DRAFT OMB CIRCULAR CONCERNING CHARGE FOR PARKING

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060047-0
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 2
• Document Creation Date: December 16, 2016
• Document Release Date: December 2, 1998
• Sequence Number: 47
• Publication Date: April 17, 1979
• Content Type: MF

Approved For Releasi2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R0006QW60047-0
17 APR 1979
1EMORANDUM FOR: Chief, NFAC Administrative Staff
FROM Maurice C. Ernst
Director of Economic Research
SUBJECT . Draft OMB Circular Concerning Charge
for Parking
1. While most if not all of the routine arguments
against a charge for parking are identified one way or the
other in the draft circular and its attachment, several
are, worth raising again if only to support a recommendation
that minimal charges be applied at Headquarters and build-
ings with similar problems.
2. First,but not necessarily the most important, is
the lack of adequate public transportation available not
only from places such as West Virginia where many of our
employees live but from a great many areas in northern
Virginia and Maryland. While OMB suggests that this be
resolved through discussions with transit companies,
there is no assurance of a favorable resolution. The lack
of adequate public transportation should not result in a
financial penalty to federal employees.
3. Secondly, those without access to adequate public
transportation and unable to locate or form a carpool should
not be made to pay an excessive parking charge in addition
to the high cost of operating a vehicle. A frequent comment
is that most people prefer to drive their own car. An
intensive survey may well show that given access to reason-
ably scheduled public transportation or carpools, many
more employees would discontinue driving alone to and from
work.
4. Another group mentioned for special attention are
those people who work irregular hours. Many people in OER
would fall into this category and rarely if ever would they
be able to utilize public transportation or join car pools.
Therefore, it would be unfair to penalize them financially
for something not under their control. It would almost seem
more reasonable to pay them an additional sum for demands
made by their job rather than charge an excessive parking fee.
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060047-0
 Approved For Relea '2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R0006QW60047-0
5. Since energy conservation is the primary goal in
this exercise and the utilization of car pools and mass
transportation systems is being urged to accomplish this
goal, perhaps a more positive approach to the problem
should be taken rather than the negative one suggested by
large parking fees. A survey should be conducted to deter-
mine those willing to routinely take a bus to and from work
and then establish with the transit company a guaranteed
number of passengers between particularly well-populated
points (fringe parking areas) and the Headquarters building
for instance. This would provide adequate service for those
who work a routine eight hour day. Those unable to use
this service for legitimate reasons, and essentially this
would mean only those in car pools or working. unusual
hours, would be subject to the minimum parking fee.
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060047-0