This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-12-336R 
entitled 'Defense Infrastructure: DOD Did Not Fully Address the 
Supplemental Reporting Requirements in Its Energy Management Report' 
which was released on February 1, 2012. 

This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as 
part of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. 
Every attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data 
integrity of the original printed product. Accessibility features, 
such as text descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes 
placed at the end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, 
are provided but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format 
of the printed version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an 
exact electronic replica of the printed version. We welcome your 
feedback. Please E-mail your comments regarding the contents or 
accessibility features of this document to Webmaster@gao.gov. 

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright 
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed 
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work 
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the 
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this 
material separately. 

GAO-12-336R: 

United States Government Accountability Office: 
Washington, DC 20548: 

January 31, 2012: 

Congressional Committees: 

Subject: Defense Infrastructure: DOD Did Not Fully Address the 
Supplemental Reporting Requirements in Its Energy Management Report: 

This report formally transmits our January 2012 briefing to committees 
in response to section 332(c) of the National Defense Authorization 
Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2010[Footnote 1] (section 332) and our 
response to House Report 111-166[Footnote 2] regarding the Department 
of Defense's (DOD) energy-efficiency programs. The act and House 
report directed DOD to report on a specific set of energy issues and 
directed GAO to review DOD's report and submit to Congress a report on 
our findings. A summary of the eight required energy-efficiency 
reporting issues is included as enclosure I. Details on our findings 
and the basis for them are provided in enclosure II. 

Background: 

The House Report (H.R. Rep. No. 111-166) directed the Secretary of 
Defense to conduct an assessment of seven specific energy issues and 
to submit the findings and recommendations resulting from the 
assessment to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House 
Committee on Armed Services. Also, the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2010, section 332(b), states that the first report 
submitted by the Secretary of Defense under 10 U.S.C. § 2925(a) (DOD's 
Annual Energy Management Report) after the date of the enactment of 
the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2010 shall include information on a similar 
list of eight specific energy issues.[Footnote 3] 

The first report submitted by DOD in response to 10 U.S.C. § 2925(a) 
after the date of the enactment of the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2010 was 
its Fiscal Year 2009 Annual Energy Management Report, issued in May 
2010. As we previously reported,[Footnote 4] the Fiscal Year 2009 
Annual Energy Management Report did not include information on the 
eight specific issues identified by the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2010. DOD 
officials stated that they planned to comply with the reporting 
requirement by including the required information in their Fiscal Year 
2010 Annual Energy Management Report. The officials noted that the 
Fiscal Year 2010 Annual Energy Management Report would be the first 
report commenced and developed under the expanded section 332 
reporting requirements. DOD's Fiscal Year 2010 Annual Energy 
Management Report was issued in July 2011. 

Scope and Methodology: 

To examine the extent to which DOD's Fiscal Year 2010 Annual Energy 
Management Report addresses the expanded reporting requirements 
contained in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2010, we analyzed the report and 
compared it with the legislative requirements. Additionally, we 
interviewed officials in the Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of 
Defense, Installations and Environment; and in the Office of the 
Assistant Secretary of Operational Energy Plans and Programs, to 
ascertain what changes, if any, were incorporated into the 2010 Report 
to address the reporting requirements, and what challenges DOD faced 
in complying with those reporting requirements. We determined that the 
data were sufficiently reliable for the purposes of our review. 

We conducted this performance audit from November 2011 through January 
2012 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing 
standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit 
to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable 
basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objective. 
We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for 
our findings and conclusions based on our audit objective. 

Summary: 

Our analysis showed that DOD's Fiscal Year 2010 Annual Energy 
Management Report fully addressed two, did not address one (issue 4), 
and partially addressed five of the eight expanded reporting 
requirements (see table 1). In some cases, it was difficult to 
determine the extent to which DOD had addressed an issue because 
information related to a specific reporting requirement was fragmented 
or scattered throughout the report. With regard to the one issue not 
addressed, DOD indicated it had plans to address it in a separate 
report tentatively scheduled to be published in early 2012. 

