Public Comments

Status: Original and derived artifacts are available for this document.

Download: pdf

MEMORANDUM
To:

From:
Date:
Re:

Hon. Markwayne Mullin, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security
Hon. Karen Evans, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management
Agency
Andrew Langer, Director, Center for Regulatory Freedom, CPAC
Foundation
April 13, 2026
Comments on United States Department of Homeland Security/Federal
Emergency Management Agency Information Collection Request,
“Application for Surplus Federal Real Property Public Benefit
Conveyance and BRAC Program for Emergency Management Use,”
Docket #FEMA-2025-0212, Fed. Reg. 2026-02678, Published February 11,
2026

Below are comments of the American Conservative Union Foundation's (d/b/a. Conservative
Political Action Coalition Foundation) (hereinafter “CPAC Foundation”) Center for
Regulatory Freedom (hereinafter “CRF”), in response to the United States Department of
Homeland Security/Federal Emergency Management Agency Information Collection
Request, “Application for Surplus Federal Real Property Public Benefit Conveyance and
BRAC Program for Emergency Management Use,” Docket #FEMA-2025-0212, Fed. Reg.
2026-02678, published February 11, 2026.
CRF is a project of the CPAC Foundation, a non-profit, non-partisan 501(c)(3) research and
education foundation. Our mission is to inject a common-sense perspective into the
regulatory process, to ensure that the risks and costs of regulations are fully based on sound
scientific and economic evidence, and to ensure that the voices, interests, and freedoms of
Americans, and especially of small businesses, are fully represented in the regulatory process
and debates. Finally, we work to ensure that regulatory proposals address real problems, that
the proposals serve to ameliorate those problems, and, perhaps most importantly, that those
proposals do not, in fact, make public policy problems worse.
1

Introduction
The Federal Emergency Management Agency is to be commended for continuing to evaluate
and refine the administrative processes governing the conveyance of surplus Federal real
property for emergency management use. The Public Benefit Conveyance (PBC) framework
plays a critical role in ensuring that underutilized Federal assets are repurposed in a manner
that advances public safety, strengthens local response capacity, and promotes efficient
stewardship of taxpayer resources.
At its core, this program reflects a sound and necessary policy objective: aligning dormant or
excess Federal real property with the operational needs of State, local, and Tribal
governments responsible for frontline emergency management. When executed effectively,
these conveyances convert static Federal assets into dynamic, mission-oriented infrastructure
that supports fire, rescue, and disaster response functions in communities across the country.
More broadly, this effort implicates a fundamental principle that should guide Federal
property policy: the Federal government owns and maintains an expansive real property
portfolio that exceeds its core mission needs. Systematic, disciplined divestment of surplus
property—particularly where there is a clear public safety use—represents both sound fiscal
management and effective intergovernmental coordination.
Executive Summary
This comment supports FEMA’s continued administration and extension of the information
collection associated with the Application for Surplus Federal Real Property Public Benefit
Conveyance and BRAC Program for Emergency Management Use. The underlying program
advances critical policy goals by facilitating the transfer of underutilized Federal assets to
entities that can deploy them for immediate and sustained public benefit.
At the same time, the effectiveness of this framework will be determined not by the existence
of the application process itself, but by whether that process is structured to maximize
participation, minimize administrative friction, and ensure timely, predictable outcomes. The
current information collection should therefore be evaluated through the lens of burden-toutility alignment, process efficiency, and interagency coordination.
First, FEMA should ensure that the application collects only information that is strictly
necessary to evaluate eligibility, feasibility, and intended use, avoiding duplicative or lowvalue data elements that do not materially inform decision-making. Second, FEMA should
reassess the estimated respondent burden to ensure that it reflects the full scope of
compliance activities, including legal, environmental, and intergovernmental coordination
costs.
Third, FEMA should prioritize clarity, standardization, and usability in the application itself,
ensuring that applicants can readily understand requirements and provide information in a
structured, decision-relevant format. Fourth, FEMA should continue to explore opportunities
to minimize burden through electronic submission, data interoperability, and alignment with
processes administered by the General Services Administration and the Department of
Defense.
2

