CAPITAL SECURITY PROGRAM
JUDICIARY CAPITAL SECURITY PROGRAM 

This chapter presents the judiciary’s requirements and priorities for the Capital Security Program (CSP), which i

Emphasis Program within the General Services Administration’s (GSA) Federal Buildings Fund. The CSP prov

address serious security deficiencies in existing courthouse buildings where physical renovations are viable in lie

new courthouse. The authority necessary to make renovations of this scope falls under the jurisdiction of GSA. The judiciary’s fiscal year (FY) 2021 request level for the CSP is $31.4 million. Proposed projects to be funded are discussed in detail below. The actual projects funded, and the dollar amounts associated with them, may chafinal amount appropriated for the CSP and the most recent project cost estimates available at the time of approprlimited or costs have changed, requested projects that cannot be accommodated within the available appropriatioscope or deferred to the following fiscal year. The judiciary built its FY 2021 budget request for the CSP on the FY 2020 enacted appropriation, which provide

CSP in FY 2020. Capital Security Projects Requested for FY 2021. The judiciary requests that $31.4 million be provided for Cdescribed below.1

The judiciary will keep the Appropriations Committees apprised of any changes to its FY 2021 CSP appropriatio

including any changes resulting from a proposed reprogramming of Raleigh CSP project funds. (See discussion 

Raleigh, North Carolina, CSP project under FY 2016 on p. 15.9.) 

1. Theodore Levin U.S. Courthouse, Detroit, Michigan. $11.6 million. The Levin Courthouse was cons

listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The 402,935 usable square feet, ten-story plus basement stcourtrooms and 13 chambers. Its Asset Management Planning (AMP) process Facilities Benefits Assessmen

score is 17.0 on a scale of 1 to 1002. Security deficiencies at this courthouse will be partially addressed by co

enclosed USMS sally port, adding a visitor access enclosure, providing courtroom holding cells on two floor

1 All project cost estimates are subject to further verification by GSA. 2 An FBA Security score of 100 represents an “ideal courthouse” and a score below 60 represents a “poor courthouse.” 
detention grade elevator cab in the existing shared freight elevator shaft to provide improved prisoner movem

requested in FY 2019 and FY 2020, but no program funding was provided in either fiscal year. 2. U.S. Courthouse, Augusta, Georgia. $19.8 million. The U.S. Courthouse in Augusta was constructed 

in 1930. It is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The 28,321 useable square feet, three-story pstructure houses two courtrooms, one hearing room, and three chambers. Its AMP process FBA Security scodeficiencies at this courthouse will be addressed by replacing an existing open air carport with an enclosed U(USMS) sally port and separate judges’ parking area, enlarging/reconfiguring the existing security screening 

providing a dedicated judges’ elevator and a dedicated prisoner elevator, reconfiguring the first floor to provi

restricted circulation paths for prisoners and judges, and constructing a new prisoner movement circulation cfloor roof to provide secure circulation on the second floor. This project was requested in FY 2019 and FY 2funding was provided in either fiscal year. 

Future Capital Security Project The judiciary studies and approves projects on a rolling basis for participation in the CSP. The following future line to receive funding: 

Ross Adair Federal Building and U.S. Courthouse, Fort Wayne, Indiana. $17.6 million. This location 

CSP study in June 2016 and currently has an AMP process FBA Security Score of 29.9. The study was compand approved by the local and circuit courts. Security deficiencies at this courthouse will be addressed by ad

parking garage, new USMS sally port and secured parking for USMS staff, two new prisoner elevators, new station, new fire egress stairs, new jury room, and new holding cell. Also, two dedicated judges’ elevators wrepurposed from an existing shared elevator and the other is a new elevator that will provide restricted circulafloor, including courtrooms). 
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The CSP was endorsed by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 2010 to assist the courts at 

significant security deficiencies but may not qualify for a new courthouse building that would, among other thingsecurity needs. The purpose of the CSP is to improve physical security in buildings occupied by the judiciary. P

 Utilizing existing building assets and federal resources cost-effectively;  Addressing security deficiencies which place the public, prisoners, judges, and federal employees at r

 Providing a low-cost alternative to high-cost capital improvements. 

