COURTHOUSE CONSTRUCTION
14.1 

COURTHOUSE CONSTRUCTION FUNDING

AND THE 

JUDICIARY COURTHOUSE PLANNING AND PRIORITIZATION PROCESS

The federal courthouse construction program is administered jointly by the judiciary and the General Services Administration (GSA). 

The judiciary establishes priorities for courthouse construction projects and sets the housing requirements for each project to ensure 

that completed facilities meet the needs of the courts. GSA, as the holder of real property authority, secures the funding for 

courthouse construction, acquires the building site, and completes design and construction work on the facilities themselves. 

The judiciary sets forth its priorities for courthouse construction funding on its Federal Judiciary Courthouse Project Priorities (CPP) 

list. The CPP is divided into two parts. Part I consists of the judiciary’s highest courthouse construction funding priorities for the 

budget year. Part II identifies out-year courthouse construction priorities. As described in detail below, the most recent CPP includes 

the following project priorities for fiscal year (FY) 2023: San Juan, Puerto Rico; Hartford, Connecticut; and Chattanooga, Tennessee. 

MANAGEMENT OF PRIOR YEAR COURTHOUSE CONSTRUCTION FUNDING

In FY 2016, Congress provided $948 million to GSA for the construction of courthouses on the CPP list, as approved by the Judicial 

Conference in September 2015. This unprecedented infusion of resources fully funded all four projects on Part I of the CPP at that 

time (Nashville, Tennessee; Toledo, Ohio; Charlotte, North Carolina; and Des Moines, Iowa), as well as the first four projects on Part 

II (Greenville, South Carolina; Anniston, Alabama; Savannah, Georgia; and San Antonio, Texas). A fifth project from Part II

(Harrisburg, Pennsylvania) also received partial funding. In total, of the 11 projects on the September 2015 CPP, eight received full 

funding, and a ninth received partial funding. In addition, $53 million was appropriated for new construction and acquisition of 

facilities that are joint U.S. courthouses and federal buildings in Greenville, Mississippi, and Rutland, Vermont. Joint 

courthouse/federal building projects are prioritized by GSA and do not appear on the judiciary’s CPP. All of these courthouse 

projects have been authorized by both the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and the Senate Committee on the 

Environment and Public Works. 

In FY 2018, Congress provided the remainder of funding needed for the project in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania ($137.2 million), as well 

as complete construction funding for two additional projects: Huntsville, Alabama ($110.0 million) and Fort Lauderdale, Florida

($190.1 million). Both the Huntsville and Fort Lauderdale projects have received authorization and are underway. 

In FY 2021, Congress provided partial funding of $135.5 million for the Hartford, CT, courthouse, and partial funding of $94.5 

million for the Chattanooga, TN, courthouse. Both projects are awaiting congressional authorization and remaining funds in FY 2022. 
14.2 

Since receiving funding in FY 2016, the Rutland, VT courthouse acquisition was completed in October 2018, and the Charlotte, NC 

Annex, Savannah, GA Annex and the Greenville, SC projects were completed in FY 2021. The San Antonio, TX new courthouse 

project was completed in December 2021, and the Nashville, TN; Anniston, AL; and Harrisburg, PA new courthouses are expected to 

be completed in FY 2022. 

Each of the remaining fully funded projects (Harrisburg, PA; Charlotte R&A, NC; Des Moines, IA; Greenville, MS; Toledo, OH; 

Savannah R&A GA; Huntsville, AL; and Ft. Lauderdale, FL) is in a different stage of development. The Administrative Office of the 

U.S. Courts (AO) continues to engage with GSA, the U.S. Marshals Service (USMS), and other Executive Branch stakeholders on a 

number of portfolio management activities to ensure that additional milestones are reached, and projects remain on track. These 

activities include regular coordination and project status meetings; development of a communications and program management plan; 

establishment of a National Courthouse Change Management Board to oversee changes impacting scope, schedule, and budget; and 

deployment of a program management dashboard to track progress. Ongoing coordination continues among judiciary stakeholders to 

address issues impacting the portfolio including risks, policies, and best practices. 

UPDATES TO THE CPP

In September 2021, the Judicial Conference of the United States approved an updated CPP list for FY 2023. The FY 2023 CPP is the 

second to incorporate the requirement that any project considered for addition to Part I must have a completed GSA Phase II 

feasibility study. This requirement helps improve the quality of GSA cost estimates associated with Part I projects, for which funding 

is being sought. 

