[House Hearing, 117 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.A.S.C. No. 117-16]
INSTALLATION RESILIENCY:
LESSONS LEARNED FROM WINTER STORM URI AND BEYOND
__________
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON READINESS
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
HEARING HELD
MARCH 26, 2021
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
___________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
48-485 WASHINGTON : 2022
SUBCOMMITTEE ON READINESS
JOHN GARAMENDI, California, Chairman
JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado
JACKIE SPEIER, California JOE WILSON, South Carolina
JASON CROW, Colorado AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia
ELISSA SLOTKIN, Michigan, Vice JACK BERGMAN, Michigan
Chair MIKE JOHNSON, Louisiana
JARED F. GOLDEN, Maine MARK E. GREEN, Tennessee
ELAINE G. LURIA, Virginia LISA C. McCLAIN, Michigan
KAIALI'I KAHELE, Hawaii BLAKE D. MOORE, Utah
MARILYN STRICKLAND, Washington
Jeanine Womble, Professional Staff Member
Ian Bennitt, Professional Staff Member
Sean Falvey, Clerk
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS
Garamendi, Hon. John, a Representative from California, Chairman,
Subcommittee on Readiness...................................... 1
Wilson, Hon. Joe, a Representative from South Carolina,
Subcommittee on Readiness...................................... 3
WITNESSES
Allen, Brig Gen John J., Jr., USAF, Commander, Air Force Civil
Engineering Center, Air Force Materiel Command, Department of
the Air Force.................................................. 9
Banta, MajGen Edward D., USMC, Commander, Marine Corps
Installations Command, United States Marine Corps Headquarters. 7
Gabram, LTG Douglas M., USA, Commanding General, Army
Installation Management Command, Department of the Army........ 4
Lindsey, VADM Yancy B., USN, Commander, Navy Installations
Command, Department of the Navy................................ 6
APPENDIX
Prepared Statements:
Allen, Brig Gen John J., Jr.................................. 58
Banta, MajGen Edward D....................................... 49
Gabram, LTG Douglas M........................................ 33
Lindsey, VADM Yancy B........................................ 40
Documents Submitted for the Record:
[There were no Documents submitted.]
Witness Responses to Questions Asked During the Hearing:
[There were no Questions submitted during the hearing.]
Questions Submitted by Members Post Hearing:
Mr. Bergman.................................................. 77
Mr. Kahele................................................... 77
INSTALLATION RESILIENCY: LESSONS LEARNED FROM WINTER STORM URI AND
BEYOND
----------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Armed Services,
Subcommittee on Readiness,
Washington, DC, Friday, March 26, 2021.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 3:01 p.m., via
Webex, Hon. John Garamendi (chairman of the subcommittee)
presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN GARAMENDI, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM
CALIFORNIA, CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON READINESS
Mr. Garamendi. Good afternoon, all. I call to order this
hearing of the Readiness Subcommittee. And if you are not
speaking, please turn off your microphones.
First, some of the administrative and technical notes that
we are required to do.
Members are reminded that they must be visible onscreen
within the software platform for the purposes of
identification. Members must continue to use the software
platform's video function while attending the hearing unless
they experience connectivity issues or other technical problems
that render the member unable to fully participate on camera.
If you experience technical difficulties, please contact the
committee staff.
When you are recognized, the video will be broadcast via
television and internet feeds. You will be recognized as normal
for questions. There is a gavel sheet, and we will discuss that
in a few moments. But, if you want to speak at any other time,
you must seek recognition verbally.
And, of course, mute your microphone when you are not
speaking, and remember to unmute prior to speaking. Please be
aware that there is a slight lag between when you are speaking
and the video comes on, so hold your voice for just a second.
Please remember to keep the software platform's video
function on for the entirety of the time that you are attending
the hearing. If you leave for a short period for reasons other
than joining a different proceeding, leave your video function
on. If you are leaving to join a different proceeding or you
have just plain had enough of us and will be absent for a
significant period of time, you should exit the platform
entirely and then rejoin when you return.
Be advised that I have designated a committee staff member
to mute unrecognized members' microphones if necessary. So we
have the control.
Please use the platform's chat feature to communicate with
staff regarding technical or logistic support issues.
Finally, there is a 5-minute countdown clock on the
software platform. Keep your eyes on it. If necessary, I will
remind you when your time is up.
So are we all clear on the details? Very good.
Now I would like to make a few opening remarks.
Today's witnesses are the global integrators for their
services' installation enterprises. They oversee the strategic
and long-term planning for our installations, ensure the
sustainment of existing infrastructure, and advocate for how
future investments should be prioritized. They implement and
operationalize the changes to law that we have passed in the
NDAAs [National Defense Authorization Acts].
Our committee, in the last four NDAAs, has explicitly
instructed the Department of Defense, and, therefore, each of
the presenters today, to address energy conservation and base
energy resiliency. In the two most recent NDAAs, we have
instructed the DOD [Department of Defense] to plan and prepare
for extreme weather events and sea level rise caused by climate
change.
Generals, you are responsible for making our installations
resilient to the hazards they face. These hazards include
disruptions to utilities from natural and manmade sources,
water scarcity, strong hurricanes on our coasts, tornados,
droughts in the West, earthquakes, and flooding along our
coast. Actually, I wrote that, but droughts also occur in the
East--for example, Georgia, Alabama, and even South Carolina.
Two years ago, Camp Lejeune and Tyndall Air Force Base were
devastated by Hurricanes Florence and Michael. When I asked the
service leaders how we could avoid the $5 billion damage in the
infrastructure to just those two bases, I was told repeatedly
that the answer is very simple: The buildings that were well-
maintained and had been renovated to today's building standards
were more resilient and in many cases not damaged by the
storms. Those that were not updated, they were damaged.
And so the services knew the solutions. But, for years, the
services have taken considerable risk in the installation
portfolio, deferring necessary maintenance and upgrades on
existing buildings in order to fund new platforms and systems.
Well, the bill has finally come due, not only in North
Carolina and Florida with those two bases, but in California,
where China Lake sustained $1.1 billion in earthquake damage,
much of which is, again, attributed to deferred maintenance and
sustainment, and, most recently, Texas and Oklahoma during
Winter Storm Uri, where under-maintained roofs, facilities,
pipes, and HVAC [heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning]
systems contributed to preventable damage to the military
infrastructure.
The phenomenon of deferred maintenance is not new, nor is
it specific to any particular administration. It is a chronic
issue. We see it across the entire Readiness Subcommittee's
jurisdiction. The services consistently fail to fund and
sustainment in favor--I am going to read that again. The
services consistently fail to fund sustainment in favor of new
platforms and their support infrastructure. It is high time
that we start learning and applying the lessons from these
events, which we must now consider as normal.
Given the range of threats to our installations, the best
way to make sound, cost-effective decisions is master planning.
By getting a holistic view of both the threats to resiliency
and the current condition of the installations, the services
can make informed decisions that guide their investment
priorities. And then, with that information, we can do our job
in providing the necessary authority and money.
I look forward to this hearing and how the services are
implementing the fiscal year 2020 NDAA requirement to conduct
resiliency-informed master planning, especially at
installations identified as being most at risk.
Finally, our installations are not islands unto themselves.
If Winter Storm Uri taught us anything, it is that resiliency
challenges faced by the surrounding communities will impact the
installations and the ability of the bases' tenants to
accomplish critical missions. The services must think of
resiliency as a problem that extends beyond the fence line as
they consider investments to improve energy, water, and
extreme-weather resiliency at our installations.
With that in mind, Mr. Wilson, you are covering for our
ranking member, Congressman Doug Lamborn, today. You know this
game; you were the chairman of this. Delighted you are with us.
The platform is yours. Mr. Wilson.
STATEMENT OF HON. JOE WILSON, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM SOUTH
CAROLINA, SUBCOMMITTEE ON READINESS
Mr. Wilson. And thank you, Chairman John Garamendi. Thank
you very much.
Today, we will hear testimony from the Air Force, Army,
Navy, and Marine Corps installation commands about lessons
learned from the Winter Storm Uri and various other recent
extreme weather events as well as the implementation of
resiliency measures from the past four National Defense
Authorization Acts.
Domestic military installations are critical to our
military readiness. They house the training, mission execution,
and sustainment operations and serve as a home to our service
men and women and their families.
Over the past several years, extreme weather events such as
severe flooding in the Midwest, hurricanes in the gulf and east
coast, and crippling winter storms, have exposed
vulnerabilities in our installations.
I gratefully represent the U.S. Army's Fort Jackson, which
is currently refortifying its infrastructure after the
thousand-year flood of 2015, which caused Simms Lake Dam to
fail.
Existing vulnerabilities include outdated and unprepared
infrastructure, concerns about energy resilience and dependence
on commercial grids, and access to clean water. Each has the
potential to undermine everyday activities at our installations
and, ultimately, the critical work of our armed services.