Table 1: Extent to Which DOD's Fiscal Year 2010 Annual Energy 
Management Report Addressed the Eight Expanded Reporting Requirements 
(Issues) Mandated by Section 332 of the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2010: 

Reporting issue: 1. A determination of whether the tools that exist as 
of the date of the enactment of this Act, including the Energy 
Conservation Investment Program and the Energy Savings Performance 
Contracts (ESPCs) Program, are sufficient to support renewable energy 
projects to achieve the Department's installation energy goals, or if 
new funding mechanisms would be beneficial; 
Our assessment: Fully addressed. 

Reporting issue: 2. A determination of the cost and feasibility of a 
policy that would require new power generation projects established on 
installations to be able to switch to provide power for military 
operations in the event of a commercial grid outage; 
Our assessment: Partially addressed. 

Reporting issue: 3. An assessment of the extent to which state and 
regional laws and regulations and market structures provide 
opportunities or obstacles to establish renewable energy projects on 
military installations; 
Our assessment: Partially addressed. 

Reporting issue: 4. A determination of the cost and feasibility of 
developing or acquiring equipment or systems that would result in 
maximized use of renewable energy sources at contingency locations; 
Our assessment: Not addressed.[A] 

Reporting issue: 5. An assessment of the feasibility of meeting the 
Department's renewable energy goals with on-base renewable energy 
production rather than with renewable energy credits; 
Our assessment: Fully addressed. 

Reporting issue: 6. An analysis of the percentage of new construction 
projects subject to the Department's current building construction 
sustainable design standards (Leadership in Energy and Environmental 
Design standards) that include a renewable energy component, and a 
determination as to whether the criteria of the Department's design 
standards, as in effect on the date of the enactment of this Act, are 
consistent with the overall goals, including renewable energy goals, 
of the Secretary; 
Our assessment: Partially addressed. 

Reporting issue: 7. The feasibility and cost of developing net-zero 
energy installations and a detailed assessment, by installation, of 
power production (including renewable energy) measured against energy 
consumption; 
Our assessment: Partially addressed. 

Reporting issue: 8. A determination of whether a dedicated funding 
mechanism for renewable energy projects for stand-alone facilities, 
including National Guard and Reserve centers, would encourage greater 
use of renewable energy sources both at existing facilities and in new 
construction; 
Our assessment: Partially addressed. 

Source: GAO's analysis of DOD data. 

[A] DOD plans to address this in a separate report tentatively 
scheduled to be published in early 2012. 

[End of table] 

For additional information on the results of our work, see the 
briefing at pages 7 through 21 of this report. 

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation: 

In oral comments on a draft of our briefing, officials from the Office 
of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installations and 
Environment (Facilities Energy) commented that they believed the 
finding that DOD has not addressed issue number 4 is inaccurate. 
Department officials stated that they are in the process of preparing 
a report in response to Section 333 of the Duncan Hunter National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009[Footnote 5] that will 
address this issue and provided GAO a copy of the draft. In our report 
we acknowledged that the department plans to issue a separate report 
on this issue and shared a draft of the report with GAO. However, 
because the department previously told us it planned to include the 
required information in its fiscal year 2010 Annual Energy Management 
Report but did not, we stand behind our finding that DOD's 2010 report 
did not address this issue. DOD also provided technical comments, 
which we have incorporated into this report as applicable. 

We are sending copies of this report to appropriate congressional 
committees and to the Secretary of Defense. In addition, this letter 
will be made available at no charge on the GAO website at [hyperlink,k 
http://www.gao.gov]. 

Should you or your staff have any questions concerning this report, 
please contact James R. McTigue, Jr., at (202) 512-7968 or 
mctiguej@gao.gov or Frank Rusco at (202) 512-3841 or ruscof@gao.gov. 
Contact points for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public 
Affairs may be found on the last page of this letter. Key contributors 
to this correspondence are listed in enclosure III. 

Signed by: 

James R. McTigue, Jr., Acting Director:
Defense Capabilities and Management: 

Signed by: 

Frank Rusco, Director:
Natural Resources and Environment: 

Enclosures-3: 

List of Committees: 

The Honorable Carl Levin:
Chairman:
The Honorable John McCain:
Ranking Member:
Committee on Armed Services:
United States Senate: 

The Honorable Howard McKeon:
Chairman:
The Honorable Adam Smith:
Ranking Member:
Committee on Armed Services:
House of Representatives: 

[End of section] 

Enclosure I: 

Summary of Section 332(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2010 (Pub. L. No. 111-84, 2009)): Additional Material 
Required for DOD's First Expanded Report: 

1. A determination of whether the tools that exist as of the date of 
the enactment of this Act, including the Energy Conservation 
Investment Program and the Energy Savings Performance Contracts 
(ESPCs) Program, are sufficient to support renewable energy projects 
to achieve the Department's installation energy goals, or if new 
funding mechanisms would be beneficial. 

