sign in sign up
<<
Home , Glenn Research Center, Kennedy Space Center, Mercury Control Center, Mission control center, NASA Headquarters, Wallops Flight Facility

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Section 3 Report Executive Order 13287

2012 – 2014

Space Shuttle Atlantis Exhibit Space Center Visitor Complex

Abbreviations for NASA Centers ARC - AFRC - Armstrong Flight Research Center GDSCC – Goldstone Deep Space Communication Complex GRC – GSFC – Goddard Space Flight Center JPL – Jet Propulsion Laboratory KSC – LaRC – MAF – Michoud Assembly Facility MSFC – Marshall Space Flight Center PBS- Plum Brook Station SSFL – Santa Susana Field Laboratory SSC- WFF – WSTF- White Sands Test Facility

Introduction

This report is submitted to the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) in compliance with Executive Order (EO) 13287, Preserve America. Section 3 of EO 13287 requires NASA to submit a triennial report that details the Agency’s progress in identifying, protecting, and using historic properties during the 2012 to 2014 timeframe. This Submitted by : submission is NASA’s fifth report, constituting the third triennial report, and discusses the NASA Headquarters progress made by NASA towards each of the 300 E Street SW EO goals and objectives. Washington DC 20546-0001 During the 2012 to 2014 reporting period, 202.358.0000 NASA continued to demonstrate significant progress in identifying, evaluating, protecting, and using historic properties. With respect to

identifying and evaluating historic properties, several of the NASA Centers and field installation facilities (collectively referred to as Centers in this report) have successfully completed gate-to-gate surveys as their facilities approach 45-50 years of age and other Centers are in the planning stages for additional survey work, including the evaluation of additional historic districts. This establishes a major momentum shift from NASA’s primary historical focus of evaluating properties based solely on exceptional merit regardless of age, rather than actually reaching the 45-50 year mark. This shift in overall priorities, due to the continued aging of many relatively young facilities and installations, has resulted in an Lunar Landing Research Facility overall expansion of the NASA historic A National Historic Landmark at LaRC being modified and re-used property inventory, including newly for testing of the Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV). identified historic districts.

EO13287 Section 3 Triennial Report (2014) Page 3

NASA has also continued emphasizing part of the JSC visitor center experience effective protection strategies for historic (Space Center ) as well as one of the properties. For example, as required by Shuttle Transport Carriers ( 747 NASA Procedural Requirement (NPR) 8510.1, modified to carry a shuttle orbiter on its titled NASA Cultural Resources Management , back).. NASA has modified and re-used the Centers have worked diligently to historic properties for internal NASA projects establish individually tailored Integrated and programs, with one larger-scale example Cultural Resource Management Plans being the renovation and re-use of the SSC B- (ICRMPs) that provide extensive procedural 2 Test Stand for System (SLS) and operational guidelines to protect historic testing. Major changes in the overall NASA properties. These ICRMPs are providing large mission have also provided a new multi-disciplinary organizations comprised of within the Agency to transition facilities management, maintenance, operations, real property, and environmental compliance groups with the guidelines and information that is necessary to successfully comply with regulatory requirements and effectively manage and protect historic properties. Additionally, many of the NASA Centers have implemented, or further expanded, the use of Programmatic Agreements to clearly and concisely define, describe, and streamline the processes and procedures needed to manage a large inventory of historic properties.

NASA also continues a strong legacy of proactively and successfully managing the challenge of historic property re-use through various mechanisms including lease agreements, museum exhibitions, and other site-specific examples. Some prominent examples of re-purpose and re-use include the transition of the retired orbiters to several very successful nation- wide museum and visitor center displays. This protects these valuable properties and The JSC Shuttle Avionics and Integration Laboratory (SAIL) enhances NASA’s heritage tourism activities Scheduled for demolition but preserved for heritage tourism by providing extensive public viewing and activities. interpretation. This was also the case with historic properties to the commercial the JSC Shuttle Avionics and Integration sector, with the shining star of Laboratory (SAIL) that was saved from these activities being the 20-year SpaceX scheduled demolition and transitioned to be lease of the KSC 39A .

EO13287 Section 3 Triennial Report (2014) Page 4

(http://www.space.com/23963-spacex- • Share negotiation initiatives and leases-historic--launch-pad.html , and mitigation measures in CRM and support http://www.nasa.gov/press/2013/december Mission Directorates and Center Directors /nasa-selects--to-begin-negotiations- in implementing NASA CRM policies; for-use-of-historic-launch-pad/ ) • Develop Agency-wide consensus positions on CRM policies and resource requirements and preservation priorities;

• Sponsor and/or conduct studies and assessments of CRM needs affecting NASA programs and activities;

• Prepare analyses and recommendations, including independent reviews; and

• Present work products and recommendations to NASA Headquarters for concurrence, approval, and/or presentation. The SAIL cockpit simulator at JSC Preserved for a heritage tourism exhibit. These dedicated HPOs are a valuable resource to help define the goals of the Finally, the Cultural Resource Management historic property management programs, (CRM) Panel members, comprised of describe roles and responsibilities, dedicated Historic Preservation Officers communicate the requirements to site-wide (HPOs) at each NASA Center, operating under personnel, effectively manage historic the leadership of the Federal Preservation properties, and ensure compliance with Officer (FPO), continue to provide a very regulatory requirements. strong “boots on the ground” presence at these nation-wide facilities. This team of HPOs is charged with many cultural resource management responsibilities, including: Executive Summary

• Provide a forum for the development, review, and approval of CRM policies; During this 3-year reporting period, extensive agency-wide effort was put forth to identify, • Support development of an agency CRM evaluate, protect, and use historic properties. database, strategies, priorities, and For example, there was a significant guidance documents for Agency and transition from evaluating relatively young Center use; facilities under Criterion G, the exceptional significance category, to expanding the • Recommend CRM initiatives deemed property evaluations based on the 50-year beneficial and value added to the NASA age category. For many of the NASA Centers, mission; this meant performing 45-50 year gate-to-

EO13287 Section 3 Triennial Report (2014) Page 5 gate surveys, and that effort resulted in the transport, nation-wide “fly-by” events, design identification of additional historic properties and construction of exhibit areas, completion and associated historic districts. New 45-50 of interpretive materials to enhance the year surveys resulting in additional historic various exhibits, and display at each orbiter’s properties and districts were performed at final destinations. KSC, JSC, WSTF, and AFRC. Numerous (http://www.nasa.gov/agency/crm/shuttle/ individually eligible property and structure #.UoZla_msi-0) evaluations, and well as archeological surveys, were also performed at the various NASA also worked diligently to re-purpose Centers, which further increased the overall and re-use historic properties, where historic property inventory. appropriate, and increase opportunities for leasing that will manage properties and allow NASA completed the final evaluation and for continued maintenance costs to be disposition of the Space Shuttle orbiters due provided by outside interests. The prime to Agency-wide transition and retirement example of this effort was the extended use efforts during this reporting period. These lease of the KSC Launch Pad 39A to SpaceX extensive efforts included completion of the for commercial space operations. In addition recordation and consultation process, to the KSC lease, ARC continues to be a strong preparation and transportation of the proponent of leasing opportunities with vehicles, public viewing events during many different partners within the

Historic Hangar 1 Illuminated for the Breakthrough Prize in Life Sciences and Physics Award Ceremony at the Shenandoah Plaza Historic District within the Ames Research Center (ARC).

