(UNTITLED)

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 60
• Document Creation Date: December 16, 2016
• Document Release Date: December 2, 1998
• Sequence Number: 55
• Content Type: LETTER

Approved For Releasi 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000OW60055-1
I feel that I should write to you, as Director of
Logistics, to express my feelings, as an employee of the
Agency, regarding the action the Agency will probably take
concerning charging for parking at the Headquarters Bldg.
It has just been mentioned, by upper-management, that the
probable charge for parking will be $5.50, beginning Sept.
1979 and increasing to $11.00 per month, by 1980.
While recognizing the fact that carpooling is a
necessary step in cutting down on traffic problems, and the
usage of gasoline, I feel that this charge would place an
extra burden on persons such as myself. I'm in a 4 person
carpool at the present time. However, due to my work
assignments, I must work late one night every other week,
and I'm on call one day every week. This means that I would
have to pay 1/4 share, per month, for a carpool spot, plus
pay to park in West Lot once a week. Again, I repeat, this
is my situation, but one I'm sure is repeated many times
throughout the Agency. I add to this, the possibility of my
office going to a 4 day work week, which would eliminate my
involvement entirely, from joining any carpool.
I feel that another consideration in charging for
parking at Headquarters is the large volume of personnel who
work shifts, either fixed or rotational, plus hours worked.
(ie: 1200-2400, 0700-1900, 1900-0700, etc). Also, the lack
of public transportation from outlying areas should have a
bearing on any parking charges.
I hope that these thoughts of mine, plus probably many
others that I haven't considered, will be, and are being
looked at in bringing to the Agency employees, a forced
expense that I, for one, can't afford.
Thank you very much for allowing me to express my
feelings concerning this matter.
DDA/ODP/PD/PCB
GA2505
Headquarters Bldg.
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-11
 STAT Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
23 April 1979
FROM
SUBJECT
Plans and Programs Staff/OL
Executive Officer, 0GC
DCI Area Response to 0MB Circular on
Employee Parking
1. Though there was insufficient time to do a
detailed study of the proposed notice (and in fact not
all of the offices queried responded), the following
comments are forwarded for your use. It should be
noted that (1) these comments are geared to the
Headquarters Building at Langley; and (2) they will
probably not break any new ground for the Agency's
response to OMB.
a. There is no commercial parking in the
Langley/McLean area. To the best of our knowledge,
there are no parking meters anywhere in this part
of Fairfax County. Because of the site of the
Headquarters Building, there is no off-street
parking. We feel sure that any commercial
parking lot established in the Langley/McLean
area would have difficulty in making a profit.
The whole area is predicated upon the availabil-
ity of free parking lots. Given the above, it
would seem difficult to arrive at a fair pricing
policy for parking in this area.
b. Public transportation to the Headquarters
Building is clearly inadequate for even those
employees who wish to ride the bus. The bus from
Friendship Heights across Cabin John Bridge was
cancelled during the summer of 1978. There are
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
at present two bus routes serving Headquarters
Building. There is no Metro stop planned any-
where near the Headquarters Building. Addi-?
tionally, the siting of the building has
guaranteed that it is doubtful that public
transportation can ever handle anything more
than a fraction of our employees. This paucity
of public transportation should be a strong
point in our presentation.
c. The Agency is by necessity a 24-hour
operation with shifts throughout the day and
night. If parking is charged, then it seems
clear that individual employees will be reluc-
tant to be assigned to a swing or midnight shift
as it will be essential for them to drive their
own car as transportation and car pools will not
be available. This would also affect the
irregular working pattern of most Agency per-
sonnel who don't follow a strict 8 to 5 schedule
but who prefer to donate extra time to get the
job done. Net result here, the Agency would
lose out on alot of voluntary work time.
d. It has been Agency policy for some
time to encourage employees to use their own
car on a reimbursable basis when on official
business. For example, the IG's office is at
present performing an inspection at a site some
miles distant from the Headquarters area. This
site is poorly served by public transportation
and it is not too much to say if IG did not
rely on personal automobiles they could not
perform their inspection.
e. Because of the Headquarters site and
lack of public transportation, it is customary
for new employees to secure a car to provide
transportation. They would be doubly penalized
by having to make parking payments as well.
f. There is the possibility that many
employees would have their spouses drive them
to and from work to avoid paid parking. The net
result of this would be an increase in gasoline
consumption since two round trips per day between
home and the office would result instead of the
present one trip.
- 2 -
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
g. Security could be affected if
employees under cover were seen riding the
CIA bus on a regular schedule.
h. There is a safety aspect also.
Many employees would no doubt be tempted to
park along either highway 123 or 193 which
aren't really suited for off-street parking
and could be dangerous to those who attempt
to go this route.
i. Lastly, all personnel who responded
were against the paid parking policy since
the feeling is that it won't accomplish any
real gasoline savings but would result in
both personal and financial hardship for
Agency employees.
2. Having said the above, we are fully aware of
the need for a greater effort to encourage car pools
and foster public transportation. One idea would be
to make car pooling even more attractive by assigning
better parking spaces to car pools. A request should
be made to Metro to investigate the possibility of
increasing bus service to the Headquarters Building--
more specifically, to reinstitute the bus from
Friendship Heights and expand service from other
areas.
3. It is understood that the Agency is under
some pressure to provide at least enough money to
cover the rent now paid to GSA for our parking area.
If a parking fee has to be imposed, we suggest it be
the minimum to make up the rent now being paid to GSA.
We would also hope that some sliding scale keyed to
grade might be instituted to obviate the financial
drain on junior employees.
4. One last suggestion would be for the Agency
itself to run commuter buses from a number of central
points throughout the metropolitan area. This may not
be feasible due to the lack of parking in the pick up
areas, but it would cut down the number of cars being
parked at the Headquarters Building every day.
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 ~ CJA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 STAT Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
19 April 1979
MEMORANDUM FOR: Director of Logistics
Special Support Assistant to the DDA
SUBJECT: No-Smoking Policies; Pay-for-Parking
1. I have been asked to conduct an inquiry and advise
you of the comments of employees of the Directorate of Opera-
tions with respect to the proposed regulations on smoking
and pay-for-parking.
