QUESTIONNAIRE 1. Please give the following information concerning each project in which Congress has authorized compensation or in which bills are pending to authorize compensation for improvements constructed by lessees and permittees on railroad rights-of-way and furnish copies of authorizing acts: (a) Name of project. (b) Location. 2. Please give the following information for each lease: (a) Kind of lease. (b) Type of structure. (c) How long structure in place before right-of-way acquired by Government? (d) Appraised value of structure. (e) How long lease in effect (include length of time of any prior leases) before right-of-way acquired by Government? (f) Offering amounts. (g) Settlement amount. Basis of appraisals, i.e., how value determined and documented: (1) Market data? (2) Reproduction cost less depreciation? (3) Reproduction cost without deduction for depre ciation? (4) How was land value treated? (5) If market data not used, why not? (6) How did appraised value of subject structure (2) Was structure subject to State and local taxes? (2) Personal property? (j) Furnish copies of several representative appraisals. (2) Chattel? (3) Amount? 3. Were there any parcels in the projects covered in question 1 for which relief was not provided? Explain. 4. In how many instances has it been necessary to institute condemnation proceedings to determine value of the improvements? Identify each case by reference to questions 1 and 2. Describe the valuation approach used by the Government and by the lessee in each case, and furnish copies of negotiators' reports, settlement memorandums, or litigation reports. 5. Identify projects in which railroad lessees or similar problems have arisen in the last 5 years where no legislation has been proposed. Give estimate of number of parcels, number of structures, and value of the various improvements. Explain how estimate determined. 6. Identify projects in which the railroad problem is expected to arise in the next 5 years. (a) Give estimate of the number of parcels, number of structures, and the value of the various improvements. Explain how the estimate determined. 7. Please furnish copies of representative leases or agreements. 8. Have there been any instances where the lessees or permittees. have sold, assigned, or abandoned their interest in their improvements to the railroad company prior to the Government's acquisition of the land by contract or condemnation? If so, how was this handled and what consideration was given to the value of the improvements and buildings formerly owned by the lessees in negotiations with the railroad, or in the condemnation proceedings for the railroad's interest? 9. Please describe the procedure used: (a) To terminate the rights of lessees occupying railroad rights-of-way; (b) To obtain the removal of buildings, improvements, fixtures, and personal property belonging to the lessees and permittees. 10. Are lessees or permittees eligible for relocation or resettlement costs? If yes, are costs incurred in removing structures and improvements eligible for reimbursement? If costs to remove structures are not eligible, explain. Explain also the effect of the 25-percent ceiling on reimbursement of resettlement expenses. How is the fair market value of railroad right-of-way determined for this purpose? 11. Please furnish copies of pertinent briefs and legal memorandums. concerning the railroad lessee problem prepared by corps personnel or submitted to the corps by railroad companies or railroad lessees. HEADQUARTERS, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, Mr. HENRY H. KREVOR, Chief Counsel, Select Subcommittee on Real Property Acquisition, Committee on Public Works, House of Representatives. DEAR MR. KREVOR: In further response to your letter of March 11,. 1964, with "Questionnaire on Railroad Lessees and Permittees," there is enclosed Department of the Army report together with five appendixes thereto containing the data requested. In this connection, subject questionnaire was transmitted to our 10 division offices and, in turn, to 37 district offices. Response to this. inquiry resulted in 27 districts with negative reports, indicating no problems in the past, present, or future involving railroad lessees. The remaining districts reported either as to specific legislation, past or future cases not involving legislation, or analogous problems. The format of the questionnaire, coupled with the large variety of data submitted, does not lend itself to summarized or tabulated answers to the questions. As a consequence, these district reports have been assembled in five binders (appendixes) for ready reference. In order to facilitate your review and analysis, a report has been prepared responsive to each question and indicating therein the location and contents in the pertinent district reports. No attempt has been made to furnish departmental comments or recommendations in this matter at this time. It is understood that after you have completed your factual analysis supplemental comments may be requested. I trust the enclosed data is sufficient for your needs; however, should you desire any additional information, kindly advise. Sincerely yours. WOODROW BERGE, Deputy Director of Real Estate. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY REPORT ON QUESTIONNAIRE RELATING TO IMPROVEMENTS BY RAILROAD LESSEES AND PERMITTEES FOR SELECT SUBCOMMITTEE ON REAL PROPERTY ACQUISITION, COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Report: Preface. TABLE OF CONTENTS Questions and answers. Enclosures to report: 1-Subcommittee request. 