1. Preparing for Facilities
Readiness
Stephen Rider, P.E.
Facilities Program Engineer

2. NASA Mission:
To pioneer the future in space exploration, scientific
discovery, and aeronautics research.
NASA’s Strategic Goals
1. Fly the Shuttle as safely as possible until its retirement, no later than
2010.
2. Complete the International Space Station in a manner consistent with
NASA’s International Partner commitments and the needs of human
exploration.
3. Develop a balanced overall program of science, exploration, and
aeronautics consistent with the redirection of the human spaceflight
program to focus on exploration.
4. Bring a new Crew Exploration Vehicle into service as soon as possible
after Shuttle retirement.
5. Encourage the pursuit of appropriate partnerships with the emerging
commercial space sector.
6. Establish a lunar return program having the maximum possible utility for
later missions to Mars and other destinations. 2

3. Presentation Objectives
• NASA Facilities Management
– Organization
– Goals
– Purpose
– Strategy
– Best Practices
• Rules and Requirements
– NASA Space Act
– Executive Orders
– Agency Policies and Processes
– Funds Management
• Recommendations
3

4. Organization Chart
Office of the
Administrator
Mission Support
Office of Institutions and
Management
Office of Infrastructure and
Administration
Facilities Engineering and Real
Property Division
4

5. Facilities Engineering and 5/31//2007
Real Property Division
Director
James W. Wright
Administrative Specialist
Mary Stites
Resources Team
•CoF Funds Management
•Budget Formulation
Planning & Real Facilities Engineering,
Estate Branch Maintenance and
Operations Branch
• Master Planning
• Real Property
• Construction of Facilities
Management
program management
5

6. Real Property Management Plan Goals
1. Identify and address real property
requirements as an integral part of Agency,
Mission Directorate, program, and project
planning.
2. Construct and operate new real property
to meet mission requirements only when
existing capabilities cannot be
effectively used or modified.
3. Continually evaluate its real property assets
to ensure alignment with the NASA Mission.
4. Leverage its real property to its maximum
potential.
5. Sustain, revitalize, and modernize its real
property required by the NASA Mission.
6

7. Real Property
• Definition: land, buildings, structures,
utilities systems, and improvements and
appurtenances thereto, permanently
annexed to land
– Includes collateral equipment
• Building-type equipment, built-in equipment,
and large, substantially affixed equipment
normally acquired and installed as a part of a
facility project
7

8. CoF Program Purpose
• Acquire, repair, modify, and/or construct
real property to support and accomplish
NASA’s missions
• Comply with Public Laws
– National Aeronautics and Space Act
of 1958
– Appropriation Act
– Authorization Act
– Executive Orders
8

9. Facilities Strategy
• Facilities supporting the mission:
– Invest in facility maintenance, repair,
replacement
– Invest in sustainable operations, design and
construction techniques when economically
justified
• And the others:
– Eliminate
• Demolition Program
• Other real property solutions (transfer, excess)
9

10. Facility Life Cycle
Facility Life-Cycle Performance Curve
Recapitalization Investments: Addresses obsolescence,
modernization, revitalization by replacement.
New Facility
Performance (or Condition)
Average Performance Curve for an inventory
with full sustainment
Repair necessary to bring facility
to an acceptable condition.
Adequate
Inadequate
More rapid deterioration due to Replace facility.
inadequate sustainment, and
subsequent loss of service life.
67 Years: Target service life of a facility with full sustainment
Time (or Service Life)
10

11. Facilities Benchmarking
• Construction Industry Institute
– Over 100 Organizations
• Industry
• Government
• Academia
• Federal Facilities Council
– 25 Federal Agencies
• GSA
• Department of State
• Department of Defense (DoD)
11

12. CoF Best Practices
• Front End Planning
• Partnering
• Team Building
• Constructability
• Value Management
• Sustainability
– Sustainable Design
– Design for Maintainability
– Total Building Commissioning
– Design for Safety and Security
• Construction Safety
– Making Zero Incidents a Reality

13. National Aeronautics And Space Act
• Authorization*
– TITLE II, Section 203, (c), (3)
• Authorizes construction, improvements, for laboratories,
research & testing sites & facilities as deemed necessary
• IMPACT: NASA can acquire, construct and
repair real property without going through
GSA (or any other Agency).
* Authorization - is a legislative act authorizing money to be spent
for government programs that specifies a maximum spending
level without provision for actual funds.
13

14. National Aeronautics And Space Act
• Appropriations
– Title III, Section 310, (a)
• nothing in this Act shall authorize the
appropriation of any amount for (1) the
acquisition or condemnation of any real
property, or (2) any other item of a capital
nature (such as plant or facility acquisition,
construction, or expansion) which exceeds
$250,000.
– Impact: All of our CoF appropriations come
to us through public laws (i.e. President’s
Budget and Congress)
14

15. Additional Real Property Requirements
• Executive Order 13327, Federal Real
Property Asset Management
– Real Property Asset Management Plan
• Executive Order 13423, Strengthening
Federal Environmental, Energy, and
Transportation Management
– Sets new energy efficiency standards
• Center Master Plans
15

