➤ continued on next page

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Logistics Management Newsletter

FROM THE LOGISTICS MANAGEMENT DIVISION

FY22 | ISSUE 4 OCTOBER 2022

Welcome. This newsletter 

is brought to you by the 

Logistics Management 

Division (LMD). Its purpose 

is to keep you abreast 

of the latest business 

practices and to share 

information about ongoing 

logistics management 

initiatives and events. It also 

introduces interim policy 

letters, which shall be 

incorporated in forthcoming 

updates of NASA 

Procedural Directives and 

Procedural Requirements.

IN THIS ISSUE

1 Farewell

2 Newcomers

4 Kudos

5 Contract Property Program

6 Equipment Management Program

8 Questions and Answers

12 Contact Us

FAREWELL 

A Retirement Farewell 

to Edward A. Ahmad

NASA Marshall Space Flight Center 

(MSFC) announced the retirement 

of Edward A. Ahmad after 24 years 

as a civil servant in the Federal 

Government. Edward arrived at 

NASA Headquarters after serving 

21 years as a logistician in the U.S. 

Army and 3 years as a Logistics 

Analyst with the Department of 

Health and Human Services. The 

NASA Logistics community knows 

him as the former Agency Equipment 

Program Manager assigned to 

Headquarters in Washington, DC, 

from 2002 to 2008. 

Edward A. Ahmad

In 2008, Edward moved to MSFC 

in Huntsville, AL, where he served 

as Project Manager and trainer 

for the implementation of the 

Agency’s newly developed automated equipment management 

system, NASA Property (NPROP). 
➤ Farewell continued

2 LOGISTICS MANAGEMENT NEWSLETTER

After the successful implementation of NPROP, he served as team 

lead for Property Accountability, 

which included overseeing MSFC’s 

Equipment Management and 

Contract Property Management 

business processes. 

During his 21-year tenure at NASA, 

Edward played key roles in several 

high-visibility logistics initiatives, 

including the Radio Frequency 

Identification (RFID) pilot program 

and as lead coordinator to facilitate 

face-to-face, hands-on training 

at NASA Centers to support the 

rollouts of NASA Disposal and 

Equipment management systems.

Edward mentored and served as 

instructor for a 3-month period 

to senior-level students seeking 

a degree in Logistics/Equipment 

Life Cycle Management. His technical expertise and interpersonal 

skills made significant impacts in 

others’ professional lives. He supported MSFC’s Student Volunteer 

Internship Program with Alabama 

Agricultural and Mechanical (A&M) 

University and the Combined 

Services Counselor for the State 

of Alabama Independent Living 

(SAIL) to facilitate the professional 

development of students attending 

the university. Edward developed 

a very detailed work schedule that 

allowed the interns to acquire a 

working hands-on knowledge of 

each business area within the MSFC 

Logistics Service office. He provided 

written performance and evaluation 

reports that covered the midpoint 

and end-of-course periods; these 

were then furnished to the Alabama 

A&M department’s director of logistics and served as a basis for the 

student’s final course grade.

Edward has received numerous 

NASA awards and commendations. 

He has always spoken with authority and expertise. He has been a 

trusted subject matter expert within 

the NASA logistics community and a 

person to whom functional managers from the Logistics Management 

Division (LMD) approached for review, 

comment, and valued input on policy 

changes and implementation. 

Ed, we wish to congratulate 

you on your retirement. 

You have been a pillar 

of the NASA equipment 

management program, and 

we will miss you as a person, 

a friend, and a colleague. 

You are the type of person 

who makes NASA the best 

place to work in the Federal 

Government, and you have 

made the NASA logistics 

community a family. Thank 

you, and we wish you the 

very best in your retirement.

NEWCOMERS

New Property Accountability Group Supervisor at JPL

Jay Sucher

Clifford Ross, Supervisor, 

JPL Property Accountability Group

Please join me in welcoming Clifford 

Ross as the new Group Supervisor 

for the Property Accountability 

Group at the Jet Propulsion 

Laboratory (JPL).