2. A determination of the cost and feasibility of a policy that would 
require new power generation projects established on installations to 
be able to switch to provide power for military operations in the 
event of a commercial grid outage. 

3. An assessment of the extent to which state and regional laws and 
regulations and market structures provide opportunities or obstacles 
to establish renewable energy projects on military installations. 

4. A determination of the cost and feasibility of developing or 
acquiring equipment or systems that would result in maximized use of 
renewable energy sources at contingency locations. 

5. An assessment of the feasibility of meeting the Department's 
renewable energy goals with on-base renewable energy production rather 
than with renewable energy credits. 

6. An analysis of the percentage of new construction projects subject 
to the Department's current building construction sustainable design 
standards (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design standards) 
that include a renewable energy component, and a determination as to 
whether the criteria of the Department's design standards, as in 
effect on the date of the enactment of this Act, are consistent with 
the overall goals, including renewable energy goals, of the Secretary. 

7. The feasibility and cost of developing net-zero energy 
installations and a detailed assessment, by installation, of power 
production (including renewable energy) measured against energy 
consumption. 

8. A determination of whether a dedicated funding mechanism for 
renewable energy projects for stand-alone facilities, including 
National Guard and Reserve centers, would encourage greater use of 
renewable energy sources both at existing facilities and in new 
construction. 

[End of section] 

Enclosure II: 

Defense Infrastructure: DOD Did Not Fully Address the Supplemental 
Reporting Requirements in Its Energy Management Report: 

Briefing for Congressional Committees: 
January 2012: 

Contents: 

Introduction; 
Researchable Objective; 
Scope and Methodology; 
Summary and Findings; 
Discussion of Energy Issues 1 through 8; 
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation; 
Related GAO Product. 

[End of section] 

Introduction: 

The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for fiscal year 2010 
[Footnote 6] House Report 111-166, directed the Department of Defense 
(DOD) to conduct assessments and report on a specific set of energy 
issues. By doing so, the committee stated that DOD could identify 
impediments that inhibit installations from furthering their renewable-
energy goals and make recommendations for actions to address those 
impediments. Furthermore, the committee report and NDAA directed the 
GAO Comptroller General to review DOD’s report and submit to Congress 
a report on such review. 

On September 29, 2010, we reported[Footnote 7] that DOD’s first 
submission following the enactment of the NDAA, the Fiscal Year 2009 
Annual Energy Management Report, did not include information on the 
eight specific issues as required. We also reported that according to 
DOD officials, DOD planned to comply with the reporting requirement by 
including the required information in its Fiscal Year 2010 Annual 
Energy Management Report. That report was issued in July 2011. 

[End of section] 

Researchable Objective: 

To what extent does the Fiscal Year 2010 Department of Defense Annual 
Energy Management Report address the supplemental reporting 
requirements mandated by the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2010? 

[End of section] 

Scope and Methodology: 

To conduct this work we did the following: 

* We examined the extent to which DOD’s Fiscal Year 2010 Annual Energy 
Management Report addressed the reporting requirements from the fiscal 
year 2010 NDAA, by reviewing the report and comparing it with the 
legislative requirements. 

* We interviewed officials in the Office of the Deputy Under Secretary 
of Defense, Installations and Environment; and in the Office of the 
Assistant Secretary of Operational Energy Plans and Programs about any 
changes that might have been incorporated into the 2010 report to 
address the legislative requirements, and about any challenges in 
complying with the reporting requirements. 

* We conducted this performance audit from November 2011 through 
January 2012 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing 
standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit 
to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable 
basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objective. 
We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for 
our findings and conclusions based on our audit objective. 