The CSP was first funded in FY 2012 when Congress designated $20 million within GSA’s Federal Buildings Fusecurity deficiencies in federal courthouses using mechanisms such as constructing additional secure corridors; a

reconfiguring elevators; constructing USMS sally ports; creating visual barriers; and reconfiguring security screeprioritization, selection, and implementation are handled collaboratively by stakeholders from the courts, the USvaluable program has resulted in greater security at federal courthouses in the selected locations at a fraction of thcourthouse construction. Recent funding for the CSP is summarized in the table below. 

Fiscal Year Funding 

FY 2012 $20 millionFY 2013 $20 millionFY 2014 $0 FY 2015 $20 millionFY 2016 $20 millionFY 2017 $26.7 million FY 2018 $20 million

FY 2019 $0 

FY 2020 $0 

Renovation projects that enhance security are selected for the program through an objective and collaborative revincludes stakeholder representatives from local courts and their circuit judicial councils, the USMS, GSA, Federa
(FPS), the Judicial Conference’s Space and Facilities Committee in consultation with the Judicial Conference’s J

Committee, and the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts (AO). The process consists of: 

1. Preliminary List. Development of a preliminary list of potential CSP projects begins with data collected 

judiciary’s AMP3 process that identify courthouses with poor security ratings. These data are then compa

assessment data collected independently by the USMS and with GSA data on government facilities that aimprovement. A preliminary list of potential projects is then compiled based on these sources of data. 

2. In-Depth Analysis and Resulting Short List. Each project on the preliminary list is then reviewed and v

more in-depth analysis conducted by stakeholder representatives of local courts and their circuit judicial cGSA, FPS, and the AO. This review looks at specific security deficiencies at each courthouse and identifconceptual solutions. Potential projects are then evaluated against a list of factors to determine the relativpotential projects. Factors may include whether there is a separate circulation pattern for judges, prisoner 

public; the number of resident judges; the type of caseload and proceedings; other repair and alteration prUSMS risk assessment and incident reports; and the presence of high-risk prisoners regularly in the court

3. Space and Facilities Committee Review and Validation. The Space and Facilities Committee reviews an

with the Judicial Security Committee, approves the specific courthouse locations to move on to the next s

selection process – completion of a capital security study. 

4. Capital Security Study and Final Recommendations. Using judiciary funding, the AO contracts with an 

firm to conduct a capital security study for each court location approved by the Space and Facilities Comreviews the security issues specific to that court location, identifies potential solutions, and documents the with corresponding budget estimates. The study also identifies other projects that are already planned or 

USMS, GSA, or the judiciary to ensure design solutions are fully coordinated. 

3 Under the AMP process, each district and circuit adopt a long-range facilities plan that includes an evaluation of each courthouse loca

needs. As part of the process, facility benefit assessments are conducted on each courthouse to determine how well the existing facility operations of the court. An urgency evaluation list is then developed each year, placing each courthouse location in rank order. This rathe urgency of space needs. The AMP process was adopted by the Judicial Conference in 2008. 
The Space and Facilities Committee’s Subcommittees on Space Planning and Rent Management then revbudgets for each project location, including rent impacts, if applicable, and recommend a final list of projFacilities Committee. The Space and Facilities Committee then reviews the recommendations and approproceed with a CSP project. 

5. Notification to GSA. GSA is advised of the result of the Space and Facilities Committee’s review of the 

If the list of projects exceeds the congressional budget limitation for that fiscal year, projects are moved t

while keeping their rank order. 

The flow chart that follows illustrates the steps involved in the approval of CSP projects for funding. 
e

In-Depth Analysis

The Judiciary, GSA, FPS, and the 

USMS review and validate 

preliminary list, and reach a 

consensus on courthouse

locations to recommend for CSP

Studies 

GSA Central Office

receives list of Space &

Facilities Committee

approved CSP projects 

and begins next steps 

towards funding 

GO!