2-Transmittal to division offices. Appendix: I. Report of Kansas City District. (This material retained in subcommittee files.) PREFACE The purpose of this report is to furnish information, statistical data and comments in response to a questionnaire submitted to this office by letter from Mr. Henry H. Krevor, chief counsel for the Select Subcommittee on Real Property Acquisition of the Committee on Public Works, House of Representatives (enclosure 1). This concerns noncompensable losses suffered by owners of structures and other improvements constructed on railroad rights-of-way acquired by the United States in connection with public works projects. In order to obtain the broadest coverage, subject questionnaire was sent to 10 divisions and, in turn, 37 district offices (enclosure 2). In response, 27 districts submitted reports indicating no material problems of this nature in the past and no known future projects involving the The remaining 10 Districts and all divisions submitted reports same. 39-949-65- -82 responsive to various features of the questionnaire as well as individual comments thereon. As may well be expected, diverse opinions are evident; however, to indicate the various approaches to the problems, these reports are furnished in their entirety irrespective as to whether such individual comments coincide with the policy and opinions of this department. By reason of the voluminous data requested as to general classifications, by projects and individual leases, it is impractical to respond in the numerical sequence of the questionnaire. Accordingly, the above-mentioned reports have been assembled and attached as appendixes to this report; appropriate references being made under the answers to the respective questions. This report does not set forth comments or recommendations of this Department as to the merits of past, present, or proposed legislation in connection with subject questionnaire. It is the understanding of this office that, at such time as the staff of this select subcommittee completes the factual analysis, supplemental comments on specific proposals will be requested. QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS Questions 1 through 4.-These questions request detailed data concerning each public works project and individual transaction "in which Congress has authorized compensation or in which bills are pending to authorize compensation for improvements constructed by lessees and permittees on railroad rights-of-way." Answer. In response to questions relating to legislative authorizations, reports on each law have also incorporated complete information requested by the full questionnaire. Congress has to date enacted special legislation in eight instances since the 82d Congress involving six reservoir projects. Additionally, there are presently pending five special bills in the 88th Congress affecting two reservoir projects; a list of these acts and bills are attached (enclosure 3). The factual information, together with pertinent comments, is set forth for each of these in the appendixes as follows: Appendix I-Report by Kansas district relating to— (a) Private Law 853, 82d Congress, Harlan County Dam and Reservoir, Kans. (b) Section 211, Public Law 86-645, Tuttle Creek Dam and Reservoir, Kans. (c) Pending bills, H.R. 5160 and S. 128, 88th Congress, Milford Dam and Reservoir. Appendix II-Report by Omaha district relating to (a) Public Law 987, 84th Congress, Fort Randall Dam and Reservoir. (b) Public Law 987, 84th Congress, Gavins Point Dam and Reservoir, Nebr. and S. Dak. (c) Public Law 987, 84th Congress, Oahe Dam and Reservoir, N. Dak. and S. Dak. (d) Public Law 87-734, Big Bend Dam and Reservoir, S. Dak. (e) Public Law 87-735, Big Bend Dam and Reservoir, S. Dak. (f) Public Law 203, 82d Congress, Garrison Dam and Reservoir, N. Dak. (g) Public Law 504, 82d Congress, Garrison Dam and Reservoir, N. Dak. Appendix III—Report by Walla Walla district relating to— (a) Private Law 783, 82d Congress, McNary lock and dam, Washington. Appendix IV-Report by Rock Island district relating to (a) Pending bills, S. 931, H.R. 1136, S. 2818, S. 2819, S. 2820, 88th Congress, Red Rock Dam and Reservoir, Iowa. The data submitted with the above-listed reports are the best available to the several offices. By reason of the age of these transactions, coupled with record disposal requirements, some information must of necessity be sketchy. Question 5.-Identify projects in which railroad lessees or similar problems have arisen in the last 5 years where no legislation has been proposed. Give estimate of number of parcels, number of structures, and value of the various improvements. Explain how estimate determined. Answer. In response to questions 5 and 6 relating to other than the above specific items of legislation, the majority of the field offices indicated no records of subject problems. However, 10 districts have submitted reports citing examples of cases involving either railroad lessees or analogous limited-use rights. These miscellaneous reports are assembled under separate binder, appendix V, by districts, and hereinafter referred to with respect to specific projects. An analysis of these reports do not disclose sufficient factual and statistical data to summarize in tabular form a direct response under this question. Since, in these past cases the Government was only indirectly involved with the lessees, no necessity existed for obtaining such data. However, there is included such information as is presently available and sufficient to indicate the nature, scope, and procedure employed in each case. It is evident that the approach to this situation has been uniform throughout the districts. In general, settlements with railroads have been by voluntary relocation contracts; these are basically agreements for the exchange and/or conveyance by the railroad of unencumbered title to the Government; the railroad has the burden and responsibility for the removal of all encumbrances (including outstanding uses) prior to delivery of title and possession to the Government. It would appear that the railroad companies have, for the most part, been willing to accept this responsibility. More specifically, there have been railroad lessees involved in six reservoir projects during the past 5 years. Facts, such as are available, together with pertinent comments, are set forth in the district reports as follows: 1. Keystone Dam and Reservoir, Okla., Tulsa district, appendix V-B. 2. John Redman Dam and Reservoir, Kans., Tulsa district, appendix V-B. 3. Waco Dam and Reservoir, Tex., Fort Worth district, appendix V-C. |