[End of section] 

Summary and Findings: 

Table 1. Extent to which DOD’s Fiscal Year 2010 Annual Energy 
Management Report addresses the eight supplemental reporting 
requirements (issues) mandated by the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2010: 

Reporting issue: 1. A determination of whether the tools that exist as 
of the date of the enactment of this Act, including the Energy 
Conservation Investment Program and the Energy Savings Performance 
Contracts (ESPCs) Program, are sufficient to support renewable energy 
projects to achieve the Department's installation energy goals, or if 
new funding mechanisms would be beneficial; 
Our assessment: Fully addressed. 

Reporting issue: 2. A determination of the cost and feasibility of a 
policy that would require new power generation projects established on 
installations to be able to switch to provide power for military 
operations in the event of a commercial grid outage; 
Our assessment: Partially addressed. 

Reporting issue: 3. An assessment of the extent to which state and 
regional laws and regulations and market structures provide 
opportunities or obstacles to establish renewable energy projects on 
military installations; 
Our assessment: Partially addressed. 

Reporting issue: 4. A determination of the cost and feasibility of 
developing or acquiring equipment or systems that would result in 
maximized use of renewable energy sources at contingency locations; 
Our assessment: Not addressed.[A] 

Reporting issue: 5. An assessment of the feasibility of meeting the 
Department's renewable energy goals with on-base renewable energy 
production rather than with renewable energy credits; 
Our assessment: Fully addressed. 

Reporting issue: 6. An analysis of the percentage of new construction 
projects subject to the Department's current building construction 
sustainable design standards (Leadership in Energy and Environmental 
Design standards) that include a renewable energy component, and a 
determination as to whether the criteria of the Department's design 
standards, as in effect on the date of the enactment of this Act, are 
consistent with the overall goals, including renewable energy goals, 
of the Secretary; 
Our assessment: Partially addressed. 

Reporting issue: 7. The feasibility and cost of developing net-zero 
energy installations and a detailed assessment, by installation, of 
power production (including renewable energy) measured against energy 
consumption; 
Our assessment: Partially addressed. 

Reporting issue: 8. A determination of whether a dedicated funding 
mechanism for renewable energy projects for stand-alone facilities, 
including National Guard and Reserve centers, would encourage greater 
use of renewable energy sources both at existing facilities and in new 
construction; 
Our assessment: Partially addressed. 

Source: GAO's analysis of DOD data. 

[A] DOD plans to address this in a separate report tentatively 
scheduled to be published in early 2012. 

[End of table] 

[End of section] 

Discussion of Energy Issues: 

Issue 1: A determination of whether the tools that exist as of the 
date of the enactment of this Act, including the Energy Conservation 
Investment Program (ECIP)[Footnote 8] and the Energy Savings 
Performance Contracts (ESPCs)[Footnote 9] Program, are sufficient to 
support renewable energy projects to achieve the Department’s 
installation energy goals, or if new funding mechanisms would be 
beneficial. 

* DOD reported: DOD determined that it is currently taking advantage 
of existing tools as well as exploring other financing mechanisms for 
renewable energy projects. DOD’s report emphasizes that all the 
military departments plan on continuing the use of existing tools and 
discusses using other financing alternatives. For example, while some 
projects may be cost-prohibitive if the department must rely solely on 
existing tools, such as military construction or ECIP appropriations, 
other funding mechanisms such as third-party financing from utilities 
and private developers could provide the level of funding needed for 
these projects. 

* What GAO found:In its report DOD discusses both existing tools-–such 
as the ECIP and the ESPCs–-and new funding mechanisms-–such as third-
party financing. DOD’s report provides specific information on 
funding and includes examples of the various tools that the department 
currently employs, and is pursuing, in order to fund projects to meet 
its energy goals. Furthermore, according to Officials from the Office 
of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense, Installations and Energy, 
DOD has the tools to execute renewable-energy projects appropriately 
by using both appropriated funding as well as leveraging other funding 
mechanisms. 

* What GAO concluded:DOD fully addressed this issue. 

Issue 2: A determination of the cost and feasibility of a policy that 
would require new power generation projects established on 
installations to be able to switch to provide power for military 
operations in the event of a commercial grid outage. 

* DOD reported: DOD considered the feasibility of a new policy to 
address this issue; however, it did not address cost. In its report 
DOD determined the following in terms of feasibility: 

- The department can benefit from the flexibility to decide whether 
new power-generation projects must be able to operate independently 
from the commercial grid based primarily on protecting critical DOD 
missions. 

