This is not a NASA Website. You might learn something. It's YOUR space agency. Get involved. Take it back. Make it work - for YOU.
Commercialization

Does NASA Need To Sell More of its Stuff?

By Keith Cowing
NASA Watch
November 28, 2013
Filed under , ,

Congressman questions whether NASA has let go of enough unused property, Washington Post
“NASA is in the midst of a huge yard sale at Kennedy Space Center, peddling unused hangars, assembly buildings, launch complexes and even a landing strip to commercial space companies.
But at the request of Rep. John L. Mica (R-Fla.), Congress soon may be asking whether the space agency is cleaning out the closets thoroughly enough. Mica said he will call for a congressional hearing early next year to explore NASA’s options for land or buildings that might no longer be needed among the 140,000 acres and scores of facilities at the space center.”

NASA OIG: NASA’s Efforts to Reduce Unneeded Infrastructure and Facilities, earlier post
NASA OIG: NASA’s Real Property Master Planning Efforts, earlier post
NASA’s Infrastructure and Facilities: Assessment of Agency’s Real Property Leasing Practices, earlier post

NASA Watch founder, Explorers Club Fellow, ex-NASA, Away Teams, Journalist, Space & Astrobiology, Lapsed climber.

5 responses to “Does NASA Need To Sell More of its Stuff?”

  1. dogstar29 says:
    0
    0

    NASA is not selling land or facilities, it is leasing facilities. If it sells undeveloped land, it will be developed, and the largest environmental preserve on the east coast of Florida, and the clear area that permits launches, will be irreversibly reduced.

  2. Geoffrey Landis says:
    0
    0

    A congressional investigation? This is going to waste vastly more money than the small amount that might be saved by speeding up the excess process, or the even smaller amount of payment that NASA would get for selling old facilities at government-excess prices.
    Congress is looking to save money, but it’s pretty clear that they don’t have any idea how to do so, or what’s important and what isn’t.

  3. pilgrim101 says:
    0
    0

    This is a process that needs to be looked at from a Historical preservation perspective also. The LUT rotted and was destroyed with no fanfare as many of the so called Apollo artifacts ended up. The property is of value to the country if it can be NASA re-purposed in a logical way or leased to a responsible and relevant private client. If no purpose can be found then all property held at the cape and other NASA stations should be open hearing evaluated for Historical preservation. This should be done before both sides of the aisle start eyeing liquidation or demolition. We do not need to repeat 1978 all over again now that we have once again burned our ships in the harbor.

  4. Eli Rabett says:
    0
    0

    Although a minor thing, the sharing of excess equipment through the Stevenson Wylder act has helped a lot of schools