Clifford has worked with many applications of Government Property, 

most recently with the Department 

of Defense, working alongside 

Rolls-Royce: specifically with the 

Joint Fighter Program and later 

transitioning to Naval Warships. His 

knowledge of Government property 

is extensive, and he is excited to 

maintain and improve the property 

system here at JPL. 

Clifford holds a bachelor’s 

degree in integrated supply chain 

management from Western 

Michigan University.
➤ Newcomers continued

LOGISTICS MANAGEMENT NEWSLETTER 3

Newly Appointed Equipment Manager at Marshall Space Flight Center

Gary Humphrey, MSFC Supply and Equipment Management Officer

Pamela D. Smith has accepted 

the opportunity to serve NASA 

as the Marshall Space Flight 

(MSFC) Equipment Manager 

with the responsibility of managing Installation Accountable 

Government Property across the 

Center. Having served NASA as 

a contractor for 34 years, she is 

deeply rooted in the mission of 

exploring space and science. Within 

her tenure on a major enterprise 

NASA contract, she oversaw a 

property management team that 

successfully received, deployed, 

tracked, and dispositioned government property globally. In addition, Pam obtained a bachelor’s 

degree in business management at 

Faulkner University and a Certified 

Professional Property Management 

certification with the National 

Property Management Association.

On a personal level, Pam is committed to her faith, family, and 

community. Both of her children are 

employees on NASA contracts, and 

she and her husband own a general 

store in a nearby rural community.

Pamela D. Smith, 

MSFC Equipment Manager

Langley’s newly built Measurement 

Systems Laboratory

Newly Appointed Property Administrator at Langley Research Center

Ann Cuyler, Contract Property, Program Manager

Please join me in welcoming 

Matthew Kesler. He is a newly 

appointed Property Administrator 

at Langley Research Center 

(LaRC) as of May 23. Matthew 

brings 6 years of experience 

with Government Property 

Management. Matthew was most 

recently an Industrial Property 

Management Specialist with the 

Defense Contract Management 

Agency (DCMA) located in Chantilly, 

VA. He started at DCMA through 

the Keystone Program in 2016. The 

Keystone Program offers a developmental pathway with on-the-job 

training and ever-increasing 

workload complexity. 

Matthew successfully completed an 

international rotation in Wiesbaden, 

Germany, in the summer of 2019. 

After returning and graduating from 

the Keystone Program in 2019, 

Matthew took on a complex itinerant workload that included six big 

defense contracts with Government 

property valued more than $200 million. He is excited about the opportunity to work at NASA and contribute 

to the logistics mission. He enjoys 

traveling and hiking with his wife.
4 LOGISTICS MANAGEMENT NEWSLETTER

KUDOS

Best Place to Work (BPTW) in the Federal Government Breakfast Recognition

Olivette Hooks, Director, Logistics Management Division

Vincent “Vince” Cappello, from the 

Logistics Management Division 

(LMD), was selected to represent 

LMD at July’s Partnership for Public 

Service’s “Best Places to Work in 

the Federal Government” breakfast. Vince arrived at NASA during 

Mission Support Future Architecture 

Program (MAP) and Key Decision 

Point C (KDP-C). He took an active 

role in workforce strategy and 

budget. As if MAP and KDP-C 

were not enough, Vince also found 

himself remotely supervising a new 

team during a worldwide pandemic, 

and his actions were exemplary 

during this time. His positive attitude 

and engaging dialogue supported 

empathetic communication while 

showing genuine concern for his 

staff and others. In addition, he 

embraced constant change while 

incorporating new technologies.

Vince found a good balance 

between getting the work done and 

meeting people’s needs. He worked 

hard to communicate often and 

effectively in the new normal. He 

listened intently and asked relevant 

questions during meetings, providing recommendations or feedback 

after having a thorough understanding of the new work environment. I 

believe his listening approach is part 

of his success in his new role.

