Facilties Location. Agencies Should Pay More Attention to Costs and RuralDevelopment Act

摘要

This report responds to your request that we develop information on the types offederal functions that lend themselves to being performed at locations other than Washington, D.C., and federal regional cities. You were concerned that federal agencies may not have been considering locating facilities in rural areas, as required by the Rural Development Act of 1972 (RDA), particularly in light of recent advances in telecommunication technology. You specifically asked that we report on (1) What executive branch civilian non-Department of Defense functions have recently selected urban locations other than Washington, D.C., and the federal cities, compared to rural locations, and what factors, benefits, and problems were associated with such site selections; (2) What federal laws and policies govern facility location and to what extent have agencies implemented this guidance; (3) What lessons can be learned from private sector site selections; (4) What functions lend themselves to being located in rural areas. To answer the first question, we used a questionnaire and follow-up interviews to survey agency officials regarding 115 sites acquired during fiscal years 1998 though 2000 by the General Services Administration (GSA) or other agencies that exercised their independent statutory authority to acquire sites. At your request, we excluded moves to Washington, D.C., and the 10 federal cities. We chose space of 25,000 square feet or larger in order to review decisions with more significant economic importance. To determine what federal laws and policies govern facility location, we interviewed GSA and other agency officials and reviewed relevant laws and policies.