in  a detailed summary, which may be found in appendix II.
To determine the federal entities’ use of disposal authorities during fiscal  years 2011 through 2015 and using the same survey instrument, we  asked entities to report the number of buildings they disposed of during  the fiscal year 2011 through 2015 time frame using their disposal  authority. We also asked the federal entities to report if they retained  proceeds from their building disposals. We also obtained Federal Real  Property Profile (FRPP) data for fiscal years 2011 through 2015 from the  General Services Administration (GSA), which collects and maintains the  data, and reviewed FRPP guidance. For our analysis of FRPP data for  this engagement, we removed the Department of Defense buildings from  government-wide building data. In addition, we included only those  buildings located in the United States, that were reported disposed during  fiscal years 2011 through 2015. We used these data to determine: the  total number of building disposals that civilian CFO Act federal entities  conducted, the types of disposal methods they used, the number for  which they reported gross proceeds, and the aggregate amount of those  proceeds. We compared our analysis of the FRPP data with the disposal  numbers reported by the entities we surveyed and asked the entities to  reconcile differences between their survey responses and FRPP data  where they existed. We assessed the reliability of FRPP data by: (1)  performing electronic testing of data elements; (2) reviewing existing  information about the data and the system that produced them; and (3)  interviewing officials knowledgeable about the data. We have identified  weaknesses in FRPP data in the past specifically related to selected data  fields which we did not include in the analysis for this review. In  instances where data errors were reported by a federal entity, we noted  the errors, made corrections, and performed our data analysis once  again. The differences in the results of the analysis were not significant  enough to change the outcome of the analysis. We found that the data  were generally reliable for our purposes, which were to identify the  number of buildings disposed of by those entities with independent  disposal authority, and the extent to which the disposing federal entities  retained proceeds from disposal activities.
To identify the factors which drive building disposals, and identify what  additional authority officials believed could help facilitate disposals, we  interviewed officials from 11 federal entities with the authority to both  dispose of buildings and retain proceeds from such disposals. We also  interviewed officials at one federal entity with the authority to dispose of  buildings but without the authority to retain proceeds, and one federal  entity with neither authority. We asked these federal entities how they  prioritized building disposals and how their disposal authority may have  influenced their priorities. We also discussed the scope and use of their  authorities for building disposals during fiscal years 2011 through 2015  and reviewed entities’ disposal guidance.
We obtained more detailed information from four of the seven federal  entities that used their disposal authority during fiscal years 2011 through  2015. We selected three to five disposals from each federal entity based  on building value, size, location and year of sale. We used this  information to characterize the agencies’ disposal priorities and  processes, gather information on proceeds retained from disposals,  identify challenges to conducting building disposals, and to provide  illustrative examples for this report. The information from these specific  disposals is not generalizable to all building disposals.
We conducted this performance audit from January 2016 to December  2016 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing  standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to  obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for  our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe  that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings  and conclusions based on our audit objectives.
section_title: Appendix II: Disposal Authorities and Retention of Proceeds Authorities Reported by 22 Federal Entities
paragraphs: Summary of authority  The Secretary may convey by sale, lease, exchange, a  combination of sale and exchange, or by such other means as  the Secretary considers appropriate an administrative site, or an  interest in an administrative site, that is under the jurisdiction of  the Secretary. The authority of the Secretary to initiate the  conveyance of an administrative site expires on September 30,  2016.  Proceeds from the conveyance of an administrative site shall be  available to the Secretary, until expended and without further  appropriation, to pay any necessary and incidental costs  incurred by the Secretary in connection with the acquisition,  improvement, maintenance, reconstruction, or construction of a  facility or improvement for the National Forest System, and for  the conveyance of administrative sites, including to pay  reasonable commissions or fees for brokerage services obtained  in connection with the conveyance if the Secretary determines  the conveyances are in the public interest.
The Department of Energy is authorized to acquire, purchase,  lease, and hold real and personal property and to sell, lease,  grant, and dispose of such real and personal property as  provided in the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended.