- A requirement to include this capability will increase costs due to 
requirements for new infrastructure, such as installing electrical 
transmission lines to areas on an installation where they would not 
normally be installed. 

* What GAO found: DOD did not address the cost element of this issue 
in its report. According to DOD officials, cost is difficult to 
address due to risk that is regional and site-specific. Further, DOD 
officials 
explained that the Defense Critical Infrastructure Program considers 
costs of a variety of resources, such as water and electricity, in its 
evaluations of how to protect an installation. The results of these 
evaluations are contained in classified assessments. 

* What GAO concluded: DOD has partially has addressed this issue in 
that it determined feasibility, but has not addressed the cost element 
of the issue. 

Issue 3: An assessment of the extent to which state and regional laws 
and regulations and market structures provide opportunities or 
obstacles to establish renewable energy projects on military 
installations. 

* DOD reported: The Department discussed the consideration of market 
and regulatory factors when planning renewable-energy projects. For 
example, the report emphasizes the importance of three factors: local 
demand for energy, local/regional energy prices, and regulatory 
incentives. In its discussion of regulatory incentives, DOD refers to 
several market structures, such as low-cost loans, loan guarantees, 
grants, and tax incentives. 

* What GAO found: It is unclear whether DOD’s assessment included a 
review of state and regional laws and regulations, and if so, there is 
no explanation of how DOD assessed the various state and regional laws 
and regulations in its report. According to officials from the Office 
of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense, Installations and Energy, 
laws and regulations were assessed and the results of those 
assessments are summarized in a by-installation chart included in the 
report. However, there is no reference to the chart in the section of 
the report that addresses this issue, and there are no references on 
the chart to laws and regulations. 

* What GAO concluded:DOD has partially addressed this issue by 
discussing market structures, but it is unclear from reading the 
report whether, how, or to what extent state and regional laws and 
regulations were assessed. 

Issue 4: A determination of the cost and feasibility of developing or 
acquiring equipment or systems that would result in maximized use of 
renewable energy sources at contingency locations. 

* DOD reported: This issue was not addressed in DOD’s Fiscal Year 2010 
Annual Energy Management Report. 

* What GAO found: DOD officials had previously stated that they would 
address the reporting requirements in their Fiscal Year 2010 Annual 
Energy Management Report. However, the report does not include a 
discussion of this issue. According to officials from the Office of 
the Secretary of Defense’s Office of Operational Energy Plans and 
Programs, this issue will be addressed in a report that they are 
preparing in response to other legislation. That report is currently 
being reviewed by the department with a target release date in early 
2012. 

* What GAO concluded: The fiscal year 2010 report that DOD submitted 
to the Congressional committees did not address this issue. 

Issue 5: An assessment of the feasibility of meeting the Department’s 
renewable energy goals with on-base renewable energy production rather 
than with renewable energy credits.[Footnote 10] 

* DOD reported: The department is subject to two statutory renewable-
energy targets: one mandates that renewable energy produced or 
procured must total a specific percentage of total facility 
electricity consumption by 2025, and the other mandates that a 
specific percentage of electricity consumption come from renewable 
sources.[Footnote 11] DOD reports that it conducted a preliminary 
assessment of renewable-energy potential at its installations using 
fiscal year 2009 data that determined the department is well 
positioned to meet its 2025 goal. The report notes that to add 
certainty to the assessment, DOD will need additional in-depth 
feasibility studies on a project-by-project basis at the installation 
level. In meeting the second goal, DOD reports that the statute has 
established targets, such as increasing renewable-energy consumption 
to 5 percent in fiscal year 2010, and while it has not met this 
requirement, the department continues to make progress. According to 
the report, DOD expects that without using renewable-energy 
certificates it can attain the 2025 goal, but it does not expect to 
attain the other goal. 

* What GAO found: DOD’s report includes an assessment of the 
feasibility of meeting the department’s renewable energy goals with on-
base renewable-energy production rather than with renewable-energy 
certificates. DOD’s results are clearly provided in trend analysis at 
both the service and department wide level. 