The approved CPP for FY 2023 (see page 14.5) reflects the continuing judicial space emergency in San Juan, Puerto Rico, which 

makes that project the de facto top courthouse construction priority of the judiciary. Part I of the FY 2023 CPP is unchanged from the 

FY 2022 CPP and continues to show Hartford, Connecticut, and Chattanooga, Tennessee. On Part II, there is a shift in the Urgency 

Evaluation (UE) rank order of two locations since the FY 2022 CPP. Specifically, the UE rating and ranking for 

Greensboro/Winston-Salem, North Carolina, dropped and conversely, the UE rating and ranking for McAllen, Texas, increased. 

Accordingly, the priority order of projects on Part II of the new CPP changed to reflect the updated 2021 UE scores by switching the 

order of these two projects. 
14.3

Judicial Space Emergency

San Juan, Puerto Rico - $262.2 million for design and construction (site is federally owned) 

The Clemente Ruiz-Nazario U.S. Courthouse and Federico Degetau Federal Building in San Juan were declared a judicial 

space emergency by the Judicial Conference in September 2020. In early 2018, the Puerto Rico District Court was informed 

that the Federico Degetau Federal Building was among eight courthouses found to be structurally deficient and at extremely 

high risk for seismic activity. GSA reported that the federal building did not meet the required performance level and that 

significant, and invasive, seismic remediation work was necessary. Recommended seismic upgrades to the Degetau Federal 

Building include reinforcing columns, new shear walls, concrete deck doweling and replacement, retrofitting the existing 

spandrels at the perimeter walls, and adding seismic bracing to the mechanical systems. In order to safely perform the 

necessary seismic work, a new annex needs to be constructed in advance to provide not only necessary permanent expansion 

space for the court but also temporary swing space for all tenants during the invasive seismic upgrade to the Degetau Federal 

Building. 

GSA currently estimates that $262.2 million is needed for design and construction of the annex. No project funding has been 

appropriated to date, nor has the project been authorized. The proposed new annex will meet the expansion needs of the 

district court with six district courtrooms and ten chambers, provide secure circulation for prisoner movement, and expand 

facilities for prisoner management to better accommodate the USMS. 

The two projects on Part I of the FY 2023 CPP (which are unchanged from FY 2022) are described in detail below. 

1. Hartford, Connecticut– $199.5 million for construction ($135.5 million previously funded in FY 2021 for site, design, and

construction)

The Abraham Ribicoff Federal Building and U.S. Courthouse (Ribicoff Federal Building) in Hartford, Connecticut, is number

one on the judiciary’s CPP list for FY 2023. GSA estimates a total of $335.0 million is required for site acquisition, design,

and construction of the new courthouse. $135.5 million was appropriated for the project in FY 2021 for full site and design

and partial construction. The amount requested in FY 2023 is $199.5 million to address the remaining balance required for

project construction. The update to GSA’s FY 2021 cost estimate is based on the completed Hartford Phase II GSA feasibility

study, selection of the final housing solution, and refinement of prior cost estimates which were based on preliminary Phase I

GSA feasibility study information.
14.4

The Ribicoff Federal Building was constructed in 1963 and houses the district court, bankruptcy court, and court of appeals, 

among other tenants. The courthouse building currently houses 10 judges (three district judges, four senior district judges, two

magistrate judges and one bankruptcy judge) and contains one hearing room and seven courtrooms (four district, two 

magistrate, and one bankruptcy), many of which do not meet U.S. Courts Design Guide (USCDG) size standards. 

The Ribicoff Federal Building has considerable challenges related to prisoner movement, with no dedicated prisoner elevator 

and an undersized sally port, prohibiting separate public/prisoner/judge circulation. The U.S. Immigration and Customs 

Enforcement Office escorts 350-500 prisoners per month in this building. The annex to the Ribicoff Federal Building, 

constructed in 1991, has ongoing water intrusion, air quality, and HVAC issues. The annex also suffered extensive damage 

after a major storm in 2008. 

2. Chattanooga, Tennessee– $123.9 million for construction ($94.5 million previously funded in FY 2021 for site, design, and

construction)

The Chattanooga U.S. Courthouse is number two on the judiciary’s CPP for FY 2023. GSA currently estimates that a total of

$218.4 million is needed for site acquisition, design, and construction of the courthouse. The update to GSA’s FY 2021 cost

estimate of $189.1 million is based on the completed Chattanooga Phase II GSA feasibility study, selection of the final housing

solution, and refinement of prior cost estimates which were based on preliminary Phase I GSA feasibility study information.

$94.5 million was appropriated for the project in FY 2021 for full site and design and partial construction. The amount

requested in FY 2023 is $123.9 million to address the remaining balance required for project construction, based on the

updated GSA cost estimate.