To facilitate the establishment of local self-government at the  communities of Oak Ridge, Tennessee, and Richland,  Washington, and to provide for the disposal of federally owned  properties of such communities the Commission shall offer for  disposal all real property within the community which is presently  under lease or license agreement with the Commission or its  community management contractor for residential, commercial  or industrial, agricultural, church or other nonprofit use, or which,  in the opinion of the Commission, is appropriate for such use.  The Commission may, but shall not be required to, dispose of  any other real property at the community, whether within or  outside of that community.
The Bonneville Power Administrator is authorized to sell, lease,  or otherwise dispose of such real property and interests in land  acquired in connection with construction or operation of electric  transmission lines or substations as in the Administrator’s   judgement are not required for the purposes of the Bonneville  Project Act; provided, however, that before the sale, lease or  disposition of real property the administrator shall secure the  approval of the President of the United States.
The Bonneville Power Administrator may make expenditures  from the Bonneville Power Administration fund without further  appropriation and without fiscal year limitation, but within such  specific directives or limitations as may be included in  appropriations acts, for any purpose necessary or appropriate to  carry out the duties imposed on the Administrator pursuant to  law.
Summary of authority  In connection with any self-determination contract or grant, the  appropriate Secretary may donate to an Indian tribe or tribal  organization title to any personal or real property found to be  excess to the needs of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Indian  Health Service, or GSA. The appropriate Secretary may also  acquire excess or surplus Government personal or real property  for donation to an Indian tribe or tribal organization if the  Secretary determines the property is appropriate for use for a  purpose for which a self-determination contract or grant  agreement is authorized under the Indian Self Determination and  Educational Assistance Act, as amended.
In connection with any compact or funding agreement executed  pursuant to the authorities of the Indian Health Service, or an  agreement negotiated under the Tribal Self-Governance  Demonstration Project, the Secretary, upon the request of an  Indian tribe, may donate to an Indian tribe title to any personal or  real property found to be excess to the needs of any agency of  the Department, or GSA. The Secretary shall acquire excess or  surplus Government personal or real property for donation to an  Indian tribe or tribal organization if the Secretary determines the  property is appropriate for use by the Indian tribe for any  purpose for which a compact of funding agreement is  authorized.
The Secretary may donate to an urban Indian organization that  has entered into a contract or received a grant under the Health  Services for Urban Indians programs any personal or real  property determined to be excess to the needs of the Indian  Health Service or GSA for the purposes of carrying out the  contract or grant.
The Administrator of FEMA is authorized to sell, convey,  mortgage, pledge, lease, exchange, or otherwise dispose of  property and assets.
If the Secretary of Homeland Security determines that specific  United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)  Service Processing Centers or other ICE-owned detention  facilities no longer meet the mission need, the Secretary is  authorized to dispose of them by directing the GSA  Administrator to sell all real and related personal property.
The proceeds from disposing of United States Immigration and  Customs Enforcement (ICE) Service Processing Centers or  other detention facilities, net of the costs of sale incurred by GSA  and ICE shall be deposited as offsetting collections into a  separate account that shall be available, subject to  appropriation, until expended for other real property capital asset  needs of existing ICE assets.
The Secretary is authorized to dispose of by sale, lease, or  otherwise, any real property or interest therein used for Coast  Guard family housing units for adequate consideration.
subsections: section_title: Statute and type of authority 14 U.S.C. § 681 Disposal
paragraphs: Summary of authority  The Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security may not  carry out activities related to the dismantling or disposal of  infrastructure comprising the LORAN-C system until the date on  which the Secretary provides to relevant congressional  committees notice of a determination by the Secretary that such  infrastructure is not required to provide a positioning, navigation  and timing system to provide redundant capability in the event  the Global Positioning System signals are disrupted.  On any date after the above notification is made, the GSA  Administrator, acting on behalf of the Secretary, may sell any  real and personal property under the administrative control of the  Coast Guard and used for the LORAN-C system, subject to such  terms and conditions that the Secretary believes to be necessary  to protect government interests and program requirements of the  Coast Guard.