Vince Capello, Deputy Director, Logistics 

Management Division

Johnson Space Center Receives NPMA Chapter of the Year Award

Ann Cuyler, Contract Property Program Manager

The Johnson Space Center (JSC) National Property Management Association (NPMA) Chapter 

received the 2022 Large Chapter of the Year Award. The JSC Chapter is composed of 

NASA contractors and NASA civil servants, supporting a broad range of contracts and 

Government-property-related activities throughout NASA. The criteria to be nominated for 

chapter of the year include being active in training, promoting and facilitating professional 

development, and participating in charitable activities in the community, among other 

things. I would also like to proudly point out that Ricardo Montenegro (JSC IPO) is the vice 

president of the JSC NPMA Chapter. 

Please note that there are NPMA chapters all around you, no matter where you live, with a combination of 

Federal and contract employees. Consider joining NPMA: members have a lot of advantages when it comes to 

attending the National Education Seminar (NES) annually and taking professional education seminars offered 

in-person or online. For more information, please go to https://www.npma.org.
LOGISTICS MANAGEMENT NEWSLETTER 5

CONTRACT PROPERTY PROGRAM

NASA Logisticians Present in 2022 NPMA’s National Education Seminar

Ann Cuyler, Contract Property Program Manager

Keisha Martindale (MSFC PA), Cynthia “Cyndi” 

Thomas-Davis (MSFC IPO), and Keither Gala 

(MSFC Property Administrator)

NASA logistics had a great representation at the National Property 

Management Association (NPMA) National Education Seminar (NES) 2022 

in Dallas, TX. Daniel Bartlett (Armstrong Flight Research Center Equipment 

Manager) and Ann Cuyler hosted educational seminars in their respective 

functional areas and plan to do the same at the 2023 NPMA NES.

The NPMA’s NES is held annually and offers a variety of educational 

courses and workshops, from property management (i.e., property 

accounting and property disposal) to fleet management. Professional education and certification play a beneficial role in our day-to-day job and mission at NASA. If you would like to learn more about certifications (property 

and fleet) and educational seminars, please visit https://www.npma.org. 

The next NPMA NES will be held the week of August 13, 2023, in Orlando, 

FL. We look forward to continuing this participation and seeing more of our 

colleagues in future events. One NASA!

Left to right, front row:

Leslie Boards (JSC Mail Mgr.), Matthew Kesler (LaRC PA), Jose Valenzuela (HQ/JPL PA), 

Irene Garcia (JSC/WSTF PA), Ann Cuyler (LMD Contract Property PM), Leigh Ann Carroll 

(LaRC Equipment Manager), Frank Johnson (LaRC Chief of Logistics), Peter Llanes (AFRC IPO), 

Lisa Williams (LMD Lifecyle PM), and Sandra Ames (KSC SEMO)

Left to right, back row:

Bushra Ebneof (LaRC IPO), Willie Gainey (KSC IPO), Ricardo Montenegro (JSC IPO), Travis 

Cooley (JSC PA), Darrell Friddle (JSC PA), Eric Copper (LaRC Supply Officer), Sharrief Wilson 

(LMD Disposal PM), Jermaine Asbury (HQ IPO), Robert Commerce (KSC PDO), Spencer Davis 

(KSC Alt TO), and Robert Sherouse (LMD Aircraft Logistics PM)
6 LOGISTICS MANAGEMENT NEWSLETTER

EQUIPMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Miguel A. Rodriguez

Article of Interest

Reprinted with permission from The Property Professional Magazine. Article is a reprint from NPMA The Property Professional, volume 29, issue 3, June 

2017. NPMA is the largest association for asset property management professionals who are responsible for the effective and efficient management of 

equipment, materials, and other movable and durable assets for their organization. Established in 1970, NPMA has members throughout the United States, 

in Canada, and overseas. NPMA serves as a center of excellence, education, and evolution for the profession. Recognized as world-class professionals, 

members benefit from the finest products, programs, and services that promote professional development. Learn more at http://www.npma.org.

TOMORROW’S FUTURE IS HERE TODAY

THE INFLUENCE DRONES HAVE ON LOGISTICS AND ASSET MANAGEMENT

By Jonathan Kime, CPPS, NOVA Chapter

“Daddy, is it a bird, or a plane?” My 

five-year-old son asked as we quickly 

ducked and looked back up at the sky. 

“Actually, neither” I said, “It’s called 

a drone.” 

“What’s a drone?” he asked.