EO13287 Section 3 Triennial Report (2014) Page 6 contributing properties of the Shenandoah centers each year, more than 1 to 1.5 million Plaza Historical District, including a Request people are participating in various NASA for Proposals to lease Hangar One and the heritage tourism opportunities each year. Moffett Federal Airfield under as Section 111 lease. NASA has maintained, and even expanded, (http://www.nasa.gov/press/2014/february our extensive public outreach and heritage /gsa-nasa-competitively-select-planetary- tourism efforts. Where practical, NASA has ventures-llc-to-begin-lease-negotiations/ ) routinely and enthusiastically provided Besides leasing, NASA has internally access for the public to view significant places modified, renovated, re-used, and re- in the nation’s space program’s history. In purposed many different historic properties addition to standard tours provided through including the SSC B-2 test stand, the JSC SAIL a visitor center, many of the smaller Centers property, the JSC Space Environment that limit public access for safety and security Laboratory (SESL), the Shuttle reasons have also initiated tours on certain Carrier Aircraft (SCA), and the LaRC gantry standard schedules. For example, at GRC, system that is part of the new Hydro Impact weekend tours of the historic district area are Basis system. now routine, and ARC provides tours for many different scientific groups and Nationwide, NASA also continued a long organizations on an as-requested basis. tradition of public involvement, outreach, and Additionally, during this reporting period, heritage tourism during this reporting period. heritage tourism activities were further There were numerous events and realized and expanded with the new exhibits celebrations including a 45 th anniversary of of the orbiters that “The Eagle Has Landed” lunar mission, the have been completed in California, , 50 th anniversary of Americans in orbit, the Washington D.C., and New York. 50 th anniversary celebration of KSC, the 95 th anniversary and associated open house at NASA also continued our strong legacy of LaRC, and the 25 th anniversary of the Full- visitor center access. The Kennedy Space Scale Aerodynamics Complex at ARC. These Center Visitors’ Center continues to draw events provided an opportunity for numerous more than 1.5 million annual visitors with the people to participate in the overall history of majority taking tours that enter the Center NASA activities with very Center-specific and drive by many of KSC’s most historic sites events. When these types of events are including Launch Pad 39A, the Vehicle coupled with other public involvement events Assembly Building, and the Mobile Launch such as orbiter fly-outs and parades, public Platforms. Visitors are provided an events at ARC held within the Shenandoah experience that allows them to see the actual Plaza National Historic District near Hangar 1, facilities, which are historic and yet still family days and open houses at various continue to contribute to making history. Centers, and routine tours for various groups, With the addition of the the total population of people attending these exhibit, public interest in KSC has increased events, per calendar year, can easily exceed and their visitor center has seen an increase 100,000. Including the total population of in twenty percent overall visitors. people attending the operational visitor

EO13287 Section 3 Triennial Report (2014) Page 7

Heritage tourism at the continues to be managed by the nonprofit Space Center Houston, providing museum and facility tour opportunities. Highlights of the Johnson Space Center tour are the historic from the era and other working historic properties housing significant Space Shuttle artifacts and functioning simulators.

Finally, the Goddard Space Flight Center

(GSFC), Wallops Flight Facility (WFF) Control Tower at the (WSSH) Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) and Transferred to the U.S. Army White Sands Missile Range Stennis Space Center (SSC) also have visitor’s for public viewing and interpretation. centers and the majority of other Centers and of course, the Space Shuttle orbiters have displays or museums with exhibits themselves. New publications have also been demonstrating much of the history of each completed during this reporting period. One location and the accomplishments they have example of this effort is the LaRC Historic made. For smaller facilities that do not have District book that was distributed to 23 visitor centers, efforts are still underway to public libraries, 18 museums, local historical provide creative solutions to expand heritage societies, numerous middle schools and high tourism opportunities. For example, as a schools, and several colleges and universities. tenant on U.S. Army property, WSTF recently To date, more than 1,200 copies of this book updated and expanded the “NASA Room” at have been distributed. the U.S. Army White Sands Missile Range (WSMR) museum and donated the White These comprehensive efforts to manage, Sands Space Harbor (WSSH) Control Tower to protect, and use historic properties in an their missile park for public viewing and efficient and compliant manner, coupled with interpretation. a long tradition of public involvement, outreach, and heritage tourism, provide NASA For students, educators, and other people with a comprehensive set of cultural resource who can’t visit our Centers, NASA has management tools that can evolve as the continued a long tradition of providing overall NASA mission continues to develop numerous websites and publications that and affect NASA’s nation-wide facilities and include virtual tours, histories, and associated operations. photographs of our historic properties. NASA has continued to actively use websites for educational purposes and for sharing information. For example, several major Section 1: Identification recordation efforts have been published on publicly accessible websites including the Question 1 evaluation of the solid Building upon previous Section 3 retrieval ships, the reports, please explain how many (SCA), the White Sands Space Harbor (WSSH),

EO13287 Section 3 Triennial Report (2014) Page 8

historic properties have been identified JSC 20 and evaluated by your agency in the past three years? Has your inventory KSC 27 improved? Please explain. MAF 6 The NASA inventory of historic properties has become more comprehensive over the last MSFC 34 three years. Due to the recent focus on gate- to-gate surveys because of facility age, and PBS 3 the focus to identify any historic districts, several of the Centers have completed SSFL 14 identification and evaluation work. For example, JSC completed a gate-to-gate WFF 3 archeological survey and a comprehensive WSTF 4 gate-to-gate 45-50 year historic assets architectural survey. KSC, WSTF, and AFRC Total Eligible Resources 226 also performed 45-50 year gate-to-gate architectural surveys. These gate-to-gate Table 2 provides a list of the built resources surveys have contributed additional historic that are individually listed on the NRHP, by properties to the overall Agency inventory. In Center: some cases, these gate-to-gate surveys have also identified additional historic districts. Table 2 Table 1 provides a list of the individually built Built Resources – Listed by Center resources that are eligible for listing on the Center Quantity National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), by Center, that are within the NASA ARC 24 inventory: GRC 1 Table 1 Built Resources – Eligible by Center KSC 10 Center Quantity Total Listed Resources 35

AFRC 1

ARC 5 As shown in Tables 1-2, during this reporting period the inventory of listed and eligible GDSCC 1 built resources has increased by nearly 10% GRC 70 above the data provided in the 2011 report. Additionally, several newly identified historic GSFC 30 districts have been evaluated during this timeframe, including new districts at KSC, JSC, JPL 8 and WSTF.

