Sustainability of DOD Buildings – Reuse of Existing Buildings

Reusing existing buildings achieves a 15%+ higher return on investment and 20% reduction in greenhouse gases.   It is less  costly and more sustainable to reuse existing buildings.

With 345,000 buildings, with over 105,000 buildings more than 50 years old, the importance of efficient renovation, repair, and sustainability of existing buildings is paramount.

DoD Building Treatment Terms
•“Adaptive reuse & rehabilitation” are terms of art outside DoD
•The DoD term for “major rehabilitation” is “modernization”
•Modernization means: “the alteration or replacement of facilities solely to implement new or higher standards to accommodate new functions or to replace a building component that typically lasts more than 50 years.”
•This study compares the costs and GHG of modernization with new construction

Sustainment/Status Quo
•Formulated for measuring baseline energy consumption
Demolition and New Construction
•LEED Silver certifiable construction – 2009 LEED for New Construction and Major Renovations
Full Modernization with Strict Application of Historic Preservation Standards (HPS)
•Full modernization with a strict application of Historic Preservation Standards ( HPS) and other DoD facility design standards
•LEED Silver
Full Modernization with Strict Application of AT/FP
•Full rehabilitation/modernization but with strict application of Anti-terrorism/ Force Protection requirements through building hardening, seismic and other DoD facility design standards
•LEED Silver

Applicable design standards include:

  • Whole Building Design
  • UFC 1-200-01 General Building Requirements
  • UFC 4-610-01 Administrative Facilities
  • UFC 1-900-01 Selection of Methods for the Reduction, Reuse and Recycling of Demolition Waste
  • UFC 3-310-04 Seismic Design for Buildings
  • DoD Minimum Antiterrorism Force Protection Standards for Buildings
  • Secretary of Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation of Historic Buildings


  • DoD’s Pre-War masonry buildings are an underutilized resource for meeting DoD GHG carbon reduction goals
  • ATFP and Progressive Collapse requirements tend to be rigidly and prescriptively applied, raising construction costs and introducing additional Scope 3 GHG emissions
  • Prior modernization treatments result in loss of original energy saving design features in Pre-War Buildings
  • Differences in GHG in alternatives resulted from the amount of new building materials introduced and transportation of demolition debris
  • Cost estimates and construction bid requests should include materials quantities in addition to costs to evaluate and validate GHG impacts.
  • Design professionals with practical experience with archaic building materials and systems are critical to the development of accurate planning level specifications
  • GHG emission tradeoffs of proposed new materials and building options should be evaluated early in the conceptual design process


  • Incorporate life-cycle GHG emissions analysis into DoD MILCON and SRM programs
  • Invest in formulation of carbon calculator system
  • Place more emphasis on existing buildings as viable project alternatives to meet mission requirements
  • Identify characteristic strengths and vulnerabilities by class of building
    Place more emphasis on existing buildings to meet DoD energy reduction goals
  • Avoid modernization treatments that result in loss of original energy saving design features in Pre-War Buildings

Green House Gas - Benefits of Building Re-use vs. New Construction

Efficient project delivery methods are of critical importance to the task of sustainability and life-cycle management of the built environment.   Job Order Contracting ( JOC ), and SABER are proven project delivery methods for renovation, repair, sustainability, and minor new construction.  JOC and SABER are a form of Integrated Project Delivery for existing buildings and infrastructure.

JOC and SABER provide the following advantages to building portfolio Owners:

•Fast and timely delivery of projects.
•Consolidation of procurement – lower overhead cost and procurement cost.
•Contractor and owner efficiencies in prosecution of the work.  Development of a partner relationship based on work performance.
•Virtual elimination of legal disputes, claims and mitigation of change orders.
•Standard pricing and specification utilizing a published unit price book (UPB), typcially RSMeans-based, resulting in efficient and effective estimating, design, and fixed price construction.
A bit more about JOC –
  1. “IPD Lite” for Existing Buildings.
  2. Consolidates procurement to shorten Project Timelines and reduce procurement costs.
  3. Transparency of pricing and procurement compliance through Unit Price Book.  Owner creates internal estimating (IGE)
  4. Long Term Facility Relationship increases productivity and enables reiterative process improvements.
  5. Quality and performance incentivized through IDIQ form of contract with minimal guarantee and clear maximum volume.