2. The D/O reaction to the subject of curtailing smoking
in federal buildings is probably identical to the reactions of
all other groups. That is, the comments range from enthusiasm
to indifference and resigned acceptance. There were no specific
comments concerning the text of the proposed notice, and no
significant resistance.
3. The D/O reaction to pay-for-parking requires more
detail. In essence, the unanimous reaction was a strong
opposition to any attempt to extract money from employees
assigned to isolated locations for the privilege of parking the
sole means of transportation available to get there. What might
be a reasonable approach within the District of Columbia does
not necessarily fit the situation in other locations outside
the District. Discussion of this issue has been very intense,
and it is viewed by many as a reduction in pay. A rigid ap-
plication of the announced policy would single out our employees
for unnecessary burdens because there is simply no alternative,
and it would he exceedingly unpopular.
4. Charging for parking at the Headquarters is not
reasonable because:
o There is no convenient or dependable public trans-
portation available to the Headquarters Building.
o Parking along Routes 123 and 193, the GW Parkway and
the Turkey Run Farm road is banned.
o Those who are able to carpool at present do so in order
to take advantage of close-in parking. Charging for parking
will not increase the number of carpools.
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
o Cover creates problems for some employees. Those
under cover are not permitted to take advantage of what public
transportation is available, nor should mixed carpools be en-
couraged between those under cover and other commuters not
aware of their affiliation.
o The hours of work within the DDO vary widely and the
DDO has many employees who donate many hours of overtime per
week for which no payment is requested or given. Because of
the lack of set hours, carpools for many employees are not
possible.
o Many DDO employees are expected to use their private
autos during the day for official purposes. There are several
field offices in the area which can only be reached by private
autos.
o There are no nearby shops or commercial offices which
can be utilized by employees during the noon hour. Employees
at Headquarters must use their private autos for dental, medical
and other appointments.
5. The action we take in this issue could affect the
individual employee's attitude for many years to come. The
many hours of overtime we now receive without compensation
will surely be affected as our employees dash for the 5 PM
bus or carpool. I urge that you do everything you can to
convince GSA that it is not in the overall interest of the
government to continue to press for payment for parking at
all locations regardless of the local circumstances.
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 STAT Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
Paid parking would lower morale even more than it already is.
One would hope that the Agency leadership is motivated to achieve
common sense solutions . . . and to articulate them forcefully
enough to make them stick.
Things don't close down overseas because it is 5 PM here.
I honestly can't afford it but if it becomes a reality, I guess
I will have to sacrifice something else to accommodate my park-
ing fee.
Will the DCI also pay for parking?
Would like to see a signed statement by Jimmy Carter published
in the newspapers to ensure that he also will pay for parking.
His word will not be good enough.
To ensure that payment for parking applies to all, U.S. Navy ships
moored in. Norfolk and elsewhere must also pay for parking.
Since government employees have not received full cost of living
increases, paying for parking would be a serious hardship for
many families.
There would be no better way to further reduce morale in the
Agency than 7th floor blind obedience to a policy clearly not
applicable to agencies stuck off in the country as we are. The
stick-it-to-the-civil servant idea may be popular with Herb Block
and the constituencies in Peoria but it doesn't help the govern-
ment work.
Driving a Pontiac Gran Prix (12 MPG) to work and return costs
$1.20. By motorcycle, the cost is $ .35 per day. Public trans-
portation costs me $2.10 per day.
(From a man who lives on Capitol Hill) During the recent winter
snow I attempted to use public transportation to CIA for a week.
I used two routes, one involved changing public buses three times,
the other involved changing from bus to Metro to Has shuttle at
Rosslyn. Both routes took about 2-1/2 hours minimum from home
to work. Returning home was more difficult since I often could
not leave work in time to catch the last shuttle. I have spent
as long as 3-1/2 hours getting home from work via public trans-
portation. Door to door by auto takes 25-35 minutes depending
on traffic.
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
Philosophically, if the government wants to artifically drive
up the cost of using private cars in order to conserve gasoline,
there are many ways to do it without singling out government
employees alone. How about toll booths on all major highways?
How about a big increase in the cost of license plates? How
about requiring manufacturers to equip every car with a device
like a taxi meter and making people pay through the nose if
they drive more than 8,000 or 10,000 miles a year?
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 STAT Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
COMMENTS AND OBSERVATIONS FROM LSD/OL
1. Government facilities are paid for with money from
all taxpayers. Para 8 of the first 0MB circular says in effect,
that "The intent is to recover space costs and act as an
incentive to carpool yet not so low etc..." If this is the
case, it is discriminatory to charge only federal employees
of the Executive Branch and exempt some federal employees
nationwide. How are the space costs of other federal
employees recovered? Why are D. C. government and Postal
services exempt? How about paid parking for Congress?
2. Some employees will believe paid parking is punitive
and react. adversely.
3. Public transportation not readily available to many
employees. e.g. Manassas, Woodbridge, Sterling Park, West
Virginia, Fredericksburg, most places in Maryland. They are
being penalized without recourse.
4. Some employees by the nature of position and. working
hours can not carpool.
5. Headquarters area should be exempt because:
a. No commercial rates in area.
b. SLUC rate less than $10 per month.
6. Will the spaces and cost be graduated on the basis of
proximity to the entrances?
7. Who will administer program?
8. Would payment be daily, monthly, quarterly, etc.
9. Who will collect the money and how will it be control-
10. How can the program be enforced.
11. Substantial increase in workload to administer program.
12. What if you are required to change locations for a
short period of time? e.g. One week from Page to Headquarters
for a project.
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
13. How will visitors be handled? How can you
distinguish between a visitor and an employee?
14. What if you normally ride in a carpool and for any
reason have to drive by yourself?
15. How will you be able to determine if a person is
parked in the correct area or space?
16. Some private companies do pay for employee parking.
17. If adopted everyone should be required to pay, even
visitors. Afterall, if you visit someone downtown, you must
pay for your parking.
