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) 2024: San Juan, Puerto Rico; Hartford, Connecticut; Chattanooga, Tennessee; and 

Bowling Green, Kentucky. 

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 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, Alabama, and Fort Lauderdale, Florida, projects have received authorization and are underway. 

Between FY 2021 and FY 2023, Congress provided partial funding of $335.0 million for the Hartford, Connecticut, courthouse, and 

partial funding of $218.4 million for the Chattanooga, Tennessee, courthouse, which represent the top two priorities on the current 
14.2 

CPP, as week as partial funding of $22.5 million for the judicial space emergency in San Juan, PR. All of these projects are awaiting 

congressional authorization and remaining funds in FY 2024. 

Since receiving funding in FY 2016, the Rutland courthouse acquisition was completed in October 2018. The Charlotte, North 

Carolina Annex, Savannah, Georgia Annex and the Greenville, South Carolina new courthouse projects were completed in FY 2021. 

In FY 2022, an additional three new courthouses were completed. Those are located in Nashville, Tennessee, San Antonio, Texas, 

and Anniston, Alabama. The Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, and Des Moines, Iowa, new courthouse projects are expected to be completed

in FY 2023, as well as the major renovation project at the Charles R. Jonas Federal Building and U.S. Courthouse in Charlotte, North 

Carolina.

Each of the remaining funded projects (Greenville, Mississippi; Toledo, Ohio; Savannah, Georgia; Huntsville, Alabama; Ft. 

Lauderdale, Florida; Hartford, Connecticut; and Chattanooga, Tennessee) 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 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; 

the operation 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 2022, the Judicial Conference of the United States approved an updated CPP list for FY 2024. The FY 2024 CPP is the

third 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 2024 (see page 14.6) 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 2024 CPP continues to show 

Hartford, Connecticut, and Chattanooga, Tennessee. It also includes the addition of one project, Bowling Green, Kentucky, which 

moved up from Part II based on the completion of its GSA Phase II feasibility study. On Part II, there is the addition of a project in 

Macon, Georgia, and a shift in the Urgency Evaluation (UE) rank order of three locations since the FY 2023 CPP. Specifically, the 

UE rating and ranking for Greensboro/Winston-Salem, North Carolina, and Norfolk, Virginia, increased and conversely, the UE rating 

and ranking for McAllen, Texas, decreased. Accordingly, the priority order of projects on Part II of the new CPP changed to reflect

the updated 2022 UE scores by switching the order of these three projects. 
14.3

Judicial Space Emergency

San Juan, Puerto Rico - $315.6 million for design and construction (site is federally owned)

The Clemente Ruiz-Nazario U.S. Courthouse and Federico Degetau Federal Building in San Juan, Puerto Rico 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 $315.6 million is needed for construction of the annex. In FY 2022, the project received $22.5 

million for site and design. GSA’s update to its FY 2022 project estimate of $239.7 million reflects changes resulting from 

annual escalation (FYs 2021 and 2022), projected annual escalation, a required project labor agreement, design fee increase, 

and maintenance and inspection (M&I) fee increases. 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 three projects on Part I of the FY 2024 CPP (which reflects the addition on one project) are described in detail below. 

1. Hartford, Connecticut – $128.1 million for construction ($135.5 million previously funded in FY 2021 for site, design, and 

partial construction, $138.0 funded in FY 2022 for partial construction, and $61.5 million funded in FY 2023 for partial

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 2024. GSA estimates a total of $463.1 million is required for site acquisition, design, 

and construction of the new courthouse. In FY 2021, $135.5 million was appropriated for full site and design and partial 

construction of the project. In FY 2022, an additional $138.0 million was appropriated and in FY 2023 an additional $61.5

million was appropriated for partial construction. The amount requested in FY 2024 is $128.1 million to address the remaining 
14.4 

balance required for project construction. GSA’s updated FY 2023 cost estimate takes into account realized annual escalation 

(FYs 2020, 2021, and 2022),locality cost factor adjustment, projected annual escalation (FY 2023 and beyond), design and M 

& I fee increases, and estimated cost of implementing applicable Executive Orders for energy and sustainable design. 

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 – $76.3 million for construction ($94.5 million previously funded in FY 2021 for site, design, and

partial construction, $85.5 million in FY 2022 for partial construction, and $38.4 million in FY 2023 for partial

construction)

The Chattanooga, Tennessee U.S. Courthouse is number two on the judiciary’s CPP for FY2024. GSA currently estimates

that a total of $294.7 million is needed for site acquisition, design, and construction of the courthouse. GSA’s update to its

FY 2022 project estimate of $218.4 million reflects changes resulting from annual escalation (FYs 2021 and 2022), locality

cost factor adjustment, a required project labor agreement, design and M&I fee increases, and estimated cost of implementing

applicable Executive Orders for energy and sustainable design. In FY 2021, $94.5 million was appropriated for the project for

full site and design and partial construction. An additional $85.5 million was appropriated in FY 2022 and $38.0 million in

FY 2023 for partial construction. The amount requested in FY 2024 is $76.3 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
14.5

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 

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. 

3. Bowling Green, Kentucky – TBD for site, design, and construction. 

The Bowling Green, Kentucky U.S. Courthouse is number three on the judiciary’s CPP for FY 2024. GSA is developing an 

updated estimate that has yet to be determined. 

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

houses two resident judges (one district and one magistrate), but only contains one magistrate judge courtroom, one undersized 

magistrate judge hearing room, and one undersized bankruptcy judge courtroom. Further, the courthouse, which was 

constructed in 1933, lacks adequate security, does not provide for future expansion needs, and does not meet current USCDG 

standards. Because of inadequacies in the existing building’s configuration and size, judges, prisoners, and the public must use 

the same public elevator and corridors. The building lacks a prisoner sallyport, restricted judges’ parking, and adequate 

setbacks and perimeter barriers. None of the courtrooms meet accessibility requirements for persons with disabilities. 

Additionally, there are considerable fire life safety deficiencies, including lack of fire protection systems and inadequate egress 

capacities.


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. 

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

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

1. Building Condition – 30 percent

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.