“It’s kind of like an airplane that someone can fly, but it doesn’t have any 

people on board” I replied. 

“Oh, like a metal kite” he declared. 

“Exactly, son, exactly.”

Drones aren’t exactly “metal kites” 

like my son suggests, but they are 

becoming increasingly popular and can 

easily be purchased online or at local 

electronic stores. Given the strides that 

drone technology has made in the last 

several years it is inevitable that drones 

will make their way into the logistics 

world in the near future. It’s our job as 

asset management professionals to 

understand how this technology could 

potentially impact us and our customers.

Most people consider drones, a 

remote-controlled pilotless aircraft, to 

be “modern technology” and a rather 

new invention, but the original drone 

concept dates back to over a century 

ago and has roots in American military 

history. The drone, also known as an 

unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), was 

an idea first thought of by the United 

States Army toward the end of World 

War I. The Army developed a remotely 

controlled unmanned aircraft weapon 

they formally named the Kettering Bug 

but informally was known as the “aerial 

torpedo.” Although the aircraft wasn’t 

actually used as a military weapon 

at that time, it served as the original 

prototype for the modern drone. In fact, 

the droning sound of the weapon’s 

engines is where the aircraft actually 

got its popular nickname. From WWI 

through the Cold War, the U.S. military 

continued to research and advance the 

pilotless weapons. In the eighties, the 

military began using drones as aerial 

targets to train soldiers. The military 

also began using unarmed and armed 

drones positioned worldwide to assist 

with surveillance, reconnaissance and 

executing mission objectives. Drones 

became a more cost effective and safe 

option—in lieu of the piloted aircraft—

because of the minimal materials 

required to produce and launch. Since 

drones are remotely controlled via 

software and hardware integration and 

don’t require a human to fly, they also 

put fewer troops in harm’s way.

While the primary role of drones in 

American history is firmly rooted in 

military operations, in the last decade 

drone technology has significantly 

evolved. Other industries are now 

looking closely at how drones could 

assist in streamlining their business 

operations and accentuate their service 

offerings. Drone technology, innovation 

and flexibility coupled with increased 

challenges in the growing logistics 

community have positioned drone 

usage as a key component of a more 

efficient future logistics operation.

Commercial companies have been 

working feverishly to incorporate drone 

technology into their logistics strategy, and online powerhouse retailer 

Amazon is leading the pack. In 2013 

Amazon announced Prime Air—its new 

delivery system—based exclusively 

around drone usage. Deliveries were 

made from one storage warehouse 

to another, effectively shortening the 

overall transit time and delivering to the 

purchaser faster. In 2015 Amazon took it 

a step further and was awarded a FAA 
➤Article of Interest continued

LOGISTICS MANAGEMENT NEWSLETTER 7

exemption that allowed their drones to 

fly over private property in an attempt 

to implement Prime Air’s 30-minute 

delivery service. These activities led 

to Amazon’s first successful public 

drone delivery in late March 2017. The 

self-governing Prime Air drone successfully delivered sunscreen to conference 

attendees. This public demonstration 

illustrates the reality of drone integration 

into our “everyday” lives. Amazon has 

also added a patent for a method to 

guide packages released from drones 

safely to the ground that would require 

less delivery time and decrease the 

probability of collisions.

Given these advancements in drone 

technology, the ease with which a 

drone can be purchased and the overall 

increased presence of drones in our 

everyday lives, what are the implications 

of drones in the logistics world?

• Delivery and Receipt—Drones

could introduce a much more automated response to shipping, delivery

and receiving, reducing the element

of human error. Using a drone for “last

mile delivery” to deliver a package to a

home or a warehouse can significantly

reduce the overall delivery time and cost

required to transport an item from a

stock warehouse to its final destination.

• Inventory Management and

Restock—Drones armed with appropriate RFID equipment could allow them

to search large storage warehouses for

inventories or retrieval of specific items.

They can reach the highest areas without assistance and can fly at speeds

upwards of 50 mph. Use of drone

technology could save significant time

when performing inventory management, inventory location or inventory 

re-stock tasks.

• Cost Savings—It is possible drones

can cut costs as drone usage requires

less humans to physically perform

logistics tasks—most drone tasks

are controlled remotely via software.