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 STAT Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 Approved For Release 2005/06/22: CIA-RDP85-00988R000600O60055-1
25 April 1979
MEMORANDUM FOR: Deputy Director for Administration
SUBJECT : Federal Employee Parking
I
1. Many employees of the Agency are concerned whether or not
Agency management has voiced any protest over the idea of paying
for parking. We would be dismayed if once again the Agency has
simply acquiesced to another policy detrimental to our individual
and organizational interests. Whether the intended results will
be realized is very questionable. The only sure result is that
federal employees have essentially taken a cut in pay.
2. Referring to paragraph "2" of there are a num-
ber of points which appear to be either misleading or possibly un-
realistic.
A. If parking fees are not intended as a revenue device,
these fees should be redistributed in some other form to
those who must pay, such as government car pool vans or
reimbursement of public transportation costs, etc.
B. Greater use of public transportation is a fallacy for
many of us since it is largely nonexistent where we live,
takes two to three times as long to commute if available,
or requires walking distances too great on either or both
ends to be practical within physical health constraints.
C. Cost savings should read "to some taxpayers". We
should not lose sight of the fact that federal employees
pay a substantial tax bill. Part of these taxes are used
to pay for establishment, maintenance, and administration
of our parking facilities. Must we pay twice?
D. It is perhaps no more inconsistent for the U.S. Govern-
ment to subsidize employee parking, than to subsidize employee
recreation, employee restrooms, employee office cleaning,
employee trash removal, employee drinking water, etc., etc.
Are these next to go?
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
dtd 16 April 1979
 Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
3. What happens to the many employees who are expected to
use their own transportation during the day to drive between the
main office and other facilities or contractors? If their personal
automobiles are required to be available, it is quite incongruous
that they should pay for parking.
4. A recent classified paper written by the Chief of Per-
sonnel Management for the DDO vividly outlines the effect upon
the Agency of the continuous hacking away of incentives and bene-
fits. We would appear to be remiss in our obligations if we do
not at least vigorously protest this latest benefit removal, and
perhaps seek an Agency exemption.
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 STAT Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
Next 1 Page(s) In Document Exempt
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 TJ N C L A S S I F I E D
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
27 April 1979
MEMORANDUM FOR: Chief, SG/ADB
SUBJECT Federal Employee Parking
Facilities II
1. The new parking guidelines will cause a number
of problems with computer testing procedures. Currently
new systems are tested after normal duty hours and involve
a number of ODP and IMS personnel. These people are
members of carpools but because of the after hours testing
they cannot carpool that day. Presently those people who
are involved in testing will park in West Lot because
their carpool is using its assigned area. Under the new
guidelines, the use of West Lot will be unavailable. 0
2. Generally there is at least one scheduled after
duty hours activity each week. Also there are numerous
occasions when personnel are requested to come to work
early to correct computer problems which are preventing
a major online system from operating. I feel that these
services will be greatly affected by the unavailability
of parking facilities.
Approved For Release 2O05/0/22 :S IA-RDP8 -00 888000600060055-1
 STAT
k, Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
ODP-9-640
19 APR 1979
MEMORANDUM FOR: Chief, Plans and Programs Staff, OL
FROM
Chief , Management Staff , ODP
SUBJECT Draft OMB Circular on Employee Parking
1. The draft circular assumes that employees
have a choice between driving alone, joining a carpool,
or using public transit for commuting. This assumption
is simplistic, lacking regard for the realities of
the situation at Langley or, for that matter, most
surburban locations.
Employees who are on-call for emergencies or
crises, employees under cover who cannot establish
a carpool with other than overt employees, employees
who work non-prime or non-standard shifts, visitors
attending meetings, and vendors responding to
maintenance calls do not have the options assumed
in the circular. Furthermore, this agency has
unique cover and operational requirements that
fall under the DCI's responsibility to protect
sources and methods. For these reasons, the cir-
cular must allow agencies discretion to exempt
fees even when the GSA determined rates exceed
the $1.0.00 per month threshold.
2.. The agency should request exemption from
the reporting requirements of paragraph 10, which
would identify agency installations and numbers of
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
employees. ODP also recommends that the agency
strongly request that the coverage section
of the circular be limited to those installations
where nearby commercial parking is already established.
3. Although the SLUC is based on the concept
that each parking space has equal value, parking
spaces nearer the building, Headquarters or elsewhere,
certainly are more desirable than parking spaces a
1/2 mile away. If fees are to be charged, there
would have to be a complex fee structure or a common
fee and elimination of all reserved and lane permits.
Exceptions for handicapped employees, etc. would
have to be provided for.
4. Since you have solicited suggestions for
implementing the program, the following observations
are offered without any claim of originality or
insight into this challenging problem:
a. Collecting fees can be approached
in a variety of ways from purchasing
lot passes which are displayed as
permits are now, to purchasing
magnetic fare cards which open
an entrance gate, from having
toll booths at lot entrances or
exits to installing parking
meters. The latter would not
be feasible for general use
because of snow removal problems
and the high capital investment
required, but parking meters could
be of use for 1-2 hour areas for
non-official visitors.
b. Establishing a fee system also
has several possibilities. I
assume that bicycles would park
without charge. But the variety
of vehicles in agency parking
lots ranges from motorcycles
to buses. Compact autos take
less space than standard models
and logically should be charged
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
less, motorcycles take even
less space and, logically, would
also have a reduced fee. As
mentioned above, proximity to
building entrances should have
a premium charge unless all
employees have equal access
to these spaces.
5. Consideration of a parking management company
to recommend an approach and to administer the system
is probably the easy way out. However, cover and
operational problems would have to be addressed.
No system of charging for parking will be satisfactory,
so the agency might hope, instead, for efficiency.
You have my sincere sympathy in your task.
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 STAT Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 Approved For Release 20001. di85-00988R000600060055-1
OCSSD-M79-169
19 April 1979
MEMORANDUM FOR: Office of Logistics
ATTENTION
FROM
SUBJECT
C. Will shift workers pay the same as day workers?
Obviously their access to public transport and/or car-
pools is diminished.
1. It would appear that at this time perhaps insufficient
data is available to permit making meaningful comment.
2. The administration of such a program also will impact
differently on different offices. Several questions come to mind:
A. How will this effect covert installations which are
ostensibly not attributable to the USG?
D. How will payment be made? If by check, how is the cover
aspect to be managed?
