[Senate Hearing 117-]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]




 
             MILITARY INFRASTRUCTURE AND CLIMATE RESILIENCE

                              ----------                              


                        WEDNESDAY, MAY 19, 2021

     Subcommittee on Military Construction,
             Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies
                               Committee on Appropriations,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The committee met at 3:00 p.m. in room SD-192, Dirksen 
Senate Office Building, Hon. Martin Heinrich (chairman) 
presiding.
    Present: Senators Heinrich, Reed, Boozman, and Hoeven.

                         DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

STATEMENT OF MR. RICHARD KIDD, DEPUTY ASSISTANT 
            SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR ENVIRONMENT AND 
            ENERGY RESILIENCE

              OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR MARTIN HEINRICH

    Senator Heinrich. Good afternoon, everyone.
    This hearing of the Military Construction, Veterans 
Affairs, and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee is 
now called to order.
    I'd like to thank our witnesses for being here today. From 
OSD we have Mr. Richard Kidd, Deputy Assistant Secretary of 
Defense for Environment and Energy Resilience. Representing 
each of the Services are Mr. Jack--say your last name for me so 
I don't--
    Mr. Surash. Surash.
    Senator Heinrich. Surash, Senior Official Performing the 
Duties of Assistant Secretary of the Army for Installations, 
Energy, and Environment, Mr. James Balocki, excellent, Deputy 
Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Installations, Energy, and 
Facilities, and Mr. Mark Correll, Deputy Assistant Secretary of 
the Air Force for Environment, Safety, and Infrastructure.
    Military installations are the backbone of our military's 
readiness. Among many other functions, they are the locations 
where we develop, test, and maintain equipment, vehicles, and 
munitions, where we base offensive and defensive systems, and 
where service members work, train, and very often live. 
Ensuring that our military installations and the facilities on 
them are resilient is absolutely critical.
    Today we'll focus on climate resilience and namely the 
ability of installations to prepare for or minimize the effects 
of extreme weather events and other climate-related 
disruptions.
    While DOD infrastructure funding and climate resilience 
needs cut across several DOD accounts, this subcommittee 
hearing is particularly framed around military construction 
funding.
    We need to understand how to appropriate limited funding 
and must be confident that DOD is building to the latest 
engineering standards, appropriately incorporating resiliency, 
and constructing facilities that most effectively decrease our 
vulnerabilities.
    While climate threats are not new, the intensity and the 
frequency of weather events has caused significant destruction 
to installations in recent years. We have spent more than $8.5 
billion in military construction funding to rebuild facilities 
damaged by a half dozen natural disasters since 2018.
    By contrast, in the previous two decades, in the previous 
20 years, we had collectively spent roughly 2.4 billion for the 
same purposes, more than 70 percent of which was attributable 
to just one storm, Hurricane Katrina back in 2005.
    Now beyond the fiscal costs, there are also operational 
impacts. In the most prominent recent examples, we saw the 
destruction of Tyndall Air Force Base in Florida following 
Hurricane Michael, which caused the displacement of F-22s from 
the 325th Fighter Wing, as well as the storm surge and flooding 
destroying or rendering inoperable hundreds of buildings at 
Camp Lejeune, the East Coast's Marine Corps Hub, and Offutt Air 
Force Base, home to STRATCOM.
    It is not just coastal and riverine installations that face 
threats from climate change. Drought, decertification, and 
permafrost thaw affect bases in many other parts of the 
country.
    In my home state of New Mexico, we're seeing more extreme 
fires, longer droughts, drier summers, and more severe floods 
when it finally does rain. Energy demand and associated 
infrastructure is also critical to consider and we need to 
ensure reliable access to energy-using proven technology, such 
as onsite battery storage and micro-grids.
    Recognizing the need to invest in climate resilience, the 
committee has provided DOD with funding targeted for this 
purpose. We regularly increase funding for the Energy 
Resilience and Conservation Investment Program or ERCIP, and in 
the past 2 years have appropriated $90 million in planning and 
design funds specifically for military installation resilience.
    I look forward to hearing from the witnesses about how this 
funding helps their services develop tools, conduct climate 
assessments, update building codes, and plan, design, and 
construct projects to improve climate resilience and any 
additional funding that is needed to accelerate that work.
    While DOD has taken steps, such as updating building codes 
and developing the recently-released DOD Climate Assessment 
Tool, it has also handicapped itself. DOD regularly defers 
investment in infrastructure and within military construction 
accounts prioritizes new platforms over recapitalization of 
existing vulnerable facilities.
    As of last month, DOD had not yet issued guidance adding a 
military installation resilience component to installation 
master plans. We have lists of the most vulnerable 
installations for each service, but it is not clear how that 
information is being used in planning and programming.
    Deferring investment in the resilience of military 
installations as climate risks become more acute and more 
frequent is certain to exacerbate financial and operational 
strains across the Department of Defense.
    We know that many of these facilities destroyed by natural 
disasters were decades-old and that newer facilities have a 
greater survival rate. I would argue that rather than just 
replacing facilities as they get destroyed, we need to target 
investment into constructing facilities that either directly 
improve resilience or mitigate risks at the most vulnerable 
installations.
    I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today about 
how we can best thread that needle, and it is my honor to turn 
over to the Ranking Member, Senator Boozman, for his opening 
comments.