The proceeds of the sale of any real and personal property  under the administrative control of the Coast Guard and used for  the LORAN-C system, less the costs of sale incurred by GSA  shall be deposited as offsetting collections into the Coast Guard  “Environmental Compliance and Restoration” account and,  without further appropriation, shall be available until expended  for environmental compliance and restoration purposes  associated with the LORAN-C system; the costs of securing and  maintaining equipment that may be used as a backup to the  Global Positioning System or to meet any other federal  navigation requirement, the demolition of improvements on such  real property; and the costs associated with the sale of such real  and personal property.
The Secretary may convey, at fair market value, real property,  owned or under the administrative control of the Coast Guard for  the purpose of using the proceeds from such conveyance to  acquire and construct military family housing and military  unaccompanied military housing.
The Secretary shall deposit the proceeds from the sale in the  Coast Guard Housing Fund established under 14 U.S.C. § 687  for the purpose of expending such proceeds to acquire and  construct military family housing and military unaccompanied  military housing and may use amounts as provided in  appropriations acts. Amounts made available from the fund  remain available until expended.
Summary of authority  With respect to any undercover investigative operation of the  Federal Bureau of Investigation or the Drug Enforcement  Administration which is necessary for the detection and  prosecution of crimes against the United States or for the  collection of foreign intelligence or counterintelligence, sums  authorized to be appropriated for the Federal Bureau of  Investigation and for the Drug Enforcement Administration, and  the proceeds from such undercover operation, may be deposited  in banks or other financial institutions.  Proceeds from such undercover operation may be used to offset  necessary and reasonable expenses incurred in such operation.  As soon as the proceeds from an undercover investigative  operation are no longer necessary for the conduct of such  operation, such proceeds or the balance of such proceeds  remaining at the time shall be deposited in the Treasury of the  United States as miscellaneous receipts.
All moneys under control of Federal Prison Industries, or  received from the sale of the products or byproducts of such  Industries, or for the services of federal prisoners, shall be  deposited or covered into the Treasury of the United States to  the credit of the Prison Industries Fund and withdrawn therefrom  only pursuant to accountable warrants or certificates of  settlement issued by the Government Accountability Office.  Federal Prison Industries is authorized to employ the fund, and  any earnings that may accrue to the corporation for, among  other things, the lease, purchase, other acquisition, repair,  alteration, erection, and maintenance of industrial buildings and  equipment.
The Secretary of Labor is authorized to accept, in the name of  the Department of Labor, and employ or dispose of in  furtherance of authorized activities of the Department of Labor  any money or property, real, personal, or mixed, tangible or  intangible, received by gift, devise, bequest, or otherwise.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, if the GSA sells a  Job Corps center facility, the Administrator shall transfer the  proceeds from the sale to the Secretary, who shall use the  proceeds to carry out the Job Corps program.
For purposes of Workforce Innovation and Opportunity, the  Secretary is authorized to dispose of any money or property,  real, personal, or mixed tangible or intangible, received by gift,  devise, bequest, or otherwise.
Summary of authority  The Secretary of State is authorized to sell, exchange, lease or  license any property or property interest for use of diplomatic  and consular establishments in foreign countries or in the United  States.  Proceeds derived from dispositions from the sale, exchange,  lease, or license of any property for use of diplomatic and  consular establishments in foreign countries or in the United  shall be applied toward acquisition, construction, or other  purposes authorized by the Foreign Buildings Service Act of  1926, as amended, or held in the Foreign Service Buildings  Fund, as in the judgment of the Secretary may best serve the  Government’s interest.
The Secretary of State shall hold any real property made  unconditionally by will or otherwise and shall either use such  property for the operation of the Department of State and the  performance of its functions, except that any such property not  required for these purposes may be liquidated by the Secretary  of State whenever in the judgment of the Secretary of State the  purposes of the gift will be served thereby.  The net proceeds from the liquidation of gifts of intangible  personal property, or personal or real property not required for  the operation of the Department of State and the proceeds of  insurance on any gift property which are not used for its  restoration, shall be deposited into the Treasury of the United  States. Such funds are hereby appropriated and shall be held in  trust by the Secretary of the Treasury for the benefit of the  Department of State. Such funds and the income from such  investments shall be available for expenditure in the operation of  the Department of State and the performance of its functions.