25X1
25X1
25X1
E. :In buildings such asi where 25X1
Support Services Division, OC
OMB Circular on Parking
the nearest public transportation is almost a mile away
the only reasonable means of traveling to
work is by car. The Agency (through GSA) rented these
buildings in remote areas. Now the employee has to pay
the price for the USG's lack of foresight. Appears un-
fair on the surface.
F. Has the impact of how this will affect recruitment and/
or retention of low paid clerical employees who may
elect to pursue careers with other than Federal offices
been examined? We already have a severe problem com-
peting with private industry cruitment. This will
only serve to widen the gap. " 25X1
Approved For Release 2005/06/2
 STAT Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
MEMORANDUM FOR: Director of Logistics
Acting Deputy Director of Security
SUBJECT: Draft 0MB Circular on Employee Parking
REFERENCE: DDA 79-1293 dtd 6 April 1979,
same subject
The Office has only one general reaction to reference
and that is that the monthly rate being established by GSA
for parking at Headquarters and Agency buildings should be
considered strictly a fee to park on the various compounds.
That is, the system currently in effect to allocate parking
spaces should remain unchanged.
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R6b%6d00V6W
 STAT Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
18 April 1979
MEMORANDUM FOR: Director of Logistics
FROM
Acting Chief, Information Systems Analysis Staff
SUBJECT : Draft OMB Circular on Employee Parking
The draft OMB Circular on Federal Employee Parking facilities
has been reviewed by this Staff and the following comments are
submitted.
(1) In many cases the cost of parking will not have
any affect on an employee's decision on whether to drive alone,
carpool or use public transit for commuting. Certain conditions
exist that make it imperative for employees to ride alone, such
as hours of work, distance employees have to travel, other
activities in the employee's work day such as traveling to school
and working overtime.
(2) It would be very difficult, if not impossible, to
administer a fee system that would be equitable among employees
and consistent with related policies.
(3) There are no existing commercial parking facilities
located near the Headquarters compound. Therefore there is no
scale to approximate the price of commercial property in the
vicinity. If there were a monthly rental value it would be less
than $10.00?
(4) Visits to other Agency buildings and facilities
during the work day often require use of privately owned vehicles.
(5) The Agency does not have adequate public transit
service available and part of the service that was available was
recently discontinued. The Agency was not successful in maintaining
that service.
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
SUBJECT: Draft OMB Circular on Employee Parking
In view of the above we recommend that the Office of Logistics
seek an exemption for this Agency from the General Services
Administration.
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 STAT Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
Next 1 Page(s) In Document Exempt
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 Approved For
dLsJ3,t&2: Gal
600060055-1
17 April 1979
MEMORANDUM FOR: Director, Office of Logistics
I
Chief, Administrative Staff, ICS
SUBJECT: Parking at Government Facilities
REFERENCE: Draft OMB Circular, dated April 6, 1979;
Subject: Federal Employees Parking Facilities
1. The following is a distillation of the comments and discussion
resulting from the meetings with senior management of the Resource
Management and Collection Tasking Staffs concerning reference OMB circular.
a. The draft OMB circular on parking fees was strongly opposed,
although all present felt the decision has already been made for policy
implementation. However, senior management does not agree that parking
fees in the Langley area should be charged since there is no legitimate
basis for concluding that comparability with commercial parking
fees in the same area would exceed $10 per month. During the discussion,
several officers voiced a curiosity as to what action NSA will take in
regard to this policy since the suburban locations of the two agencies
are analogous.
b. A question on everyone's mind was how the allocation of
parking permits (even on a monthly fee basis) would be handled.
Would the allocation of permits be done with the same rationale that
currently exists, or would it be on a first-come, first-served basis?
c. If parking fees are charged, will there be a differentiation
of cost for different locations around the building depending upon proximity
to entrance areas? Senior management was about evenly divided on this issue,
i.e., about half felt there should be a rental fee differentiation
and about half believed there should not be a rental fee differentiation
if the objective is to reduce the overall number of cars with single
occupants driving to the building.
2. Because the above questions could not be answered at this time,
we are unable to recommend any additional suggestions (other than that
noted in para l.a.) that would be helpful in preparing a response to OMB.
Approved F?p
000600060055-1
 STAT Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
OTR 79-1021
3 APR 1979
MEMORANDUM FOR:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Acting Executive Officer, DDA
Donald E. Smith
Director of Training
Draft OMB Circular on Employee Parking
1. This memorandum responds to your 12 April request
for comments or suggestions concerning the draft OMB circular
on employee parking.
2. Primary Office of Training concern rests on the
authorization or basis upon which we will be able to main-
tain leased parking facilities, at Government expense, solely
for the use of students at the Chamber of Commerce Building.
Paragraph 6 of the text may provide an "umbrella" under which
we can provide such parking, but it does not deal specifi-
cally with. the problem. In keeping with the overall program
objective we would try to reduce or limit student parking
wherever possible. Our efforts will, of course, be affected
directly by the frequency and capacity of available shuttle
bus service, especially during peak student travel hours.
In any event, since students are temporarily away from their
regular place of work, special provision for leased parking
for students, at government expense, should be continued.
3. Another question: How will parking charges be
assessed. to employees whose basic job involves varying
periods of TDY from the Headquarters area, sometimes for
as long as a month or more?
Donald E. Smith
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 STAT Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 Approved For Release 2005) /iiIFAI kbP85-00988R000600060055-V9? 1.2W91.1-
18 April 1979
MEMORANDUM FOR: Deputy Director for Administration
SUBJECT . Additional Suggestion Related to Increased Parking
Costs ^
1. In the President's recent energy message, the statement was
made that free parking for Federal employees was to be eliminated. The
objective of this action rather obviously is to encourage the use of
mass transit and the formation of car pools to the ultimate end that
consumption of gasoline will be reduced. I understand that you are
charged with devising the means by which the Agency will implement the
President's directive. I I
2. Since the ultimate aim of this decision is to reduce the con-
sumption of gasoline, it appears that high prices to park private
vehicles provide a formidable negative sanction to people driving to
work alone. However, I would like to propose an additional facet to
the implementation plan which may provide a positive impetus for people
to save gasoline. II
3. I propose that the Agency provide at Headquarters and at all
of it's outlying facilities in the Washington, D. C. area extensive
facilities to park and secure highly efficient vehicles such as bicycles,
motorcycles, and mopeds. These facilities should be as close to the
building as is practical and there should be no fee charged to park
such vehicles.
