DRAFT OMB CIRCULAR ON EMPLOYEE PARKING

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060042-5
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 5
• Document Creation Date: December 16, 2016
• Document Release Date: December 2, 1998
• Sequence Number: 42
• Publication Date: April 27, 1979
• Content Type: MF

Approved For Re1se 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988Rc1 00060042-5
MEMORANDUM FOR: NFAC Mministrative Staff
SUBJECT . Draft OMB Circular on Employee Parking
7 APR 1971
1. I view the subsidization of federal employees to be a true
concern in an energy-conscious environment. At the same time, one
cannot view federal parking in the aggregate. As mentioned in the 0MB
drafts, there are clear distinctions that have to be made between
agencies concerning location, facilities, public transportation, and
the like. One major consideration that may be limited to CIA is the
employee cover issue. 0
2. While some of the data I use is old and the figures could be
revised, the differences between agency statistics and other federal
agencies in~t the area clearly reflect that an exemption for CIA may be
in order.
3. I suspect that, given the Langley location, we probably have
a employee population whose demographic ratios may be dramatically
different from others within the metropolitan area. While we do not have
the demographic breakdown for the agency, we have obtained the figures
on OWI personnel and they may or ma be representative of the total
on our rolls as of 27,.,
building population. Of the total not be
April 1978, 77 percent reside in Virginia, 19 percent in Ma land, 2
percent in the District and 1 percent in West Virginia.
4. Our lack of public transportation and close proximity to the
Beltway encouraged our employees to locate at substantial distances from
the building. This dispersion, I suspect, was driven by the fact most
employees were not able to afford the limited housing in the immediate
area and there was little or no apartment housing in the relatively
expensive neighborhoods nearby. These factors certainly contribute. to
a greater population dispersion than normally found in suburban locations.
5. Because of this dispersion,. the opportunity for carpooling is
reduced considerably. Further, as you well know, there is practically
no public transportation and what there is available, is limited to the
District and Virginia. I understand that there is only limited bus service
free Maryland and there were attempts to reduce, rather than increase,
service.
6. Agency figures from the 1976 parking formula show there are
approximately 400 employees who work shifts and who, for the most part,
would be precluded from carpooling. There are probably another 100 employees
who are handicapped and forced to use other public transportation. Given
the nature and complexity of CIA's mission, the majority of the 300 or
so supergrade employees may not be able to take advantage of carpooling.
25X1
25X1
25X1
1
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00188R000600060042-5
 Approved For RdWse 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988RO x600060042-5
7. Of the remaining 0 employees assigned to the Headquarters
building, it is rather impressive that almost 0 employees already
carpool. It seems that any additional increase would be insignificant
and, further, the loss in "free" overtime put in by our employees v;ould
be severe. With one exception - the DCI area - (15%) - most directorates
are evenly balanced in terms of employees carpooling (34 - 38%) and
these figures exceed the metropolitan figures.
8. One additional factor, unique to CIA, is the fact that car-
pooling between overt employees and personnel under cover can be a
serious consideration/limitation if good cover practices are to be-
maintained. Q
9. It is my opinion that the additional management costs to be
incurred to handle a very marginal increase in carpooling certainly
does not appear to be cost effective. Rather, an aggressive affirmative
action program, to include the possible elimination of the preferential
parking system, and whatever other innovative ideas that could be
developed are a better approach, at least at Lanagley.
10. One of the main OMB arguments to subsidized parking in some
facilities is that many employees have been forced to public transportation
because of limited parking spaces. That is certainly not the case at
the CIA Headquarters building. Q
11. It appears that federal employees would be burdened with a regressive
tax. At the same time, however, the government would be subsidizing the
parking of the private sector at those companies under contract to the
government who provide free parking to their employees. This, of course,
is charged to the government through general and administrative expenses on
the contract. The numbers of employees provided this benefit must be
immense given the high level of contracting out. It is clearly arbitrary to
single out the federal employee at the same time the government is subsiding
the private sector. 0
R.E. H NEMAN
Director
Weapons Intelligence
25X1
25X1
25X1
25X1
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060042-5
SECRET
 Approved For Re` ase ?2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988RQQ0600060042-5
PROPOSED EQUITABLE PARKING CHARGE
The following proposal is intented to encourage increase car-
pooling and use of public transportation, but also avoid any unnecessary
financial hardship and decline in working morale by Feberal employees.
Charge the parking fee as outlined in
16 April 1979.
Charge the full fee effective 1 October 1979 rather than 50 percent
in 1979 and 'full charge in 81 because people are more likely to change
to carpooling and public transportation in response to one large fee
than to two small increases.
Increase the salary of all Federal employees by one half of the
average parking fee. This would be consistent with the stated purpose
that the fees are not intended as a revenue device.
The employee would now have several options available: If he
chose to drive alone the net cost would be one half the parking fee;
if he participated in a two person carpool there would be no net cost;
and for a three person or larger carpool each participant would realize
a net savings.
NFAC/OWI/AVAD
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R00Q600060042-5
 Approved For Reuse 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R0 $600060042-5
2 0 APR 1919
MEMORANDUM FOR: Chief, NFAC Administrative Staff
H. C. Eisenbeiss
Director of Central Reference
SUBJECT : Comments on the 0MB Circular Regarding
Employee Parking
1. The subject of paid parking caused, as you might guess,
considerable reactions on the part of OCR employees. Principal
arguments made against the proposal include:
a. Mass transit facilities to commute to Headquarters
building from surrounding areas is virtually non-existent.
The Office has employees who travel a considerable distance
to come to Headquarters, including those who commute from
West Virginia, and who have no option to utilize public
transportation. The position in paragraph 3.e. that cites
free or low ccst parking as a disincentive to transit use
is, therefore, basically not valid for the Agency.
b. The cost involved in administering paid parking
would not be insignificant both in terms of time and
personnel. Further, how would fees be assessed? Surely those
parking inside the building would be charged considerably more
than those who park in the west parking lot. Since
there is no commercial parking available locally and the
rental value for the space paid to GSA is less than
$10.00 monthly, it would appear that the Agency has every
right to receive an exemption in accord with the circular.
c. If paid parking is imposed here at Headquarters,
there is a good possibility that employees will park outside
the Agency compound in residential areas, along route 123,
etc. This situation will obviously be the cause for an
environmental impact study by*Fairfax County officials.
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060042-5
 Approved For ReWase 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R600060042-5
SUBJECT: Comments on the OMB Circular Regarding
Employee Parking
d. There are a number of employees who work late hours,
attend educational courses after-hours in the building, etc.
A very real problem would arise if they declined to undertake
these efforts because transportation is not available for
them during late evening hours.
e. The current carpool program already occupies a
large share of the parking space at Headquarters; the
Agency is, in fact, already in compliance with the spirit:
of the 0MB circular. Further, we have been repeatedly
informed that there are not sufficient resources available
to monitor closely the misuse of carpool permits. How
will the Agency be able to handle the additional carpools
which might result from a paid parking scheme?
f. The circular incorrectly implies that there are
no "out-of-pocket" costs for those who drive to work as
compared with those who utilize public transportation.
2. Since the location of the National Security Agency is
similar to that of our own Agency, located a substantial distance
from urban areas with the lack of public transportation
facilities, it is suggested that the Agency find out how they intend
to respond to the 0MB circular.
3. Attached herewith is a useful historical perspective on
the subject submitted by the Curator, Historical Intelligence
Collection.
H. C. Eisenbeiss
Attachment:
As stated
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060042-5