The DISPOSAL Act directs the General Services Administration to dispose of specified Federal buildings in Washington, D.C. by sale or long-term ground lease. The bill aims to reduce underused federal real estate, generate receipts, and change where some Federal agencies are physically located.
This matters because it changes the default for underutilized central-city assets from retention to market disposal, narrows procedural reviews that historically slowed such transactions, and creates new operational and oversight questions for agencies, local governments, preservation advocates, and private buyers.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill requires the GSA Administrator to dispose of a set of federal buildings in Washington, D.C., allowing either sales at fair market value or ground leases up to 99 years, and authorizes limited leasebacks. It grants the Administrator broad discretion over transaction terms, exempts specified disposals from several federal statutes and procedural requirements, and bars sale or lease to foreign persons as defined by existing law.
Who It Affects
Directly affects GSA, federal agencies occupying the targeted buildings, commercial developers and institutional real-estate buyers, preservation stakeholders in D.C., and committees of Congress receiving notice of relocations. It also affects Treasury and the Federal Buildings Fund because of the bill’s direction on how proceeds are allocated.
Why It Matters
The bill both accelerates and simplifies large-scale property dispositions by trimming environmental, historic-preservation, homeless-assistance, and certain procurement hurdles for covered transactions. It shifts proceeds first to cover relocation and implementation costs, with any excess reducing the federal deficit, so decisions about valuation and timing have fiscal as well as operational consequences.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill identifies a primary set of federal properties in Washington, D.C. for mandatory disposal and sets the procedural framework for how GSA must carry out those transactions. It names six buildings—major downtown federal office complexes—and authorizes GSA to either sell them at fair market value (evaluated at highest and best use) or enter into ground leases with terms up to 99 years.
For transactions GSA approves, the Administrator can include practical components such as relocating tenant agencies or a short leaseback of up to five years to smooth the transition.
To speed transactions, the statute carves out a set of statutory and procedural exemptions for disposals of the listed properties: it makes covered disposals exempt from the McKinney–Vento homeless assistance requirement, the National Environmental Policy Act, the National Historic Preservation Act as codified in title 54, and certain chapters of title 40 and title 41 that govern administrative procedures and procurement. Those exemptions are subject to qualifications if GSA later adds other low-utilization buildings to the covered list—size and National Historic Landmark status trigger narrower exemption rules.The bill gives the Administrator sole and absolute discretion to select relocation sites for agencies moved out of the disposed buildings, requires consultation with agency heads about mission-related needs, and expressly forbids ‘‘build-to-suit’’ leases where GSA would contract for a developer to design and construct a building tailored to an agency.
Before publicly announcing any relocation outside the District of Columbia, GSA must give a 30-day notice to two congressional committees. The statute also precludes judicial review of Administrator actions implementing the disposal authority, removing the typical APA and certain claims-review avenues.On finances, the bill directs net proceeds from disposals first to an account in the Federal Buildings Fund to cover implementation and relocation costs as determined by the Administrator; any surplus after that deposit must be transferred to the Treasury general fund to reduce the deficit.
Amounts credited to the Fund under this mechanism remain available only by subsequent appropriation. The Administrator may add up to 20 additional GSA-controlled buildings per calendar year to the disposal list if they average under 60 percent utilization over the preceding year, with conditional rules limiting the statutory exemptions for very large or landmark properties.
Finally, the authority to carry out disposals under this statute sunsets on December 31, 2028, though prior actions and final rules issued under the authority remain effective after that date.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill explicitly names six major D.C. office complexes for disposal (including the Frances Perkins, James V. Forrestal, Theodore Roosevelt, Robert C. Weaver, Agriculture South, and Hubert H. Humphrey Federal Buildings).
GSA may sell buildings at fair-market value or enter ground leases with terms of up to 99 years; transactions can include a leaseback of not more than five years.
Disposals of the initially named buildings are exempted from NEPA, the National Historic Preservation Act (title 54), section 501 of the McKinney–Vento Act, and certain procurement statutes, subject to narrower exemption rules if additional low-utilization buildings are later added.
The Administrator has sole authority to choose relocation sites for displaced agencies (must consult the affected agency) and is prohibited from using build-to-suit leases to meet agency requirements.
Net proceeds first fund implementation and relocation costs deposited into the Federal Buildings Fund and any remaining receipts are deposited to the Treasury general fund to reduce the deficit; amounts credited to the Fund require a later appropriation to be spent.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
Names the bill the 'Disposing of Inactive Structures and Properties by Offering for Sale And Lease Act' or the 'DISPOSAL Act.' This is a purely formal provision but signals the statute’s focus on property turnover rather than rehabilitation or long-term federal occupancy.
Mandatory disposals and transaction authority
Requires the GSA Administrator to dispose of a specific list of federal buildings in Washington, D.C., and authorizes either a sale at fair market value evaluated at highest and best use or a ground lease up to 99 years. The Administrator may set transaction terms as she determines in the government's interest and can include relocation of tenant agencies or limited leasebacks (up to five years) as part of a deal—giving flexibility to structure deals that address operational continuity and maximize value.