Traditional Project Delivery vs. Integrated Project Delivery – Premier cost estimating and efficient project delivery software and services for JOC, SABER, SATOC, IDIQ, MATOC, MACC, POCA, and BOA.  Featurings:

  • Exclusive 400,000 line item enhancement of RSMeans Cost Data
  • Automated Technical Evaluations
  • Contract, Project, Estimating, Document Management
  • Visual Estimating

TCO - Green House Gas

Legal and Policy Framework
•National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 ( Amended)
•Energy Policy Act of 2005
•Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007
•Executive Order 13423: Federal Environment, Energy, and Transportation Management (2007)
•Executive Order 13514: Federal Leadership in Environment, Energy, Economic Performance (2009)

BIM Strategy- Why Everything, or Nothing Ever, Changes!

BIM is the life-cycle modeling and management of the built environment supported by digital technology.  Forget the 3D visualization distraction for a moment and let’s focus on the important component of the BIM acronym; the “I” for information.


As we all know from a quote commonly attributed to Peter Drucker… and I paraphrase ‘You can’t manage what you don’t measure’.   Most, if not all failures to implement BIM and/or facility life-cycle management are likely traceable to the fundamental failure to gather the requisite accurate and transparent information required  in order to make informed decisions.  (Note: I use the terms “facility” or “facilities” to include any built structure.)
First, a few clarifications and items to help frame this discussion:

  1.  BIM definition: “BIM is the life-cycle modeling and management of the built environment supported by digital technology.”
  2. While BIM can be applied to any situation, the focus of this discussion is upon – multi-facility portfolios, with extensive capital reinvestment, renovation, repair, maintenance, and sustainability requirements/projects.
  3. We are all faced with a significantly altered economic and environmental landscape: more to do, limited capital/cost cuts, more accountability and transparency, and the need to reduce our “carbon footprint”.
  4. Success in today’s world requires moving from a reactionary and needs-satisfaction mode to longer term strategies with associated options.  This is  a major shift in thinking for many, but especially for our business or “for-profit sectors”.
  5. Robust, proven processes with associated accurate transparent, and actionable information in support of fact-based decision-marking  are drivers for success.
  6. Creation of a business-based capital reinvestment  and asset management framework and decision-making capability are central requirements.
  7. Accurate, timely information is required for sound decision-making.
  8. Decisions regarding reinvestment into the built should be made in concert with the attainment and support of an organization’s mission.
  9. Technology is a tool to enable lower cost implementation of strategies and processes.  Technology’s role is to assure consistent, cost-efficient application of embedded business process, enabling faster deployment, automation of routine or complex mathematical processes, and associated decision-making and reporting capabilities.


Okay, so know let’s look a bit more about  why BIM is not fully understood, nor being rapidly accepted across the Architecture, Engineering, Construction, Owner, Operations/Facility Management sector(s).

  1. Many, if not most organizations lack robust, consistent, and transparent planning policies and overall life-cycle management processes.
  2. Existing processes and construction delivery methods are largely antagonistic  and outdated, with divergent goals for involved parties.
  3. Stove-piped mandates with many players, and unused or misunderstood information.
  4. Lack of clear direction and leadership focus, process management, and desired, quantitative outcomes.
  5. Lack of appropriate tools to assist the life-cycle management process, inclusive of appropriate data validation and standardization.
  6. The appropriate use of consultants, especially in the areas of “change management”.
  7. Lack of understanding and adopting of newer and more efficient construction delivery methods (Integrated Project Delivery – IPD, Job Order Contracting – JOC), contracts, and supporting technology tools.