EO13287 Section 3 Triennial Report (2014) Page 9

Table 3 provides the eligible and listed WFF 3 resources when combining all of the various historic properties, including the following WSTF 28 four categories:

Total Historic Properties 1. Built resources, listed; 543 (Listed, Eligible, and Districts) 2. Built resources, eligible;

3. Built resources that are part of an eligible historic district; and Table 4 provides the list of National Historic 4. Built resources that are part of a listed Landmarks (and contributing resources) in historic district. the NASA NHL inventory. This inventory has changed slightly since the 2011 report due to the KSC transfer of two NHL contributing Table 3 -Listed, Eligible, and resources to the Air Force Contributing to Listed or Eligible Districts Station. This reduced the total NHL built resources within the NASA inventory. Center Quantity

Table 4 - Built Resources Contributing to AFRC 5 National Historic Landmarks (NHLs) ARC 49 Center Quantity GDSN 1 ARC 4 GRC 71 GDSCC 1

GSFC 30 GRC 1

JPL 8 GSFC 1

JSC 20 JPL 2

KSC 110 JSC 2

LARC 161 KSC 19

MAF 6 LaRC 5

MSFC 34 MSFC 6

PBS 3 PBS 8

SSFL 14 SSC 4

EO13287 Section 3 Triennial Report (2014) Page 10

Table 5 Built Resources within NHLs 53 Archeological Resource Summary

Total NHLs 20 NASA – Archeological Quantity

Some higher-profile examples of newly Listed - Archeological 55 identified and evaluated properties include Eligible - Archeological 8 the following:

• At WSTF, the WSSH Historic District, the Total Listed and Eligible 63 200 Area Laboratory Complex, and two Propulsion Test Historic Districts in the Total Sites Inventoried 285 300 and 400 Areas were recently identified during stand-alone site surveys Question 2 and a gate-to-gate evaluation. Describe your agency policies that • AFRC identified a new historic district promote and/or influence the with contributing properties during their identification and evaluation of historic properties. official 45-50 year gate-to-gate survey.

• KSC identified and evaluated the NASA previously reported that the policy Operational Support Unit driver for historic property management was (BOSU) and the Jay Jay Bridge Railroad based on a NASA Interim Directive (NID) for System, and associated locomotives, as cultural resource management activities that well as finding several individually would eventually be replaced by a final NASA eligible and contributing resources during Procedural Requirements (NPR) document their 45-50 year survey which included which was in the final coordination process. NASA-owned properties within the Cape During this reporting period, NASA Canaveral Air Force Station Industrial coordinated and finalized the subject NPR Area. (8510.1), titled NASA Cultural Resources Management , to provide Agency-wide • JSC has tentatively identified additional guidance on roles and responsibilities, historic properties during their recent 45- programmatic requirements, and the 50 year survey including 29 eligible establishment of Center-specific Integrated properties, and one new historic district. Cultural Resources Management Plans (ICRMPs) that provide a site-specific • Other Centers including SSC, LaRC, GSFC, roadmap for management practices and and GRC have also identified additional operational procedures. This NPR is the key properties during this reporting period. document elaborating on essential Table 5 provides a summary of the data for responsibilities of the Senior Policy Official, both eligible and listed archeological sites, as the Federal Preservation Officer (FPO), HPOs well as total sites inventoried. at the various Centers, and numerous other personnel across NASA at the Centers and at Headquarters that may be affected by, or

EO13287 Section 3 Triennial Report (2014) Page 11

The History of the Langley Research Center As an overall agency goal, all NASA Centers are encouraged to re-evaluate for additional historic districts. become involved with, cultural resource Accompanying the NPR is the publication of management activities. the Guidance for Implementation of NASA Cultural Resources Management This NPR also facilitates communication Requirements, a detailed manual that between the Center HPOs, facilities provides day to day guidance for individual engineering, master planning staff, and real HPOs and center staff. The guidance property management professionals, which document provides detailed steps for enhances and encourages an effective identification of cultural resources, Section dialogue during the overall planning and 106 compliance and other laws related to decision-making process. NPR 8510.1 cultural resources. (http://nodis3.gsfc.nasa.gov/displayDir.cfm?t =NPR&c=8510&s=1 ) clearly describes Question 3 procedures and requirements that promote How has your agency established goals and influence the identification and for the identification and evaluation of evaluation of historic properties. For historic properties including whether example, the NPR specifically details that they have been met? facility HPOs are responsible for implementing NASA CRM program activities, NASA Headquarters continues to encourage and ensuring compliance with Sections 106 the HPOs at the Centers to develop facility- and 110 of the National Historic Preservation specific goals for the identification and Act (NHPA). evaluation of their historic properties. At a

EO13287 Section 3 Triennial Report (2014) Page 12 minimum, the four primary goals that have appropriate, Programmatic Agreements for been communicated from NASA both built properties and archeological Headquarters to the HPOs are as follows: resources. These Programmatic Agreements will then provide a basic framework, with First, evaluate the facilities and structures clear and concise requirements, for the that are approaching 45-50 years of age, management, protection, and use of historic which for many facilities requires the properties, functioning as a mechanism to completion of new gate-to-gate facility streamline requirements and enhance surveys. As the various Centers continue to communication. Working in tandem with age, the focus is directed towards these detailed site-specific ICRMPs, the relatively younger facilities that have not yet Programmatic Agreement documentation will been evaluated since they were not benefit the overall program, provide for previously considered exceptional properties timely and appropriate planning and under Criterion G, and had not yet decision-making, minimize delays and approached 50 years in age. disagreements, and clearly delineate Second, HPOs should re-visit their facilities, regulatory compliance requirements and and survey where necessary, for the presence their mitigation and resolution pathways. of additional historic districts. For many of Fourth, the HPOs should continue to enhance the Centers, surveys have historically heritage tourism opportunities, whenever concentrated on potentially eligible possible, to further provide NASA’s story to individual facilities that were deemed of the general public and specific interest exceptional significance under Criterion G. As groups. Creative solutions and thinking- such, many of the previously completed outside-the-box are encouraged to further surveys and evaluations did not take a increase opportunities where traditional comprehensive site-wide view of the entire visitor center and site tours are not as facility and whether there is the potential for feasible due to facility size, access limitations, additional historic districts. As one example, security and safety issues, or other preventive WSTF was surveyed under the Space Shuttle factors. Survey for Shuttle-related facilities, and also had a facility-specific survey completed for Question 4 the White Sands Space Harbor (WSSH) when Describe any internal reporting it was being closed during Shuttle retirement requirements your agency may have for and transition activities. After the WSSH work the identification and evaluation of was completed, a separate comprehensive historic properties, including gate-to-gate survey was completed for the collections (museum and entire facility and two Propulsion Test archaeological). Districts were identified due to significant operations related to the , as For internal reporting and documentation well as an individually eligible property. requirements, NASA has continued to use the Other Centers are having similar experiences. currently in-place, and continually enhanced and updated, computerized systems such as Third, the HPOs at the various Centers should the NASA Environmental Tracking System actively evaluate and pursue, where (NETS), the Real Property Database, and the