Based on his or her determination, the Secretary shall dispose of  property acquired in carrying out the purposes of the Department  of State.
The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration may  dispose of any interest in property for adequate compensation,  and the amount so received shall be credited to the  appropriation current when the amount is received; be merged  with and available for the purposes of such appropriation; and  remain available until expended.
section_title: Federal entity
paragraphs: Summary of authority  The Administrator may construct and improve laboratories and  other test facilities and dispose of those that are airport and  airway property or technical equipment used for the special  purposes of the Administration.
All fees and amounts collected by the Administration, with limited  exceptions, shall be credited to a separate account established  in the Treasury and made available for Administration activities.  The amounts shall be available immediately for expenditure but  only for congressionally authorized and intended purposes, and  shall remain available until expended.
The Secretary may complete, recondition, reconstruct, renovate,  repair, maintain, operate, charter, rent, sell, or otherwise dispose  of any property or other interests obtained if the recipient of a  loan or loan guarantee under the Railroad Rehabilitation and  Improvement Financing program does not meet the terms of the  loan or loan guarantee.
The Secretary of Transportation may sell property (other than  vessels transferred under section 4 of the Merchant Marine Act,  1920) on terms the Secretary considers appropriate.
In the same manner that a private corporation may make a  contract within the scope of its authority under its charter, the  Secretary may make contracts and cooperative agreements for  the United States Government and disburse amounts to carry  out the Secretary’s duties and powers under this section, for  purposes of the Merchant Marine, and all other Maritime  Administration programs, and to protect, preserve and improve  collateral held by the Secretary to secure indebtedness. Only  those amounts specifically authorized by law may be  appropriated for the use of the Maritime Administration, with the  use of such proceeds subject to further appropriation by  Congress.
For the purpose of carrying out the functions of the Saint  Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation, the Corporation  may acquire, by purchase, lease, condemnation, or donation  such real and personal property and any interest therein, and  may sell, lease, or otherwise dispose of such real and personal  property, as the Administrator deems necessary for the conduct  of its business.  For the purpose of carrying out the functions of the Saint  Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation, the Corporation  shall determine the character of and the necessity for its  obligations and expenditures, and the manner in which they shall  be incurred, allowed and paid, subject to provisions of law  specifically applicable to Government corporations.
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency may acquire real  property (or property interests) to carry out the duties and  responsibilities of the office and hold, maintain, sell, lease or  otherwise dispose of this property (or property interest).
section_title: Federal entity
paragraphs: Summary of authority  The Comptroller of the Currency may impose and collect  assessments, fees, or other charges as necessary or  appropriate to carry out the responsibilities of the office of the  Comptroller. Such assessments, fees, and other charges shall  be set to meet the Comptroller’s expenses in carrying out  authorized activities.
The Secretary may dispose of any property acquired for the  purpose of this section, which is the operation of residences and  facilities as therapeutic housing in connection with the  compensated work therapy programs. The proceeds of any such  disposal shall be credited to the General Post Fund, which is a  trust fund authorized by 31 U.S.C. § 1321(a)(45).    Funds received by the Department under this section shall be  deposited in the General Post Fund. The Secretary may  distribute out of the fund such amounts as necessary for the  acquisition, management, maintenance, and disposition of real  property for the purpose of carrying out such program. The  Secretary shall manage the operation of this section so as to  ensure that expenditures under this subsection for any fiscal  year shall not exceed by more than $500,000 proceeds credited  to the General Post Fund under this section. The operation of  the program and funds received shall be separately accounted  for, and shall be stated in the documents accompanying the  President’s budget for each fiscal year.