                   STATEMENT OF SENATOR JOHN BOOZMAN

    Senator Boozman. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm very 
pleased to be with you today as your Ranking Member of the 
subcommittee for our first MILCON hearing. I've enjoyed working 
with you on the Migratory Bird Commission and a number of other 
things and really look forward to working closely with you and 
your staff that does such a great job on the important issues 
within this portfolio.
    I'd like to join you in welcoming Mr. Richard Kidd and our 
other witnesses here today to discuss Military Infrastructure 
and Climate Resilience.
    Resilience is a particularly timely topic given the ongoing 
national discussion concerning the important vulnerability of 
our nation's critical infrastructure. It is vital that our 
military be able to protect our national interests around the 
globe in the face of ever-present challenges.
    To be resilient first requires that our national resources, 
infrastructure and installations be hardened against threats, 
both natural and manmade, and, second, when we are forced to 
face adversity, we can continue to execute our missions without 
the systems of support we regularly rely on.
    That's a lot to address within an account that is 
historically underfunded and often flat. Everyone here today is 
well aware that infrastructure's typically the bill payer for 
higher priorities within the department.While we have not yet 
seen the fiscal year 2022 budget request, the details released 
so far do not bode well for higher investment in our 
infrastructure accounts.
    That is particularly concerning given the scale of DOD's 
facilities and installations. With over 600,000 facilities at 
more than 4,500 sites worldwide, this trillion dollar portfolio 
directly contributes to military power and readiness.
    Given historical underinvestment in not just MILCON but 
also sustainment, restoration, and modernization, our 
facilities often suffer from insufficient maintenance and 
improvements, leaving them susceptible to a variety of risks, 
and this is not a Democrat or Republican thing. This is just 
the history of what we've encountered.
    The past few years have seen multiple natural disasters and 
weather events severely impacting installations, causing 
billions in damage. As several of you acknowledge in your 
written statements, newer facilities fared better while older 
and degraded facilities experienced loss or failure.
    We seem to be in a reactive state, spending billions of 
dollars to build back our bases because we're not putting in 
the required upfront investment to construct or adequately 
maintain, repair, and recapitalize our infrastructure.
    I'm pleased to hear that new facilities are being planned, 
designed, and constructed with maximum resilience in mind, but 
we cannot afford to replace all of our inventory.
    Fiscal realities, especially in the years to come, will 
continue to prioritize weapons systems and other tip of the 
spear requirements over support systems, like infrastructure.
    We must make smart investments based on risks to protect 
our most critical and vulnerable assets. In addition to our 
physical infrastructure, today's automation and 
interconnectivity of systems are exposing new vulnerabilities 
in industrial and facility control systems.
    We need to look no further than the recent Colonial 
Pipeline attack to see the potential chaos and havoc that 
disruptions to our systems can cause. While many commercial 
intrusions are financially motivated, attacks on DOD 
infrastructure are focused on disrupting the mission and 
compromising assets, putting lives at risk in the process.
    Electricity is also a critical asset enabler and our 
adversaries are seeking methods to deny, disrupt, or attack our 
energy supply and distribution systems.
    Cyber and energy resilience, in addition to climate 
resilience, are critical and require holistic solutions, not 
focusing on just one issue.
    We need to improve resilience so our bases can continue to 
operate, support its missions, and take care of its people in 
the event of a natural and an unnatural disaster.
    I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today on their 
efforts to work towards comprehensive installation resilience 
and with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Senator Boozman.
    We now turn to the witnesses for their opening statements. 
Your full written testimony will be included in the record, and 
you'll be recognized for three minutes to summarize your 
remarks, and we'll start with Mr. Kidd.
    Thank you.