In February, Winter Storm Uri wreaked havoc across the
United States, highlighting weather-related threats to our
bases and yielding important lessons. Thankfully, installations
such as Offutt Air Force Base, headquarters of U.S. Strategic
Command, demonstrated their resilience during the storm by
disconnecting the base from the commercial power grid and
operating off the two power plants on site with no disruption
to operations. Other installations did not fare so well,
experiencing prolonged power and water loss.
Over the years, Congress and DOD have looked to prioritize
the investments in resilience projects and better manage risk
posed by extreme weather. I look forward to hearing today how
the services are implementing provisions to strengthen our
installations.
Better planning is a key to the process. So-called black-
start tests have been employed to test the reliability of
existing backup power and identify areas that require
additional resiliency measures. Black starts have underscored
the importance of microgridding or islanding, which generally
means that an installation can maintain power when one or more
of the connected power sources experience an outage or are not
currently generating power. This, along with other energy-
resilient mechanisms, is worth further exploring.
The military services have accepted risk in their
installation portfolios for years. The cost of that risk is now
apparent. The estimated recovery costs of Hurricanes Michael
and Florence in the military construction accounts alone were
over $4 billion. These services can do better to assess risk
and vulnerabilities at their installations to sustain the
installation operation and save taxpayer dollars in the wake of
the events.
Sensible, cost-effective investments will be the key to
mitigating future risk. Better facility, energy, and water
resilience is directly tied to the safety and security of our
installations. We can do better as a nation to understand, plan
for, and mitigate the posed threats as we have seen with the
incredible winter storms.
I want to thank the witnesses for their engagement today in
this important topic, and I look forward to hearing about how
your service is taking action.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.
Mr. Garamendi. Thank you, Mr. Wilson.
Before I introduce the witnesses today, it occurred to me
that Pogo may have had it correct: We have seen the enemy, and
it is us. It is, in fact, the Armed Services Committee and the
Appropriations Committee that have shortchanged the funding
necessary to build the resiliency into our bases. It is my
intent that this committee will do everything it can to change
that pattern of rather sad history.
So, with that good news, maybe, if we could pull it off, I
am going to introduce our witnesses one at a time.
I am going to start with the U.S. Army: Lieutenant General
Douglas Gabram, Commanding General, Army Installation
Management Command. And the rest of his title and where he is
is just above his head there: U.S. Army Military Command,
Installation Management Command Headquarters, Fort Sam Houston,
Texas.
General, why don't you get us started?
STATEMENT OF LTG DOUGLAS M. GABRAM, USA, COMMANDING GENERAL,
ARMY INSTALLATION MANAGEMENT COMMAND, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
General Gabram. Well, Chairman Garamendi, good afternoon--
Congressman Wilson and distinguished members of the
Subcommittee on Readiness. Thank you for this opportunity to
testify about Army installation resilience.
I have been fortunate and honored to serve almost 37 years.
My wife of 34 years is a former Army nurse and now on the front
lines of COVID here in San Antonio. Our son is in Officer
Candidate School at Fort Benning, Georgia. Eighteen PCS
[permanent change of station], moved multiple deployments. We
lived and raised our children on military installations.
So why do I tell you this? Because our service is a family
affair, like many of yours. Installation readiness and
resilience is very personal to me.
So I look forward to updating you on the Army's efforts to
mitigate and repair facilities impacted by Winter Storm Uri as
well as the strides we are taking to improve resiliency across
our installations for the short and long term.
So, on behalf of Acting Secretary Whitley and Chief of
Staff of the Army General McConville, I can assure you the Army
takes very seriously the threats that climate change poses to
our installations and facilities.
Just last month, in February, we experienced unprecedented
conditions that shattered historical low temperature records
for consecutive days. Winter Storm Uri hit us hard. In total,
694 facilities, including some barracks, and 1,366 privatized
homes across 4 installations--Fort Hood, Fort Sill, Fort Polk,
and Fort Riley--were damaged in some manner.
Of the privatized homes impacted, 145 experienced enough
damage for us to temporarily displace those residents. And with
exceptional assistance from our privatized housing partners, we
are on track to get all the remaining families back into their
homes within 2 weeks.
So our planning and preventive measures saved time and
money, protected our force, and maintained mission readiness.
Our contingency training, along with local first responders and
service providers, paid off for quick response times.
We also validated that our aging facilities and systems
failed first and suffered the most damage. Over time, our
infrastructure has felt the effects of high use and limited
funding. Army senior leaders recognize this, and we are taking
decisive steps to improve our facilities, especially barracks.
With continued support from Congress, the Army will continue to
modernize our facilities to increase resilience, as outlined in
the new Army Installation Strategy.
Now I would like to highlight the Army Installation Energy
and Water Strategic Plan. The Army will integrate energy and
water considerations across the enterprise by focusing on three
strategic goals: resilience, efficiency, and affordability.
It is Army policy right now that our commanders will
consider the impacts of changing climate and extreme weather
into all infrastructure plans, policies, and procedures. For
example, the installation master planning will accomplish this
by using the Army's Climate Assessment Tool and the Army
Climate Resilience Handbook to inform the planning process.
Installations are also preparing energy and water plans to
identify ways to improve efficiency and strengthen the
resiliency of our electrical and water systems. All Army
installations are scheduled to complete these plans by the end
of fiscal year 2022.
And to implement these plans, the Army will continue to
aggressively pursue energy savings performance contracts. We
have 99 of these already in place, and we are looking to
expand. Together, these measures helped contribute to a 20
percent reduction in energy consumption over the last decade.
We are also actively pursuing increased MILCON [military
construction] funding under DOD's Energy Resilience and
Conservation Investment Program.
In summary, through proactive planning, collaborative
engagement among multiple stakeholders, and leadership by our
garrison and senior commanders, we were able to act decisively
to keep our soldiers and families safe during this winter
storm.
We are committed to improve the resilience of our
installations, ensuring they are aligned with Army policy, the
Army Installation Strategy, and the Army Installation Energy
and Water Strategic Plan to optimize our long-term investments.
Chairman Garamendi, Congressman Wilson, thanks for the
opportunity to testify before you today. I look forward to
further dialogue in this important matter. And thanks for your
continued support of the Army soldiers, families, civilians,
retirees, and veterans. I really look forward to your
questions.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of General Gabram can be found in
the Appendix on page 33.]
Mr. Garamendi. [Off mic.]
Voice. Chairman, you are muted.
Mr. Garamendi [continuing]. Commander of Navy
Installations.
STATEMENT OF VADM YANCY B. LINDSEY, USN, COMMANDER, NAVY
INSTALLATIONS COMMAND, DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
Admiral Lindsey. All right, Chairman Garamendi, I think
that was my cue. So, Chairman Garamendi, Congressman Wilson,
and distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you for
this opportunity to testify today on the resilience of Navy
installations.
Our Navy's 70 installations worldwide provide the platform
from which the United States develops, generates, projects, and
sustains naval power. The capability and capacity of our
installations to resist, adapt, and recover from crisis or
disaster, whether natural or manmade, is fundamental to
installation mission execution and support of the fleet, the
fighter, and the family.
We have what I believe is a strong record of considering,
incorporating, and executing resiliency into all aspects of
installation operations, to include infrastructure, facility
and utilities planning, design, construction, and repair, often
in cooperation and coordination with the State, county, and
local communities' utility providers, et cetera.
As a former installation commanding officer, a three-time
region commander, and today as Commander of Navy Installations
Command, resiliency has been and continues to be critical to
mission execution and mission success.
Also fundamental to execution and success are vibrant,
productive, informal and formal relationships with State and
local governments, other Federal and public agencies, and
private entities. These partnerships are absolutely critical to
the continued success of our resilience initiatives.
Many of our resiliency efforts and successes can be traced
back to authorities and/or resourcing provided by Congress
which allow us to seek out and take advantage of resiliency-
building opportunities, both within Navy lifelines but also in
conjunction with other non-Navy organizations and entities.
I look forward to continuing to work with Congress and this
subcommittee to build upon our success and seek out clever and
creative solutions to address Navy installation resiliency and
the effects of our changing climate.
Thank you for the opportunity to appear today, and I look
forward to your questions. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Admiral Lindsey can be found in
the Appendix on page 40.]
Mr. Garamendi. Admiral, thank you very much.
I now turn to the Marine Corps: General Banta, Marine Corps
Installations Command.
General.
STATEMENT OF MAJGEN EDWARD D. BANTA, USMC, COMMANDER, MARINE
CORPS INSTALLATIONS COMMAND, UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
HEADQUARTERS
General Banta. Good afternoon, Chairman Garamendi,
Congressman Wilson, and distinguished members of this
subcommittee. Thanks for the invitation and opportunity to
address the committee today on installation resiliency, which
is critical to our ability to train forces and maintain
readiness.
I also wanted to thank Congress for your support to the
Marine Corps Hurricane Florence recovery efforts. Thanks to
your strong support, we are making substantial progress in
rebuilding Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune and our air stations
at Cherry Point and New River.