EO13287 Section 3 Triennial Report (2014) Page 13

Property, Plant, and Equipment systems. The NETS database is the primary vehicle for These systems continue to provide asset data management and internal/external visibility and can generate various property reporting and recordkeeping with respect to reports as requested, by Center or for the the historic properties at each of the NASA entire Agency. During this reporting period, Centers. The NETS database system has been the NASA real property system and NETS continually enhanced during this reporting database have been fully integrated to period and provides multiple abilities for provide additional visibility to multiple internal reporting, external report organizations regarding historic property generation, data management, coordination condition, location, and eligibility status. This with real property, and NASA Headquarters integration effort clearly identifies when notifications. And first and foremost, NASA master planning efforts and real property Headquarters can issue data calls to the records may indicate that an historic HPOs, at any time, for various information including archeological surveys, property status and inventories, heritage tourism events, property re-use activities, HPO training events, historic resource protection actions, and property evaluation criteria.

NETS also provides the ability for HPOs to upload surveys, consultation documentation, correspondence, recordation information, and related files to the system, then these documents can be viewed by other Center HPOs and by NASA Headquarters. The ability for information sharing between the nation- wide NASA Centers is highly beneficial. NASA Headquarters, as well as the HPOs, have the ability to generate reports for all of the available data, both at the Center level, or at NASA Environmental Tracking System (NETS) the Agency-wide level, when required for Reporting Screen both internal and external requests. This property could be affected; for example, by a central repository for all cultural resource planned demolition. These reporting systems management documentation provides an are a very useful planning tool for the HPOs to effective management tool that is critical to complete timely mitigations and the overall success of the numerous program consultations, increase project visibility, and requirements. enhance inter-departmental communication. It also provides much more visibility to the Question 5 master planning and real property groups Explain how your agency has employed when it comes to historic properties, and the the use of partnerships to assist in the requirements that may be required if adverse identification and evaluation of historic effects are identified. properties.

EO13287 Section 3 Triennial Report (2014) Page 14

NASA continues to use partnerships in recordation fieldwork. This partnership was various capacities primarily during the re-use highly beneficial due to the remote location of of available historic properties. However, on the area, U.S. Army security issues, access occasion, opportunities have arisen for limitations, safety considerations because the partnerships within the realm of historic area is an active military range, and specific property identification and evaluation. At requirements expected from the State of NM KSC, for example, the National Park Service because WSSH was, technically, an Army (NPS) Southeast Archaeological Center facility on DOD property, only being managed (SEAC) partnered with NASA to further and operated by NASA personnel. This evaluate the Elliot Plantation Complex and partnership streamlined the overall assist with the completion of a nomination identification and evaluation process, package. This assistance is beneficial due to reducing costs, increasing communication, the scale and size of this colonial site that has and collaboratively working to complete a many multi-component archeological sites, timely large-scale recordation process. but is located within the proposed Shiloh Launch Site study area and could be affected Question 6 by development and operations within the Provide specific examples of major area. challenges, successes, and or opportunities your agency has During the transition and retirement process experienced in identifying historic for the Space Shuttle program, the White properties over the past three years. Sands Space Harbor (WSSH), located near Las Cruces, NM, was identified and evaluated for As previously described, one of the major historic properties. The WSSH is comprised challenges during this reporting period has of several gypsum runway systems that were been to shift the HPO focus from the Criterion used for training and as an G evaluation factor of exceptional alternate landing site in the event the KSC and significance, solely due to the major increase AFRC runways were not available due to in properties that are now approaching 45-50 weather, or other reasons. A partnership years of age. There has been some with the U.S. Army was used during the measurable success in this area, even with the identification and evaluation of the area difficult fiscal constraints inherent with many because the location of the facility is actually government programs. These successes on Department of Defense (DOD) property, include several of the NASA Centers initiating but the facility itself is operated by NASA, and completing 45-50 year gate-to-gate using WSTF personnel. This partnership historic property surveys over the last three consisted of assistance with site access, year period. These successful gate-to-gate escorting, photography approvals, real-time surveys were completed at KSC, JSC, AFRC security and safety notifications due to active and WSTF and resulted in additional historic missile testing in the area, and support during properties joining the NASA inventory. This the recordation activities, including gate-to-gate process also resulted in the assistance with the Memorandum of identification of additional historic districts. Agreement, negotiations with the State of NM Historic Preservation Officer, and final A challenge during this reporting period continues to be the process for addressing

EO13287 Section 3 Triennial Report (2014) Page 15 historic personal property and artifact • At ARC, extensive oversight is being management. Although this program has provided to protect Hangar 1 during significantly matured, there can be remediation work. Additionally, Hangars coordination, communication, and final 1, 2, and 3 are also being monitored and disposition issues due to confusion on roles protected as the Moffett Federal Airfield and responsibilities, process, communication, lease is being developed. and coordination. This challenge has been • mostly mitigated, so with increased At JSC, efforts are underway to protect the collaboration between real property Mission Control National Historic organizations and the HPOs throughout the Landmark via a Historic Furnishing Agency, these historic artifacts and other Survey that will be used to manage personal property are being systematically maintenance and general upgrades (e.g., evaluated and offered to various museums fabrics and furniture) that are necessary and educational facilities. to maintain the overall integrity of the area as this historic property ages.

• During the recordation of the JSC White Section 2: Protection Flight (FCR), care was taken to preserve three of the original consoles which will be displayed as part Question 7 of the SAIL/Mission Control Exhibit that Explain how your agency has protected is part of the JSC visitor center historic properties. experience.