                 SUMMARY STATEMENT OF MR. RICHARD KIDD

    Mr. Kidd. Chairman Heinrich, Ranking Member Boozman, and 
Distinguished Members, thank you for the opportunity to speak 
with you on the important topic of Military Infrastructure and 
Climate Resilience.
    I would also like to thank all the staff members who worked 
behind the scenes to make this hearing possible.
    Senator Heinrich. Can you hit your microphone button? I 
think it may be off or pull it closer.
    Mr. Kidd. How about now?
    Senator Heinrich. We won't count this against your time. 
There we go.
    Mr. Kidd. Thank you.
    I left off thanking the staff for all their hard work.
    Senator Heinrich. Well said.
    Mr. Kidd. The Department of Defense has identified climate 
change as a critical national security issue and a threat 
multiplier. Climate change will continue to amplify operational 
demands on the force, degrade installations and infrastructure, 
increase health risk to our service members, and may require 
modifications to much of our existing or planned investment in 
equipment.
    Extreme weather events are already costing the department 
billions of dollars, as you mentioned in your remarks, 
Chairman, and these costs are likely to increase as climate 
change accelerates.
    Not adapting to climate change, though, will be even more 
expensive with failure measured not only in additional repair 
dollars but also in terms of lost military capability, lower 
readiness, missed opportunities for technical innovation, and 
economic growth.
    At the same time as we recognize these climate realities, 
the national defense strategy is equally clear: the homeland is 
no longer a sanctuary. We know that our adversaries can launch 
cyberattacks on key energy systems and infrastructure, whether 
at the national, regional, or local level. Enhancing energy and 
water resilience on our installations is essential to 
preserving our operational capabilities, regardless of the 
threat, manmade or natural. Climate's resilience is mission 
resilience.
    The National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2020 
requires the department to address risks and threats to 
installation resilience comprehensively, systematically, and 
including the threats from climate change.
    Similarly, the department is responding to an Executive 
Order from the White House, Tackling Climate Crisis at Home and 
Abroad, required to produce a plan that integrates climate 
consideration across the full spectrum of our activities to 
assure a capable and ready force.
    In responding to the direction of an Executive Branch and 
the Legislative Branch, the department is building resilience 
by conducting climate assessments, updating our directives and 
unified facilities and building energy and water resilience 
plans across our installations.
    To do this, we are taking advantage of the authority and 
the resources that you have provided us, acknowledge the Energy 
Resilience Conservation and Improvement Fund. This is perhaps 
our most important and flexible account when building 
resilience.
    We also acknowledge the authorities we have to take 
advantage of third party financing opportunities as well as 
expanded authorities to work to build resilience through our 
local communities.
    In sum, the department's efforts to address climate change 
are directly aligned with and supportive of the department's 
overall efforts to ensure mission continuity and preserve 
resilience.
    This afternoon you will hear how each component service 
does this in a manner consistent with their unique requirements 
and context.
    I look forward to your questions and continued dialogue.
    [The statement follows:]
               Prepared Statement of Mr. Richard G. Kidd
                              introduction
    Chairman Heinrich, Ranking Member Boozman, and distinguished 
members of the subcommittee: Thank you for the opportunity to speak 
with you on the important topic of military infrastructure and climate 
resilience.
    Our installations are key platforms for our nation's defense. They 
are our power projection platforms and support every mission the DoD 
Components undertake to defend this nation.
    Therefore, we must work to ensure installations and infrastructure 
are resilient to a wide range of challenges to include climate change, 
disruptions to energy or water supplies, and direct physical or cyber-
attacks.
    Federal law mandates that the Secretary of Defense ``shall ensure 
readiness of the armed forces for their military missions by pursuing 
energy security and energy resilience'' (10 U.S.C. 2911).
    The term ``military installation resilience'' means the capability 
of a military installation to avoid, prepare for, minimize the effect 
of, adapt to, and recover from extreme weather events, or from 
anticipated or unanticipated changes in environmental conditions, that 
do, or have the potential to, adversely affect the military 
installation or essential transportation, logistical, or other 
necessary resources outside of the military installation that are 
necessary in order to maintain, improve, or rapidly reestablish 
installation mission assurance and mission-essential functions.
    The Department has been and will continue to be proactive in 
developing comprehensive policy, guidance, and tools to ensure 
installation resilience, with a focus on robust infrastructure, sound 
land management policies, and increased energy and climate resilience.
                             climate change
    To successfully execute the DoD mission, the Military Departments 
must have the energy, land, air, and water resources necessary to train 
and operate in a world adversely impacted by a changing climate. 
Additionally, the Department must build in climate resilience into our 
formations, equipment, human capital, and all enabling energy, water 
and communications systems.
    Climate change is already negatively impacting the Department's 
missions. From melting Arctic sea ice and thawing permafrost, to 
wildfires, hurricanes, drought, and sea level rise, the impacts of 
climate change on the operational environment are placing significant 
demands on our forces, and our interagency and international partners.
    Severe weather related events at Tyndall AFB, Offutt AFB, and Camp 
Lejeune over the past five years are sober reminders of the 
catastrophic effects that climate change can have on the Department's 
missions. These events, including the recent degrading effects of 