CSP project funded; 

begin design and 

construction 

The Space Planning 

Subcommittee, in 

consultation with the Rent 

Management Subcommittee 

(as appropriate) reviews list 

of potential CSP project 

locations and makes 

recommendation to Space & 

Facilities Committee 

Preliminary List of Potential 

Projects

The Judiciary compiles the 

preliminary list of courthouse 

locations with security deficiencies 

based upon Asset Management 

Planning process data 

Space & Facilities

Committee 

approves CSP 

project location

Circuit Judicial 

Councils approve the 

conducting of a CSP 

Study at locations within their Circuit 

High-Level Capital Security Program (CSP) Process Summary 
STATUS OF CSP PROJECTS:FY 2020 CSP. Congress did not provide funding for CSP in FY 2020. FY 2019 CSP. Congress did not provide funding for CSP in FY 2019. FY 2018 CSP.

1. Hato Rey Complex, Clemente Ruiz Nazario U.S. Courthouse and Federico Degetau Federal Buildin

Puerto Rico (Phase 2). $20 million. The Hato Rey complex, which includes the Degetau Federal OfficRuiz Nazario U.S. Courthouse, serves as the headquarters for the District Court in the District of Puerto Rproject study completed in 2016 evaluated existing conditions of both buildings and proposed a preferred solution to address additional deficiencies of each structure. The recommendation for the Ruiz Nazario C

involves construction of a secure judges’ parking garage, designation of a judges’ elevator, and the additijudge/prisoner elevator. At the Degetau Federal Building, a new USMS vehicle sally port is proposed in with a new shared judge/prisoner elevator. In April 2018, staff from GSA, the AO, and the circuit met to clarify the scope. Staff also discussed options regarding the facility’s seismic vulnerability and the potencourthouse annex project being pursued. A courthouse annex project currently is on Part II of the FederaCourthouse Project Priorities list. Funding for a Phase 2 CSP project was appropriated and authorized bJune 2019. The project is currently under design. 

FY 2017 CSP. 

1. U.S. Post Office and Courthouse, Alexandria, Louisiana (construction only). $9 million. The projec

summarized below (FY 2016 CSP); $9 million from FY 2017 appropriations will be used for construction 

2. U.S. Courthouse, Paducah, Kentucky. $17.7 million. The original CSP project in this location was ide

address security deficiencies by improving secure circulation, and adding a dedicated prisoner elevator, a judges’ elevator, restricted judges’ parking, and a USMS vehicle sally port for prisoner transport vehiclesconstruction completion was originally March 2021; however, in September 2017, GSA issued a report aassets potentially impacted by Executive Order 13717, which established a Federal Earthquake Risk ManStandard. Based on the standard, the Paducah Courthouse was identified as being Exceptionally High Ri
requiring seismic mitigation. Options to address the risk have been evaluated and as a result this CSP procancelled. Instead, GSA has determined that the work required for the CSP and seismic upgrades are inteterms of their execution and must therefore be accomplished as one project. GSA believes that all deficieremedied through a prospectus-level renovation and alteration project that will include CSP security imprwell as seismic and overall building upgrades. GSA intends to request funding for this project in FY 202comprehensive feasibility study is conducted. This study began in October 2019 and is anticipated to be spring 2020. Accordingly, GSA submitted in May 2019 a request to Congress to reprogram the $17.7 million that had previously reserved for the Paducah CSP project to cover necessary costs for prior year CSP projects that 

encountered funding shortfalls. These projects are: Raleigh, North Carolina; Texarkana, Arkansas/Texas