Delivery costs could also be cut as

multiple modes of transportation

might not be required to transport

an item from stock to its final delivery

location. Material and maintenance

costs associated to drones have the

potential to be less than maintenance

associated with traditional modes

of transportation.

• Environmental Considerations—

Compared to the traditional land, air and

sea delivery methods drones are a more

environmentally friendly option and have

the ability to be emissions free.

As with any new technology, there are 

challenges with drone technology that 

must be addressed before drones can 

become a commonly accepted and 

approved form of transport. Federal 

aviation laws are still forming and 

must be vetted and approved. Laws 

to govern personal and public use 

of drones haven’t been needed until 

recently, as drones were mainly used 

only in the military. These laws are 

needed to govern drone activity and 

prevent collisions between drones and 

other air traffic like passenger jets and 

non-commercial airplanes. Another 

challenge is the limited amount of 

cargo drones can carry and safety 

of objects in transport. Drones have 

not yet been able to carry anything 

heavier than 10 pounds. The safety of 

an object while in transport and when 

delivered, even if as light as a pound, 

is also a concern. Even a light object, 

if accidentally dropped while carried 

hundreds of feet in the air, could cause 

significant damage. Privacy concerns 

also arise with drone usage. This has 

led to drone prevention areas that 

purposely cause interference with the 

drone and its originator.

Finally, security is an ongoing concern. 

Since drones are controlled remotely 

there is always a possibility for drones 

to be taken over by an adversary.

As drones become more readily available various industries—from law 

enforcement to logistics to entertainment—will be thinking of creative ways 

of using drone technology to increase 

productivity, lower costs and improve 

operational efficiencies. Because, as for 

the use of drones, the sky’s the limit.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Jonathan Kime, CPPS, is a Business Analyst 

with Sunflower Systems. He has over 3 years 

of property and asset management experience primarily focusing on consultant, account 

management and implementation services. 

Jonathan resides in the Northern Virginia area 

and is a member of NOVA Chapter.
8 LOGISTICS MANAGEMENT NEWSLETTER

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

Miguel A. Rodriguez

Property Survey Reports

Q1. The End User (EU) was the last person who had physical possession of the equipment. It was 

not the official EU named on the Equipment Master Record (EMR). She initiated and submitted the 

form as the EU and signed as the Property Custodian (PC). When the SEMO received the NF-598 for 

review, the SEMO noticed that although she is a PC, she is not the official PC for the equipment item. 

The SEMO rejected the NF-598, which was sent back to her queue as the PC. 

She then received the notification from LiveCycle for the requested updates and attempted to edit 

the form but was not able to make any updates from Section 1 (Basic Data).

She then rejected the form back to the EU hoping that would delete the PC signature and allow her 

to update the form as the EU. 

She then received a notification from LiveCycle for the requested updates as EU but it still will 

not allow her to make any edits/updates to the form. She attempted to delete her signature and was 

not able to do so. It appears that there is no mechanism to delete the EU signature to make edits 

to Section 1 (Basic Data and/or correct PC information) if needed. 

Updating information after a rejection has been an issue for quite a while. Unfortunately, our customers become so frustrated with the process that they either give up all together and let the PSR 

sit forever, or they end up submitting a duplicate form. 

Most of the time I’m only made aware of the issues when following up on the status of an NF-598. 

Even then, it is extremely difficult to get anyone to respond to my e-mail inquiries. Some of the feedback I get from our customers is that it shouldn’t be so difficult to process the form. 

A1. The form must be rejected to the individual who submitted the form. They should be able to update the 

PC and Section 1 and resubmit the form. If they can’t make any changes, they should submit a ticket.

Q2. Our Center OSI Integrator (COI)—a Senior Executive Service (SES) Directorate head—does not 

agree that the concurrence/non-concurrence of the 598 should be at the SES Directorate level.

A2. The concurrence/non-concurrence with the Survey Officer (SO)/Survey Review Board (SRB) findings and 

recommendations for implementation is not at the SES Directorate level. This is the responsibility of the employee’s organization head (e.g., Division Director/Chief, Branch Chief, etc.). If the head of the organization does not 

concur with SRB’s findings and recommendations, he/she can appeal to a higher authority/NASA official for 

adjudication (e.g., to implement financial liability or to implement any other adverse action against an employee). 

