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) 2020 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 appropriatio

scope or deferred to the following fiscal year. In the absence of enacted full year FY 2019 appropriations, the judiciary made funding assumptions to construct request. The judiciary built its FY 2020 budget request for the CSP assuming no program funding is provided in After full year FY 2019 appropriations are enacted, the judiciary will re-estimate its FY 2020 budget request and 

Appropriations Committees any changes to FY 2020 appropriations requirements for the CSP. 

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

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 st

courtrooms and 13 chambers. Its AMP process FBA Security score is 17.0. Security deficiencies at this cou

partially addressed by constructing an enclosed USMS sally port, adding a visitor access enclosure, providing cells on two floors, and incorporating a detention grade elevator cab in the existing shared freight elevator sh

improved prisoner movement. [This project was requested in FY 2019 but is assumed to be unfunded in that 

1 All project cost estimates are subject to further verification by GSA. 
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 Asset Management Planning (A

Facilities Benefits Assessment (FBA) Security score is 26.4 on a scale of 1 to 1002

. Security deficiencies at t

addressed by replacing an existing open air carport with an enclosed U.S. Marshals Service (USMS) sally pojudges’ parking area, enlarging/reconfiguring the existing security screening queuing area, providing a dedicaand a dedicated prisoner elevator, reconfiguring the first floor to provide secure and restricted circulation pathjudges, and constructing a new prisoner movement circulation corridor over the first-floor roof to provide secsecond floor. [This project was requested in FY 2019 but is assumed to be unfunded in that year.] 

Future Capital Security Projects The judiciary studies and approves projects on a rolling basis for participation in the CSP. The following future p

line to receive funding: 

1. The Eldon B. Mahon U.S. Courthouse, Fort Worth, Texas. $9.0 million ($4.7 million from CSP (esti

from USMS). The USMS has a completed security improvement design for the Eldon B. Mahon U.S. Court

Texas. The facility has an AMP process FBA Security Score of 42.75. The design includes a new prisoner/j

port, holding cells, and restricted and secure circulation, as well as USMS command center renovations. Det

documents and cost estimates have been completed and the project is ready for construction. The total projec

estimate is $9.0 million, including $4.3 million of funding from the USMS for security improvements to their 

propose a reprogramming of existing CSP funds to cover the costs of the Fort Worth project (see Paducah, Kon page 15.7). 2. E. Ross Adair Federal Building and U.S. Courthouse, Fort Wayne, Indiana. $15.6 million. This loc

for a CSP study in June 2016 and currently has an AMP process FBA Security Score of 29.9. The study was 2018. Security deficiencies at this courthouse will be addressed by adding a new judges’ parking garage, new 

and secured parking for USMS staff, two new prisoner elevators, new security screening station, new fire egr

room, and new holding cell. Also, two dedicated judges’ elevators will be provided (one is repurposed from 

2 A FBA Security score of 100 represents an “ideal courthouse” and a score below 60 represents a “poor courthouse.” 
elevator and the other is a new elevator that will provide restricted circulation to the second floor, including cevent that the Theodore Levin U.S. Courthouse, Detroit, Michigan project does receive appropriations in FY would seek funding for Fort Wayne in its place. The judiciary will provide any changes to its CSP requiremebudget re-estimate. 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTIONThe 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 CSP is to improve physical security in buildings occupied by the judiciary. Prog

 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; areconfiguring elevators; enclosing prisoner drop-off areas to create sally ports; creating visual barriers; and recon

screening areas. Project prioritization, selection, and implementation are handled collaboratively by stakeholderUSMS, and GSA. This valuable program has resulted in greater security at federal courthouses in the selected locations at a fraction courthouse construction. Recent funding for the CSP is summarized in the table below. 

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 (assumed) $0 
Renovation projects that enhance security are selected for the program through an objective and collaborative rev

includes 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 JCommittee, 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 c

GSA, FPS, and the AO. This review looks at specific security deficiencies at each courthouse and identif

conceptual 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 sselection 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 Com

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 ra

the urgency of space needs. The AMP process was adopted by the Judicial Conference in 2008. 
reviews 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. 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 proj

Facilities Committee. The Space and Facilities Committee then reviews the recommendations and appro

proceed 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 2019 CSP. The judiciary’s current assumption is that Congress will not provide CSP funding 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 additi

judge/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 poten

courthouse 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 has been appropriated but not yet a

Congress. 