Louisiana; and Alexandria, Louisiana. In addition, $3.18 million of the proposed reprogramming will be complete a newly approved project in Fort Worth, Texas, as described below. Eldon B. Mahon U.S. Courthouse, Fort Worth, Texas. $9.0 million ($3.18 million from CSP; $4.3 m$1.82 million from GSA’s R&A FY 2019 Spending Plan). The USMS has a completed security improEldon B. Mahon U.S. Courthouse in Fort Worth, Texas. This facility currently has an AMP process FBA 42.75. The design includes a new prisoner/judge’s elevator, sally port, holding cells, and restricted and sewell as USMS command center renovations. Detailed construction documents and cost estimates have beproject is ready for construction. The total project construction cost estimate is $9.0 million, and $4.3 mi

the USMS. Because of this funding shortfall, and because this project aligns with many of the goals of thSpace and Facilities Committee, at its November 2018 meeting, approved this project for program particithe reallocation of funds originally intended for Paducah, Kentucky. Approximately $3.18 million was refunds originally intended for Paducah, Kentucky, plus $1.82 million from GSA’s FY 2019 Major Repairs Spending Plan. 
FY 2016 CSP.

1. Terry Sanford Federal Building, Raleigh, North Carolina. $15.7 million. Security deficiencies at thi

were intended to be addressed by adding and/or reconfiguring elevators, providing secure parking for judconstructing additional secure circulation corridors with security screening revisions to better accommodacourts and the Military Entrance Processing Station (MEPS) - a future tenant. The design for this project completed in October 2017. The construction bids received were significantly higher than the budget, the

design was revised in April 2019. In addition to the $15.7 million of FY 2016 funding, approximately $6reprogrammed from funds originally intended for the Paducah, Kentucky, project to cover this shortfall dchanges and lack of competition, for total project availability of $22.5 million. As a result of CSP project delays and other recently identified building deficiencies in the Sanford FBuilding that are beyond the scope of the proposed CSP project, the Eastern District of North Carowithdrew support for this project in November 2019. The Fourth Circuit Judicial Council approvein December 2019. The judiciary will work with GSA to identify remaining funds for the Raleigh Cthat can be proposed for reprogramming to unfunded CSP projects. 

2. U.S. Post Office and Courthouse, Alexandria, Louisiana (design only). $1.93 million. Security defic

courthouse will be addressed by constructing restricted judges’ parking, a judges’ elevator, and reconfigu

to facilitate restricted circulation for all judges. The USMS will have new space that includes an enclosed holding cells, a prisoner elevator, and reconfigured corridors to facilitate secure prisoner transport. Full fproject was requested in FY 2016. Due to increased cost estimates for other projects, however, FY 2016 were only sufficient to complete the Alexandria project’s design ($1.93 million). Construction funding ($was received in FY 2017 appropriations and an additional $1.0 million was reprogrammed from funds or

intended for the Paducah, Kentucky, project to cover a budget shortfall. This shortfall was due to underecosts, escalation, and market conditions. Final design is planned for completion in February 2020 and coaward is planned for Spring 2020.
3. Ron De Lugo Federal Building, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands (Phase 2). $2.37 million. Security d

this courthouse will be addressed by constructing enhancements to the first-floor entry screening and accespace. The project will provide air-conditioned space for USMS screening equipment, thus prolonging it

organize the processing space to minimize lobby queuing, provide separate adjacent zones for an employ

and occupant/visitor entrance, and improve ballistic protection available to court security officers. Estimconstruction completion is November 2020. 

FY 2015 CSP. 

1. J. Robert Elliot Federal Building and U.S. Courthouse, Columbus, Georgia. $6.7 million. Security 

courthouse were addressed by constructing an enclosed USMS sally port and prisoner and judges’ elevatoprisoner movement, reconfiguring and constructing new corridors, and adding perimeter fencing. The pr

in Summer 2019. As a result of the project, the AMP process FBA Security Score for this courthouse im60.2 and the overall FBA score improved from 54.9 to 61.7.

2. Federal Building and U.S. Courthouse, Monroe, Louisiana. $6.1 million. Security deficiencies at thi

addressed by enclosing a sally port, adding one or two elevators (for prisoners and judges), and reconfigu

corridors. Additional judiciary funding ($2.8 million) will be used to build a new courtroom and jury asscourthouse needs in lieu of building a new courthouse. The design was completed in November 2017. A anticipated due to two-plus years of escalation between the initial and projected construction start dates a

general cost conditions for the project. In addition to the $6.1 million of FY 2015 funding, approximately received from funds originally intended for the Paducah, Kentucky, project to cover this budget shortfall 

funding availability of $9.5 million. Anticipated construction award date is March 2020 with anticipated construction completion in February 2022. 