Finally, FEMA should view this information collection not as a static administrative
requirement, but as a critical gateway in a broader disposition pipeline. Streamlining this
gateway is essential to advancing the larger policy objective of reducing the Federal real
property footprint while strengthening local emergency management capacity.
The Importance of Making Surplus Federal Property Conveyance As Simple As
Possible
The conveyance of surplus Federal real property for emergency management use represents a
clear instance in which administrative efficiency and public benefit are directly aligned.
Properties that are no longer mission-critical to Federal agencies impose ongoing carrying
costs and opportunity costs, while simultaneously remaining unavailable for productive use
at the State and local level. Accelerating their transfer is therefore both fiscally responsible
and operationally prudent.
From a fiscal perspective, divestment of surplus property removes assets from the Federal
balance sheet that would otherwise require maintenance, security, and administrative
oversight. These costs, while often diffuse and underreported, accumulate over time and
represent a form of structural inefficiency in Federal asset management. Conveyance to State
and local entities eliminates these liabilities while preserving the public character of the
asset.
From the perspective of State and local governments, the benefits are equally clear.
Emergency management infrastructure—fire stations, training facilities, logistics hubs, and
emergency operations centers—requires substantial capital investment. The availability of
surplus Federal property reduces or eliminates the need for new expenditures, allowing
jurisdictions to allocate limited resources more effectively across other critical priorities.
The information collection at issue should therefore be evaluated not only as a compliance
instrument under the Paperwork Reduction Act, but as a key determinant of how efficiently
these mutually reinforcing benefits are realized. Any unnecessary complexity, ambiguity, or
delay embedded in the application process directly undermines the program’s effectiveness.
In this regard, FEMA should ensure that the application is tightly aligned with core decision
criteria. Each data element should serve a clear and demonstrable purpose in assessing
eligibility, intended use, and compliance with statutory and regulatory requirements. Data
elements that do not materially inform these determinations should be eliminated or
consolidated.
Particular attention should be paid to avoiding duplication across Federal agencies involved
in the disposition process. Because these conveyances operate within a broader interagency
framework involving GSA and, in some cases, DOD, applicants may face overlapping or
redundant information requests. FEMA should work to harmonize its requirements with
those of partner agencies, with the goal of enabling a single, coherent submission process
wherever feasible.
The estimated respondent burden should also be revisited to ensure that it reflects the full
scope of activities required to complete the application. While the form itself may be
3

relatively straightforward, applicants often must engage in internal coordination, legal
review, property assessment, and compliance verification. These activities represent real
costs that should be captured in FEMA’s burden analysis.
Improving the clarity and structure of the application will further reduce burden and enhance
data quality. Clear definitions, standardized response formats, and explicit instructions can
significantly reduce the likelihood of incomplete or inconsistent submissions, thereby
reducing the need for follow-up requests and accelerating the review process.
FEMA should also continue to prioritize electronic submission and data management
capabilities. Digital platforms can streamline data entry, enable validation checks, and
facilitate information sharing across agencies. These tools are particularly important in
ensuring that smaller jurisdictions—often with limited administrative capacity—are able to
participate effectively in the program.
Beyond the application itself, FEMA should consider how process design can support more
predictable and timely outcomes. While not strictly within the scope of the information
collection, the efficiency of downstream review and approval processes is closely linked to
the structure and completeness of the initial submission. Clear timelines, transparent status
tracking, and defined points of contact can enhance the overall functionality of the system.
A related consideration is the standard governing evaluation of proposed uses, including the
concept of “highest and best use.” While this standard is well-established in property
management, its application should be transparent and grounded in objective criteria.
Applicants should have a clear understanding of how their proposals will be evaluated and
what factors may influence approval decisions.
In all of these respects, the guiding principle should be facilitation rather than friction. The
objective of the program is not to impose procedural hurdles, but to enable the efficient
transfer of assets to entities that can deploy them in service of public safety. Administrative
design should reflect that objective at every stage.
Conclusion
FEMA’s administration of the Public Benefit Conveyance program for emergency
management use represents an important mechanism for aligning Federal asset management
with local operational needs. The extension of the associated information collection is
appropriate and necessary to support this function.
At the same time, the success of this framework will depend on the degree to which the
application process is structured to minimize burden, eliminate redundancy, and provide
clear, actionable guidance to applicants. By focusing on necessity, proportionality, and
process efficiency, FEMA can ensure that the information collection serves its intended
purpose without imposing unnecessary constraints.
More fundamentally, this program should be understood as part of a broader effort to
rationalize the Federal government’s real property portfolio. Divesting surplus assets—
4

particularly where they can be repurposed for emergency management—advances both fiscal
responsibility and public safety objectives.
The effectiveness of FEMA’s approach will not be determined by the volume of information
collected or the procedural completeness of the application process, but by whether the
system facilitates timely, predictable, and efficient transfers that place underutilized Federal
assets into the hands of State and local entities capable of putting them to immediate and
sustained public use.
Sincerely,

Andrew M. Langer
Director
CPAC Foundation Center for Regulatory Freedom

5