As part of this effort, we are incorporating significant
improvements to our facilities that will ultimately result in
more resilient bases. We have also initiated resiliency
initiatives across our installations, such as the ongoing
master planning effort at MCRD [Marine Corps Recruit Depot]
Parris Island. That will help mitigate the effects of myriad
threats.
To that point, when we think of resiliency, we consider our
installations' ability to anticipate, prepare for, adapt to,
and recover from a wide spectrum of threats to our operational
readiness, to include the effects of climate change. So, in
that sense, installation resiliency is fundamental to enabling
the operational readiness and warfighting capability of our
Fleet Marine Forces and the joint force.
And we know our installations are vulnerable targets for a
growing host of sophisticated kinetic and nonkinetic threats,
but also to environmental factors that threaten our ability to
generate readiness and deploy and recover forces from our bases
and stations.
Recent events such as Winter Storm Uri, drastic changes to
weather patterns, rising sea levels, natural disasters, COVID-
19, insider threats--all of this underscores this point.
Climate-related effects like wildfire and droughts routinely
threaten our west coast installations. Hurricanes and typhoons
are a staple for our east coast and Pacific bases. And the
prospect of rising sea levels directly affects all of our
coastal installations, with our recruit depot at Parris Island
as a prime example.
I would like to take a moment to speak to the nexus between
our efforts to develop our future force and opportunities to
improve the resiliency of our installations. Our Commandant has
initiated a comprehensive force design effort that will
fundamentally reshape aspects of our future force, and we
anticipate evolving our installations accordingly.
As we work with our force planners, who are actively
experimenting with force design initiatives, we seek to refine
and understand our future installation requirements and
identify opportunities to improve our resiliency in the
process. Examples include building upon investments in smart
grids and microgrid technologies, incorporating the effects of
climate change into all of our installation master plans, and
designing and building our new infrastructure to maximize
energy and water efficiency.
As Hurricane Florence demonstrated at Camp Lejeune, our new
assets and infrastructure built with updated construction
standards were significantly more resilient to the storm's
effects than our older facilities. We really appreciate the
committee's support as we recover from the hurricane's damage.
And that has resulted in rebuilding out of flood plains,
applying updated standards for construction and repairs.
And while we are incorporating vulnerability assessments
and evaluations into our master planning process, we recognize
we still have work to do.
We also recognize the interdependencies between our
installations and the surrounding and supporting communities.
In short, we must look beyond our fence line and plan with our
local partners.
For example, Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point's living
shoreline, a Readiness and Environmental Protection Integration
challenge submitted by the North Carolina Department of
Agriculture, is creating a living shoreline to mitigate erosion
along the Neuse River.
Additionally, MCICOM [Marine Corps Installation Command]
recently completed the Climate Change and Adaptation Resiliency
Study to identify potential hazards and mitigation costs for
MCRD Parris Island. Building upon this momentum, Parris Island
and Beaufort recently partnered with the Lowcountry Council of
Governments, the city of Beaufort, and the town of Port Royal
to continue this resiliency planning work.
We look forward to more opportunities to address similar
issues in coordination with Federal, State, and local partners.
We are working to improve the resiliency of our
installations' critical functions, such as the power grid,
water distribution, and communications capabilities. Over the
last few years, MCICOM has leveraged third-party financing/
leasing mechanisms, Energy Resilience and Conservation
Investment Program [ERCIP], and FSRM [Facilities Sustainment,
Restoration, and Modernization] funding to deliver clean energy
while increasing the resilience of utilities infrastructure in
support of critical missions.
An example of this is Marine Corps Logistics Base Albany,
which will become the first Marine Corps net-zero installation
this April, next month. This significant energy achievement
will produce as much electricity from renewable green-energy
sources as it consumes from the surrounding community utility
providers.
So, in closing, the Marine Corps continues to learn from
past events and seeks new solutions to shore up our coastlines,
modernize our bases' infrastructure, and increase our ability
to recover from extreme weather events. We have to be agile
enough to adapt to the effects of drastic changes in the
environment and reinforce the foundations of our installations'
resiliency.
Thank you once again for the opportunity to appear before
you this afternoon and for your leadership in addressing
today's climate-related changes. I look forward to your
questions.
[The prepared statement of General Banta can be found in
the Appendix on page 49.]
Mr. Garamendi. General, thank you very much.
I now turn to General Allen, Commander of the Air Force
Civil Engineering Center.
General Allen.
STATEMENT OF BRIG GEN JOHN J. ALLEN, JR., USAF, COMMANDER, AIR
FORCE CIVIL ENGINEERING CENTER, AIR FORCE MATERIEL COMMAND,
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
General Allen. Good afternoon, Chairman Garamendi,
Congressman Wilson, and other distinguished members of the
subcommittee. I am honored to appear before you today to
discuss Air Force and Space Force installation resilience.
As you are well aware, natural disasters and severe weather
have significantly impacted Air Force and Space Force
installations over the last few years. We are aggressively
moving forward with rebuild efforts at Tyndall Air Force Base
and Offutt Air Force Base in Nebraska and are continuing to
assess damage and recover from recent winter storms that
impacted large portions of the United States.
It is of utmost importance to us that we ensure our
installations are ready and resilient. Our installations are
the platforms from which we build, deploy, and employ readiness
and combat power. All Air Force and Space Force missions start
and end on an installation. Just as importantly, they are home
to thousands of airmen, guardians, and their families.
In recent years, Congress has included numerous provisions
in legislation to enhance installation resilience, and the
Department of the Air Force is working to implement them.
We have developed a Severe Weather and Climate Screening
Risk Assessment Playbook, which we have used to conduct initial
assessments of exposure and risk due to severe weather and
climate hazards at all major installations. The results will be
used to develop installation resilience component plans to be
included in each installation development plan, as required by
the fiscal year 2020 NDAA.
Additionally, we have completed installation energy plans
for 24 installations and plan to have another 20 complete by
the end of this fiscal year.
We have also conducted energy resilience and readiness
exercises at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California, Hanscom
Air Force Base in Massachusetts, and Joint Base McGuire-Dix-
Lakehurst in New Jersey. We have two more planned, at Wright-
Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio and Eielson Air Force Base in
Alaska, for this year. And in future years, we expect to
complete at least five per year, as required by the fiscal year
2021 National Defense Authorization Act.
Finally, I would like to mention the recent winter storms
and extreme cold that impacted a large portion of the United
States. Twenty-eight Department of the Air Force installations
were impacted to some extent. We are continuing to assess
damage and are committed to restoring facilities to full
mission capability.
The majority of the damage was the result of burst water
and fire-suppression lines due to freezing. Our personnel
repaired our installations admirably, but numerous factors,
including sustained periods of extreme cold, degraded
facilities and infrastructure condition, and off-base power and
water supply issues, led to damage and temporary interruptions.
As we remain steadfast in our resolve to provide credible
combat capability to the joint force and for our Nation, the
Department of the Air Force is committed to continuing to work
with this subcommittee and the rest of Congress to ensure our
installations are ready and resilient.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today, and I look
forward to answering your questions.
[The prepared statement of General Allen can be found in
the Appendix on page 58.]
Mr. Garamendi. Thank you very much, General Allen.
For all of the witnesses, we thank you for your
presentation.
I am going to read the gavel list here, and we will modify
as people come and go: Garamendi, Wilson, Courtney, Scott,
Crow. If other members want to participate, please raise your
hand, and the staff will get you in the gavel list.
Please be aware that--Kai wants to be on--that people exit
and return to the hearing, and the gavel list is somewhat
flexible, resulting in that. Mr. Johnson also would like to
participate.
Okay. So, I get to start.
Here is where I want to start with this. This is going to
be a long-term process in which this subcommittee will carry on
the work of the previous years and really try to enhance the
opportunities for the military services to address the
infrastructure needs on the various facilities.
It is a process that is going to require interaction
between the presenters today and the men and women that follow
them in these positions. That interaction has to be more than
the President's budget. It has to be an interaction that begins
with sharing of information early into the process.
General Gabram, you indicated that the Army will complete
its work on the assessment of the infrastructure resiliency in
the end of the 2022 fiscal year. The other witnesses indicated
that they have work in process on this. I don't want to wait
until it is over. I want to work with you as you proceed,so
that we can get ahead of the problem, ahead of the programs.
And so I would ask each of you to briefly describe how we
might be able to interact as you work towards completion of the
required resiliency plans so that we can take advantage of this
year's NDAA and build into it money, MILCON, get ahead of the
problems. Those installations that are critical and need
immediate attention, we don't want you to wait and we don't
want to wait either.
So let's start with--I am going to go in reverse order
here. We will start with the Air Force and then work back and
end up with the Army.
General Allen.
General Allen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I think, for the Air Force at least, we have enjoyed a
really good working relationship with your staff. I saw that
firsthand play out when we were dealing with the aftermath of
Hurricane Michael and its impacts on Tyndall and then the
subsequent storm event we had up in the Midwest that affected
Offutt in Nebraska.