NASA continues to emphasize and promote • NASA erected a protective fence around the importance of historic property several acres of an important protection, whenever feasible, appropriate, archeological site and cave painting to and consistent with the evolving mission of protect it from vandalism. The fence was the Agency. There have been several erected after consultation with tribes to noteworthy activities within the realm of consider alternative protection methods, historic property protection, as described by but given that the pictographs were the following examples: delicate and could be easily damaged with graffiti, the tribes decided that a fence • At JSC, the Shuttle Avionics and would be best protective and would allow Integration Laboratory (SAIL) was access for ceremonial purposes. scheduled for demolition, but a successful negotiation between several internal organizations resulted in the facility being transitioned to a heritage tourism location on the JSC visitor center tours. The protection of this historic resource, instead of certain demolition, was given high praise from the Texas State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO).

EO13287 Section 3 Triennial Report (2014) Page 16

Question 8 Describe the programs and procedures your agency has established to ensure the protection of historic properties, including compliance with Sections 106, 110, and 111 of NHPA.

NASA’s NASA Policy Directive 8500.1 expressly identifies compliance with the NHPA, and the new NPR 8510.1 clearly and concisely describes the Agency policy towards compliance with Sections 106, 110, White Flight Control Room (FCR) at JSC and 111. Day-to-day compliance with the NHPA is delegated to the HPO at the Center In addition to specific actions at these historic level. All HPOs are required to have Section properties, NASA Headquarters has 106 training and are also encouraged to emphasized to the HPO community the obtain additional training on an as-needed importance of negotiating Programmatic basis. HPOs work with their facility master Agreements with their respective SHPOs, and planning group and real property officers to other consulting parties, to further protect identify projects that might affect historic historic properties. These Programmatic properties. In fact, NASA has now officially Agreements will provide a clear and concise completed its NPR for Master Planning, which roadmap for the continued protection of both directs Master Planners to align their Center historic structures, archeological resources, Master Plans with Section 106 and 110 and the numerous historic districts located at considerations, as well as emphasizes the various Centers. WFF has recently reutilization of eligible facilities. And as negotiated and completed a Programmatic previously stated, NASA Headquarters has Agreement, and WSTF has entered into emphasized the importance of Center-specific discussions with the New Mexico SHPO to Programmatic Agreements to address develop a Programmatic Agreement for both processes and solutions and streamline the archeological and architectural resources, overall management approach. including two historic districts. Some Centers currently have in-place Programmatic The finalized NPR now mandates that all Agreements (e.g., LaRC, KSC and JSC), and Centers develop Integrated Cultural Resource other Centers are in the early planning stages Management Plans (ICRMPs) to ensure of developing Programmatic Agreements that proper procedures are followed whenever will streamline procedures, and minimize historic properties may be adversely affected potential problems, with the end result being during site operations and project planning. a more effective overall management These ICRMPs clearly define, document, and approach for the protection of historic summarize all of the local archeological sites, properties. historic properties, and historic districts, and provide guidelines for the protection and treatment of those specific resources. For

EO13287 Section 3 Triennial Report (2014) Page 17 example, the ICRMPs include standard different NASA Centers during this 3-year procedures for all site personnel, processes period. The locations for the annual training and procedures for unanticipated discoveries, that were selected by NASA Headquarters requirements for modifications or other included LaRC, ARC, and KSC. By rotating the changes to historic properties/districts, face-to-face meeting, and associated cultural curation processes (if applicable), roadmaps resource management training, between the for involvement with early planning activities, Centers it provides the HPOs with a valuable public involvement considerations, tribal opportunity to network with their peers, consultation requirements, and overall discuss projects, share lessons learned and security and protection considerations. other best management practices, and tour Additionally, the ICRMPs are designed to the various historic properties, and districts, further integrate with various site that are located at the different NASA Centers. operational documentation such as Permits This is especially important considering that to Excavate (dig permits), Records of many of the NASA personnel assigned to Environmental Consideration (RECs) used cultural resource management tasks are also during the NEPA process, site operation serving in another capacity such as real contracts and subcontracts, and other property management, facility master standard project planning and evaluation planning, or environmental compliance documentation. management.

Finally, NASA continues to routinely use the In addition to the NASA Headquarters Space Act Agreement Maker e-routing training that is provided on an annual basis, process that was developed to provide the Historic Preservation Officers are different program managers at Headquarters routinely encouraged to independently obtain with an opportunity to review project training, on an as needed basis, to better documentation and ensure that they concur understand program requirements and better with proposed construction or demolition facilitate the day-to-day operational activities. projects. This system provides for the During this 3-year reporting period, safeguard and protection of historic personnel at the MSFC and WFF properties through checks and balances to independently attended introductory or ensure Section 106 is complete for projects refresher Section 106 training, while before funding is approved. This process has personnel located at WSTF attended an been employed several times to identify advanced 106 training course intended for projects that still need to complete their experienced practitioners. Additionally, Section 106 process before funding could be WSTF personnel attended a focused training approved, and has been shown to be an program specific to preparing and negotiating effective “last defense” to identify project various agreement documents including problems and issues. Memorandums of Agreement and Programmatic Agreements. MSFC personnel NASA has maintained a strong emphasis on independently attended a very specific training for the Historic Preservation Officers. training course related solely to Native The annual training provided by NASA American consultations. Headquarters was rotated between three

EO13287 Section 3 Triennial Report (2014) Page 18

The HPOs are also encouraged to provide • Historic and cultural resource compliance internal training to the programs and projects considerations must be considered for all at their own Centers. For example, briefings projects; to senior management, facility engineering, real property, master planners, as well as • Environmental checklists are required technical staff are routinely provided and are that will identify the potential for any highly beneficial towards raising the damage to a historic site; awareness of program requirements and increasing valuable communication between • The HPO must be consulted for all organizations. projects on historic properties to ensure compliance with 36 CFR Part 800; Question 9 Describe your agency policies that • The HPO must be consulted prior to promote and/or influence the modifications or demolition decisions to protection of historic properties. allow for a determination of eligibility;

NASA continues to rely on the combined • The facility project manager must develop policies of the environmental management an adaptive reuse feasibility report, in program and real property organizations to conjunction with the HPO, if a building is protect historic properties through eligible and still planned for modification utilization, revitalization, and stewardship. or demolition; These policies are documented in the current NPD and NPR guidance for cultural resource • The facility project manager will provide management, as well as the current NPR for ample opportunity for the HPO to develop Facilities Project Requirements (8820.2G; mitigation plans, as needed, for historic http://nodis3.gsfc.nasa.gov/displayDir.cfm?t properties. =NPR&c=8820&s=2F ). As specifically stated in NPR 8820.2G, there are numerous policy These policies provide the framework for a objectives directly attributable to the collaborative effort to identify and protect protection of historic properties. This historic properties that may be affected by integration of historic property requirements facility modifications and demolitions. In into facility management programs and particular, the adaptive reuse feasibility procedures is highly beneficial to ensuring report is designed to provide a detailed that all stakeholders are involved in the discussion of issues, and options, regarding planning and decision-making process. For the protection of historic properties. These example, NPR 8820.22 states: efforts, coupled with the requirements of the cultural resource management NPR, provide • The facility project team shall include the baseline for NASA’s historic property historic preservation stakeholders at all protection policies. times;