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 vehicles

construction 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 Man

Standard. 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 pro
cancelled. Instead, GSA has determined that the work required for the CSP and seismic upgrades are inte

terms 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 202

comprehensive feasibility study is conducted in FY 2019. Accordingly, GSA plans to propose to the Appropriations Committees a reprogramming of the $17.7 milbeen previously reserved for the Paducah CSP project to cover necessary costs for prior year CSP project

encountered funding shortfalls. These projects are: St. Thomas, Virgin Islands; Raleigh, North Carolina

Arkansas/Texas; Monroe, Louisiana; and Alexandria, Louisiana. In addition, $4.7 million (estimated) of 

reprogramming will be used to complete a newly approved project in Fort Worth, Texas, as described abo15.2. The judiciary anticipates that GSA will transmit a formal reprogramming request regarding these funds to 

Appropriations Committees in the near future. 
FY 2016 CSP.

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

will be addressed by adding and/or reconfiguring elevators, providing secure parking for judges, and consadditional secure circulation corridors with security screening revisions to better accommodate both the cMilitary Entrance Processing Station (MEPS) - a future tenant. The design for this project was completed 

2017. The construction bids received were significantly higher than the budget, therefore, the project is u

constructability review. GSA plans to address this project’s funding shortfall by transmitting to the Appr

Committees a proposed reprogramming of funds from the Paducah project (see page 15.7 above). 

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 reconfiguto 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; construction will commence once the contract is awarded. The 

planned for completion in spring 2019; however, a budget shortfall is anticipated due to market escalationto address this project’s funding shortfall by transmitting to the Appropriations Committees a proposed reof funds from the Paducah project (see page 15.7 above).

3. Ron De Lugo Federal Building, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands (Phase 2). $2.37 million. Security d

courthouse will be addressed by constructing enhancements to the first-floor entry screening and access cproject will provide air-conditioned space for USMS screening equipment, thus prolonging its useful life, processing space to minimize lobby queuing, provide separate adjacent zones for an employee entrance aentrance, and improve ballistic protection available to court security officers. Estimated construction com

2020; however, this schedule may change due to hurricane damage to the building sustained in 2017. 
FY 2015 CSP. 

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

this courthouse will be addressed by constructing an enclosed USMS sally port and prisoner and judges’ secure prisoner movement, reconfiguring and constructing new corridors, and adding perimeter fencing. kick-off meeting was held in August 2015 and work is currently underway on this project. Construction complete, and the project is on-budget. Estimated construction completion is late 2018. 

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 reconfigucorridors. Additional judiciary funding ($2.5 million) will be used to build a new courtroom to address c

lieu of building a new courthouse. The design was completed in November 2017. Anticipated substantia

completion is December 2020. A budget shortfall is anticipated due to two-plus years of escalation betwe

projected construction start dates and underestimated general cost conditions for the project. GSA plans project’s funding shortfall by transmitting to the Appropriations Committees a proposed reprogramming 

Paducah project (see page 15.7 above). 

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, a

prisoners and judges, building corridors for secure circulation, and reconfiguring building entry screening 

was completed in May 2018. Construction is scheduled to commence in summer 2019 and anticipated sucompletion is summer 2020. A funding shortfall has been identified due to costs associated with the relobranch tenant impacted by the CSP project scope and requirements. GSA plans to address this project’s ftransmitting to the Appropriations Committees a proposed reprogramming of funds from the Paducah proabove). 

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

1. 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 under coestimated construction completion in September 2020. The project could not afford to swing tenants out during construction and therefore, a five-phase, 36-month construction schedule was instituted. GSA has cannot use its hurricane funding authority to pay the delay costs due to difficulty in obtaining labor and m

hurricanes in 2017. The overall project schedule is extended by approximately five months. GSA plans tproject’s funding shortfall by transmitting to the Appropriations Committees a proposed reprogramming 

Paducah project (see page 15.7 above). A follow-on Phase 2 project to construct an adequate security scrbuilding’s lobby was funded in FY 2016 in the amount of $2.37 million. 

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 evaluatconcerns not addressed by the FY 2012 project. The resulting project was funded in FY 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 stairw

constructed to make the facility compliant with Life Safety Codes. Construction was completed in July 2the project, the AMP process FBA Security Score for this courthouse improved from 37.2 to 58.7 and the improved from 61.9 to 67.7.