You know, maybe a better example is a lot of the language
that you all have put in to this effect starting back in 2018.
I felt like we had a good conversation going with your staff,
and so that language was actually quite helpful to the things
we are trying to do.
And I guess what I would say is, we are happy to be there
in Washington or wherever you would like us to share the
results of what we are seeing as we go out and do climate risk
assessments at each of our installations, which are the first
step in building those resiliency plans, which are part of our
installation development plans. We have a lot of information we
can share now already with our installation energy plans.
You know, we go to an installation, we do the initial step
of the planning, which is focusing on risk assessments and gaps
and seams that we need to close. And a lot of those solutions
involve leveraging private-sector capital. And I think having
you involved with what we are seeing there and what our ideas
are coming out of there can be very helpful. Sometimes those
kinds of initiatives might require legislative help to get
across the finish line.
So I guess I would boil it down to say, I am really pleased
with the relationship that we have already in this job and in
my last job when I was there in the Pentagon. I think that is
very helpful, and we would like to see that continue.
Does that help, sir?
Mr. Garamendi. It is a starting point. What I am looking at
here is an interactive period of--well, for the future, so that
we interact as we go forward. The NDAA is probably, at least
our version, is 3 or 4 months out, probably 3. And if we are
going to build anything into it, we need to be on that task
now, as you work to complete.
General Banta.
General Banta. Chairman Garamendi, thanks for the
opportunity to comment here.
Following up on what General Allen said, I think we have a
very good relationship with the staff members, in particular,
there with Congress and in this subcommittee, and that probably
provides a pretty good opportunity for continued and regular
engagement as we progress with our resiliency plans.
You know, I talked a little bit about what we had done thus
far. And we have a completed resiliency plan down for Parris
Island, Marine Corps Recruit Depot Parris Island. And we have
several installation energy security plans that are completed,
with several--two actually completed, with three more coming
online in the next couple months.
So we have a lot of data now that we can share. Clearly, we
have more to do and to stay on trajectory in order to meet the
requirements from the NDAA. But we are happy to share that
information in whatever forums or venues are most productive to
ensure that we are updating Congress and your subcommittee as
needed.
And I will pause there, sir. Over.
Mr. Garamendi. Thank you, General.
Admiral Lindsey.
Admiral Lindsey. Chair Garamendi, thank you.
I think, as far as interactive and making sure that you and
the subcommittee is aware and up to speed, so to speak, on what
we have in the hopper, providing regular updates on the
projects that we have currently underway that talk to
installation resiliency and climate change, whether it is
energy, other utilities.
And then, obviously, as soon as the NDAA is released,
obviously, provide you an update for those projects as well,
and providing some kind of regular drumbeat to your staff and
the subcommittee staff so you can see what we are working on,
where we are working on it, and how those support resiliency
and climate change and other efforts in that area, sir.
So I think, at least from my perspective, we are happy to
do that, and I think that might be helpful in assuring that you
know what we are doing, where, and how it feeds into this
important topic.
Over.
Mr. Garamendi. Thank you, Admiral.
General Gabram. I mispronounced your name, General. Forgive
me. ``Gabram.''
General Gabram. ``Gabram.'' Yes, sir. That is okay. My dad
knew it was going to be an issue.
Just to add to my comrades, I mean, sir, we are available
at any time. We have 30 for the Army right now that are at or
near completion that we could share; 11 are final, 16 are in
final review.
We are also partnering with the Pacific Northwest Lab to
assist in helping us put a strategy and the implementation plan
for those plans--to put them into action. And there are several
other areas, such as the Office of Initiatives Projects [OIP]
and even the Energy Resilience and Conservation Improvement
Plans.
So I think the lateral communication between the services
is pretty good, but we look forward to sharing whatever battle
rhythm or drumbeat that you would like to set up.
Thank you.
Mr. Garamendi. ``Battle rhythm and drumbeat.''
Well, I said it; I am going to say it again: We are going
to write a new NDAA. And the lessons--well, let's just say, the
climate and the geology have given us a heads-up. And a lot of
the MILCON that is currently stacked up for the next years may
or may not address these resiliency issues.
And so what I want to try to--not try to--what I want to do
and will make every effort to achieve is to look at what is
critical so that the sustainment of the facilities is in better
probability.
And, therefore, for each of you, I would like to know where
you are in assessing the most dangerous, the most critical risk
at the most critical bases, so that we can deal with that as we
rack and stack our own assessment of military construction as
well as other programs that we would like--that you need to
have done sooner than later.
So that is the whole point of this exercise. And, yes,
thank you very much for working closely with the staff on all
of these things. We are going to ramp it up. I don't want to
wait 2 years to get to the most critical issues on the
resiliency side.
Mr. Wilson, I am going to turn this over to you.
Mr. Wilson. Thank you, Chairman Garamendi. I appreciate it.
And for our panelists today, what an honor to be with you,
and we appreciate your dedication and service.
And, in particular, General Banta, I want to thank you for
your recognition of Parris Island, what extraordinary
facilities there are there and how historic they are. I
previously represented Parris Island, and so it was really so
heartwarming to learn the history of it, that, in fact, the
first Spanish settlement on the east coast of the United States
was there in 1566. And then, of course, for over 100 years, it
has now been a Marine training facility. So 600 years of
appreciation.
And then I am really looking forward--next month, I will be
next door at Hilton Head Island for the Heritage Golf Classic.
So those of us who grew up in the Lowcountry of South Carolina
are so proud and grateful for the success of Parris Island.
With that, a question for General Gabram, and that is: I
was grateful to hear of the success of the energy savings
performance contracts. We have those at different facilities in
South Carolina, and they have been remarkably successful.
Military installation resilience has been defined as the
ability of an installation to avoid, prepare for, and minimize
the effect or adapt to and recover from extreme weather events
or changes in environmental conditions. This does not include
other important considerations, like internet connectivity and
security, adaptive design that accommodates multiple tenants
and missions, and enabling infrastructure.
What is the Army's concept of installation resiliency? And
how is that postured to meet the additional considerations?
General Gabram. Chairman, I would first thank you. And I
would like to--it kind of starts with our Strategic Energy and
Water Plan, and then it really goes around three goals. And I
will start wide and kind of hone it down a little bit.
So the three, it is made up of resilience, which the simple
definition is ensure energy and water for critical missions
under all conditions, sort of to your point; efficiency; and
affordability. Those are the three objectives we look at within
the strategic plan.
To your point about energy savings performance contracts,
sir, we are all in. And, since 2010, we have awarded
approximately $1.8 billion worth of these contracts. And right
now we have 99 in execution, and we are looking to do a lot
more.
So we completely understand the capability that these could
bring in terms of resilience and efficiency and affordability.
And we are working to take a look through the energy and water
plans--because that covers that risk assessment in that plan--
and then where and when we can go with or look to a savings
performance contract.
Thank you.
Mr. Wilson. And, General Gabram, you have extraordinary
people representing you on the Hill, and if they could provide
to us the examples of energy savings performance contracts, I--
that has just been such a positive story for our country.
General Allen, do you have any experience employing
nontraditional funding streams to address the resiliency issue,
such as public-private partnerships, enhanced-use leases, or
other innovative financing, to help supplement the traditional
MILCON and facilities maintenance process?
Additionally, is there any consideration of secure micro-
reactors, small modular reactors, on a secure post, such as
Offutt or possibly Andersen Air Force Base in Guam?
Mr. Garamendi. General Allen, you are muted.
General Allen. Can you hear me now?
Mr. Wilson. Yes.
General Allen. Sorry about that. Congressman Wilson, thank
you.
I would like to think of energy savings performance
contracts and utility energy service contracts as
nontraditional. I think we have been doing them for a little
while, so maybe they are in the traditional category now. But
they have been very powerful tools for us. And, going back
about 5 years, we have been able to leverage about $750 million
in private capital that we then pay back through energy
savings. So that is great.
The other things that we have had some success in and I
think are really going to help guide our path forward in this
are energy assurance leases and then enhanced-use leases,
where, in both cases, we are taking underutilized land on an
installation, partnering with the public or private sector for
them to come in and set up some--in the case of energy
assurance leases, some sort of energy generation that then
provides energy resiliency back to the installation.
We have 130 megawatts of potential generation in work now
with EALs, energy assurance leases, that we are looking at
across five installations. And so, when you start to do that
math, it is not quite perfect yet, but when you are talking
about that kind of generation, you are getting close to being
able to island your installation off the grid if you need to.
And on the enhanced-use lease, I was just out at Edwards
Air Force Base in California and got to see what is starting to
come out of the ground, what will be the largest PV array in
the country, photovoltaic array in the country. It is out on
the western edge of Edwards. That is an enhanced-use lease. It
is going to put 800 megawatts of power into the California
grid, green power--a big deal.
Our benefit there, our fair market value that we get out of
that, has a potential to be about $2 million a year that then
we can put into energy-resiliency initiatives at Edwards and
other places around the Air Force.