Winter Storm Uri, are representative of the climate-changed weather 
conditions we can expect in the future.
    Climate change impacts can affect sources of supplies, equipment, 
vehicles, and weapons systems as well as their distribution and 
storage. Environmental Justice considerations require that training and 
testing, as well as acquisition actions, are not disproportionately 
impacting low income and/or minority populations (EO 13985 and EO 
13990). Risks and opportunities will be coordinated through the updated 
DoD Environmental Justice Strategy to be developed per EO 14008.
    As the National Climate Assessment makes clear, continued growth in 
greenhouse gas emissions along the current trend risks ``unanticipated 
changes and impacts, some of which are potentially large and 
irreversible.'' (Fourth National Climate Assessment, Vol 1) In other 
words, we need to act now to ensure climate change effects do not 
outpace mitigation efforts. The Department of Defense, by the nature of 
our national security role, manages risk. The evidence is clear: we 
must act deliberately today to avoid untenable risk in the future.
    Given the current trajectory, these demands are likely to increase. 
According to recent, authoritative, and actionable science, the effects 
of climate change will outpace mitigation efforts at least for the next 
20-50 years. To avoid unmanageable effects impacting mission, we must 
begin mitigation now at the same time we are adapting to observed and 
reasonably foreseeable climate changes.
    Executive Order 14008, Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and 
Abroad, identifies climate change as a national security issue and 
directs the Secretary of Defense (SECDEF), in coordination with inter-
agency stakeholders, to submit to the President, an analysis of the 
security implications of climate change (Climate Risk Analysis) that 
can be incorporated into modeling, simulation, war-gaming, and other 
analyses.
    EO 14008 further directs the SECDEF and Chairman of the Joint 
Chiefs of Staff (CJCS) to consider the security implications of climate 
change, inclusive of Climate Risk Analysis findings, in developing the 
National Defense Strategy, Defense Planning Guidance, Chairman's Risk 
Assessment, and other relevant strategy, planning, and programming 
documents and processes.
    EO 14008 Section 211 directs the head of each agency to submit a 
draft Climate Action Plan to the National Climate Task Force and the 
Federal Chief Sustainability Officer that describes steps the agency 
can take with regard to its facilities and operations to bolster 
adaptation and increase resilience to the impacts of climate change. 
The Plan focuses on climate change adaptation in accordance with the 
Interim Instructions for Preparing Draft Climate Action Plans Under 
Executive Order 14008, released by the Council on Environmental Quality 
on 3 March 2021, and subsequent instructions.
    The Department's Plan is almost complete and will be submitted on 
27 May 2021. The plan integrates climate considerations across the full 
spectrum of our activities to ensure a ready and capable force. It 
complements the DoD Sustainability Report and Implementation Plan 
(SRIP), which addresses greenhouse gas reduction, real property 
management, fleet and mobility, sustainable procurement, and 
electronics stewardship and data centers.
            climate action plan--climate literate workforce
    DoD Senior Leaders are tasked with translating abstract climate 
hazards to address meaningful emerging risks and to identify gaps in 
existing knowledge and staff capacities. Building climate literacy and 
capability in the workforce appropriate for different functional areas 
will enable the Department to identify and address climate readiness 
actions across their areas of responsibility and successfully carry out 
the mission in an era of rapidly changing climatic conditions.
    By focusing on climate literacy, the Department will ensure that 
climate change considerations and impacts are factored into all 
relevant and applicable DoD decisions. While some experts must know how 
to assess scientifically credible information about climate and 
communicate about climate and climate change in a meaningful way to 
support decision-makers, other staff will receive climate literacy 
training appropriate for their functions.
    The Department is committed to integrating climate change literacy 
into all its training and education efforts, from skill-specific 
military education to graduate training in the war colleges. This 
includes activities related to developing, acquiring, fielding, 
sustaining equipment and services, and installation practitioners. For 
example, installation management teams should attain climate literacy 
levels to support their risk-informed and responsible decisions.
       climate action plan--understanding climate vulnerabilities
    A key component of the Climate Action Plan task is a description of 
each agency's climate vulnerabilities, particularly in the area of 
installation, building and facility energy, and water efficiency. In 
mid-Fiscal Year (FY) 2019, Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of 
Defense for Environment and Energy Resilience chose to proceed with the 
development of the DoD Climate Assessment Tool (DCAT), a Department- 
wide, screening-level climate hazard assessment tool based on an 
existing geospatial tool developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 
(USACE) for the Department of Army (Office of the Assistant Secretary 
for the Army for Installations, Energy, and Environment).
    The DCAT relies on the best available data and model outputs 
already produced and processed into forms amenable for producing 
actionable assessments of future climate exposure to eight hazards: 
coastal flooding, riverine flooding, heat, drought, energy demand, land 
degradation, wildfire, and historical extreme weather events. It 
includes customizable reports that can be used to prioritize 
installations for further, more detailed study of exposure, 
sensitivity, and adaptive capacity (ESAC); support effective and 
efficient planning; and identify climate resilience measures.
    With the release of the DoD Climate Assessment Tool (DCAT), DoD now 
has the capability to quantify and compare installation exposure to 
climate hazards out into the future. On April 22, 2021 the Department 
published a report entitled ``DoD Installation Exposure to Climate 