4. While it is admitted that encouraging the use of bicycles,
motorcycles, and mopeds will not encourage use of mass transit or the
formation of car pools, I believe it could clearly be shown that such
encouragement would result in a reduction in the consumption of gaso-
line. Since I perceive this reduction to be the ultimate objective of
the President's directive, I believe it is important to provide these
positive reinforcements as well as the negative sanctions in the imple-
mentation means. II
.UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R0a0600060055-1
SUBJECT: Additional Suggestion Related to Increased Parking Costs
5. I am sure that there are many facets of this suggestion which
go beyond the rather straightforward argument that its implementation
will reduce consumption of gasoline; but I believe that it is a viable
suggestion and that it should be considered in the Agency's total re-
sponse to this situation. Thank you for your time and attention. ^
Advanced Concepts Division
Office of Research & Development
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
MEMORANDUM FOR: Chief, Plans and Programs Staff, OL
ie- Real state and Construction
Division, OL
SUBJECT: Revision of OMB Circular (Proposed)
re Parking
1. We note that the intent of the proposed parking policy
is to encourage carpooling and reduce the cost, to the taxpayer,
of government-subsidized parking for its employees. Our
analysis of the proposal leads to the conclusion that neither
of these goals would be achieved if the Agency is forced to comply
with the policy. The following factors have a bearing on
this conclusion:
a. Of our =major buildings in the Metropolitan
Washington Area (MWA), only 5 (the "E" Street complex,
Street, and the
complex) are in the
District. We now pay for only 19 parking spaces at
civilian garages--in the District-- 4 official and
15 carpool spaces for the Resources Management Staff.
A major problem is assignment, recruitment, and retention
of personnel at these sites because of a prejudice,
especially among clerical employees, against working
in the District. To now add a parking fee, which will
average around
50 per month to the other undesirable
characteristics associated with employment in the District
will only exacerbate an existing problem.
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
2/
b. Our employees in Rosslyn generally pay for
their own parking on an individual basis. Fees have
been negotiated with lessors, but in any event, are,
and will probably continue to be, slightly less than
the commercial rate in the District.
c. We have a third group of employees who enjoy both
the amenities of suburban employment and free parking
at our site in Northern Virginia. This group constitutes
the bulk of our Washington-based employees. Under the
proposed circular, it is very likely that this group may
continue to enjoy free parking since the $10 minimum
established by OMB should be sufficient to exclude
having to charge for parking at Headquarters,
and Vienna--at least for the near term or until GSA
increases its SLUC rates.
d. We have now created a whole series of inequities
among our employees--duty in the District will be avoided as
the plague.
2. Demographics are an important consideration. Only a
small minority of our employees reside in the District; slightly
more live in Maryland, but by far the largest portion (75 percent)
reside in Virginia. Of this group, many, especially the newer
and lower graded personnel, live in the outlying areas because
that is where the most housing for the price is available.
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R00Q.00Q36p055-1
Public transportation does not serve many of these areas.
Nor does public transportation serve many of our buildings
in Northern Virginia and most of that which is available originates
in D.C. where the smallest percentage of our employees reside.
Therefore, implementation of the proposed parking policy will
have little impact on Metro's ridership.
3. There are some four buildings in the MWA where our
employee parking is comingled with civilian parking. Implementing
this policy may therefore create another inequity--Federal
employees paying where the neighboring space continues to be
occupied gratis by his/her civilian counterpart.
We pay for very little employee parking--the afore-
mentioned l spaces for RMS plus 50 student parking spaces at
the Chamber of Commerce Building. Thus, the monetary savings
to the taxpayer would, sho.uld this policy be implemented, be
insignificant. Such a policy might also create further inequity
for the student/employee who pays for Hi-s-,/her employee space yet
must also pay for space to park while attending-Agency-sponsored
training!
ILLEGIB
5. The Agency has, and continues to make, every effort to
control parking and to encourage carpooling. What 0MB is saying,
in part, is that because the government has not been conscientious
in applying PPMR 101-20.117, those Agency which have must be
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R0060006005$-1
penalized along with the rest. There is, however, one
aspect--~? (pooling--in which the Agency could improve its
performance.
6. One final comment concerns OMB's concept of the impact
such a policy will have on our Administrative workload. It
is inconceivable that such a policy can be administered so
that the "routine administrative workload should be approximately
the same as that experienced under past practice". Even if the
bulk of the work is contracted out, we will have to manage the
contract, oversee the policing (and adjudicate problems),
account for funds (audit), and the list goes on. The one time
report requested could pose a security problem, and its preparation
alone will consume untold manhours.
7. We recognize that the foregoing is a negative summary
of the problems envisioned. Nevertheless, we continue in our
belief that such a policy, if applied to CIA, will not achieve
the stated aims and can only increase existing inequities,
contribute to a further lowering of employee morale, and add to
the administrative burdens the Agency must bear.
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 STAT Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
Next 1 Page(s) In Document Exempt
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 Approved For Releas 8 n0988R0.00600060055-1
NAO VT ` A E- VW
DD/A Reg
79- /.33/,5?
25 April 1979
MEMORANDUM FOR: Deputy Director for Administration
NIO/SS/RDT&E
SUBJECT : Parking Facilities at CIA Headquarters
1. Parking problems at CIA Headquarters are extremely complex.
The Agency has been located in a secluded area for reasons of secu-
rity. Employee parking outside of the Agency compound is impractical
for many employees. To levy the Standard Level User Charge on each
person occupying a parking lot space would be a regressive tax that
would unfairly burden those persons employed at lower grade levels.
2. The current method of parking space allocation is greatly
in need of revision. The President's plan provides a convenient
opportunity to conduct that revision. The following suggestions are
proffered for your consideration:
a. Parking fees are not intended as a revenue device,
therefore the least burdensome alternative is reached by
operating under a system where revenues equal expenditures,
provided that the desired goals can be accomplished at this
level.
b. Monetary incentives to conserve are not effective
among those who can afford to ignore them. Merely charging
a fee for parking space would not accomplish the President's
goals. A system must be developed whereby it is inconvenient
not to conserve.
c. Energy conservation goals could be accomplished by
making close-in parking available at little or no cost to
energy efficient cars containing more than one person.
d. The program could be monitored daily at a very low
cost to insure compliance with desired goals. Under the
present Agency parking program numerous permits have been
issued to nonexistent carpools.