All aspects of BIM/faclity life-cycle managment, it’s organization, purpose, policies, assumptions, mandates, methods and scope must be discussed, agreed upon, and re-evaluated on a continuous, cyclical basis.  It’s important that process ownership resides with everyone in the organization with appropriate expertise applied and shared from multiple knowledge-domains.   Furthermore, that direct involvement and support of decision-makers and appropriate involvement of consultants and/or outsourcing is available.

BIM/life-cycle facility management requires fundamental changes in business practices.  Unfortuantely, change management is a tremendous chasm to bridge, and achieving any significant success using internal resource only is unlikely.  Just a few of the areas associated with implementing a BIM strategy are shown below.

BIM Process Framework

Anticipated outcomes must be linked to ALL decisions in terms of anticipated financial, functional and/or conditional improvements.

Proprietary (e.g., Excel) and COTS tools for are used for various aspects of facility life-cycle management – strategic planning, capital planning and management/financial modeling, construction delivery, maintenance management, spaces planning/untilization, building automation/security, project management, etc.  Relatively limited effort, focus, associated or investment is typically applied in consideration of integrating and rationalizing these various systems in terms of the validation and standardization of information across multiple knowledge domains.    The piecemeal/ad-hoc approach is a symptom of process and cultural issues with an organization and/or lack of attention to change management.   For example, a common  “excuse” relative to this issue of integrating disparate technologies and processes is that the involved technology is” incompatible”.    In today’s world, virtually any technology using current technology can communicate with another.  The real issues reside in the people and process that create the information.  The inherent “fear of change” and traditional lack of collaboration among various professional discipline are the fundamental issues to be address.   A good example is the continued use of proprietary spreadsheets for cost estimating and other somewhat complex domains.  The use of spreadsheets is well beyond their technologies ability.  Spreadsheets are single user and non-collaborative, have no concept of hierarchy, nor full audit capability.  In short, spreadsheets are inefficient and costly to maintain at best, and are costly relative to information reuse or updating.  Spreadsheet use cost estimating and cost control for facility portfolios is unfortunately both pervasive and untenable.

Similarly CAD-centric visualization tools, such as Revit and AutoCad [from Autodesk], SketchUp (graphical design), Archicad, Bentley, etc. are excellent data visualization tools however, should not be confused as a turnkey BIM life-cycle management solutions.   Relational database centric systems offer enhances data management, however, do not afford the flexibility of spreadsheets.  Newer cloud-based technologies and associated offer higher degrees of collaboration, transparency, and flexibility.

Sample Technology Timeline


Any attempt at life-cycle facility management – BIM will have little or no value unless based upon a collaborative evaluation of current and planned operations, conditions, and priorities.   The objective of BIM is to cost-effectivey meet infrastructure requirements in support of an organizations mission, and to mitigate any preventative and unplanned disruptions to operations and/or compromises the financial position of the organization.  This includes an asset management decision support capability the bases capital reinvestment upon financial and functional returns.  All projects compete for organizational resources and objective criteria must be established to enable maximum utilization of these finite resources.  Informed, goal focused decision support capability is a definitive source of opportunity for efficiency/productivity gains.

Cost awareness across the organization is an important starting point. Everyone in an organization must realize that capital reinvestment decisions are inter-related and impact long term operational expenses.
While uncertainty will certainly be present to some extent, virtually any facility life-cycle project or task can be modeled for decision-makers, and modeled over several timelines… 5 yr, 10yr, 50yr. etc.  The mindset that performance and process improvement is ongoing vs. static must be adopted.  This accounts for associate organizational “growth” or “shrinkage”, trends, regulatory impacts, etc.  The overall goal is to maximize any ability to adapt, renew, renovate, recycle, reuse, and/or grow/shrink physical resources.