The Secretary is authorized to transfer real property under the  jurisdiction or control of the Department of Veterans Affairs to  another department or agency of the United States, to a state or  political subdivision of a state, or to any public or private,  including an Indian Tribe. The property must be transferred at  fair market value, unless it is transferred to a homeless provider.  Property under VA’s authority cannot be disposed of until the  Secretary determines that the property is no longer needed by  the Department in carrying out its functions and is not suitable  for use for the provision of services to homeless veterans by the  Department under the McKinney-Vento Act or by another entity  under VA’s Enhanced-Use Lease authority. This authority  expires on December 31, 2018.  Proceeds from the transfer of real property are deposited in the  Department of Veterans Affairs Capital Asset Fund and, to the  extend provided in advance in appropriations acts, may be used  for property transfer costs, including demolition, environmental  remediation, maintenance and repair, improvements to facilitate  the transfer, and administrative expenses; costs associated with  future transfers of property under this authority; costs associated  with enhancing medical care services to veterans by improving,  renovating, replacing, updating, or establishing patient care  facilities through minor construction projects; costs associated  with the transfer, lease, or adaptive use of a structure or other  property under the jurisdiction of the Secretary that is listed on  the National Register of Historic Places.
section_title: Federal entity
paragraphs: Summary of authority  The Secretary may transfer to a State for use as the site of a  State nursing-home or domiciliary facility real property which the  Secretary determines to be excess to the needs of the  Department.
If, during the term of an enhanced-use lease or within 30 days  after the end of the term of the lease, the Secretary determines  that the leased property is no longer needed by the Department,  the Secretary may initiate action for the transfer to the lessee of  all right, title, and interest of the United States in the property. A  disposition of property may not be made under this section  unless the Secretary determines that the disposition under this  section rather than under sections 8118 or 8122 of title 38 is in  the best interests of the Department.  A disposition under this section may be made in return for cash  at fair value as the Secretary determines is in the best interest of  the United States and upon such other terms and conditions as  the Secretary considers appropriate.
The President is authorized to acquire, by purchase, lease,  condemnation, donation, or otherwise, any real property or any  interest in real property that the President in his discretion  determines is needed to conduct a remedial action under the  Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and  Liability Act of 1980, as amended. The President may use the  authority for a remedial action only if, before an interest in real  estate is acquired under this subsection, the State in which the  interest to be acquired is located assures the President, through  a contract or cooperative agreement or otherwise, that the State  will accept transfer of the interest following completion of the  remedial action.
The GSA Administrator is authorized to dispose of surplus real  property by sale, exchange, lease, permit, or transfer for cash,  credit, or other property.
The GSA Administrator, notwithstanding any other provision of  law, is authorized by sale, lease, exchange, or otherwise, real  and related personal property, or interests therein.  Net proceeds from the disposition of real property are deposited  in the Federal Buildings Fund and are used for GSA real  property capital needs to the extent provided in appropriations  act.
The National Science Foundation shall have the authority to hold  and dispose of by grant, sale, lease, or loan, real and personal  property of all kinds necessary for, or resulting from, the exercise  of authority granted by the National Science Foundation Act of  1950, as amended.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission  42 U.S.C. § 2201(g)
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is authorized to acquire,  purchase, lease, and hold real and personal property, including  patents, as agent of and on behalf of the United States, and to  sell, lease, grant, and dispose of such real and personal property  as provided in the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended.
section_title: Statute and type of authority 39 U.S.C. § 401(5) Disposal
paragraphs: Summary of authority  The United States Postal Service is authorized to acquire  personal or real property and to hold, maintain, sell, lease, or  otherwise dispose of such property.
Proceeds are deposited in the Postal Service Fund and remain  available to the United States Postal Service without fiscal year  limitation to carry out the purposes, functions, and powers  authorized by title 39 of the U.S. Code. All revenues received by  the United States Postal Service are appropriated to the United  States Postal Service.
section_title: Appendix III: Enacting Legislation for Disposal Authorities and Retention of Proceeds Authorities of Federal Entities
paragraphs: Enacting and amending legislation  Pub. L. No.109-54, 119 Stat. 560 (Aug. 2, 2005) – Authorized  the Secretary to convey administrative sites with certain  limiting terms and conditions on conveyances.  Pub. L. No. 109-54, 119 Stat. 563 (Aug. 2, 2005) – Authorized  the Secretary to deposit and use funds from the conveyance of  administrative sites for specified activities.  Pub. L. No. 111-8, 123 Stat. 748 (Mar. 11, 2009) – Duration of  Secretary’s authority changed from Sept. 20, 2008 to Sept. 30,  2011.  Pub. L. No. 112-74, 125 Stat. 1045 (Dec. 23, 2011) – Duration  of Secretary’s authority changed from Sept. 30, 2011 to Sept.  30, 2016.