Change at Home and Abroad'' which provides analysis of installation 
exposure to climate change hazards at over 1400 installations at home 
and abroad.
    This assessment helps identify the climate hazards to which DoD 
installations are most exposed, which is the first step in addressing 
the potential physical harm, security impacts, and degradation in 
readiness resulting from global climate change. Assessing the 
sensitivity of an installation to its climate hazard exposure is the 
next step, followed by identifying measures to reduce exposure and 
sensitivity. Information in this report, combined with other DoD data 
and analytical results, will be used to support that Climate Risk 
Analysis.
               building installation and range resiliency
    The Department incorporates climate resilience as a cross-cutting 
consideration for our planning and decision-making processes, and not 
as a separate program or specific set of actions. Specifically, the 
Department considers resilience in the installation planning and basing 
processes. This includes consideration of environmental vulnerabilities 
in installation master planning, management of natural resources, 
design and construction standards, utility systems and service, as well 
as emergency management operations.
    The DoD has a worldwide footprint--almost 3 million military and 
civilian personnel, more than 26 million acres, and over 603,385 
facilities encompassing more than 2.2 billion square feet and valued at 
more than $1,210 billion (B); many of which serve specialized, mission-
critical purposes. These assets are distributed across the Services 
(Army, Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, and Space Force) and numerous DoD 
agencies, each with distinct operations.
    The Department's installations remain critical components of its 
ability to fight and win wars. Our warfighters cannot do their job 
without bases from which to fight, on which to train, or in which to 
live when they are not deployed. Our installations support our 
families--many of whom live there and all of whom use their support 
services. The bottom line is that installations support our military 
readiness. To ensure that our installations are prepared to support the 
defense of this nation, the Department takes a broad, systemic approach 
that considers climate and man-made threats to built and natural 
infrastructure. Not only must we ensure that facilities themselves are 
resilient in the face of a range of threats, but we must also ensure 
that the surrounding land, water, and airspace can support mission-
essential activities.
    Since 2010, DoD has developed a comprehensive set of policies, 
directives, and plans to manage the effects of climate change on its 
operations, missions, and facilities. The Department has a 
comprehensive approach to building climate-ready installations. This 
approach considers resilience in installation planning: installation 
master planning, installation energy planning (IEP), management of 
natural resources, design and construction standards, utility systems 
and service, and emergency management operations.
                               facilities
    Regarding the built environment, the Department pursues resilience 
through application of its building codes in both installation 
planning, and design and construction of individual facilities. The 
Department updates these building codes, collectively known as Unified 
Facilities Criteria and Unified Facilities Guide Specifications, on a 
regular basis to reflect revised industry and federal standards. As 
building technologies improve and data from natural disasters increases 
over time, these standards become more stringent towards protecting 
life and property in these types of events.
    The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 amended 
10 USC Section 2864 to require that installation master plans address 
risks and threats to installation resilience, including those from 
climate change. The Department's September 2020 update to UFC 2-100-01, 
Installation Master Planning directs installations to incorporate 
climate resilience analysis in master planning activities to ensure 
mission sustainment over the intended lifespan of infrastructure and 
assets. The UFC also provides instruction on the use of climate 
scenario planning, and refers to the DoD Climate Assessment Tool (DCAT) 
and the DoD Regional Sea Level Database (DRSL). To aid in 
implementation, the Military Departments have established handbooks to 
support installation staff as they incorporate climate change into 
installation planning.
    Outputs from the Department's forthcoming Climate Risk Analysis and 
Climate Action Plan will be used to further inform and update the 
Department's installation master planning efforts. In master planning 
for effects of climate change, the Department is taking a broad and 
holistic approach. For example, sea walls might reduce risks on an 
installation, however, without considerations for managing local 
circulation effects, they could result in induced flooding elsewhere. 
Additionally planning and design of built and natural infrastructure 
must assess the effects of infrastructure projects on local areas to 
avoid disproportionate impacts to low income and minority communities.
    The challenge to maintain present built and natural infrastructure 
into the future will vary depending on location, climate hazard 
exposure, and sensitivity of missions and operations. Improving 
understanding of infrastructure components and ecosystems is critical.
    Information about how natural ecosystems contribute to ecosystem 
services and climate resilience, and how they overlap with the built 
environment provide insight into how to design better solutions that 
account for the condition and benefits of the whole system. For 
example, as we have previously reported, coastal ecosystems-including 
wetlands, marshes, and mangroves-may shield communities from the 
impacts of climate change.
    Planning for future infrastructure and new DoD installations can 
also take decades. The DoD's global property holdings are worth nearly 
$1.2 trillion (DoD 2020b). As the frequency of extreme weather events 
has increased, the DoD must consider the related risks and make wise 
investment decisions to mitigate the impacts of extreme weather on the 
DoD's mission.
    Recent updates to Unified Facilities Criteria to incorporate 
forward-looking projections of climate-related data into its planning 
and design criteria include the following:

  --UFC 3-201-01, Civil Engineering. Includes sections on minimum 
        design flood elevation and flood mitigation requirements, flood 
        resistant design options, and flood protection systems. 
        Establishes a technical approach for using the DoD Regional Sea 
        Level Database at coastal installations to determine future 
        inundated areas, future floodplains, and design flood 
        elevations.

  --UFC 3-201-02, Landscape Architecture. Directs all DoD projects to 
        design plantings for climate resiliency. States DoD projects 
        must consider potential climate change effects and address the 
        effects through strategic land use planning, modifications, and 
        design interventions.

  --UFC 1-200-02, High Performance and Sustainable Building 
        Requirements. Requires that new building designs are 
        ``responsive to any Government-provided projections of climate 
        change and determination of acceptable risk.'' Directs DoD 
        Components to identify and implement operations and maintenance 
        policies that improve the climate resiliency of facilities and 
        operations.

    Related Unified Facilities Criteria updates for extreme events 
include the following:

  --UFC 3-301-01, Structural Engineering. Provides design load 
        combinations for designing structural components that are 
        sensitive to vertical earthquake ground motion.

  --UFC 3-400-02, Engineering Weather Data. Directs installation 
        planners to request engineering weather data from Air Force's 
        14th Weather Squadron that focuses on climatic variables of 
        temperature, humidity, precipitation, and winds.

         environmental conservation and compatible development
    The Department's lands and waters are vital to readiness. As 
training, testing, and operational requirements expand and new weapons 
systems are introduced, access and use of ranges becomes increasingly 
important. Managing for healthy and resilient natural landscapes, such 
as reducing fire risks, avoiding wildlife conflicts, removing invasive 
species, and improving range and training areas, provides the 
conditions necessary for mission-essential activities.
    This includes opportunities to maintain and improve ``natural 
infrastructure,'' implementing solutions outside installation 
boundaries to enhance the benefits provided by natural systems. Natural 
infrastructure solutions encompasses a wide range of possible actions 
that can help promote installation resilience and preserve access to 
critical installation and range assets and capabilities.
    For example: restoring historical hydrology (e.g., wetlands and 
coastal marshes) can help reduce flooding impacts on coastal 
infrastructure; reestablishing oyster reefs and restoring shoreline and 
dune vegetation can help reduce impacts of storm surge on low-lying 
installations; restoring high-value habitat can enhance wildlife 
corridors for threatened, endangered, or at-risk species and avoid or 
mitigate regulatory restrictions on training, testing, and operations; 
and removing vegetation and managing fuel loads can minimize wildfire 
risk to infrastructure, personnel, and operations.
    To assist installations in developing plans to manage the evolving 
natural resources challenges, the DoD worked with the National Wildlife 
Federation to develop planning guidance--''Climate Adaptation for DoD 
Natural Resource Managers.'' The guide, published in June 2019, 
provides an overview of how a changing climate may affect military 
lands and other resources, and outlines a process to incorporate 
adaptation strategies into Integrated Natural Resource Management Plans 
(INRMP).
    Two key programs that are facilitating the Department's sustainment 
efforts are the Readiness and Environmental Protection Integration 
Program (REPI) and the Sentinel Landscapes Program.
    Readiness and Environmental Protection Integration Program (REPI)--
The REPI program preserves test, training, and operational capabilities 
that enable readiness, strengthens strategic partnerships, and supports 
test, training, and operational capability. The REPI program stimulates 
innovative and diverse partnerships between local communities and 
military installations that increase collaboration and promote 
installation resilience. Partnership agreements provide installation 
commanders, trainers, testers, and operators with increased mission 
flexibility by preventing, mitigating, or removing restrictions that 