“Everyone impacted by decisions made” is the short answer, including but not limited to  Owners, Architects, Planners, Contractors, Sub-Contractors, Business Product Manufacturers, Technology Providers, Consultants, Building Users, Oversight Groups.   From an Owner perspective, involved parties would include; Senior Management/HQ, Local Management, Planners, Capital Planners, Finance, Procurement, Project Managers, Building Users,


So, assuming one proceeds down the BIM life-cycle facility path, what are the reasonable expectations?  First, it’s important to understand that a phased approach is likely the best approach.   Think of BIM as a large pie, one that you are going to put together a piece at a time.   That said, you need the to be aware of the list of ingredients and how and when to put the ingredients together.

Secondly, BIM / life-cycle facility management is verb, a process, not a one time thing… like a project.  It’s primary gold is to improve upon the efficiency of impacts of the built environment, helping decision-makers compare and better select among available capital reinvestment alternatives.  All decisions should consider space, equipments, physical and functional conditions, current construction cost estimates and operational cost estimates over defined periods of time.  An ROI, Return-on-Investment business analysis is mandatory for all projects, inclusive of due consideration of any associated potential risks to the organization’s mission.  So called , “lean practices” are an important objective, as are simple to use decision support and monitoring tools such as “dashboards” and associated key performance indicators (KPIs).
Ongoing facility portfolio reassessment based on a routine and consistently conducted functional and physcial facility assessments associated with appropriate standardized and well vetted reference cost databases, cost models, and other tools such as GIS and BAS.

Efficient facility construction, renovation, repair, and sustainability process management methods such as IPD [integrated project delivery] and JOC [Job Order Contracting], which involve all stakeholders collaboratively from project concept and design, through construction and warranty periods are core components of BIM/facility-life cycle management.

Collaborative, Efficient Project Delivery Methods

Thus in summary, anyone involved in BIM, particularly owners would do well to establish clear leadership and organizational ownership of the associated business processes at all levels in the organization ( local, regional, and HQ) as well as defined inter-relationships and expectations of all collaborative partners (Architects, Engineers, Contractors, Consultants, Technology Providers, etc.).  Organizations also must
clearly articulate all associated business processes and workflows, and mandate their use, as well as the fact that all decisions must be outcome-based.  Full training and support must be available as all levels, including access to all requisite tools, software, information, etc.

The Benefits of BIM, Life-cycle Management, Sustainability and High Performance Buildings

In many ways BIM, Life-cycle facility management, sustainability, and high performance buildings are interchangeable terms… some of us just don’t know it yet.

BIM is the life-cycle management of facilities (vertical and horizontal built environment), support by digital technology.  Thus BIM is part process and part software.  Life-cycle management includes all physical and functional conditions of a structure (physical condition of major systems, sub-systems, components, functional conditions-suitability for current mission, life/safety/security, access/ADA, utilization, ….) and all associated strategic, capital, and tactical planning.  High performance building management and sustainability also includes these factors, with a focus upon environmental impacts-Sustainable Sites, Water Efficiency, Energy and Atmosphere, Materials and Resources, and Indoor Environmental Quality.

The benefits of BIM, Life-cycle management, sustainability, and high performance building strategies go well beyond financial considerations, though productivity and improved performance is sorely lacking within the AEC communities.

The following are just a few of the benefits of Sustainability and High Performance Buildings:

– Improved building occupant productivity ( studies indicate that approximatley $260B Billion lost annually due to poor indoor air quality-Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory).  Productivity gains have also been linked to factors such as day lighting (7-8%), temperature, ventilation,

–  Goodwill, enhanced image.

–  Reduce environmental impact / carbon footprint:  energy, water, waste, pollution (CO2 emissions, pesticides, fertilizers, …)

To put facility costs into perspective, here’s an example from the National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS).  Annual costs in the private office building sector average $200 per square foot for salaries, $20 per square foot for building costs, and $2 per square foot for energy use – a 100:10:1 ratio.   It is therefore relatively easy to calculate direct cost savings relative to productivity and energy improvements.

via – Premier software for efficient construction project delivery – visual cost estimating and project management – JOC, SABER, IPD, SATOC, MATOC, MACC, IDIQ, POCA, BOA, and exclusive enhanced 400,000 line item RSMeans Cost Database.


