Lawmakers Allocate Money for DOD Energy Security Position
Author(s): Fawzia Sheikh
Type: News Article
Date: 07/16/2009
House and Senate lawmakers want $5 million in fiscal year 2010 to fund a new operational energy director position established in last year’s defense authorization bill that will “help paint a better picture” of the scope of the tasks assigned to this individual, Christine Parthemore of the Center for a New American Security told Inside the Pentagon.
The money was not part of the president’s budget request but added by the House Armed Services Committee, committee spokeswoman Lara Battles told ITP.
The Senate Armed Services Committee is also recommending $5 million for the new position in order to “increase oversight and coordinate energy efforts across the military services,” committee spokeswoman Tara Andringa told ITP. “The position was created in last year’s [National Defense Authorization Act] but has yet to be filled.”
Although Congress did not allocate any dollars to the director of operational energy plans and programs last year, lawmakers did set out reporting requirements, said Parthemore, the Bacevich fellow specializing in energy security and climate change at the Washington-based think tank. However, without an assigned budget, it was “hard to determine what the scope’s going to be,” she said. “In this year’s [bill] they added in an authorization to appropriate $5 million, so that’s great.”
This director’s job will be to “keep tabs” on the energy-related efforts of the services, the combatant commands and the military bases, she said. The director will ensure there’s “an overarching operational energy strategy that is sort of dictating what the actions of all the players are,” she maintained.
If the operational energy director position is “expanded at some point, or as they tweak what it’s actually going to do,” CNAS recommends that the individual considers climate change in any energy decisions, she told ITP. “So I think that’s the main difference between the legislation and our [recommendations].”
Moreover, Parthemore added, the think tank’s suggestion reiterates the administration’s message that energy and climate change must go hand in hand.
Last year’s defense authorization bill noted that the director of operational energy would set metrics for the Defense Department, allowing it to report back to Congress on “what they’re actually accomplishing, the ways in which change is actually being affected by this position,” she said. The House version of the FY-10 bill establishes certain metrics, she said.
Section 334, for example, discusses DOD goals regarding procurement of renewable aviation fuels, Parthemore said. For FY-25 and each subsequent fiscal year, the Pentagon must aim to “procure from renewable aviation fuel sources not less than 25 percent of the total quantity of aviation fuel consumed by the Department of Defense in the contiguous United States,” states the bill. The department must also obtain fuels from renewable aviation fuel sources whenever the use of such fuels is consistent with the operational energy strategy required by the bill, it notes.
Further, the House asks for a report on the implementation of comptroller general recommendations regarding fuel demand management at forward-deployed locations. Not later than February 1, 2010, the director of operational energy plans and programs must submit to the congressional armed services committees a report on any specific actions that have been taken to implement three recommendations made by the comptroller general, the bill says.
The comptroller general advised that each of the combatant commanders establish requirements for managing fuel demand at forward-deployed locations within their respective areas of responsibility, that the head of each military department develop guidance to implement such requirements, and that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff require that fuel demand considerations be incorporated into the Joint Staff’s initiative to develop joint standards of life support at forward-deployed locations, lawmakers state.
The House Armed Services Committee, moreover, asks that the defense secretary consider renewable fuels, including “domestically produced algae-based, biodiesel, and biomass-derived fuels, for testing, certification, and use in aviation, maritime, and ground transportation fleets,” indicates the bill. Not later than February 1, 2010, the defense secretary must provide to the armed services committees an assessment on his consideration of renewable fuels. It has to include “technical, logistical, and policy considerations” and explain whether it would be beneficial to establish a renewable fuel commodity class that is distinct from petroleum-based products,” lawmakers state.
In the Senate, lawmakers are establishing “comprehensive reporting requirements” for DOD’s efforts to develop and implement plans and strategies to meet energy efficiency requirements established by applicable statutes and executive orders, Andringa noted. The provision will help Congress and DOD gain visibility on installation renewable energy projects, determine if existing funding mechanisms are sufficient and provide a cost and feasibility response for implementing the recommendations of the 2008 Defense Science Board Report titled “More Fight -- Less Fuel,” she added.
In addition, the Senate Armed Services Committee is asking Defense Secretary Robert Gates to identify and address areas in which electricity needs to carry out critical missions may be vulnerable to disruption, and the authority to award contracts, grants, or other agreements to reimburse private parties for actions taken to address such vulnerabilities, Andringa said.
Topic(s): Natural Resources + National Security = Natural Security
Project(s): Energy Security and Climate Change
People: Christine Parthemore