So, you know, particularly out West, but a lot of our
installations have that untapped potential, I would say. And we
are only getting better at doing these things. And a lot of
where we are heading in the Air Force is going to involve those
kinds of tools.
Did that answer your question, sir?
Mr. Wilson. It does. But I hope you will look into small
modular reactors too, in a secure position, like on Offutt or
Guam. And you can get back with me later on that.
Congratulations on your success.
A final question for Admiral Lindsey. To what extent have
climate conditions or extreme weather events resulted in
shifting missions from particular installations to others in
order to reduce infrastructure vulnerabilities? And what has
been the impact of the adjustments?
Admiral Lindsey. Thank you for the question.
Shift in--none of the missions, I don't believe, that I can
think of that we have actually shifted. We have obviously had
to do repairs and continue to weave climate change and
resiliency efforts into those installations that are in the
face of natural disasters or subject to hurricanes or
earthquakes. But as we do those, we do those--as we construct
those facilities, as we modernize them, as we renovate them, we
weave improved building codes and criteria so that they are
more resilient to the natural disasters that they may be
subject to in the future.
But I can't think of specifically any missions that have
been permanently shifted as a result of climate change or sea
level rise.
Over.
Mr. Wilson. Well, thank you very much. And, as I conclude,
I grew up in the ``Holy City'' of Charleston with the
Charleston Navy Base. And so--and I was a Sea Cadet, all right?
So I really appreciate your service.
I yield back.
Mr. Garamendi. Thank you very much, Mr. Wilson.
There has been a change in the gavel order. I think Mr.
Courtney has stepped out. If and when he returns, we will put
him back in. And, therefore, the gavel order is Crow, followed
by Scott. And I believe there are three others that have
offered to join in. I will give you that information when Mr.
Crow finishes his questions.
You have 5 minutes, Mr. Crow.
Mr. Crow. Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you to all the witnesses as well. This is a very
interesting topic, one that I have spent a lot of time looking
at.
My first question goes to a bill that I had in the fiscal
year 2020 NDAA called the Military Installation Resilience
Assuredness Act, the MIRA Act, which actually requires all
major military installations to integrate into their master
plan on a rolling basis an assessment of resiliency, climate
effects, extreme weather, and the like.
It is my understanding now, 18 months after we passed that,
that none of those assessments have been conducted or completed
at this point. So my first question is, have those been done or
are they in the process of being done?
And then the second is, how does that work in with the
renewed emphasis that the DOD has on climate? I forget which
one of you said at the beginning that you are actually using
now the Climate Assessment Tool and you expect that assessment
to be completed at the end of fiscal year 2022.
So if you could explain to me the intersection of those two
efforts, the status of the MIRA Act, and how you expect those
to go forward, I would be very appreciative.
General Gabram. General Gabram. I will start.
So I would say, we are in the process of executing, in
reference to the MIRA Act.
The Army Climate Change Assessment Tool, for us, it is web-
based. So it really is a predictive analysis tool of the
climate vulnerability, right? It is like a risk assessment. It
looks at drought, flooding, fire, tornados, hurricane, ice
storms. And so we have about 117 installations assessed right
now.
And then we also have--and this is just--that one came out
in July of 2020, and our Climate Resilience Handbook came out
in August of 2020. It is really a companion; it is a planner to
the Climate Assessment Tool.
And that goes into and leads into our energy and water
plans. And, as I said, we have 30 at or near completion, and I
had said completed by 2022, but we are working--you know, we
are working in stride. If we can get them done sooner,
obviously we absolutely will do that.
So that is kind of how those two tools integrate or nest
into the plan----
Mr. Crow. General, can you just tell me when you--do you
know--and if you don't right now, that's fine, but if you can
give me that information--when you expect the first of those
master plan updates to occur, relative to the MIRA Act?
General Gabram. I don't. Updates--to you, I do not, so, for
the record, I will have to check that and get back.
But, in terms of what we are doing at the installation and
below and then above, up to me, we are getting after what I
just described.
[The information referred to was not available at the time
of printing.]
Mr. Crow. Okay.
And then, secondly, with the remaining time we have here:
Obviously, moving to microgrids and having to do the metering
that we have to do, which obviously remains a big challenge
within many of your installations--because I know we don't even
have a firm grasp on the actual energy use itself at all of our
installations because we don't have the meters in place.
Could you just briefly describe the importance of making
sure that we have supply-chain integrity of our hardware so we
are not sourcing those from places that are within the Chinese
sphere of influence and we have integrity to the hardware that
is in place to conduct this work?
General Gabram. Yeah, I would--Congressman, I would--USACE
[United States Army Corps of Engineers], our partners, our
Corps of Engineers, the acquisition process that we go through,
we address it in those arenas. And, obviously, the threat
there, as you described, is, you know--it is significant.
The metering program you mentioned, we are in the process
of executing that. We have installed about 19,000 advanced
meters at--I think it was 120 Enterprise Energy Data Reporting
Systems in place. So we are in progress. We are not there yet,
but we are working on it.
Over.
Mr. Crow. I appreciate that.
Just in the remaining time, I would just reiterate the
need--obviously, this is an area of great importance to me--to
make sure we are building this out, but at the same time, I
didn't want us to put hardware into place in these microgrids
that actually provide a backdoor for some of our main
adversaries. So I think that is something we all have to look
very hard at.
Thank you.
I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Garamendi. Thank you, Mr. Crow.
Mr. Scott, you are next.
Mr. Scott. Thank you, Chairman.
General Gabram, I am told--and correct me if I am wrong--
that Fort Hood's February electric bill was somewhere around
$30 million, and that is effectively the same amount of money
that was spent for all of fiscal year 2020 for that base for
energy. Is that correct?
General Gabram. Congressman, the projected bill, you are
correct, is approximately that, although we are in the process
of challenging and taking a look at that, the accuracy.
Because, as you know, you know, there are many folks in Texas
that are looking at a higher bill than----
Mr. Scott. Sure.
General Gabram [continuing]. They are actually going to
turn out to be. But you are correct; it is in that
neighborhood.
Mr. Scott. Okay. Are the other bases [inaudible] or is Fort
Hood the primary one?
General Gabram. Fort Hood is the primary one, Congressman.
Mr. Scott. Okay. And so did we have any other bases that
ended up with similar changes in their billing for their power
supply throughout other States?
General Allen. Congressman, this is General Allen for the
Air Force.
Yes, to answer your question, some of our Air Force
installations have gotten February utility bills that are
higher than--abnormally high.
Over.
Mr. Scott. Okay. And are those installations in Texas, and,
if not, which State are they in?
General Allen. They are in Texas.
Mr. Scott. Okay. I think that is something that we, as a
committee, may want to look at.
And as we look at the new sources of energy--I know in
Georgia we have the Marine Corps Logistics Base in Albany that
is using alternative energy from a landfill and then at Robins
Air Force Base we have the solar panels. And I think this gets
back to what Mr. Crow and, I think, Mr. Wilson were talking
about a little bit.
You know, as we look at these new sources of energy, you
know, the resilience of them and the dependability of them--I
don't have as much faith in solar as I do some of the new
technologies that we see out there. And I hope that you will
continue to keep us more informed with the types of technology
that you are pushing towards for the energy on our
installations.
And, General Allen, I didn't see in the report where you
talked about Air Force Materiel Command and--I am sorry--about
our installations like Robins Air Force Base, the depots. How
is DOD addressing facilities on our depots that are in degraded
conditions at this stage?
General Allen. Thanks, Congressman. Well, our depots do
resource themselves with their working capital fund. Certain of
the facilities, particularly those that are generating the
service that they provide, some of that facility sustainment is
covered with working capital fund. But they are primarily
reliant on the O&M [operations and maintenance] that we program
every year, just like we do for all of our installations. And
our infrastructure investment strategy that was published 2
years ago is our path by which we are trying to improve that.
In a nutshell, we are trying to resource at a minimum of 2
percent of our plant replacement value each year, which we
believe is the minimum level that we need to sustain,
effectively, to realize the design life of our built
infrastructure. Does that help?
Mr. Scott. It is a good answer. And thank you for that. One
final question, and I will turn it over to other people. How
much of the resiliency plan has to do with demolition and
getting rid of old buildings in the inventory on all of our
bases, whether they be depots or more traditional bases that
are not energy efficient; how much demolition are we looking at
where we can get rid of some of these buildings and the payback
is pretty short-term?
General Allen. Sir, General Allen, again. Our investment
strategy targets a 5 percent reduction through demolition, and
that is fairly modest. But that is a good start. Because,
absolutely, we need to reduce the amount of built
infrastructure that we have so that the money we are able to
program is, you know, it goes further, frankly.
Mr. Scott. All right. Thank you, gentlemen, and I will
yield the remaining 20 seconds.
Mr. Garamendi. Very good. And the next two will be Mr.
Kahele and Mr. Johnson. So guys, you are up.