Approved For Release 204 N?2 L9, ip -E&8R000600060055-1
 I Approved For Releasa y005/ c- ,U)P8"F0988R00060 0055-1
SUBJECT: Parking Facilities at CIA 25 April 1979
Headquarters
3. If ingress and egress to North and South Lots were limited
in the same manner that access to West Lot is currently limited, park-
ing attendant booths could be erected at entry/exit points and manned
for a relatively small sum. Carpool permits would not have to be
issued because the lots would only be open to those cars with more
than one occupant. A carpool member driving in alone on a certain
day would have to park in West Lot. Parking rates should encourage
the use of energy efficient vehicles as well as carpooling in
approximate proportion to the amount of energy conserved. The matrix
below is illustrative:
DAILY PARKING RATES
EPA
Number of Vehicle Occupants
Combined
MPG Rating
1
2
3 4 +
Less than 15
1.00
.75
.50 .25
15-25
.80 .
60
.40 .20
Greater than 25
Approved For Release 2005/(6 CIL4&I8D000600060055-1
 STAT Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 Approved For ReleasIeWO,2005/06/22 : Ch-&f~5-00988R00060 +060055-1
DDS&T-2178-79
2 5 APR 1979
MEMORANDUM FOR: Director of Logistics
SUBJECT: OMB Circular on Employee Parking
Please find attached the comments of our six
offices on the OMB Circular on Employee Parking. We
hope these comments and the rate of fair rental value
used for calculating the standard level user charges
for the Headquarters Building will assist you in
seeking an exemption.
Executive Officer
Directorate of
Science and Technology
Attachments: as stated
UNCLASSIFIED WHEN DETACHED
FROM ATTACHMENTS
SECRET
25X1
STAT
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-0 - 1673
 Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
MISSING PAGE
ORIGINAL DOCUMENT MISSING PAGE(S):
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
ri
*WWII
NPIC/SS-05/79
24 April 1979
MEMORANDUM FOR: Chief, Administrative Support Staff, DDS&T
SUBJECT President's Program for Charging for Parking
on Government Owned Lots
1. A question has risen concerning Subject. Does the
collection of fees imply that the Government will be liable for
damage, theft or personal injury?
2. Can you put this question forward for solution as part of
the total package on parking fees?
Chief, Support Staff, NPIC
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 Approved For Relea a 2005/06/22: CIA-RDPti85.0O988RO0 00'eOO ..-1
NPIC/D-147/79
APR 2 3 1979
MEMORANDUM FOR: Deputy Director for Science and Technology
SUBJECT President's Program for Charging for Parking
on Government Lots
A waiver from the requirement to charge for parking is requested
for NPIC because personnel at the Center have no viable alternative
to driving personal vehicles. The reasons are:
1. Adequate public transportation is not available to
employees in this area. Most of our employees are low graded and
have been forced to seek housing within their affordable range
which is only available outside the perimeter of the Metropolitan
area. Few have any form of public transportation available and
these require multiple transfers and 2-3 hour travel time.
2. Approximately 50% of I mployees now carpool. STAT
This has been necessary for the basic reasons of economy and limited
parking. Any further increase of car pooling is not practical
and would impact.on our efficiency. 1 -1 is on flex-time STAT
and to increase car pooling would force our employees to take more
leave to handle personal matters, thereby reducing efficiency.
3. Further, Agency policy requires our employees to use their
POV's for business conducted between buildings. It was decided
earlier that Agency shuttle service tol was not cost STAT
effective and the shuttle service was cancelled.' However much
.business is conducted between buildings and personnel must use their
own vehicles.
4. You should also be aware that the Center is located in a
high crime area and we have great concern for the safety of our
employees. Movement in the streets even in day light, but partic-
ularly after dark, may result in injury to the employees. Vandalism,
theft, muggings and even murder in this area have such a high rate
of incidence that it has been necessary to post guards on the parking
lots.
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 Approved For Relea 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000&A0060055-1
NPIC/D-147/79
SUBJECT: President's Program for Charging for Parking
on Government Lots
. 5, The policy to. charge for parking on Government lots will
be a direct pay reduction for all employees, most of whom are in
the lower pay scales and cannot aford the extra expense. This is
of particular concern since the employees have no viable option
but to continue driving to work.
National Photographic Interpretation Center
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 STAT Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
Next 2 Page(s) In Document Exempt
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 co, 75-01
Approved For Re.se 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R0410600060055-1
24 April 1979
MEMORANDUM FOR: Chief, Administrative Support Staff, DDS&T
SUBJECT : Comments on Proposed Draft from 0MB Concerning
Parking 0
1. Attached is a detailed commentary by our Logs Chief
who has suffered through having to manage parking before.
2. In essence I have been discussing parking problems
with our Steering Committee, our peoplehe Support Staff and
elements of OL such as LSD and RECD.
3. Our concerns focus on who will make the decisions --
us or GSA?? On What basis? What will be the impact on us?
Discussions at Steering suggest that we may have to increase
our TVA ,,as .that .Steerihg :members and others can have transport
to and from meetings at Headquarters and other outlying units. [
4. We are also exploring with LSD the possible increased
use of the shuttle buses although there are problems here of
both parking at Headquarters and providing transportation to and
from perimeter (Hqs.) parkin . Nonetheless, if we in OTS end up
paying at the SLUC rate-that does or $68 a month
versus the Hqs. SLUG rate of a parking space, we will
have all sorts of problems.
5. Finally while we are trying to get a fix on how things
are developing on parking charges we.are told repeatedly that
GSA has no answers or proposals and will have none until
1 September at the earliest. 0
25X1
25X1
25X1
25X1
25X1
25X1
Attachment:
As stated
ie
OTS Support Staff
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-009
25X1
C L
 Approved For Relea2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000U0 060055-1
1. Purpose - Self-explanatory.
2. Coverage - Who will identify Agency activities outside the
Washington Metropolitan Area and who will conduct the survey of
commercial rates to establish a parking fee for Agency employees
outside the Washingtoin area?