3. U.S. Courthouse and Post Office Building, Texarkana, Texas/Arkansas. $7.2 million. Security defic

courthouse will be addressed by consolidating the USMS space into one location, enclosing a sally port, aprisoners and judges, building corridors for secure circulation, and reconfiguring building entry screening was completed in May 2018 and construction started in October 2019 with anticipated substantial constru

summer 2021. In addition to the $7.2 million of FY 2015 funding, approximately $3.3 million was repro
originally intended for the Paducah, Kentucky, project to cover budget shortfall, resulting in total project of $10.5 million. This shortfall was due to underestimated direct costs, escalation, and market conditions

FY 2014 CSP. Congress did not provide funding for CSP in FY 2014.FY 2013 CSP. 

Ron De Lugo Federal Building, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands (Phase 1). $20 million. Several maj

deficiencies at this courthouse will be addressed by constructing judges’ and prisoner elevators, a restricte

USMS sally port, and other security-related site improvements. The FY 2013 Phase 1 project is currently 

The project could not afford to swing tenants out of the courthouse during construction and therefore, a ficonstruction schedule was instituted. GSA has confirmed that it cannot use its hurricane funding authoritcosts due to difficulty in obtaining labor and materials following the hurricanes in 2017. In May 2019, $4

from GSA’s FY 2019 Major Repair and Alterations Spending Plan to cover delay costs due to difficulty i

materials following Hurricane Irma in 2017. A follow-on Phase 2 project to construct an adequate securithe building’s lobby was funded in FY 2016 in the amount of $2.37 million. The overall project schedule 

by approximately five months with anticipated substantial construction completion in November 2020. 

FY 2012 CSP. 

1. Federal Building and U.S. Courthouse, Benton, Illinois. $4.7 million. Security deficiencies at this co

addressed by reconfiguring and constructing new corridors, adding an elevator, enclosing a sally port, and 

barriers. The project is complete, and the court resumed occupancy of the space in January 2015. As a rethe AMP process FBA Security Score for this courthouse improved from 46.1 to 80.2 and the overall FBA from 51.7 to 61.1. 

2. Hato Rey Complex, Clemente Ruiz-Nazario U.S. Courthouse and Federico Degetau Federal Buildin

Rico (Phase 1). $3.1 million. Security deficiencies at this courthouse were partially addressed by constrdedicated elevator for prisoner movement. The project is complete, and the court resumed occupancy in of this project, the AMP process FBA Security Score for this courthouse improved from 58.9 to 68.2 and score improved from 70.4 to 73.0. A follow-on Phase 2 CSP project study has been completed to evaluat
concerns not addressed by the FY 2012 project. The resulting project was funded in FY 2018 (described 2018). 

3. Frank M. Scarlett Building, Brunswick, Georgia. $5.5 million. A new judge’s elevator, perimeter fe

parking area were constructed. Secure circulation was provided on the upper floors by re-stacking the cleoperations, relocating the magistrate and bankruptcy judges’ chambers, and constructing a USMS sally pelevator. The project is complete, and the court resumed occupancy of the space in May 2017. As a resuAMP process FBA Security Score for this courthouse improved from 41.1 to 63.9, and the overall FBA s61.2 to 67.7.

4. U.S. Courthouse and Post Office, Lexington, Kentucky. $6.7 million. Security deficiencies at this co

addressed by reconfiguring and constructing new corridors, adding dedicated prisoner and judges’ elevatoport, and constructing visual barriers. In addition to the security enhancements, two new fire egress stairwconstructed to make the facility compliant with life safety codes. Construction was completed in July 20project, the AMP process FBA Security Score for this courthouse improved from 37.2 to 58.7 and the oveimproved from 61.9 to 67.7.