NPR 4200.1 does not require the appeals official to be an SES employee. The NPR places adjudication authority 

on the higher management level/NASA official—who could/could not be an SES employee—with oversight over 

organization heads.
LOGISTICS MANAGEMENT NEWSLETTER 9

➤ Questions and Answers continued

Q3. How do we deal with mapped organizations as they relate to routing the form to Directorate 

heads that may be assigned at different Centers?

A3. There are a couple of options:

a. The organization head appealing the SRB findings and recommendations may attach a copy

of the completed survey to an e-mail and start the process with the appeals official.

b. The appeals official may delegate his/her authority to a NASA official on Center. The systematic routing

of an NF-598 can be modified to route the document to delegated authorities.

Q4. If there is a non-concurrence of the findings, how does the Center Operations Director adjudicate 

the case (beyond the written memo as stated in the NPR) and remove the action from his/her queue? 

A4. The appeals official must hit “complete” after recording his/her adjudication on the NF-598. This action 

will remove the action from the queue and return the NF-598 to the organization head, the Survey Officer, and 

the SEMO.

Q5. I am trying to access the NF-598 through the NASA Electronic Forms System (NEF) site, and the 

site requires entering the credentials (pictured side). Is there a different way to access the NF-598 

without providing my credentials?

A5. There are several possible causes that we are 

aware of.

a. Computers that are not owned by NASA are

commonly not configured correctly, and you may

need to submit a NAMS request to work around

the issue.

b. Name changes can sometimes cause issues,

and these have to be debugged on a case-by- 

 case basis.

c. If you have a Mac computer, Macs sometimes

aren’t configured correctly. We provide instructions

on how to fix them (see next page).
10 LOGISTICS MANAGEMENT NEWSLETTER

➤ Questions and Answers continued

Here are the best tips for when users are having issues when logging 

into NEF with a Mac:

a. First try clearing the cache; see instructions below:

1. The fastest way to clear your cache is to use the shortcut

[CMD] + [ALT] + [E].

2. You can also enable a developer menu in Safari

Select the Safari menu drop-down the item “Preferences....” 

Click on the tab “Advanced.”

Check the option “Show Develop menu in menu bar” at the 

bottom. Now you should see a new menu item in the main 

menu named “Develop”. 

Click on the menu item “Develop”; you can select “Empty 

Caches” from the submenu items.

b. If clearing the cache does not work, ensure that Enterprise

Connect is up and running. If it is up and running, doublecheck its configuration. Click the following link for additional

information.

https://esd.nasa.gov/esdportal?id=kb_article&sys_id=0211b6ac1b968510ac86edfde54bcb8a

Property Pass and Remote Work

Q6. How are we to use NF-892s to document civil servants with a valid Telework Agreement beyond 

180 days? The Block 6 drop-down doesn’t provide that option, which will be confusing to civil servant 

End Users looking to complete a pass that’s in line with their Routine Telework Agreement (which is 

usually valid for up to one year). 

A6. The same way we used it before the pandemic...that is, a property pass renewal with SEMO’s approval. 

Routine telework implies that the employee will be present at his/her NASA office one or more days a pay period. 

Renewal of an NF-892 should not be challenging—in fact, this is an opportunity for inventory validation 

(when necessary).
LOGISTICS MANAGEMENT NEWSLETTER 11

➤ Questions and Answers continued

Q7. Will contractors be allowed to work remotely?

A7. Good question—the answer is probably beyond the equipment management scope. I suggest contacting 

the corresponding CO for an answer.

Q8. If contractors are allowed to work remotely and the contractor’s duty location is no longer 

a NASA Facility, are we to convert NASA-owned equipment into GFP for the contract at that point?

A8. Good question. Center Equipment Management (EM) officials must support (from an inventory management 

perspective) contract provisions; that is, if the corresponding CO indicates (through contract provision) that the 

contractors’ assigned equipment is to be treated as Government Furnished Property (GFP), then EM personnel 

should process the GFP transaction(s) in SAP.