3. Back round -
a. Self-explanatory.
b. Self-explanatory.
c. Will employees continue to drive by themselves in spite
of the parking fee? Are comparable figures available on the number
of carpools which occupy paid parking lots as opposed to those
parking lots where fees are not levied? Are these questions
irrelevant since the decision has been made that U.S. Government
employees will be assessed parking fees?
4. Poles - Will different rates be established in the OTS
complex commensurate with the space assigned? Should a carpool or an
employee be charged the same rate for a "Bullpen Space" at the rear
of Central Building as compared to individuals who have clear access
in and out of their space at all times, e.g., parking on the quadrangle
or along the roadways in the complex? What rates will be charged for
the twenty spaces allotted to OTS in the Navy Potomac Annex parking
lob on 23rd Street? These questions have been posed by Agency employees.
5. Acquisition of Parking Facilities - Now will the parking
spaces at the rear of Central Building be assigned? Will spaces be
assigned by lane? Individuals who arrive first are now required to
park as close to Central Building as possible and those who arrive
later are to park to the rear until the lane is completely filled.
Those who arrive first, therefore, cannot leave'the parking lot until
the. individuals in front of them leave.
.a. Availability of Public Transit - Who will conduct a survey
on available public transit for the 2430 "E" Street area?
b. -Availability of Car Pools - Who will conduct a survey for
the OTS complex?
C. Off Street Parkin. - The only off-street parking for the OTS
complex is on 23rd Street between'09O0 and 1600. All available
spots have parking meters.
d. Impact on Residential Neighborhoods - There are not residential
neighborhoods near the OTS complex.
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 Approved For Relea 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R0006 0060055-1
e. Locations of Employees Domiciles - This presents a problem
security-wise as several OTS employees are under cover. Who will
conduct the analysis? The analysis will cover a wide spectrum as
some 0TS employees commute daily from distances as far away as
West Virginia?
f. Special or unusual Requirements
(1) How many visitor's spaces will be assigned?
(2) Do we charge people who .are on extended leave or TDY?
Do we charge people who are on annual, sick or military leave?
(3) If we charge people who are on extended leave or TDY
and carpool cannot recruit another member, how many complaints
will we receive if a carpool is reduced to three members and the
carpool cannot use the express lanes on Route 1-95 in Virginia?
(4) If we charge people while they are on extended TDY or
leave and they refuse to pay, what means are used for collection
of delinquent fees?
(5) How do we handle spaces for those employees who work
flexi-hours considering we have limited "free access" spaces?
Comment on last paragraph under paragraph 5.
Will time and experience support this rationale? If not, what
happens 'if, pe 9 odi c reductions-are not achieved but are increased?
6. Allocation and Assignment of Parking Facilities - Should our
present procedure for assignment of parking spaces be reviewed? Should
the present practice of alloting spaces in "blocks" to each OTS operating
component be continued? Spaces for small cars on the South Patio at
the rear of South Building are not numbered or separated by yellow
lines. Presently individuals park on a first-come first-serve basis
in an area which can accommodate twenty small cars. An assigned
parking permit must be displayed on the dashboard or sun visor. Since
the buildings in the OTS complex are being considered as historical
sites, it will not be possible to alter the present patio with its
slate boieks or neither will we be allowed to paint yellow lines for
parking spaces without the approval of the Regional Historical
Preservation Liaison, Department of Interior. Who will determine the
number of spaces we will be authorized? Is there any restriction on
the square footage assigned to each parking space?
7. Charges for Employee Parking -
a. Establishment of Charges - Should the Agency have some
input on the rates charged since the parking spaces in the OTS
complex are not compatible? Will GSA conduct a survey of the
area or will a consultant be utilized to determine the rates to
be charged?
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 Approved For Release4005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R00060QW0055-1
. Which Operating Component in the Agency will be responsible?
STAT
c. Will policing of the parking lots be required to ensure that
parking regulations are enforced? Who will be responsible if
policing is required? Will warning stickers be passed out for a
first offense on illegal parking or will irrevocable parking tickets
be placed on the offenders vehicle? Can Federal Protective Officers
be used to enforce parking regulations?
What legal opinions will we receive to enforce the parking regula-
tions? Will we have attendants as is the case in commercial parking
lots? What happens when an employee cannot park in his/her space and
we have no space to assign them and the employee must use a commercial
lot? Does the employee pay the U. S. Government for his/her assigned
space for that day if a commercial lot has to be used? The last
Thursday of the month presents a problem because the OTS complex over-
flows with vehicles which arrive from other areas in the metropolitan
area and Q to attend the OTS end-of-the-month meeting with Senior
Officials in OTS and all Branch and Division Chiefs in OTS. What
happens when five lanes have to be blocked off'in the rear of Central
Building to accommodate fork lifts which are required to deliver heavy
equipment or remove excess heavy material from the rear of Central
Building? Central Building does not have elevators. Will employees
using bicycles have to pay for parking? Will bike racks be provided?
8. Responsibilities
{l -Who-will'- ssue`requla"tions and guidelines when fees
procedures, etc. are received from GSA? ,
(2) Who in the Agency will assess charges consistent with the
procedures of the CMB circular?
(3) Who will provide for the collection and deposit of employee
parking charges within the Agency?
(4) Who will issue instructions to implement the provisions of
the OMB circular?
9. Agency Administrative Workload
It is difficult to perceive that the workload will not increase.
Paragraph 10 of the 0MB circular requires a periodic report to be
sumitted on parking. Even after regulations are implemented, employees
will park illegally; employees will continue to gripe when they have to
pay the fee; employees will complain continually and tie up not only
themselves and others in bull sessions about parking when actually they
could otherwise be more gainfully employed in their current assignment;
employees will require receipts for cash payments; other will insist on
receipts for checks.
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 Approved For Releas05/06/22: CIA-RDP85-00988R0006Q&W0055-1
10. 32 ports
We will comply with reporting requirements as required.
ii. Inquiries - Unless otherwise advised, our inquiries will be
directed to OL/LSD and OL/RECD.