can result from nearby incompatible development. In the last 16 years, 
REPI partnerships have protected more than 586,000 acres of land around 
106 installations in 33 states.
    In FY 2019, the Department was provided expanded authority under 10 
U.S.C. 2684a to specifically address military installation resilience 
as a key element of the REPI program. This authority further enhances 
the REPI program's ability to engage in collaborative land protection 
and natural resource management activities to help installations avoid, 
prepare for, minimize the effect of, adapt to, and recover from extreme 
weather events, or from anticipated or unanticipated changes in 
environmental conditions.
    Sentinel Landscapes Program--The Sentinel Landscapes Program 
coordinates between DoD, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA), and 
the Department of the Interior (DOI). This coalition of federal 
agencies, state governments, local communities, and private 
conservation organizations works to advance shared land-use goals 
around military bases.
    The program works closely to identify landscapes across the country 
where all three missions of the federal agencies-promoting sustainable 
agricultural and forestry rural lands, strengthening national defense, 
and building community resilience to climate change-intersect. Once 
identified, the three agencies coordinate to target their various 
conservation programs to properties within these priority areas. Each 
project site, or ``sentinel landscape'' has been remarkably successful 
in collaborating across agricultural, defense, and conservation sectors 
to tackle complex issues related to water quantity and quality, 
imperiled species habitat, and wildfire mitigation.
             office of local defense community cooperation
    Many states and communities across the country support the mission 
of the DoD. Through its Office of Local Defense Community Cooperation 
(OLDCC), the Department is leveraging the capabilities of state and 
local partners through grants and technical assistance to enhance the 
readiness of its installations and ranges, and to deliver safe places 
for its members and their families where capabilities in DoD do not 
otherwise exist.
    OLDCC's program portfolio is comprised of over 200 separate grants, 
exceeding $1.3 billion. Recently through its Defense Community 
Infrastructure Program (DCIP), OLDCC has funded projects to support 
communities serving Fort Huachuca, Arizona, and Joint Region Marianas, 
at Tinian. These projects are improving community utility 
infrastructure which in turn is strengthening the resilience of the 
strategic support area serving the bases. In the NDAA for FY2021, 
Congress amended 10 USC Section 2391 to enhance DCIP's ability to 
facilitate investments in community infrastructure projects that 
bolster military installation resilience. As part of its holistic 
approach, the Department is continuing to explore ways to use the DCIP 
program to enhance its internal climate and energy resilience approach.
                                research
    DoD's Strategic Environmental Research and Develop Program (SERDP) 
and Environmental Security Technology Certification Program (ESTCP) 
invest in research focused on improving DoD understanding of 
environmental and climate related risks to installations and mission. 
DoD uses the SERDP and ESTCP programs to validate and fund sustainable 
design initiatives and cutting-edge clean energy technologies that can 
reduce DoD's vulnerability to climate change and increase resilience to 
unavoidable impacts. The following are a few examples of SERDP research 
efforts related to infrastructure and climate resiliency:
  --In response to coastal threats associated with rising sea level, 
        SERDP initiated the DoD- led Coastal Assessment Regional 
        Scenario Working Group and developed the DoD Regional Sea Level 
        Database (DRSL) to provide authoritative, scenario driven sea 
        level change information relevant to each coastal installation. 
        The DRSL is now publicly available so that contracted third 
        parties (e.g., engineering firms), can use the future sea level 
        change information for coastal installation and facilities 
        planning. This availability is critical since DoD installation 
        master planning standards and civil engineering design 
        standards now incorporate DRSL information into installation 
        planning.