The existing courthouse was constructed in 1933 and houses the district court, among other court and non-court related

tenants. The courthouse building houses five judges (two district judges, one senior district judge, and two magistrate judges)

and contains three courtrooms (one district and two magistrate) and one hearing room. The bankruptcy court is currently

housed in leased space (two bankruptcy judges using one bankruptcy judge courtroom and one hearing room). The courthouse

building lacks adequate security, does not provide for future expansion, and does not meet USCDG standards. Because of

inadequacies in the existing building’s configuration and size, judges, prisoners, and the public must use the same public

elevators and corridors. There are not enough courtroom holding cells. The prisoner access route to one of the magistrate

judge courtrooms passes through the magistrate judge’s chambers. Further, the building lacks a prisoner sally port, adequate

setbacks, or perimeter barriers. The building has ongoing water infiltration issues, mold issues, and a major rat infestation
14.5 

throughout the building, as well as the presence of asbestos. None of the courtrooms meet the recommended size requirements 

of the USCDG, nor accessibility requirements for persons with disabilities. 
14.6
14.7
14.8

BACKGROUND:

Federal Judiciary Courthouse Project Priorities (CPP) List

The judiciary compiles a prioritized list of federal construction projects representing the courts’ most urgent courthouse construction 

needs. This prioritization is based on the judiciary’s long-range space planning methodology called the Asset Management Planning 

(AMP) process (as discussed below). Prior to FY 2016, this list was referred to as the Five-Year Courthouse Project Plan (Five-Year 

Plan). In September 2015, the Judicial Conference recognized that the Five-Year Plan did not reflect an accurate funding timeline or 

articulate the relative urgency-of-need for projects on the Five-Year Plan (particularly those that remained on the plan for long periods 

of time). To address these concerns, the Conference adopted a new planning instrument to detail the judiciary’s priorities for new 

construction: the Federal Judiciary CPP list. 

The CPP is a two-part, two-page document. Part I lists the judiciary’s highest courthouse construction priorities – projects for which 

the judiciary will request federal funding in its annual budget submission – in numbered priority order. The priority order of all 

projects on Part I is maintained until a project has been fully funded, at which point the funded project is removed from Part I. Part II 

of the CPP consists of a separate table that includes the remaining projects. Prioritization of projects on Part II is reviewed and 

updated annually based on the location’s Urgency Evaluation (UE) score.

1

 New projects may be added to Part II of the CPP after the 

completion of a Phase I GSA feasibility study that recommends the construction of a new courthouse or annex. As of September 

2020, projects must have a completed Phase II GSA feasibility study before they can be elevated to Part I of the plan.

AMP Process

The AMP process was approved by the Judicial Conference in March 2008. The AMP process incorporates rigorous facility 

assessments and consistently applied objective standards and guidelines to evaluate space needs in federal courthouses throughout the 

nation. Deliverables of the AMP process include a district-wide Long-Range Facilities Plan, a Facility Benefit Assessment (FBA) 

score for each courthouse, and a UE ranking for each city. Through these deliverables, the judiciary identifies courthouse space issues 

by location, preliminary housing solutions, and relative urgency-of-need compared to other courts nationwide.

The FBA score is based upon factors grouped into one of four weighted categories: 

1. Building Condition – 30 percent

1 When two or more projects have UE scores so similar as to make meaningful prioritization among those projects difficult, the Judicial Conference Committee 

on Space and Facilities has approved a list of additional factors that can be used to inform the prioritization process. These factors include: (1) whether a court is 

currently located in a leased building as opposed to a GSA-owned facility; (2) whether the United States Marshals Service (USMS) produces a high number of 

prisoners for court proceedings at that location; and (3) whether the location has received past congressional funding. 
14.9

2. Space Functionality – 30 percent

3. Security – 25 percent

4. Space Standards – 15 percent

The UE ranking is used to determine which courthouses throughout the nation have the most urgent space needs, regardless of the size 

of the courthouse or type of housing solution. There are four weighted factors used to calculate a courthouse location’s UE ranking: 

1. FBA score – 40 percent

2. Judges without chambers – 30 percent

3. Judges without courtrooms based on courtroom sharing policies – 20 percent

4. Projected caseload growth – 10 percent

The annual UE Results List is published early each calendar year to reflect updates in a location’s courtroom or chambers needs and

caseload growth, and to update or add locations that have been evaluated under the AMP process since the issuance of the prior year’s 

UE Results List. All 94 districts and 12 circuit headquarters throughout the country have been assessed under the AMP process.