* What GAO concluded: DOD has fully addressed this issue. As stated in 
its report, DOD has conducted an assessment and reported its 
conclusion on the feasibility of meeting its renewable-energy goals 
with on-base renewable-energy production rather than with renewable-
energy certificates. 

Issue 6: An analysis of the percentage of new construction projects 
subject to the Department’s current building construction sustainable 
design standards (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design 
standards)[Footnote 12] that include a renewable energy component, and 
a determination as to whether the criteria of the Department’s design 
standards, as in effect on the date of the enactment of this Act, are 
consistent with the overall goals, including renewable energy goals, 
of the Secretary. 

* DOD reported: On-site renewable energy generation at the facility 
level does not contribute significantly to the Department’s renewable 
energy generation. DOD plans to achieve renewable energy goals by 
initiating large-scale, renewable energy generation projects, which 
are not incorporated into current Leadership in Energy and 
Environmental Design standards. Those standards are consistent with 
renewable energy goals, but likely will not significantly contribute 
to adding generation capacity. Furthermore, DOD is including new 
approaches to renewable technology in the overall design for new 
military construction to make its infrastructure more energy self-
sufficient. 

* What GAO found: DOD provided a list of new construction and funded 
renewable energy initiatives for both the Army and the Air Force, 
including a variety of renewable energy projects such as solar, wind, 
and geothermal. The Navy did not submit its data to DOD for inclusion 
in the report. The report does not include an analysis of the 
percentage of new construction projects subject to DOD’s design and 
the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design standards.Although DOD
’s design standard criteria appear to be consistent with renewable 
energy goals, DOD informed us that these renewable energy projects 
will not significantly contribute to meeting renewable energy goals. 

* What GAO concluded: DOD has partially addressed this issue. The 
report does not include data on the Navy, nor does it provide an 
analysis of the percentage of new construction projects subject to the 
Department’s current building construction sustainable design 
standards that include a renewable energy component. 

Index point for: GAO-12-79, page 24, footnote 1 for LEED definition in 
footnote and page 1, first paragraph after the word “quality” in the 
footnote. 

Issue 7: The feasibility and cost of developing net-zero energy 
installations[Footnote 13] and a detailed assessment, by installation, 
of power production (including renewable energy) measured against 
energy consumption. 

* DOD reported: Net-zero energy is a concept of energy self-
sufficiency, based on minimized demand and use of local renewable-
energy sources. DOD determined that net-zero assessments on an 
installation require in-depth analyses of energy use, the potential 
for energy-consumption reduction, the potential for on-site renewable-
energy production, and local grid modifications required to control 
energy supply from more-diverse and often intermittent sources. DOD 
identified four pilot installations and several other net-zero 
energy candidate installations and reported that a more-comprehensive 
and in-depth net-zero feasibility study for each installation will be 
required to develop cost estimates. Furthermore, each military 
department will refine its net-zero energy installations focus based 
on results from ongoing and planned studies. 

* What GAO found: DOD officials reported that although the feasibility 
of net-zero installations was assessed, cost was not assessed. 

* What GAO concluded: DOD has partially addressed this issue. DOD’s 
report describes its approach for evaluating the feasibility of net-
zero energy installations; however, it does not address the cost 
aspect of the issue. 

Issue 8: A determination of whether a dedicated funding mechanism for 
renewable energy projects for stand-alone facilities, including 
National Guard and Reserve centers, would encourage greater use of 
renewable energy sources both at existing facilities and in new 
construction. 

* DOD reported: DOD components will execute energy projects that are 
cost-effective over their life cycles, both at stand-alone facilities 
and those that are connected with the commercial grid. The report also 
notes that DOD has not identified a need for any funding mechanisms 
for renewable-energy projects beyond those currently available. 

* What GAO found: According to DOD officials, existing funding 
mechanisms are sufficient to encourage greater use of renewable-energy 
sources both at existing facilities and in new construction. They also 
said the department has determined it will have the tools to execute 
renewable-energy projects appropriately by using appropriated funding 
and third-party financing. 

* What GAO concluded: DOD has partially addressed this issue. DOD’s 
response to this issue in its report was not complete. For example, 
the report does not specifically address whether a dedicated funding 
mechanism would encourage greater use of renewable-energy sources, and 
it does not address National Guard and Reserve centers in the 
discussion of stand-alone facilities. 