Fram,ework for High Performanc Building Managment, BIM, and Sustainability




Source: Quantifying the Hidden Benefits of High-Performance Building, TAMU Mays Business School Cooperative Study, December 2011

Bryson York, Emily. (2010, August 28). Goodwill, better business grow from going green.
U.S. Green building Counsel. (2010). LEED for New Construction.
Kats, Greg. (2003). The Costs and Financial Benefits of Green Building.
Kats, Gregory.(2006). Greening America’s Schools Costs and Benefits.
Beko, Gabriel, Geo Clausen, & Charles J. Weschler. (2008, October). Is the use of particle air filtration justified? Costs
and benefits of filtration with regard to health effects, building cleaning and occupant productivity. Building and
Environment, 43(10), 1647-1657.
Hepner, Christina M. & Richard A. Boser. (2006, December). Architects’ Perceptions of LEED Indoor
Environmental Quality Checklist Items on Employee Productivity. International Journal of Construction Education and
Research, 2(3), 193-208.
NSF/IUCRC Center for Building performance and Diagnostics at Carnegie Mellon University. Mixed Mode Conditioning Systems.
NSF/IUCRC Center for Building performance and Diagnostics at Carnegie Mellon University. High Performance Lighting.
U.S. Green building Counsel. (2009). LEED® for Retail.
Gardner, Ken. (2010). Overcoming Barriers to Green Building.
Miller, Norm & Dave Pogue. (2009). Do Green Buildings Make Dollars and Sense?
WBDG Sustainable Committee. (2010). Sustainable.
Romm, Joesph & William Browning. (1997). Green Building and the Bottom Line.
Issa, M.H., J.H. Rankin, & A.J. Christian. (2010, January). Canadian practitioners’ perception of
research work investigating the cost premiums, long-term costs and health and productivity benefits
of green buildings. Building and Environment, 45(2010), 1698-1711.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      Hepner, Christina M. & Richard A. Boser. (2006, December). Architects’ Perceptions of LEED Indoor Environmental Quality Checklist Items on Employee Productivity. International Journal of Construction Education and Research, 2(3), 193-208.
Hepner, Christina M. & Richard A. Boser. (2006, December). Architects’ Perceptions of LEED Indoor
Environmental Quality Checklist Items on Employee Productivity. International Journal of Construction Education and
Research, 2(3), 193-208.
NSF/IUCRC Center for Building performance and Diagnostics at Carnegie Mellon University. Daylighting.
Hoffman, Andrew & Rebecca Henn. (2008). Overcoming the Social and Psychological Barriers to Green Building.
Kats, Greg. (2003). The Costs and Financial Benefits of Green Building.
Romm, Joesph & William Browning. (1997). Green Building and the Bottom Line.
Fisk, William J. (2000). Health and Productivity Gains from Better Indoor Environments and Their
Relationship with Building Energy Efficiency.
NSF/IUCRC Center for Building performance and Diagnostics at Carnegie Mellon University. Daylighting.
NSF/IUCRC Center for Building performance and Diagnostics at Carnegie Mellon University. High Performance Lighting.
Gregerson, John. (2010). The Thermal Comfort Zone.
Gregerson, John. (2010). The Thermal Comfort Zone.
Fisk, William J. (2000). Health and Productivity Gains from Better Indoor Environments and Their Relationship with Building
Energy Efficiency.
NSF/IUCRC Center for Building performance and Diagnostics at Carnegie Mellon University. Mixed Mode Conditioning Systems.
International Society of Sustainability Professionals
Fisk, William J. (2002). How IEQ Affects Health, Productivity.
Fisk, William J. (2002). How IEQ Affects Health, Productivity.
Kats, Greg. (2003). The Costs and Financial Benefits of Green Building.
Kats, Greg. (2003). The Costs and Financial Benefits of Green Building.
Kats, Greg. (2003). The Costs and Financial Benefits of Green Building.
Lipow, Gar W. Cooling It: No Hair Shirt Solutions to Global Warming.
Cascio, Wayne and John Boudreau. (2008). Investing in People. (p. 195-215). Pearson Education, Inc.