EO13287 Section 3 Triennial Report (2014) Page 19

Question 10 temporarily idle, facilities such as test stands, Explain how your agency has employed wind tunnels, and laboratories. For most the use of partnerships to assist in the reimbursable work, Centers will require the protection of historic properties. commercial entity to pay a surcharge to the total costs to provide for facility maintenance As stated in the previous report, NASA and general infrastructure support needs. continues to consider the actual use of its This process is becoming common within the facilities as the best management practice to Agency to help defray operational and ensure protection of various historic maintenance costs, including those costs properties. Continued use by NASA, or in directly attributable to historic property partnership with commercial entities, assists management and general maintenance the Agency with maintenance and Center requirements, thereby making these historic management and operations funding to structures viable for continued use. provide for facility upkeep, and maintain overall facility infrastructure in good working Finally, NASA has continued with various condition. There are numerous examples of partnerships to manage and operate the partnerships to use NASA facilities for major visitor centers. For example, the JSC commercial interests which generates visitor center is managed through a funding that is used for the overall protection partnership with the non-profit Space Center of the facility itself. For example, the Houston. This partnership provides for the extensive amount of partnerships with protection of important properties and tenants from industry, academics, and non- increases heritage tourism activities through profits at ARC provide much-needed support site tours. For example, the planned 747 for facility management costs, and have even Shuttle Carrier Aircraft and Space Shuttle provided for capital expenditures to renovate model display that will be the only visitor and upgrade historic facilities. The latest center experience that exhibits the classic opportunity is the Request for Proposals for a Section 111 NHPA lease of the Moffett Federal Airfield which includes a WWII era airfield and three lighter than air hangars from the 1930s that a partner plans to restore and make provide a new viable use, thus avoiding their excess or demolition. The lease encompasses over 1000 acres and Hangar One, which is considered an important historic icon in Mountain View, California.

Another example of partnerships that protect historic properties is the reimbursable project work carried out under inter-agency piggyback configuration of Space Shuttle cooperative agreements or Space Act Shuttle Carrier Aircraft (SCA) at the JSC Space Center Houston Agreements. Many of NASA’s testing and Being prepared as a heritage tourism exhibit. research facilities have pursued actively commercial work for mothballed, or

EO13287 Section 3 Triennial Report (2014) Page 20 transportation is being financed through the interpretation experience was provided. non-profit agency’s fundraising efforts. These exhibits have been very successful, as clearly shown by the vast amount of Similarly, the KSC visitor complex is a attendees. NASA also successfully negotiated partnership with a commercial entity to the protection of the JSC SAIL, which was operate, maintain, and manage the facility. scheduled and ready for dismantling and This includes the protection of the Space demolition. The protection of the SAIL by Shuttle Atlantis exhibit, and other important adding it to the visitor center experience for historic properties and artifacts. As part of future generations to visit will enhance the the complex, there is also a partnership with Agency’s heritage tourism program. Finally, the Center for Space Education that includes a the efforts by the HPOs to formalize the research center, and the Early Space protection of historic properties through Exploration exhibit displaying numerous enhanced, or new, Programmatic Agreements artifacts, including the Gemini 9A spacecraft was also a successful endeavor, but still has and the Control Center consoles and more room to grow and expand throughout furniture. These types of partnerships assist the various Centers. with the oversight and management of historic properties and artifacts, and provide A challenge for NASA was the proposed a heritage tourism activity for the public to demolition of all of the structures at the Santa enjoy for many years to come. Susana Field Laboratory in California, and the impacts of extensive remediation would have Question 11 on significant Native American sites including Provide specific examples of major archeological and Sacred Sites. The cleanup challenges, successes, and/or effort required all of the test stands and opportunities your agency has facilities contributing to three test stand encountered in protecting historic historic districts to be demolished to prepare properties over the past three years. the site for extensive cleanup and eventual

The major, shining star, success for protecting disposal (excess) of the site. Over two years historic properties during this reporting NASA consulted with over 35 consulting period has to be the final disposition of the parties including Native American tribes to Space Shuttle orbiters to ensure their resolve concerns regarding the test stands protection for future generations of visitors. that heralded California’s role in the The disposition of these historic properties development of rocketry and important required extensive recordation efforts archeological sites. The end result of the coupled with public viewings and associated consultation was a Programmatic Agreement retirement events, transportation on the SCA, that looks to preserve the integrity of the key fly-by routes to further encourage public Native American archeological site and retain involvement and viewing, then installation at one test stand if cleanup standards can be their final museum or visitor center met. destination. There were ground breaking Another challenge during this reporting events for the Atlantis exhibit at KSC, and period was to further integrate historic extensive effort was expended to ensure that property management through the a very high-quality public viewing and collaboration of other groups with the HPOs

EO13287 Section 3 Triennial Report (2014) Page 21 and other historic property management an Agency-wide challenge; however, through professionals. This effort requires close increased communication, additional policy coordination between many disparate guidance, electronic record collaboration, and organizations and individuals from real effective oversight, the gap that sometimes property to master planners to project occurs between organizations is slowly, but managers to senior leaders. Planning and successfully, being closed to ensure that decision-making occurs on a day-to-day basis, historic properties are part of all relevant and ensuring that historic property discussions and decision processes protection considerations are part of that throughout all of the NASA organizations. communication and discussion process can be a challenging endeavor. It’s all too common to learn of planning decisions “after the fact”, which is the primary impetus to Section 3: Use working diligently to integrate organizations, increase communication, and ensure that Question 12 historic property protection is considered at Explain how your agency has used all stages of project planning and facility historic properties. management decisions. To this end, efforts are underway to further address and mitigate There are numerous high-profile examples of this challenge. For example, the 2014 face-to- NASA using historic properties during this 3- face meeting of the HPO community that was year reporting period. First of all, while NASA held at KSC was a joint meeting with Agency- continues to fully utilize its historic inventory, wide real property and master planning as missions change or finish, NASA must professionals. This was the first attempt to regularly identify new uses for important integrate the annual meetings, and training, Agency assets, whether they are historic or and similar joint activities are planned for the not. As NASA’s overall mission changes, future. Additionally, efforts were made to opportunities continue to arise for the use, integrate the electronic property information and re-purposing, of various historic and status data that resides in both the real structures. For example, NASA has already property database and the NETS database. seen several requests and specific This policy of inclusion has increased opportunities to use legacy facilities for the visibility to the HPO community when master new Agency transition to commercial based planning and property decisions are made, spaceflight services. Additionally, the while also identifying the eligibility status of transition to the SLS and Orion work has also all properties to these same property and identified specific programmatic needs for planning personnel. This increased visibility, testing and evaluation programs to use and resulting communication, will ensure historic properties. Some specific examples of additional protections to NASA’s historic these types of activities are provided as properties. follows:

In summary, the vast amount of individuals • KSC has successfully negotiated a 20-year involved in day-to-day activities at the NASA lease for the re-use of KSC’s historic Pad Centers makes integration and collaboration 39A by SpaceX which includes

EO13287 Section 3 Triennial Report (2014) Page 22

requirements for the commercial entity to • LaRC has re-purposed the gantry system, bear the overall costs of maintenance. The a National Historic Landmark, to operate Space Shuttle orbiters have been re- a new Hydro Impact Basin for simulating purposed to museums and visitor centers Orion splash down testing. in Florida, California, Washington D.C., • and New York to provide for public SSC modified Test Stand B-2, also a viewing and interpretation. National Historic Landmark, for re-use during testing of the • JSC has re-purposed the Shuttle Carrier (SLS). Aircraft (SCA) to the JSC visitor center for • public viewing and interpretation. JSC re-purposed the Shuttle Avionics Integration Laboratory (SAIL) for • The Space Transportation System (STS) heritage tourism activities provided by program building in Palmdale, CA was the JSC visitor center. This project transitioned out of NASA oversight received high praise from the Texas responsibility and re-purposed to the U.S. SHPO. Air Force operations.

KSC Launch Pad 39A Kennedy Space Center Director Bob Cabana announces that on April 14, 2014 NASA signed a property agreement with SpaceX for use and operation of Launch Complex 39A. NASA Administrator Charlie Bolden, left, and , president and chief operating officer of SpaceX, look on. SpaceX will use Launch Complex 39A for such as the , currently under development (Image Credit: NASA/Don Casper)

EO13287 Section 3 Triennial Report (2014) Page 23

• JSC has re-purposed and modified the the Facility Condition Index (FCI) to evaluate Space Environment Simulation and score properties. The FCI evaluates each Laboratory (SESL), a National Historic facility for items such as structural integrity, Landmark, for test operations related to expected life-span, safety and health issues, the James Webb Telescope project. and efficiency of operating systems such as

• JSC has re-purposed Building 45, which previously included the Technical Library, for use as the JSC Occupational Space Flight Medicine Clinic.

• WSTF transferred the WSSH Control Tower from the Shuttle alternate runway area on the U.S. Army White Sands Missile Range (WSMR) to the WSMR Museum’s Missile Park for public viewing and interpretation.

• JSC has started refurbishment of the historic Mission Control to continue its use as a heritage tourism activity.

• ARC continues a strong tradition of re- using the historic property throughout the Center, including within the Shenandoah Plaza Historic District, via leasing to various tenants.

Question 13 Explain the overall condition of the Space Environmental Simulation Laboratory at JSC historic properties within your agency’s Re-purposed for the James Webb Telescope project. control. HVAC, electrical, and water supplies. As described in the previous 3-year report, NASA NASA’s inventory of historic buildings and continues to score most facilities slightly structures continues to be considered in good above the mid-point of the 1 (very poor) to 5 condition. For many of the historic (excellent) score. Although the FCI does not properties at NASA, the structures specifically evaluate specific features and themselves are relatively young, with many of special issues related to historic properties, the facilities just now reaching the 45-50 year the Center HPO will assist with overall age. Additionally, many of these facilities condition assessments on an as-needed basis. have been in constant use for various test programs and project requirements, so For the numerous archeological assets routine maintenance has been consistent. locations throughout the various Centers, Additionally, NASA has continued to use an their Agency-wide condition is also annual condition assessment, also known as

EO13287 Section 3 Triennial Report (2014) Page 24 considered very good. NASA Centers are makers within the Agency. The integration of generally not publicly accessible without master planning, real property, and historic visitor clearance and escorts, and many of the property management professionals is a key facilities are located in remote areas or goal to foster and promote additional controlled and fenced locations. This ensures opportunities to use, or adaptively re- that access to archeological resources that purpose, historic properties. could cause adverse effects is minimal. Internally, NASA has procedures in effect at Question 15 all the Centers specific to digging and Explain how your agency has used excavating activities. A dig permit (Permit to Section 111 (16 U.S.C. § 470h-3) of Excavate) must be completed and approved NHPA in the protection of historic before digging can occur within facility fence properties. lines, and many of the Centers have The prime example for the out-leasing of archeological surveys with GPS coordinates of federally controlled historic properties for known sites, which will mitigate possible maintenance and facility management disturbance or impact the condition of these funding considerations is the anticipate out- archeological assets. Finally, the Centers all lease of the Moffett Federal Airfield in have specific procedures for unintended Sunnyvale or Mountain View, CA. The RFP discoveries, which will halt operations and was publicized in November of 2013 and protect any resources that may be lease negotiations are being finalized that will unintentionally encountered during facility allow over 1000 acres and multiple historic operations that require digging, blading, or structures including three lighter than air excavating. hangars to be restored and repurposed for Question 14 the partner’s use. The lease is a Section 111 Describe your agency policies that lease providing for the preservation of these promote and/or influence the use of its iconic historic structures and their associated historic properties. airfield. The proceeds from the sixty year lease will be reinvested in historic properties NASA does not have specific policies in-place at ARC and across the Agency, thereby that distinguishes between identification, improving the maintenance and contributing evaluation, protection, and use of historic to the continued viable use of multiple other properties. However, it is the overall policy of historic structures. the Agency, as described in NASA procedural requirements, to promote and influence the NASA also has the ability to enter into other use of historic properties whenever feasible, types of lease or partnership agreements and possible, and in the interests of the ever- has selected to lease the historic Launch Pad evolving NASA mission. At the majority of the 39A at the KSC to SpaceX for its continued Centers, the master planning process is being use. This agreement provides for 20 years of used to actively promote the use of historic management and maintenance funding, via a properties. Additionally, the real property commercial interest, to assist NASA with professionals have also been involved so the maintenance of an important historic HPOs can identify opportunities, promote property. Any artifacts that need to be active re-use, and influence the decision removed to adapt the Launchpad for its new