[End of section] 

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation: 

In oral comments on a draft of this briefing, officials from the 
Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installations and 
Environment (Facilities Energy) commented that they believed the 
finding that DOD has not addressed issue number 4 is inaccurate. 
Department officials stated that they are in the process of preparing a 
report in response to Section 333 of the Duncan Hunter National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 that will address this 
issue and provided GAO a copy of the draft. In our briefing we 
acknowledged that the department plans to issue a separate report on 
this issue and provided GAO a copy of the draft. However, because the 
department previously told us it planned to include the required 
information in its fiscal year 2010 Annual Energy Management Report 
but did not, we stand behind our finding that DOD’s 2010 report did 
not address this issue. DOD also provided technical comments, which we 
have incorporated into this briefing as applicable. 

[End of section] 

Related GAO Products: 

Defense Infrastructure: Department of Defense’s Energy Supplemental 
Report. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-988R]. 
Washington, D.C.: September 29, 2010. 

Defense Infrastructure: Department of Defense Renewable Energy 
Initiatives. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-681R]. 
Washington, D.C.: April 26, 2010. 

Defense Infrastructure: DOD Needs to Take Actions to Address 
Challenges in Meeting Federal Renewable Energy Goals. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-104]. Washington, D.C.: December 
18, 2009. 

Defense Critical Infrastructure: Actions Needed to Improve the 
Consistency, Reliability, and Usefulness of DOD’s Tier 1 Task Critical 
Asset List. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-740R]. 
Washington, D.C.: July 17, 2009. 

Federal Energy Management: Addressing Challenges through Better Plans 
and Clarifying the Greenhouse Gas Emission Measure Will Help Meet Long-
term Goals for Buildings. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-977]. Washington, D.C.: September 
30, 2008. 

Defense Management: Overarching Organizational Framework Needed to 
Guide and Oversee Energy Reduction Efforts for Military Operations. 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-426]. Washington, D.C.: 
March 13, 2008. 

Advanced Energy Technologies: Budget Trends and Challenges for DOE’s 
Energy R&D Program. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-556T]. Washington, D.C.: March 5, 
2008. 

Transmission Lines: Issues Associated with High-Voltage Direct-Current 
Transmission Lines along Transportation Rights of Way. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-347R. Washington, D.C.: February 1, 
2008. 

Advanced Energy Technologies: Key Challenges to Their Development and 
Deployment. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-550T]. 
Washington, D.C.: February 28, 2007. 

Department of Energy: Key Challenges Remain for Developing and 
Deploying Advanced Energy Technologies to Meet Future Needs. 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-106]. Washington, D.C.: 
December 20, 2006. 

Renewable Energy: Increased Geothermal Development Will Depend on 
Overcoming Many Challenges. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-629]. Washington, D.C.: May 24, 
2006. 

Energy Savings: Performance Contracts Offer Benefits, but Vigilance Is 
Needed to Protect Government Interests. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-05-340]. Washington, D.C.: June 22, 
2005. 

National Energy Policy: Inventory of Major Federal Energy Programs and 
Status of Policy Recommendations. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-05-379]. Washington, D.C.: June 10, 
2005. 

Meeting Energy Demand in the 21st Century: Many Challenges and Key 
Questions. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-05-414T]. 
Washington, D.C.: March 16, 2005. 

Capital Financing: Partnerships and Energy Savings Performance 
Contracts Raise Budgeting and Monitoring Concerns. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-05-55]. Washington, D.C.: December 16, 
2004. 

Geothermal Energy: Information on the Navy’s Geothermal Program. 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-04-513]. Washington, D.C.: 
June 4, 2004. 

[End of section] 

GAO on the Web: 
Website: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/]. 

Contact: 
Managing Director, Public Affairs, youngc1@gao.gov: 
(202) 512-4800: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room 7149: 
Washington, D.C. 20548: 

Copyright: 
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright 
protection in the United States. The published product may be 
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further permission 
from GAO. However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or 
other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary 
if you wish to reproduce this material separately. 

[End of Enclosure II] 

Enclosure III: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments: 

GAO Contacts: 

James R. McTigue, Jr., at (202) 512-7968 or mctiguej@gao.gov or Frank 
Rusco at (202) 512-3841 or ruscof@gao.gov. 