42 U.S.C. § 2201(g)
Pub. L. No. 83-703, 68 Stat. 949 (Aug. 30, 1954).
Pub. L. No. 84-221, 69 Stat. 476 (Aug. 4, 1955).
16 U.S.C. § 832a(e)
Pub. L. No. 75-329, 50 Stat. 733 (Aug. 20, 1937).
16 U.S.C. § 838i(a)
Pub. L. No. 93-454, 88 Stat. 1378 (Oct. 18, 1974).
25 U.S.C. § 5324(f)
Pub. L. No. 100-472, 102 Stat. 2292 (Oct. 5, 1988) –  Authorized the Secretary to (1) permit an Indian tribe to use  existing school buildings, hospitals, and other facilities, and  personal property thereon; (2) donate to an Indian tribe the title  to any excess personal property of the Bureau of Indian  Affairs, Indian Health Service, or General Services  Administration; and (3) acquire excess government personal  property for donation to an Indian tribe.  Pub. L. No. 101-644, 104 Stat. 4666 (Oct. 25, 1994) –  Authorized the Secretary to donate real property to an Indian  tribe and acquire excess government real property for donation  to an Indian tribe.  Pub. L. No. 103-413, 108 Stat. 4254 (Oct. 25, 1994) – Placed  certain limitations on the Secretary’s authority to donate  excess personal and real property to Indian tribes.
25 U.S.C. § 5392(c)
Pub. L. No. 106-260, 114 Stat. 726 (Aug. 18, 2000).
25 U.S.C. § 1660g(b)
Pub. L. No. 111-148, 124 Stat. 935 (Mar. 23, 2010).
15 U.S.C. § 2218(b)(3)
Pub. L. No. 93-498, 88 Stat. 1548 (Oct. 29, 1974).
Pub. L. No. 114-4, 129 Stat. 69 (Mar. 4, 2015).
Pub. L. No. 103-206, 107 Stat. 2423 (Dec. 20, 1993).
Pub. L. No. 114-120, 130 Stat. 83 (Feb. 8, 2016).
subsections: section_title: Federal entity
paragraphs: Enacting and amending legislation  Pub. L. No. 104-324, 110 Stat. 3911 (Oct. 19, 1996) –  Authorized the Secretary to convey or lease property or  facilities to private persons with proceeds used to carry out  activities under the chapter.  Pub. L. No. 11-281, 124 Stat. 2919 (Oct. 15, 2010) –  Authorized the Secretary to convey, at fair market value, real  property of the Coast Guard with proceeds going toward  acquiring and constructing military housing.
Pub. L. No. 104-324, 110 Stat. 3912 (Oct. 19, 1996) –  Established the Coast Guard Housing Fund and authorized it  to include proceeds from the conveyance or lease of property  or facilities under section 685. Authorized the Secretary to use  the funds for military housing.  Pub. L. No. 111-281, 124 Stat. 2920 (Oct. 15, 2010) – Limited  authority of Coast Guard Housing Fund to include proceeds  from conveyances of property, not proceeds from leases of  property, nor proceeds from conveyances or leases of  facilities.
Pub. L. No. 102-395, § 102(b)(1)
Pub. L. No. 95-624, 92 Stat. 3465 (Nov. 9, 1978) – Authorized  the Federal Bureau of Investigation to use appropriated funds  for leasing space within the United States, District of Columbia,  and territories of the United States, when necessary for the  detection and prosecution of crimes against the United States,  or for the collection of foreign intelligence or  counterintelligence. Authorized the Federal Bureau of  Investigation to use or deposit the proceeds from such  undercover operations.  Pub. L. No. 102-395, 106 Stat. 1838 (Oct. 6, 1992) –  Authorized the Federal Bureau of Investigation or Drug  Enforcement Administration, during fiscal years 1993, 1994,  and 1995, to use appropriated funds for purchasing property,  buildings, and other facilities, and for leasing space within the  United States, District of Columbia, and territories of the United  States, when necessary to detect and prosecute crimes  against the United States, or for the collection of foreign  intelligence or counterintelligence. Authorized the Federal  Bureau of Investigation and Drug Enforcement Administration,  during fiscal years 1993, 1994, and 1995, to use or deposit  proceeds from undercover operations.  Pub. L. No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1315 (Apr. 24, 1996) –  Continued Pub. L. No. 102-395 § 102(b) until specifically  repealed.