Mr. Kahele. Yes, sir. Mahalo, Chair, and aloha to my
colleagues and to our panelists today. Aloha from Hawaii. My
question is for Admiral Lindsey. So I am out here in Hawaii, as
you are well aware. You know, Hawaii is critical to our
National Defense Strategy as outlined by the INDOPACOM [U.S.
Indo-Pacific Command] commander.
And my question to you, sir, is in regards to the Barking
Sands Tactical Underwater Range, which is a critical part of
PMRF, the Pacific Missile Range Facility, on the island of
Kauai. This location and the range is very unique; it is
strategic; it plays an essential role in realistic training
operations, especially for our submarine warfare fleet and
their fleet engagements in the Pacific theater of operations.
The range allows training, tactical development. And really, it
is a premier facility for crew certification and training
enhancing for critical readiness of the Pacific Fleet.
Right now, sir, roughly, 30 percent of the Barking Sands
Tactical Underwater Range and its in-water sensors, which, as I
understand, 12 of the 42 in-water sensors are inoperable due to
the aging infrastructure. And as you all know, sir, with
climate change and major hurricanes that come through the
Hawaiian Islands, or at least near the Hawaiian Islands, every
hurricane cycle, which is in the summer, we are just one bad
storm away from additional sensors being compromised.
So given this serious threat to the readiness of our
submarine fleet, will the United States Navy prioritize and
accelerate funding towards underwater communications
infrastructure projects that will prevent the potential loss of
these undersea warfare training sensors and capabilities, such
as mine warfare and underwater communications and splash
detection? Over.
Admiral Lindsey. Thank you, Congressman. Thank you for
highlighting the importance [of that] facility and that
installation in Kauai. I had the opportunity to visit that here
in the past, and it is a unique and critical asset, one that we
need to continue to work on to improve its resiliency and its
ability to do its mission. In fact, that is one of the
locations that we are pursuing energy resiliency projects to
make sure that it can continue to do its mission under adverse
situations.
The range you talk about, sir, unfortunately, doesn't fall
underneath my purview, the equipment or the operation of the
range, but I am happy to take that question, if you will allow
me, for the record, and get back to you on a better answer to
the operation of the range and the equipment associated with
it. It just doesn't fall underneath my responsibility, maybe
Installations can help. So I apologize for not being able to
specifically answer your question. But if I can take it for the
record, I would be happy to get back to you on it.
Mr. Kahele. Yeah, sounds good, sounds good, Admiral. And I
will be out there in few weeks, so I will have a chance to meet
with the base commander, the captain out there at PMRF. So
thank you so much, and I appreciate you helping run down an
answer for that. Thank you. I yield, Chair. Thank you so much.
[The information referred to was not available at the time
of printing.]
Mr. Garamendi. Mr. Kahele, thank you for the question. The
next is Mr. Johnson.
Mr. Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I feel like I
should apologize to the generals for being underdressed for
today's hearing, but we are all multitasking at home, so we
appreciate your indulgence on that.
Question for General Allen. In the aftermath of the recent
winter storms, my base here, Barksdale Air Force Base in
northwest Louisiana, has been cited as a good case study for
its resilient water system. And the base has the redundancies
in place so that it can switch from its primary water source,
which is the city of Shreveport, our largest municipality, to a
secondary storage if the need arises. And I have been told that
while these water redundancies were a godsend during the recent
winter storm, there were fairly significant issues with power
generation. The base has diesel generators in place for
mission-critical facilities, but there are logistical concerns
with making sure there is enough fuel on hand to keep them
running.
So, as you look at electricity redundancies on our
installations, I am curious what your thoughts are on
capitalizing on the characteristics of each individual
installation and their surrounding communities.
So, for example, Barksdale, our home in northwest
Louisiana, is a natural gas-rich area with a significant amount
of infrastructure in place that I think would make a transition
to natural gas generators or even a natural gas power plant
relatively easy.
So, should we be capitalizing on those types of geographic
qualities and distinctions, and can you speak to any examples
of where the Air Force has done that in other parts of the
country?
General Allen. Can you hear me, sir?
Mr. Johnson. Yes, sir.
General Allen. Okay. I think you are exactly right, we need
to tailor our resiliency, whether that is water or power, to
what best fits the circumstance where the installation is. And
very often, what that might look like is just a separate
substation for power, a redundant feed, if you will, that is
not necessarily connected back to the same plant that could
fail and deny power.
We have used spot generation powered by diesel fuel around
our installations for years. I think there are better ways to
do that now, but we still do rely on that significantly. Some
of the work that we do through UESCs [utility energy service
contracts] or energy assurance leases involve natural gas power
generation coming onto the installation, which, essentially,
allows us to island, should we need to, from the grid. Or if we
are island, that allows us to continue to operate.
So, our energy assurance leases, while we like green
energy, aren't necessarily always involving the use of green
energy.
So, to your point, we are going through these programs. Our
focus in energy resilience and water resilience, has been
mission assurance. And so we are going for the solutions that
will deliver us the best bang for the buck in the way of
mission assurance, and sometimes that does involve, to your
point, natural gas generation. Does that help?
Mr. Johnson. Very helpful. I appreciate that. It gives a
little perspective on it.
I have another question. Let me go to General Gabram if I
can. As you know, Fort Polk has been a case study in resiliency
in the past year. And I have that installation in the south
part of my district, towards south Louisiana. And we had a
recent weather event. Of course, it wasn't as big of a
resiliency threat, really, as Hurricane Laura presented in
August of last year. There was significant challenges with
electricity generation during that event.
And as we look to expand the concept of building resiliency
through energy generation and microgrids on installations,
would you agree that we should be prioritizing those
installations that history shows are really more likely to
suffer from extreme weather events than others?
General Gabram. Congressman, absolutely. And, you know, as
we look around the country, and we regionalize and we look at
geography, it is really important. And we look at patterns, and
this is the tools we've talked about today help us make that
assessment. I am very close with Fort Polk, with Laura, and
Delta--the second hurricane, remember, that came through was
Delta--and then now Uri. I would tell you, you can be really
proud of the team there at Fort Polk. Their resiliency in the
human dimension, they really did great. And the partner on the
ground, frankly, Corvias, as we are still working on roofs,
because roofs were a big part of the damage. The good news is
the new roofs that we were put on the privatized homes did very
well in the Winter Storm Uri.
So, I absolutely agree with you 110 percent. Fort Polk is
just in an area of the country where it is susceptible to the
climate change aspects left and right. So agreed. Thank you.
Mr. Johnson. Thank you for that answer, and I am out of
time. I yield back. But I just say, first, we are blessed to be
in the greatest State in America. But, yes, we are situated,
geographically, to take a lot of hits. So thank you for that,
and I yield back.
Mr. Garamendi. Let's see, every committee member let that
comment slide by, Mr. Johnson. The gavel order, Strickland,
Moore, Luria.
Ms. Strickland. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am from
Washington State, and I am going to quibble a bit with my
colleague about the greatest State. But with that said, Joint
Base Lewis-McChord [JBLM] is in my district. And Washington
State doesn't have the same type of weather events like
hurricanes and severe winter storms, but we are increasingly
impacted by changing weather conditions that have led to large-
scale forest fires on both sides of our State. And one of the
ways that climate change has affected Joint Base Lewis-McChord
is really about the wildfires and the impact. We have warmer
weather, we have changing rainfall patterns, we have severe
winds, and those create wildfires that are just damaging and
devastating. And these are going to get worse if we don't start
to take climate change seriously.
You know, I am glad to hear that the Secretary of Defense
has declared climate change a national security issue, because
it, in fact, is.
And so I want to start with General Gabram and really talk
about fire resiliency and earthquake preparedness. So, again,
while the recent wildfires didn't reach JBLM, or even the
Yakima Training Center in eastern Washington, can you talk a
bit about fire and earthquake resiliency strategies that you
are using on the west coast? And just tell me a bit about what
you are doing.
General Gabram. I just had the opportunity to visit JBLM,
oh, about 3 weeks ago, and had a great time. I would also like
to say, not related, but they are going to open the first
children's museum in our Nation in April, and it is going to be
great for families.
But to address your primary question that we do have a
wildland fire program at JBLM. And the three things that we are
looking at right now are controlled burns, fuel reduction, and
then fielding a proper fire equipment. And I would like to say
on the wildfire side, you know, it comes down to manning in
some places and people--97 percent of our garrisons have
qualified wildland program managers, they are called, and,
obviously, JBLM has them with the position they are in in the
country.
And we also--the critical mission nodes, or critical nodes,
as you know, is Gray Army Airfield; the Western Air Defense
Sector; the ammunition storage points; mission, and command and
control centers; and then the fire and emergency centers at
JBLM. And so we know those are critical and very important.
We assessed the earthquake risk at JBLM as medium. I know
that probably doesn't make you feel good, but those
facilities--a lot of the facilities were built between the
1940s and 1980s. So that infrastructure we are looking at very
closely. Because 60 percent--relating to the earthquake
threat--60 percent of the buildings are not constructed to
current code to withstand a greater than a magnitude 6
earthquake. So I think we know our jersey number at JBLM, we
just got to work to protect.