16. Policies & Procedures
• NASA Policy Directive (NPD) 7330.1G
Approval Authorities for Facility Projects
• NPD 8820.2C, Design and Construction of
Facilities
• *NASA Procedural Requirements (NPR)
8820.2F, Facility Project Requirements
*Revision in process for approval and signature at
the time of this slide presentation submittal. NPR
8820.2E may still be in effect.
16

17. CoF and NPR 7120.5 Series
• NPR 7120.X Series refers to NPR
8820.2
– For CoF processes and facility project
requirements
• NPR 8820.2 refers to NPR 7120.5D
• When a facility project is also a project per
NPR 7120.5D, both policies apply
– No duplication of effort is required, but elements from
both documents must be met
17

18. SYSTEMS ENGINEERING
NPR 7123.1
• Application of this NPR to Construction
of Facilities (CoF)
– Scaled to level of systems engineering for
function of structure
– Documented in systems engineering
management plan (SEMP) (as required)
– Refers to NPR 8820.2 for CoF engineering
requirements
• NPR 8820.2 refers to NPR 7123.1
18

19. CoF Project Types
• Institutional (Prioritized Agencywide):
– Common use facilities, such as primary
utility distribution systems, general
administrative buildings, roads, parking
lots, and quality of life facilities
• Program Direct (Prioritized within each
Program):
– Facilities required to satisfy Program
specific requirements/capabilities (e.g. test
facilities, labs, R&D)
19

20. CoF Process
Identify
Required Capability
Functional These are Not Typically
Requirements Statement CoF Funded
Facility
Concept Study
Environmental
Evaluation
Perform Studies
Requirements Document 20

21. CoF Process
Preliminary Typically
Engineering Report CoF Funded
Engineering Studies
Design
Construction
Activation
21

22. CoF Typical Timeline
Identify
Required Capability
Functional Six months to a year
Requirements Statement
Facility
Concept Study
Environmental
Evaluation
Perform Studies
Requirements Document 22

23. CoF Typical Timeline
Preliminary Three to five years
Engineering Report
Engineering Studies
Design
Construction
Activation
23

24. CoF Funding Categories
• Local Approval (Center budgeted)
– Any project costing less than $500,000
– Not included within the Agency CoF Program
• Minor Revitalization and Repair
– $500,000 and less than $5,000,000
• Discrete
– $5,000,000 and up
• Demolition
– No funding limits
– Not exclusively CoF Program funded
• Facilities Planning and Design
24

25. CoF Funding Rules Outside of the
Normal Budget Process
• Upward variations into the CoF Program
(Institutional Investment)
– Limited to 10% of the appropriated
programs affected or $750,000 whichever
is less
• Operating Plan Changes
– Any project change in excess of the
upward variation rules
25

26. Recommendations
• New capabilities
– *Notify Facilities Organization (Center or HQ) as
early as possible to get your facility needs into the
budget
• Existing Capabilities
– *Ensure the Center Facilities Organization is
aware of your need for the facility
• Fully define your facility requirements
– Schedule, Cost, and Scope
*Note: Even if you don’t know your complete facility
requirements yet.
26

27. Questions?
27

28. BACKUP
Slides

29. NASA Real Property
• Just the Facts:
– Over 2500 Buildings
– Over 2300 Other
Structures
– Over $23 Billion Current
Replacement Value
– Over40 Million Square
Feet
– Over 360,000 Acres
– Aged, high technology
facilities.
29

30. Facility by Type
(# of facilities)
Roads, Bridges, All Other Office Airfield Pavements
Railroads Harbors and Ports
Recreational (other
than buildings) Power Development
and Distribution
Laboratories Other Institutional
Uses
Nav. & Traffic Aids,
Flood Control
Warehouses/ Stora
Communications
Systems
Utility Systems
Industrial
R&D (not Labs)
Space Exploration
Service
Structures
30

31. Facilities by Type
(replacement value)
All Other
Roads, Bridges, Office
Railroads Airfield Pavements Harbors and Ports
Power Development
and Distribution
Laboratories Storage
Industrial
Service
Space Exploration
Structures
R&D (not Labs)
Communications
From RPI Systems Utility Systems
February 2006
31

32. FY06 Facility Condition Index by Center
(Active Facilities Only)
Based on a parametric model, 5 point scale (1 – Poor, Unable to meet intended
function; 5 – Very Good, fully functional with no significant repairs required).
FCI is calculated annually, based on 100% inspection of all NASA facilities.
4.5
Total Agency FCI: 3.6:
“Fair:” “Occasionally unable to
function as intended.”
4
3.5
FCI
3
2.5
2
JPL
ARC
DFRC
GRC
GSFC
JSC
KSC
LaRC
MSFC
SSC
32

33. Years
G
0
10
20
30
40
50
R
C 60
A
RC
M
AF
La
RC
M
SF
C
W
FF
G
SF
C
JP
L
JS
W C
ST
F
K
Average Facility Age
SC
SS
D C
FR
C
33