Pub. L. No. 80-772, 62 Stat. 852 (June 25, 1948).
section_title: Statutory authority 29 U.S.C. § 568
paragraphs: Enacting and amending legislation  Pub. L. No. 102-394, 106 Stat. 1799 (Oct. 6, 1992) –  Authorized the Secretary of Labor to accept, employ, or  dispose of money, real property, or personal property received  by gift, devise, bequest, or otherwise.  Pub. L. 103-333, 108 Stat. 2548 (Sept. 30, 1994) – Continued  the Secretary of Labor’s authority to fiscal year ending Sept.  30, 1995 and each fiscal year thereafter.
29 U.S.C. § 3208(g)
Pub. L. No. 113-128, 128 Stat. 1554 (July 22, 2014).
29 U.S.C. § 3249(b)
Pub. L. No. 113-128, 128 Stat. 1599 (July 22, 2014).
Pub. L. No. 79-33, 59 Stat. 53 (Apr. 19, 1945).
Pub. L. No. 96-465, 94 Stat. 2153 (Oct. 17, 1980).
Pub. L. No. 101-246, 104 Stat. 24 (Feb. 16, 1990).  22 U.S.C. §§ 4304(b) (5) and (f)  Pub. L. No. 101-246, 104 Stat. 24 (Feb. 16, 1990).  49 U.S.C. § 40110(a)(3)
Pub. L. No. 85-726, 72 Stat. 748 (Aug. 23, 1958).
49 U.S.C. § 40110(c)(4)
Pub. L. No. 112-95, 126 Stat. 39, 44 (Feb. 14, 2012).
49 U.S.C. § 45303(c)
Pub. L. No. 104-264, 110 Stat. 3247 (Oct. 9, 1996).
45 U.S.C. § 823(h)(2)
Pub. L. No. 105-178, 112 Stat. 476 (June 9, 1998).
46 U.S.C. § 50304(a)
Pub. L. No. 109-304, 120 Stat. 1565 (Oct. 6, 2006).
49 U.S.C. § 109(h)(1)
Pub. L. No. 74-835, 49 Stat. 1987-88 (June 29, 1936).
33 U.S.C. § 984(a)
Pub. L. No. 83-358, 68 Stat. 94 (May 13, 1954).
Pub. L. No. 111-203, 124 Stat. 1528 (July 21, 2010).
Pub. L. No. 102-242, 105 Stat. 2248 (Dec. 19, 1991).
38 U.S.C. § 2032(g)
Pub. L. No. 105-114, 111 Stat. 2286 (Nov. 21, 1977).  Pub. L. No. 107-95, 115 Stat. 918 (Dec. 21, 2001) --  Redesignated the section number of this authority within title  38 of the U.S. Code.
Pub. L. No. 108-422, 118 Stat. 2388 (Nov. 30, 2004).
38 U.S.C. § 8122(a)(3)
Pub. L. No. 100-687, 102 Stat. 4135 (Nov. 18, 1988).
section_title: Federal entity
paragraphs: Enacting and amending legislation  Pub. L. No. 102-86, 105 Stat. 420 (Aug. 14, 1991) –  Authorized the Secretary to determine that leased property is  no longer needed by the department and initiate action for the  transfer to the lessee of the property by requesting the  Administrator of the General Services Administration to  dispose of the property.  Pub. L. No. 108-422, 118 Stat. 2390 (Oct. 30, 2004) –  Authorized the Secretary to dispose of property under this  section, rather than section 8818 or 8122 of title 38, only if the  Secretary determines that the disposition is in the best  interests of the Department.  Pub. L. No. 112-154, 126 Stat. 1181 (Aug. 6, 2012) –  Authorized the Secretary to dispose of property in return for  cash at fair value as he determines is in the best interest of the  United States and upon such terms and conditions as the  Secretary deems appropriate.