What is BIM … It’s not Revit, Archicad, Bentley …

BIM and Cloud technologies/processes will redefine the relationships between all construction professionals.

BIM is the life-cycle management of the built environment supported by digital technology.  While 3d visualization, aka Revit, Archicad, Bentley, et al is a valuable component of BIM it is neither the primary component, or necessarily a requisite component.   These 3d visualization tools and their suppliers have primarily targeted architects and designers.  Why is that?   It’s simple, 3d visualization helps in the visual design and “selling” of structures.  When combined with MEP, it also can save money relative to crash/collision detection.

The true value of BIM, however, lies within business management and process change/adaptation.  The integration of previously disparate silos of construction and facility management information and processes into a collaborative, transparent environment is what BIM offers.

How do we get there?  Simple really, the combination of BIM with CLOUD technology will result in disruptive, positive change.  Affordable, scalable technology is now available to embed robust business processes.

For example, Integrated Project Delivery (IPD), and Job Order Contracting (JOC), the latter being IPD for facility renovation, repair, sustainability and minor new construction, are both efficient, proven construction delivery methods.  The are now both available embedded within technologies to support the collaborative needed of Owners, Contractors, AEs, BPMs (business product manufactures), and the relevant other Community members.

The linking of efficient construction delivery methods like IPD and JOC, with CPMS, CMMS, CAFM, BAS, GIS… to name a few… has already begun.

Valuable information On-Demand to enable efficient construction and facility management is BIM… part technology, part process, 100% collaborative.

Terms of equal import to BIM?   ” Adaptive Project Delivery” and “Adaptive Construction Management”.

BIMF - The Framework for BIM

via – Premier software for efficient project delivery – JOC, IPD, SABER, SATOC,IDIQ,  MATOC, MACC, POCA, BOA …

The Criticality of Project Delivery to Sustainability

Change on the AEC Horizon?

 The ability to meet sustainability and carbon footprint goals in the non-residential buildings sector will require the implementation of robust business processes, the integration of core industry knowledge domains, and the deployment of supporting technologies.

Major productivity gains within the Architectural, Engineering, and Construction (AEC) sector can be achieved by the complementary processes and technologies of 4D/5D Building Information Modeling (BIM), Integrated Project Delivery (IPD), and Job Order Contracting (JOC), which provide the requisite framework for building trust, collaboration, and increased productivity – from project conceptualization thru construction and subsequent operations/maintenance.

 While the success of these process and technology tools is dependent upon fundamental changes in the AEC sector, the critical  issues of global warming, diminishing natural resources, and the dynamics of an altered world economy will help to speed adoption.

via, leading cost estimating and construction delivery management software provider for JOC, SABER, IPD, SATOC, MATOC, MACC, POC, IDIQ, BOA ….

High Performance Building Materials

Journal of Advanced and High-Performance Materials

An official publication of the National Institute of Building Sciences Advanced Materials Council

Cover of JMAT Winter 2011 issue

The need to protect critical infrastructure from natural and manmade disasters and the commitment to making the federal building stock more secure, energy efficient, and environmentally sustainable are not separate or mutually exclusive tasks. They are interconnected by the integrated design process, which describes the linkages among project design objectives. – NIBS, JMAT



The National Institute of Building Sciences Advanced Materials Council is pleased to announce the continuation of our relationship with Matrix Group Publishing in the production of the Journal of Advanced and High-Performance Materials—the premier publication for materials and research used in the built environment to achieve resilience, integration and durability, while providing security as a hallmark of high-performing buildings.