34. Total Current Replacement
Value by Center
4.5
4
3.5
3
$ Billions
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
KSC GRC LaRC ARC SSC JSC MSFC JPL GSFC DFRC
34
Note: Includes both Active & Inactive Facilities

35. Acreage by Center
NASA owns 125,276 acres
Controls another 237,901 acres
140,000
Total 363,177 acres
8,000 120,000 Acres Total
Acres Owned
7,000 Acres Total 100,000
6,000 Acres Owned
80,000
5,000
A cres
60,000
4,000
3,000 40,000
2,000 20,000
1,000 0
KSC
SSC
WSTF
0
M AF
W FF
JP L
G SFC
JS C
M SFC
ARC
DFRC
GRC
L aR C
35

36. Facilities Life Lines
• Construction of Facilities (CoF)
• FERPD budgeted, managed and funded for Institutional
projects
– Discrete - $5 M and over (no year)
– Minor Revitalization and Construction - $500K-$5M (3
year)
– Demolition – $0 and up (no year)
– Facility Planning and Design (FP&D) (3 year)
• Studies, Preliminary Engineering Report (PER), Designs
– Full Cost (2 year)
• Full Time Equivalents (FTE), Travel, Contractor Support
• Center Management and Operations (CM&O)
• Facilities Projects (under $500K)
– Facility Operations and Maintenance
• FERPD provides advocacy and sets Agency policy
36

37. Facilities Engineering and Real Property Division
Facilities Maintenance Assessment
Not corrected for inflation
600 Funded M&R*
National Research Council (2% CRV)
Requirement Reported by Centers**
500 Facilitiy Sustainment Model
400
$M
300
200
100
0
FY96 FY97 FY98 FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06
*M&R defined as the recurring day-to-day work required to preserve facilities (buildings, structures,
grounds, utility systems, and collateral equipment) in such a condition that they may be used for
their designated purpose over an intended service or design life. (non-CoF) 37
** M&R Requirement = Center request for adequate maintenance and stable repair backlog.

38. CoF Funding 2000-2013
(Procurement Only)
450 PROGRAM DIRECT FY06-08:
MSFC Replacement Building;
400 JPL Flight Projects Center;
GSFC Exploration Sciences Bldg;
350
300
Dollars in Millions
250
200
150
100
50
0
00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13
Institutional Center G&A Corporate G&A Program Direct
Hurricane supplemental funding shown for information only 38

39. FY 07 PPBES CoF Prioritization
• Uses a Risk Management Approach (5 by 5
Matrix)
– Project must be mission related
– Probability and Consequences Plotted
– Discerning factors delineate between projects with
same score
• Final prioritization is done by a team made up
of members from each Center, Mission
Directorates, and Mission Support Offices
• Establishes Agency CoF Priorities
• CoF Prioritization Timeline – driven by HQ
Office of the Chief Financial Officer
39

40. CoF Prioritization Results (FY 09)
• Over $174 M was Center Total
initially scored as Very ARC 10,140
High Risk (Probability 5, DFRC 8,800
Consequence 5) GRC 10,200
• After scrubbing the list, GSFC 10,200
we were able to add in JPL 10,100
some High risk (5,4 or JSC 19,950
4,5)
KSC 23,600
• Consensus process LaRC 10,200
(using color coded
MSFC 14,800
cards)
SSC 5,900
• Open process with buy
in from all Total 123,890
40

41. CoF Demolition Program
• Headquarters provides funding
– $10M per year, FY04 through FY07; $15 M for FY08
and beyond
– Saves costs and improves overall condition by
removing unneeded facilities
• From NASA’s FY05 Deferred Maintenance Report: “NASA’s
aggressive demolition program (in FY04-05), 117 facilities,
accounted for a DM reduction of $17 million…$64 million
reduction in FY04…$98 M in FY05”
– Removes safety and environmental hazards
• Demolition also required as part of repair by
replacement
• Centers also fund demolition projects
• Deconstruction techniques are used to offset
costs (e.g. salvaging steel and copper) 41

42. Institutional CoF Issues
• Significantly under-funded
– Recent data call identified $484 M in
requirements for FY 2009 consideration through
prioritization
– $174 M was Very High risk to mission
– $97 M was High risk to mission
– $124 M available for FY 2009 prioritization
• Impact:
– Risk to infrastructure will increase (recent
incidents of fires at JSC and GRC), increasing
risk to mission
– Reactive mode for natural/manmade disasters
– System failures redirect scarce funds (GRC
electrical fire)
42

43. Coming CoF Tools
• Building Information Modeling
– Software used to model a facility
• Facilities Project Management
Database
– GRC developed
– Focus on project execution phases
• Design, Construction
– May soon be “required” method for
receiving CoF funds
43

44. Other Real Property Initiatives
• Shared Capabilities Assets Program
• Sustainable design and construction
• Healthy Buildings (Indoor Air Quality –
IAQ)
• Construction Safety
• Reliability Centered Maintenance
• Full Cost Management and use of
Working Capital Fund
• Integrated Asset Management
44