Ms. Strickland. All right. Thank you, and then I have one
more question. Like I said earlier, the fires didn't
necessarily reach the base, but we know that wildfires have a
severe impact on air quality. And in many times during the
summer, we did air quality ratings that are very, very
unhealthy for sometimes weeks at a time. And this can cause
respiratory issues, it can cause bronchitis.
So, can you talk a bit about how these types of incidents
affect readiness, because, clearly, people aren't even advised
to go outside and do training and physical activity.
General Gabram. I think you are referring primarily up
towards Yakima, because there is a lot--as you know, there is a
lot of training that goes there from JBLM. But the air quality
is a concern. Obviously, I think the smart thing to do and we
do is understand when it is and where it is. And then training,
you know, we don't go out and train in the middle of a 10-day
air quality issue where we expose our soldiers to those type of
conditions.
So that is taken into effect by the chain of command. So I
don't have a fix for that, per se. But in terms of discipline,
to set our life, health, and safety, I call it, to set our
folks up correctly, we do take that precaution. I hope that
answers your question, ma'am.
Ms. Strickland. Great. Thank you very much. And thank you
for acknowledging the children's museum at JBLM. I was here
when the First Lady was visiting, and it is the only children's
museum on a military installation in the U.S., and so, we are
very proud of that facility. I yield back, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Garamendi. So, Mr. Johnson, take that.
Mr. Moore.
Mr. Moore. Thank you, Chairman. And I will let everyone
quibble over each of their States. I think that Utah's record
and performance stands on its own. So we will rise above this
conversation, and we will just let it settle.
Thank you all for being here today. It is an important
topic to discuss, and seeing how this interacts. Something I am
excited about is I am on the Natural Resources Committee and
Armed Services Committee, and hope to be a reasonable solid
voice in this matter.
And one question, I have a couple of questions. General
Allen, you may be aware, in 2019 the DOD listed Hill Air Force
Base in my district the number one base susceptible to climate
change. But just a few months later, an Air Force report did
not even have it listed on the top 10. So there is some
inconsistency or discrepancy there.
My question would be is there efforts in place to ensure
that we have, or that's broadly communicated, a framework that
is used, whether it be the basis, criteria, or methodology used
in making these determinations? Is there an effort in place?
Are you committed to continuing that? You can see how that
would be alarming to be number one, and then all of a sudden,
not even on [inaudible] Air Force bases [inaudible].
General Allen. Thank you, Congressman, yes, I was working
in the Pentagon when that happened. The first list was
calculated using criteria that the Office of the Secretary of
Defense issued. And when we saw the results, we ran the list
and ran the criteria a little differently, and that was the
second list you are talking about.
I guess what I would say is each was a top 10 list, and all
20 of those installations are high on our cross-check to
understand how they are, in fact, threatened by climate change
and atmospheric conditions, weather conditions, et cetera. Does
that help you, Congressman?
Mr. Moore. Yes, I understand there is a commitment to
broadly communicate the framework and what goes into it
because, you know, lists are lists, but if we [inaudible].
General Allen. I can tell you that our installation
development plan--[inaudible] can you all hear me? Congressman,
I lost you there for a second. Can you hear me? Am I muted? Can
y'all hear me? I think I am not hearing anything.
Mr. Garamendi. I think Mr. Moore has a communication issue.
And we are going to come back to you for another 2 or 3
minutes. Mr. Moore, you want to try one more time?
Mr. Moore. Can you hear me, Chairman?
Mr. Garamendi. We can now. Please, continue.
Mr. Moore. Just one more question, General.
Mr. Garamendi. We are getting some--I am getting some
serious feedback from somebody who has a microphone that is not
muted.
Okay, Mr. Moore, your turn.
Mr. Moore. General Allen, enhanced-use leases. My next
question is enhanced-use leases, an ability for the community
to interact with the Air Force, in our case, are such a
positive. I view them as a win-win. That is the way I
communicate them. Do you know if there is any chance to use
enhanced-use leases to help fill the gaps in energy resilience
improvements where maybe MILCON dollars are not able to be
used?
General Allen. Congressman, can you hear me okay?
Mr. Moore. [No verbal response.]
General Allen. Absolutely. There is. We have enhanced-use
leases that return value, fair market value, for whatever the
lease is, back to the Air Force so that we can invest those
dollars in energy initiatives. And then we have, I guess, I
would say, enhanced-use leases that are tailored to energy
assurance. We call them energy assurance leases, where we are
actually taking underutilized land, partnering with a developer
who will bring in some sort of energy generation, perhaps, to
put onto the grid, or perhaps to put right back into the
installation. Or most often, you know, to put energy into the
grid, to sell into the grid, but then we have an agreement with
them that should we need it in the event of a denial of
service, then we would get that energy, if that makes sense.
So, enhanced-use leases, broadly, yes, we get fair market
value for whatever underutilized land we are leasing. And we
can use that money typically to reinvest in facilities which
improves their resiliency. And then very specifically, to
energy assurance, we have energy assurance leases, which are
targeted at just what you are talking about. Over.
Mr. Moore. Thank you so much. And, Chairman, sorry for some
of my connectivity issues. I will just end with saying to my
colleagues on the committee, and to General Allen, our office
is always available to talk enhanced-use leases. We really do
find them to be a really productive way. And I open that up to
any of my colleagues if they want to be involved at all. Thank
you all. I yield back.
Mr. Garamendi. Thank you very much, Mr. Moore. For all of
us that are actually all across the Nation, in the South as
well as in the West, the Federal Power Administration, Western
Power, WAPA, in the West, is providing energy to Beale Air
Force Base. And their purpose, among other things, is to
provide power into the general grid, but also, specifically, to
provide power to the Federal Government programs. And, so, if
you happen to have one of those grids from the power
administration, Western Power, the eastern side to Georgia and
that area, we will look at that.
And, General Allen, again, a best practice that might be
shared across the services. So a little memo from you about
what you are doing at Beale, and how that is working out would
be shared all around.
Okay. I am going to go now to Mrs. Luria. That would be the
last person on the first round. And we might have an extra half
hour after Mrs. Luria.
One more thing, if there is a serious disruption of my
service, Mrs. Luria, you are taking over. So, not only do you
get to question, but you may have the chair.
Mrs. Luria. Well, thank you, Chairman Garamendi. And thank
you to our witnesses today. My district includes Naval Station
Norfolk, a large part of Hampton Roads. And my question I am
going to address to Admiral Lindsey, and also to General Allen,
because of Langley Air Force Base. And Hampton Roads is
particularly at risk because of sea level rise.
I was just looking at some of the provisions in last year's
NDAA, which required the examination of community
infrastructure located outside the installation that is
necessary to maintain mission capability, or that impacts the
resilience of the military installation, such as civilian
infrastructure related to disaster risk reduction, power,
water, communications, transportation, and emergency services.
In Norfolk, for example, this seems to particularly pertain
to Naval Station Norfolk and the access road of Hampton
Boulevard, which floods frequently and is projected to flood
more frequently over time.
General Allen, I know that at Langley Air Force Base, there
are some similar issues related to sea level rise with current
flooding that are specifically of interest. And I have gone to
visit the pump stations there, and kind of understand some of
the flooding issues at that installation.
And so, I was just curious if you could both weigh in on
any guidance you have to the localities that seek to work with
DOD in order to use some of the existing authorities and
funding that we put in place for defense access roads, defense
community infrastructure projects, so that we can best create
that partnership between DOD and the local community to make
sure that we, you know, literally shore up some of these issues
with sea level rise and flooding. And make sure that we can
continue to have access to these bases, and that you would make
recommendations-wise for that coordination and any guidance you
have.
Admiral Lindsey, do you want to go first?
Admiral Lindsey. Yes, ma'am, and thank you for the
question. And thank you for your support of our men and women
[inaudible]. And the important mission that the Hampton Roads
area serves, not only for our Navy but for our Nation.
I think there is some great examples of where we
collaborated with the local communities. A fundamental mission
of our installation is to maintain good relationship with the
people--productive relationships, good cooperative, coordinated
relationships. And the joint land use studies that we recently
completed here a couple of years ago, I think, are a good
example of that where we look at land use outside the fence
line, so to speak, in the communities, and work together to
make sure that not only is able--the way land sustained in
military mission but also how we can partner to help the local
community, to [inaudible] land a more productive and efficient
way, so to speak.
And then you bring up Hampton Boulevard. There are some
challenges we continue to tackle in that area. And so as we
renovate, as we construct, as we do things to modernize and
sustain the installation there, we are constantly weaving in
the aspects of sea level rise and climate change so that that
installation can persist and continue to do its mission for
many decades in the future.