JMAT Winter 2011 (PDF 3.1 MB, 36 pgs)

Highlights include:

  • “Advanced and High-Performance Materials Program”
  • “An Advanced Materials Database: A Gateway for Future and Secure Infrastructures”
  • “High-Ductility Concrete for Resilient Infrastructure”
  • “Carbon Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Strengthening for Alternate Load Paths to Mitigate Progressive Collapse Vulnerabilities”
  • “Evolution of Elastomeric Retrofits for Concrete Masonry Unit Walls for Enhanced Blast Resistance at the Engineer Research and Development Center”
  • “Emergent Materials for Security, Energy and the Environment”

ADVANCED MATERIALS COUNCILAdvanced materials are building-and infrastructure-related materials that exhibit high-performance attributes but have not reached widespread application in the commercial marketplace.High-performance attributes include enhanced security, safety, resiliency, energy conservation, environmental sustainability, durability, cost effectiveness, functionality, productivity and maintainability. MEMBERS:Younane AbousleimanUniversity of OklahomaAkmal AliU.S. Department of Homeland SecuritySteven McKnightNational Science FoundationBlaine BrownellUniversity of MinnesotaKathryn ButlerNational Institute of Standards and Technology, Building and Fire Research Laboratory, Fire Research DivisionTerry ButlerU.S. Department of Homeland SecurityAlexander ChengUniversity of MississippiThomas ColemanU.S. Department of Homeland SecurityTod CompanionU.S. Department of Homeland SecurityFernando Cortez-LiraAnalytical Research, LLCBruce DavidsonU.S. Department of Homeland SecurityShane DavisU.S. Department of Homeland SecurityBeverly DiPaoloU.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Engineering Research and Development Center, Construction Engineering Research LaboratoryChris DoyleU.S. Department of Homeland SecurityRobert DyeLos Alamos National LaboratoryMitchell EricksonU.S. Department of Homeland SecurityMohammed EttouneyWeidlinger Associates, Inc.Christopher FeatherstonU.S. Department of Homeland SecurityGary FischmanNational Research CouncilJohn FortuneU.S. Department of Homeland SecurityLee GlascoeLawrence Livermore National LaboratoryWilliam GrosshandlerNational Institute of Standards and Technology, Building and Fire Research LaboratoryClint HallSandia National LaboratoryDon HicksU.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Engineering Research and Development Center,  Construction Engineering Research LaboratoryMary Ellen HynesU.S. Department of Homeland SecurityMila KennettU.S. Department of Homeland SecurityWilliam KochDefense Threat Reduction AgencyAshok KumarU.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Engineering Research and Development Center, Construction Engineering Research  LaboratorySean LangU.S. Department of Homeland SecurityVictor LiUniversity of MichiganWilliam LueckeNational Institute of Standards and Technology, Metallurgy DivisionPhilip MattsonU.S. Department of Homeland SecurityDelia MillironLawrence Berkeley National LaboratoryYellapu MurtyCellular Materials International, Inc.Laura ParkerU.S. Department of Homeland SecurityRoland PellenqMassachusetts Institute of TechnologyLong PhanNational Institute of Standards and Technology, Building and Fire Research Laboratory, Materials and Construction ResearchMartin SavoieU.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Engineering Research and Development Center, Construction Engineering Research LaboratoryBogdan SrdanovicAPS ConsultingMary ToneyNational Science FoundationJeffrey UrbanLawrence Berkeley National LaboratoryM VallettPort Authority of New York & New JerseyCatlin Van RoonU.S. Department of Homeland SecurityJohn VoellerBlack & VeatchJohn Jy-An WangOak Ridge National LaboratoryAndrea WatsonNational Renewable Energy LaboratoryMichael WernerMBDCJack WiseSandia National LaboratoryGeorge ZippererDefense Threat Reduction AgencyAbdul ZureickGeorgia Institute of TechnologySTAFF:Earle KennettNational Institute of Building SciencesDrew RoulandNational Institute of Building SciencesBob Payndb Interactiv

via – Premier provider of cost estimating and project management software for JOC, SABER, IDIQ, SATOC, MATOC, POCA, & BOA.