EO13287 Section 3 Triennial Report (2014) Page 25 launch vehicles will be carefully removed and Motors, and Wyle Laboratories. Many of made available to museums through NASA’s these organizations also utilize the parade artifacts module through GSA. In addition to grounds within the Shenandoah Plaza the 20-year SpaceX agreement, ARC is also Historic District for special events, including very proactive in providing lease agreements public events that provide additional heritage that result in capital expenditures to maintain tourism access to NASA’s historic properties. and operate important historic properties that may not be immediately needed by the WSTF has also partnered with the U.S. Army Agency, but are also difficult to excess or White Sands Missile Range to curate items remove from the property inventory. and display the WSSH control tower within the WSMR museum and adjacent Missile Due to the on-going fiscal challenges that Park. This no-cost partnership provides NASA has encountered over the last several heritage tourism activity that is located years, and the expectation that the “freeze the outside the gates of the facility itself, which footprint” or “reduce the footprint” mandate minimizes site access issues due to safety and for property will be Agency policy for the security concerns. foreseeable future, it is critical that NASA continue to actively pursue additional Another major partnership that has been opportunities for Section 111 out-leasing. recently realized with respect to property use is the agreement with SpaceX to use KSC Question 16 Launch Pad 39A. This 20-year agreement Explain how your agency has employed provides funding for the general management the use of partnerships to assist in the and maintenance of this important historic use of historic properties. property, which will preserve the facility for potential future use. Many other potential ARC continues to be NASA’s leader in partnerships are being evaluated as we move partnerships that encourage and foster the forward into the new paradigm of using the re-use of historic properties. Numerous services of various commercial spaceflight partnerships at Ames for several of the companies. It is highly likely that additional facilities have been in-place for many years, facilities, throughout the country, may be and many of these partnerships use the used or re-purposed for various historic properties throughout the complex, programmatic support requirements. including the properties within the Shenandoah Plaza Historic District. At ARC, Question 17 there are academic, industry, and non-profit Provide specific examples of major organizations that share the facility, and challenges, successes, and/or ultimately share the costs associated with opportunities your agency has property management and maintenance. encountered in using historic Some of these higher-profile partnerships properties over the past three years. include agreements with Carnegie Mellon As federal government budgets continue to University, Santa Clara University, Moffett be scrutinized and reduced, and the overall Field Historical Society Museum, Western mission of NASA constantly fluctuates and Disaster Center, Bloom Energy Corporation, changes, there will inevitably be scenarios Airship Ventures, Space Systems Loral, Tesla

EO13287 Section 3 Triennial Report (2014) Page 26 where difficult decisions on the use of historic discussed, success stories include the SpaceX properties will be required. The major lease at KSC, the re-purposing of the B-2 test challenge to the Agency going forward will be stand at SSC for the SLS program, re-using the the continued push to “freeze the footprint” of historic gantry at LaRC for Orion testing, the Agency’s property inventory which will repurposing the SAIL at JSC for heritage minimize center operation and maintenance tourism, re-using the SESL at JSC for the costs and allow for replacement buildings James Webb telescope project, re-purposing that will meet the ever-increasing energy and Building 45 at JSC for the Occupational Space water conservation and sustainability Flight Medicine Clinic, transferring ownership requirements of the future. Taking this idea of the STS building in Palmdale to the Air one step further, the Agency is actively Force, and of course, documenting, working to actually “reduce the footprint”, preserving, and exhibiting the Space Shuttle which routinely means demolition of older orbiters for future generations to view and facilities that don’t meet the needs of the enjoy. These high-profile examples of using overall mission. This has already been seen historic properties clearly show that, even in locally at several of the Centers where a difficult fiscal environment, the evaluation, property slated for demolition has protection, and re-use of very significant significantly expanded, and in many cases the properties, including National Historic demolition schedule itself is being expedited, Landmarks, can be achieved. which then puts significant pressure on the HPO community, and the property and In summary, although there are many planning professionals, to establish challenges ahead for NASA to do much more opportunities for protection and re-use, and with much less, there are still opportunities meet compliance requirements to mitigate available to use historic properties, and NASA adverse effects. This push to “do more with has been successful with those endeavors. less” will inevitably impact additional historic properties, and even historic districts, when Question 18 older structures, mothballed facilities, and Describe your agency’s sustainability other historic structures are evaluated for use goals and climate change adaptation and decisions are made to demolish and planning and how stewardship of replace, or simply reduce the property historic properties is being addressed. footprint. To mitigate the effects of these issues, NASA continues to evaluate the The 2013 NASA Strategic Sustainability potential for leases, adaptation, and re-use Performance Plan (SSPP) addresses major whenever feasible and appropriate. goals of the Agency including greenhouse gas reductions, sustainable buildings, fleet Although the “freeze the footprint”, and even management, water use efficiency, pollution “reduce the footprint” strategy will be a major prevention, sustainable acquisition, electronic challenge to the Agency, the major success stewardship, renewable energy, and climate story is that, even in this environment, NASA change resilience. The SSPP clearly describes has also been able to successfully re-use specific metrics and goals that the Agency facilities and structures, even for some of the strives to achieve; for example, annual goals larger, higher-profile facilities. As previously for reductions in water intensity, greenhouse

EO13287 Section 3 Triennial Report (2014) Page 27

planning. Additionally, facility project requirements must be evaluated and addressed with respect to the SSPP goals of energy and water efficiencies as well as other sustainability practices, regardless of whether the facility is relatively new or identified as an historic property.

Additionally, NASA has held climate risk workshops at six NASA centers that considers climate scenarios in the regions around each NASA center and the implications to the center’s infrastructure, continued viability, and necessary adaptation strategies due to the proximity of many of our centers to the ocean, deserts and major rivers. In particular, LaRC which comprises mostly of a historic district is in the tidewater region of which is subject to tidal and river flooding issues in addition to climate change threats. Sample Climate Adaptation Strategy for Consideration of adaptation strategies at NASA Centers LaRC considered the built environment and gas, and petroleum use. Additionally, there the historic resources. are goals for increases in sustainable buildings and renewable energy projects, a Information on NASA’s 2013 Climate Risk more robust requirement for sustainable Management Plan and Report – Update is acquisition, as well as short-term and long- available at term risk analyses regarding potential http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/file climate change impacts. The Agency then s/2013_NASA_ClimateRiskMgmtPlanReport_ actively tracks and reports progress towards 6_27_13_FNL.pdf . achieving these goals on an annual basis.

Although the SSPP does not specifically describe historic property management as one of the nine major performance goals, the SSPP’s overall goals are still partly implemented through NPR 8820.2, “Facilities Project Requirements”, which requires that work carried out on facilities of historic significance must be carried out in accordance with Section 106 and its implementing regulations, 36 CFR 800, while at the same time requiring consideration of the SSPPs major goals during facility

EO13287 Section 3 Triennial Report (2014) Page 28

HERE MEN FROM THE PLANET EARTH FIRST SET FOOT UPON THE JULY 1969, A.D. WE CAME IN PEACE FOR ALL MANKIND

The words on a plaque left on the Moon by and

EO13287 Section 3 Triennial Report (2014) Page 29