42 U.S.C. §9604(j)
Pub. L. No. 99-499, 100 Stat. 1624 (Oct. 17, 1986).
Pub. L. No. 81-152, 63 Stat. 385 (June 30, 1949).
Pub. L. No. 108-447, 118 Stat. 3259 (Dec. 8, 2004).
42 U.S.C. § 1870(e)
Pub. L. No. 81-507, 64 Stat. 153 (May 10, 1950).
42 U.S.C. § 2201(g)
Pub. L. No. 83-703, 68 Stat. 949 (Aug. 30, 1954).
39 U.S.C. § 401(5)
Pub. L. No. 91-375, 84 Stat. 723 (Aug. 12, 1970).
Pub. L. No. 91-375, 84 Stat. 739 (Aug. 12, 1970).
Pub. L. No. 91-375, 84 Stat. 743 (Aug. 12, 1970).
section_title: Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
subsections: section_title: GAO Contact
section_title: Staff Acknowledgments
paragraphs: In addition to the individual named above, Maria Edelstein (Assistant  Director), Christopher Jones (Analyst in Charge), Lindsay Bach, Russ  Burnett, Jack Granberg, Delwen Jones, Hannah Laufe, Malika Rice,  Minette Richardson, and Janani Shankaran made key contributions to this  report.
section_title: Related GAO Products
paragraphs: Federal Real Property: Efforts Made, but Challenges Remain in Reducing  Unneeded Facilities. GAO-16-869T. Washington, D.C.: September 23,  2016.
Federal Real Property: Public-Private Partnerships Have a Limited Role  in Disposal and Management of Unneeded Property. GAO-16-776R.  Washington, D.C.: August 30, 2016.
Federal Real Property: Improving Data Transparency and Expanding the  National Strategy Could Help Address Long-standing Challenges.  GAO-16-275. Washington, D.C.: March 31, 2016.
Federal Real Property: Continued Efforts, Legislation, and Implementing  GAO Recommendation Could Address Challenges. GAO-15-689T.  Washington, D.C.: June 16, 2015.
Federal Real Property: Current Efforts, GAO Recommendations, and  Proposed Legislation Could Address Challenges. GAO-15-688T.  Washington, D.C.: June 16, 2015.
DOE Real Property: Better Data and a More Proactive Approach Needed  to Facilitate Property Disposal. GAO-15-305. Washington, D.C.: February  25, 2015.
Federal Real Property: Excess and Underutilized Property Is an Ongoing  Challenge. GAO-13-573T. Washington, D.C.: April 25, 2013.
Federal Real Property: High-Risk Designation Remains due to Persistent  Management Challenges. GAO-13-422T. Washington, D.C.: February 27,  2013.
Federal Real Property: Improved Data and a National Strategy Needed to  Better Manage Excess and Underutilized Property. GAO-12-958T.  Washington, D.C.: August 6, 2012.
Federal Real Property: National Strategy and Better Data Needed to  Improve Management of Excess and Underutilized Property.  GAO-12-645. Washington, D.C.: June 20, 2012.
Federal Real Property: Proposed Civilian Board Could Address Disposal  of Unneeded Facilities. GAO-11-704T. Washington, D.C.: June 9, 2011.
Federal Real Property: Progress Made on Planning and Data, but  Unneeded Owned and Leased Facilities Remain. GAO-11-520T.  Washington, D.C.: April 6, 2011.
Federal Real Property: The Government Faces Challenges to Disposing  of Unneeded Buildings. GAO-11-370T. Washington, D.C.: February 10,  2011.
VA Real Property: VA Emphasizes Enhanced-Use Leases to Manage Its  Real Property Portfolio. GAO-09-776T. Washington, D.C.: June 10, 2009.