Statutory exemptions and foreign-ownership ban
Establishes statutory exemptions for covered disposals from several high-profile federal statutes and procedural chapters (including NEPA, historic-preservation rules, and McKinney–Vento), thereby streamlining approvals and reducing litigation points for the core list. It also bars sales or ground leases to foreign persons or entities as defined in the Secure Federal LEASEs Act, which narrows the buyer/lessee pool and is aimed at national-security concerns.
Relocation authority and limits
Vests the Administrator with sole and absolute authority to select relocation sites for agencies removed from disposed buildings, but requires consultation with agency leadership and consideration of mission-related needs. The section forbids build-to-suit procurement (preventing GSA from contracting for purpose-built construction to meet an agency’s unique specs) and requires a 30-day congressional notice before announcing relocations outside D.C. It also exempts certain relocation-related actions and funds from specified procurement and hiring statutes.
Disposition proceeds and spending rules
Directs net proceeds from disposals first to the Federal Buildings Fund to cover costs the Administrator determines are necessary to implement the section (including relocations); any remaining proceeds must be deposited into the Treasury general fund to reduce the deficit. Crucially, amounts placed in the Fund under this provision remain available only if Congress later appropriates them, limiting automatic internal reuse.
Preclusion of judicial review
Precludes judicial review of Administrator actions taken to carry out the section, specifically removing review under the Administrative Procedure Act and certain statutory claims-review provisions. This is an aggressive delegation that narrows the ordinary avenues for stakeholders to challenge disposals in court.
Adding additional low‑utilization buildings, appropriations, and sunset
Allows the Administrator to add up to 20 additional GSA-controlled buildings per year to the disposal list if each averages under 60 percent utilization over the prior year, with conditional limits on which statutory exemptions apply depending on building size or landmark status. The provision makes previously appropriated Fund balances available for relocation expenses until expended, clarifies these authorities are in addition to existing law, and sets a termination date for the authority of December 31, 2028—while preserving the validity of prior actions taken under the statute after the sunset.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Government across all five countries.
Explore Government in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Private developers and investors: Large, centrally located federal properties entering the market create redevelopment and long-term lease opportunities, particularly for firms that can convert office complexes to mixed-use, residential, or commercial projects.
- Local real-estate markets and municipal tax bases: Transfer of federal properties from tax-exempt status to private ownership or long-term leaseholds can expand the taxable property base and catalyze downtown redevelopment.
- Federal government budget managers and Treasury: Proceeds directed first to relocation costs and then to the general fund provide a mechanism to capture asset value and reduce the federal deficit, at least on paper, once transactions occur.
- GSA operational leadership: The Administrator gains broad discretion to structure transactions and relocate agencies, enabling faster decision-making and potentially lower holding costs for underused properties.
Who Bears the Cost
- Federal agencies currently housed in the targeted buildings: These agencies face relocation disruption, potential mission impacts, and the operational costs of moving or adapting to new office footprints.
- Historic-preservation and community groups: Narrowed preservation and environmental reviews reduce procedural tools these stakeholders use to influence outcomes, increasing the risk of irreversible changes to historic or culturally significant buildings.
- Potential buyers constrained by the foreign-ownership prohibition: The ban on foreign persons/entities reduces the competitive buyer pool and may lower final sale prices, with implications for realized receipts.
- GSA and implementing staff: Accelerated timelines, the need to manage complex sales/leases, and coordination of relocations create administrative burdens and potential unfunded implementation costs despite a mechanism to recoup some costs from proceeds.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is between efficient monetization of underused federal assets and preserving public-interest safeguards: the bill empowers GSA to unlock value quickly—but does so by curtailing environmental, historic‑preservation, procurement, and judicial oversight that traditionally protect community interests and agency missions; the result forces a choice between speed/value and transparency/accountability.
The bill trades off procedural safeguards and third-party oversight for speed and discretion. By exempting covered disposals from NEPA and historic-preservation review, the statute reduces predictable delays and litigation risk—but it also removes formal mechanisms to surface environmental, community, and cultural concerns that can materially affect project feasibility and public acceptance.
The conditional tightening of exemptions for large buildings or National Historic Landmarks creates a two-tier regime that may complicate portfolio-level planning and invites strategic behavior around designation and utilization metrics.
Precluding judicial review sharply limits stakeholders’ ability to challenge GSA decisions, raising constitutional and administrative-law questions about accountability when the government sells landmark public assets. Financially, routing excess proceeds to the Treasury general fund prioritizes deficit reduction over reinvestment in the federal real-estate portfolio; at the same time, the requirement that amounts placed in the Federal Buildings Fund still need congressional appropriation to be spent can leave GSA unable to access funds it just generated, creating a possible mismatch between who bears relocation costs initially and who ultimately pays.
Finally, the sunset date encourages accelerated transactions within a compressed timeframe, which can depress bargaining leverage or lead to rushed valuations if market timing is unfavorable.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.