So that is another important part of what we are doing at
Hampton Roads is getting after the resiliency, climate change
issues through our mission, our mission assurance assessments,
other tools that Congress has provided that we talked about,
ESPCs, EULs [enhanced-use leases], and those things.
So I think the relationship there is good, it is
productive. As you know the communities submitted a Defense
Community Infrastructure Program grant request to help with
some of those issues. The two installations gave endorsing
letters to that. It was not picked up recently, but we are
hopeful going forward that they will be successful in being
able to get some of those grants to address some of those
issues that you have highlighted here. Hopefully, that answers
your question from a Navy perspective.
Mrs. Luria. Yes, well, thank you Admiral Lindsey. General
Allen, from the Air Force perspective, do you have any
additional guidance or words of wisdom for our surrounding
communities outside of Air Force installations that would help
improve coordination for these types of projects?
General Allen. Thank you, Congresswoman. I have had the
privilege to be stationed at Langley twice from 2003 to 2005,
and then again from 2013 to 2015. I look at Langley as perhaps
being a pathfinder for other communities. I will give a
shoutout to retired Navy Admiral Craig Quigley who runs the
Hampton Roads Federal Facility Alliance. And then we had
tremendous partners in Hampton, the city of Hampton.
When I was there, we were doing a lot of partnering with
them on reducing encroachment around the airfield, which was
very important. We had already been the benefactor of a lot of
recovery money from Hurricane Isabel that came through in 2003.
So we were able to do about $500 million worth of improvements
between the hurricane recovery and the F-22 beddown. And you
mentioned the pump station that we put in that allows us to
move rainwater off the installation. You know, it helps with
our flooding problems.
So those things we did early, and I got to enjoy them when
I was there 10 years later. It really worked. Langley is a
place that understands climate resiliency, so it is really
built into every dollar that they are spending, because they
are living the challenges of that.
But I think what is most important, frankly, are those
partnerships that we have with HRMFFA [Hampton Roads Military
and Federal Facilities Alliance] and with the city of Hampton,
and they are very, very active participants in bringing P4
[public-public and public-private] solutions to the table for
us. At least that was my experience when I was there. So I
mean, it is an example for others.
Mrs. Luria. Well, thank you, General Allen and Admiral
Lindsey. And I agree that HRMFFA, as an organization, really
brings together both the military and our communities across
Hampton Roads to help solve these problems. So we are grateful
for Admiral Quigley and his work.
And also, I want to say that, you know, Langley has a place
in my heart, too. My daughter was born there at the hospital.
So thank you, again, for appearing today.
Mr. Garamendi. Thank you very much, Mrs. Luria.
We are now going into the second round. I am going to forgo
questions that I would ask, but I will make one comment.
The hearings that we have had this year and in previous
years all intersect. We have talked about the depots, about the
shipyards. We have talked about this whole issue of resiliency.
These issues all come together in the maintenance and the
upgrade of the bases. And, so, as we go into this year, I want
to make sure that we pay attention in the NDAA to the necessary
investments to maintain these bases.
Now, Mr. Wilson, Mrs. Luria, and Mr. Johnson are up for
questions. I would alert everybody that General Banta had to
leave for a meeting at the half-hour mark, and so, he has
departed the hearing.
So Mr. Wilson.
Mr. Wilson. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. And,
actually, I want to commend all of our witnesses, they really
very well answered so many of the issues that I feel so
positive about, like energy savings performance contracts.
Hopefully, looking at small mod reactors to be self-sufficient
in the event of severe weather, just as the incredible
snowstorm, just inconceivable of what occurred in Texas so
recently. My goodness. And so, with all of this, indeed, this
is directly related to readiness. And I am really grateful for
the military leadership that are being proactive to get ready
and to look out for our service members and our ability to
protect American families. And so with that, I yield back.
Mr. Garamendi. Thank you very much, Mr. Wilson.
Mrs. Luria, we are back to you.
Mr. Kahele, are you still with us? Okay. Here is the order,
Wilson, you just finished. Luria, Johnson, and then that will
complete it unless somebody else rejoins.
Mrs. Luria? I believe she may have been satisfied with her
last round of questions, and she has left.
Mr. Johnson? One more time, would you like to comment on
the glories of Louisiana one more time?
Mr. Johnson. I won't take advantage of my time and do that
again. It speaks for itself. It is res ipsa loquitur, as we say
in the law, things speak for itself.
I am really for the generals for their straightforward
answers today. It really helps. I am a new member of the
committee and the subcommittee. And I just find all of this
fascinating. So I am grateful to just listen in. So thank you
for all of that. I yield back.
Mr. Garamendi. Well, I just see Mrs. Luria has returned.
You came very close to losing your slot, Mrs. Luria, but go for
it.
Mrs. Luria. Well, Chairman Garamendi, I will pass on
further questions and really appreciate the witnesses' time
today. Thank you.
Mr. Garamendi. Thank you. That completes all of the
witnesses. There are some questions that had been asked for the
record, and those have been submitted. There may be a few more.
So if any of the members have questions for the record, please
get them to the staff soon, like, within the next couple of
days.
I do want to thank our witnesses. You have an extremely
important role, as do we. The communication between your work
and our work is essential if the issue of resiliency is going
to be resolved.
I mentioned a moment ago that this particular hearing cuts
across much of what we do here in this committee. We are
responsible for the physical infrastructure of the Department
of Defense facilities, and, therefore, the information given
today and in the days and weeks ahead, as we put together the
next NDAA, will be essential.
So for the presenters today, the professional staff will be
back in touch with you. I also will reach out to the committee
members who have knowledge of the installation in their
districts, and ask them to inform us of issues that they know
of that may not be working its way up through the chain of
command.
So as we work together to address resiliency and the
installation performance, we will be looking to just that,
working together.
So Admiral Lindsey, thank you so much. General Banta, I
would thank you if you were still here, but we will send a
little note of appreciation. General Gabram, thank you very
much. And General Allen, thank you for your participation. We
look forward to working with you in the days ahead. So with
that, this hearing is adjourned. Thank you so very much.
[Whereupon, at 4:34 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
=======================================================================
A P P E N D I X
March 26, 2021
=======================================================================
=======================================================================
PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
March 26, 2021
=======================================================================
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
=======================================================================
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS POST HEARING
March 26, 2021
=======================================================================
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. BERGMAN
Mr. Bergman. How can the Department as a whole better utilize new
building technologies like cross-laminated timber? What authorities or
guidance do you need from Congress that would further increase the
partnership between each of your respective services and the mass
timber industry? How can we ensure technologies like cross-laminated
timber are incorporated into new construction going up in the immediate
future, as opposed to waiting for it to weave in across the FYDP,
especially as we re-build installations impacted by extreme weather
events?
General Gabram. [No answer was available at the time of printing.]
Mr. Bergman. How can the Department as a whole better utilize new
building technologies like cross-laminated timber? What authorities or
guidance do you need from Congress that would further increase the
partnership between each of your respective services and the mass
timber industry? How can we ensure technologies like cross-laminated
timber are incorporated into new construction going up in the immediate
future, as opposed to waiting for it to weave in across the FYDP,
especially as we re-build installations impacted by extreme weather
events?
Admiral Lindsey. [No answer was available at the time of printing.]
Mr. Bergman. How can the Department as a whole better utilize new
building technologies like cross-laminated timber? What authorities or
guidance do you need from Congress that would further increase the
partnership between each of your respective services and the mass
timber industry? How can we ensure technologies like cross-laminated
timber are incorporated into new construction going up in the immediate
future, as opposed to waiting for it to weave in across the FYDP,
especially as we re-build installations impacted by extreme weather
events?
General Banta. [No answer was available at the time of printing.]
Mr. Bergman. How can the Department as a whole better utilize new
building technologies like cross-laminated timber? What authorities or
guidance do you need from Congress that would further increase the
partnership between each of your respective services and the mass
timber industry? How can we ensure technologies like cross-laminated
timber are incorporated into new construction going up in the immediate
future, as opposed to waiting for it to weave in across the FYDP,
especially as we re-build installations impacted by extreme weather
events?
General Allen. [No answer was available at the time of printing.]
______
QUESTION SUBMITTED BY MR. KAHELE
Mr. Kahele. The Barking Sands Tactical Underwater Range (BARSTUR)
Range is a critical part of the Pacific Missile Range Facility (PMRF)
complex. Its unique and strategic location off Kauai plays an essential
role in providing realistic training operations to prepare the fleet
for engagements in the Pacific theater of operations. The range allows
training and tactical development providing the fleet with a premier
facility for crew certification and training enhancing critical
readiness of the fleet in the Pacific and worldwide. Right now, roughly
30% of BASTUR's in-water sensors (12 of 42 in-water sensors) are
inoperable due to the aging infrastructure. It is one bad storm away
from additional sensors being compromised. Given this serious threat to
the readiness of the fleet, will the Navy prioritize and accelerate
funding towards underwater communications infrastructure projects to
prevent potential loss of undersea warfare training capability?
Admiral Lindsey. [No answer was available at the time of printing.]
[all]