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000600060055-1
 Approved For ReIe a 200 @6 5;lN%L5-00988R00Q"0060055-1
OD&E 0510-79
24 April 1979
MEMORANDUM FOR:
C/AS/DDS&T
SUBJECT Comments on the Draft OMB Circular on Parking
1. The reaction common to the responses received from
our employees regarding the "pay for parking" concept is
largely negative, ranging from outrage to resignation.
Much of the rationale offered by the draft OMB circular as
justification for the parking charge is seriously questioned.
Further, it is believed that the projected energy savings
will be far outweighed by the loss to the Agency of volun-
tarily donated overtime and managerial flexibility.
2. The draft circular indicates that public funds are
being used to-subsidize parking expenses for some Federal
employees, while private sector employees do not receive
such benefits. In fact, many private sector employers pro-
vide free parking for their employees as an incentive.
Prominent among these are companies who contract heavily
wfith the U.S. Government. By projection, one may say that
the Federal Government thus subsidizes free parking for
those contractor employees who are engaged in performing
efforts under government contracts.
3.* The statement that free or low cost parking biases
an employee's decision on how to travel to work may be true,
but certainly it is not the total criteria, at least in the
case of Agency employees. The majority of locations occupied
by the Agency have extremely poor public transportation serv-
ices, if it exists at all. For Agency employees the latter
is a far more significant criterion inasmuch as there is no
viable alternative to driving when public transportation is
not available.
WARNING NOTICE
INTELLIGENCE SOURCES
AND METHODS INVOLVED
25X1
25X1
25X1
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RI 5-00988R000600060055-1
Go 111 'G L
 Approved For Reuse 2005/06/22] PR O988ROQW600060055-1
SUBJECT: Comments on the Draft OMB Circular on Parking
4. Except for Headquarters, Agency buildings all utilize
some form of Cover. The required Cover and security procedures
constrain the flexibility of many of our employees to carpool.
These procedures preclude employees living within a reasonable
distance of one another from carpooling if they have different
Cover situations. Further, as many of our employees are scat-
tered among the outlying buildings, the need to conduct official
business face-to-face is not satisfied by the existing shuttle
system. There is a frequent need for expeditious travel between
Agency buildings during the day and often the conduct of neces-
sary business is completed by stopping off at one or another
building, either on the way into the employees' office or on
their way home. In addition, carpooling is a luxury not avail-
able to many who work odd hours to meet the requirements of
their function. Enforced carpooling can only lead to a struc-
tured 8:00 to 5:00 mentality that would be counterproductive. E
5. In determining the necessity for a parking fee the
GSA must take into consideration several elements. Within the
ranks of Federal employees affected, the fee to be charged
would be prejudicial to two groups,.the lower salaried employees
and those already carpooling. The lower grade employees, those
.hardest .hit _by :the 12-% - i fiattonary ,Thee -and .the 5% -ost 'of
living pay raise, would now suffer an additional financial
burden in parking fees or other additional transportation costs.
Because local public transportation services to Agency buildings
are limited, carpooling and paying will be the only option for
many of these employees. Many of our buildings have no com-
mercial parking facilities within a radius of five miles or
more. Some, in particular thel have no eating
facilities and are not within walking distance of any. The
Headquarters Building and most of the other buildings occupied
by elements of the Agency are in suburban locations where no
public parking of any kind is available. These factors should
.be sufficient to value the Agency's parking spaces at less than
the minimum under which the proposed policy will call for col-
lection of a parking fee. Additionally, the aspects of Cover,
security, managerial flexibility and employee mobility, should
enter into the calculation. II
OD&E 0510-79
Page 2
25X1
25X1
25X1
Approved For Release 2005/06 r 09888000600060055-1
 Approved For ReWase 2005/06/ 988R0Q8600060055-1
SUBJECT: Comments on the Draft OMB Circular on Parking
6. Charging Agency employees a parking fee, in our
opinion, would be highly impractical and counterproductive
to the fulfillment of our mission. For much of our profes-
sional work force carpooling is simply incompatible with
performing their assigned duties. Voluntary effort beyond
a 40-hour work week is what keeps this place functioning.
We have come to expect and count upon such effort from a
large proportion of our work force. A ready willingness to
turn-to when the need demands could be stifled by enforced
carpooling. The fact that most of us work with sensitive
and classified materials which cannot be carried home at
night compounds the situation. Positive incentives-for
those employees who do find it practical to carpool have
already been applied by the assignment to them of highly,
desired reserve parking spaces. Increasing the cost of
individual transportation to work strikes inequitably at
those who either have no access to the existing public
transportation, are assigned to locations not served by
public transportation, are under Cover and cannot carpool,
do not live conveniently near other employees, or whose
duties and responsibilities make carpooling impractical. E
25X1
25X1
Distribution:
Orig-Addressee
l-EO/OD&E subj file
1-E0/OD&E chrono
25X1
DDB&T;OD&E:EO
epf (24 April 1979)
OD&E 0510-79
Page 3
Approved For Release 20059UO1 1 jt5-009888000600060055-1
 Approved 2 ?~ Ct X509
ORD-558-79
2 C AF RI ,979
MEMORANDUM FOR; Chief, Administrative Staff, DDS&T
X0050055-1
y 5
SUBJECT . ORD Comments on Draft 0MB Circular on Employee
Parking
We, in the Ames Building, do not have subsidized parking. The
circular,. however, assuredly will have an impact in the form of higher
commercial parking rates. The higher rates may lead to some increase in
carpooling; that in turn will cause more FLSA-exempt employees--many of
whom work extra time without extra pay to get the job done--to stop giving.
that extra effort. The priority will be to meet the carpool, especially
"For those who -do not`live *near onveni-ent public transportat on.
Similarly, FLSA non-exempt employees, usually lower grade personnel
who cannot afford increased commercial parking rates, will be unable
to stay to do necessary overtime work for additional pay because they
would miss their carpools.
Philip K. Eckman
Director of Research and Development
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP85-00988E 0 0 0996 055-1
I c, i ;?l :F PC +
yet Y lei, i} r 1,
ise x EYxs~vt trc~, d