Staff Acknowledgments: 

In addition to the contacts named above, GAO staff who made key 
contributions to this report include Harold Reich, Assistant Director; 
Ernie Hazera, Assistant Director; Tim Burke; Larry Bridges; Cheryl 
Weissman; Charles Perdue, and Michael Willems. 

[End of section] 

Footnotes: 

[1] Pub. L. No.111-84 (2009). 

[2] The committee report accompanying H.R. 2647, a bill for the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010. 

[3] There is considerable overlap between the two lists of issues, and 
seven of the eight issues are substantively similar. The one issue 
that is in section 332 that is not reflected in the committee report 
(H.R. Rep. No. 111-166) relates to DOD's making a determination of the 
cost and feasibility of developing or acquiring equipment or systems 
that would result in maximized use of renewable energy sources at 
contingency locations. 

[4] GAO, Defense Infrastructure: Department of Defense's Energy 
Supplemental Report, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-988R] (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 29, 
2010). 

[5] Pub. L. No. 110-417 (2008) 

[6] Pub. L. No. 111-84, §332 (2009). 

[7] GAO, Defense Infrastructure: Department of Defense’s Energy 
Supplemental Report, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-988R] (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 29, 
2010). 

[8] Energy Conservation Investment Program (ECIP)-–An Office of the 
Secretary of Defense centrally managed, project-oriented element 
within the Defense-wide military construction account that is 
programmed annually and represents the primary direct DOD investment 
in energy and water conservation. 

[9] Energy Savings Performance Contracts allow federal agencies to 
hire a contractor to develop energy-conservation or renewable-energy 
projects with the expectation that the annual savings from the project 
will fund the project’s annual costs. 

[10] Although the statute refers to renewable-energy credits, in its 
report DOD referred to them as renewable-energy certificates. 
Renewable-energy certificates are tradable, non tangible energy 
commodities, that can be bought and sold between multiple parties, and 
represent the environmental attributes of renewable-energy generation. 
Generation of renewable energy in effect produces two products: the 
energy and accompanying renewable-energy certificate. 

[11] (1)Title 10 U.S.C. §2911(e) mandates that renewable energy 
(electric and non electric) produced or procured must total 25 percent 
of total electricity consumption by the year 2025, and (2) the Energy 
Policy Act of 2005 mandates that 5 percent of electricity consumption 
come from renewable sources, increasing to 7.5 percent by 2013. 

[12] Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design standards –are an 
internationally recognized green building certification system.Green 
building practices are construction and maintenance practices designed 
to make efficient use of resources, reduce environmental problems, and 
provide long-term financial and health benefits through lower annual 
operating costs and better indoor air quality.According to DOD, DOD 
Instruction 4170.11 and Executive Order 13514 require new buildings to 
be constructed to Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Silver 
standards, where cost effective. 

[13] A net-zero energy installation is one that produces as much 
energy on-site or nearby as it consumes in its buildings and 
facilities, and maximizes the use of renewable energy resources. 

[End of section] 

GAO’s Mission: 

The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, and 
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting 
its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the 
performance and accountability of the federal government for the 
American people. GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates 
federal programs and policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, 
and other assistance to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, 
and funding decisions. GAO’s commitment to good government is 
reflected in its core values of accountability, integrity, and 
reliability. 

Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony: 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 
cost is through GAO’s website [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. Each 
weekday afternoon, GAO posts on its website newly released reports, 
testimony, and correspondence. To have GAO e mail you a list of newly 
posted products, go to [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov] and select “E-
mail Updates.” 

Order by Phone: 

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of 
production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the 
publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black 
and white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s 
website, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm]. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or 
TDD (202) 512-2537. 

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, 
MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional 
information. 

Connect with GAO: 

Connect with GAO on facebook, flickr, twitter, and YouTube.
Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or E mail Updates. Listen to our Podcasts.
Visit GAO on the web at [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. 

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs: 

Contact: 
Website: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm]; 
E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov; 
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470. 

Congressional Relations: 

Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, siggerudk@gao.gov, (202) 512-4400
U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125
Washington, DC 20548. 

Public Affairs: 
Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (202) 512-4800
U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 
Washington, DC 20548.