Q9. Is NPR 4200.1H going to be updated to clarify the 

inventory process for property pass equipment on a 

remote work agreement?

A9. Yes.

Q10. How are we to treat remote-work contractor employees 

requesting an NF-892? This is just specific to contractor 

employees with a Remote Work Agreement (not telework 

agreement).

A10. This question is similar or related to question 8. A remote-work request from a contractor shall be evaluated 

by the corresponding CO, and the CO may concur with the request if allowed by the FAR or any other regulation/

law governing contracts. Equipment Management personnel must support the contractor in accordance with 

contract provision(s).

Q11. If contractors are allowed to work remotely, shall we consider their duty location no longer 

a NASA Facility and therefore they are not considered onsite contractors? 

A11. Probably. It is the CO’s call and subject to the FAR and contract provisions.

Q12. If Q11 is true, and the contractor’s duty location is no longer considered a NASA Facility, 

should Center Equipment Management be processing a GFP action (in SAP) for any instance 

of a remote-work contractor submitting an NF-892 (regardless of the property pass period)?

A12. The contract must include the GFP clause for equipment to be GFP to a contractor. For this purpose, 

the contractor must have an inventory management system (per contract provision) for the management, 

tracking, and control of GFP items. It is the CO’s decision to include the GFP clause in the contract. There 

is no need for an NF-892 if the property is GFP to the contractor. The Equipment Master Records (EMR) 

for controlled equipment is made inactive in SAP once the item is GFP to a contractor.
CONTACT US

Your involvement, understanding, and feedback are essential to making the Logistics 

Management Program a success. Please send us your questions or stories to share by 

calling or e-mailing:

Olivette M. Hooks

Director, Logistics 

Management Division

Office: 202-358-0721

olivette.hooks@nasa.gov

https://www.nasa.gov/offices/LMD

Chris Ainsworth

Logistics Management Institute 

(LMI) Program Support

Office: 202-358-4612

christopher.e.ainsworth@nasa.gov

Vincent E. Cappello

Deputy Director, Logistics 

Management Division

Office: 202-309-8304

vincent.e.cappello@nasa.gov

https://www.nasa.gov/offices/LMD/

programs/support_and_supply_chain

Wayne A. Cragwell

Logistics Management Institute 

(LMI) Program Support

Office: 202-358-4612

wayne.a.cragwell@nasa.gov

Timothy A. Currie

Transportation 

Management Program

Office: 202-358-1219

timothy.a.currie@nasa.gov

https://www.nasa.gov/offices/LMD/

programs/transportation_management

Ann Cuyler

Contract Property 

Management Program

Office: 202-358-1524

ann.cuyler@nasa.gov 

https://www.nasa.gov/offices/LMD/

programs/contract_property_management

Peral R. Hill

Supply and Materials 

Management Program

Office: 202-358-0491

peral.r.hill@nasa.gov

https://www.nasa.gov/offices/LMD/

programs/supply_management

Marjorie C. Jackson

Logistics Compensating Controls 

Reviews (CCR) Program

Office: 202-358-2464

marjorie.c.jackson@nasa.gov

Miguel A. Rodriguez

NASA Equipment and Mail 

Management Programs

Office: 202-358-1065

miguel.a.rodriguez-1@nasa.gov

https://www.nasa.gov/offices/LMD/

programs/equipment_management

Robert S. Sherouse

Artifact Identification and 

Disposition Program

Aviation Logistics Asset 

Management and Special Projects

Office: 202-358-0746

robert.sherouse@nasa.gov

Lisa M. Williams

Lifecycle Logistics and 

Supply Chain Program

Office: 321-867-7777

lisa.m.williams@nasa.gov

Sharrief Wilson

Property Disposal 

Management Program

Office: 202-358-0875

sharrief.wilson@nasa.gov

https://www.nasa.gov/offices/LMD/

programs/property_disposal_management

Vacant

Administrative Assistant National Aeronautics and Space Administration

The Logistics Management Division

NASA Headquarters

300 E Street SW

Washington, DC 20546

www.nasa.gov