  --In response to drought risk, SERDP initiated a study to understand 
        and assess environmental vulnerabilities on installations in 
        the desert southwest. This research seeks to detect and assess 
        drought response of sensitive riparian forests to drought 
        stress over recent decades and will be carried out within three 
        DoD bases in the Southwest, with widely applicable results.

  --In response to wildfire risk, SERDP developed a Fire Science 
        Strategy in 2014 focused on the following: improved 
        characterization, monitoring, modeling, and mapping of fuelsto 
        support enhanced smoke management and fire planning at DoD 
        installations; enhanced smoke management using advanced 
        monitoring and modeling approaches; and research to quantify, 
        model, and monitor post-fire effects.

  --SERDP and ESTCP investments seek to understand changes to the 
        Arctic terrestrial environment relevant to DoD infrastructure. 
        Permafrost degradation can impact soil, vegetation, buildings, 
        roads, and airfields. SERDP and ESTCP investments are leading 
        to tools for making Arctic infrastructure more ``aware'' of 
        permafrost changes before costly failures occur. An example is 
        Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory's fiber- optic 
        geophysical sensing package capable of providing real-time 
        information on subsurface conditions relevant to infrastructure 
        performance and failure in Arctic environments.

    Traditionally, the Department has been challenged in transferring 
clean energy technologies from the SERDP and ESTCP programs over the 
``valley of death'' from concept to programs of record. The Department 
is revitalizing efforts to facilitate technology transfer through 
directed programs such as the Energy Resilience and Conservation 
Investment Program (ERCIP), as well as third-party financed 
authorities.
                            energy programs
    Unlike the Department's MilCon and Environmental Remediation 
programs, where the budget request includes specific line items, our 
energy programs are subsumed across other accounts.
            energy resilience policies, programs, and tools
    As defined in Section 101 of Title 10, energy resilience is the 
``ability to avoid, prepare for, minimize, adapt to, and recover from 
anticipated and unanticipated energy disruptions in order to ensure 
energy availability and reliability sufficient to provide for mission 
assurance and readiness, including mission essential operations related 
to readiness, and to execute or rapidly reestablish mission essential 
requirements.''
    The Department utilizes a portfolio of appropriated and third party 
financed programs to pursue energy resilience. These programs are 
governed by key instructions and policies to ensure warfighter 
requirements are addressed holistically and in a prioritized and cost 
effective manner.
                         policies and programs
    The Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment 
(ASD(S)) provides policy and oversight to the military departments and 
defense agencies that align to the energy resilience requirements of 
Title 10 and Department of Defense Instruction (DoDI) 4170.11, 
Installation Energy Management. The Department implements policies 
through critical initiatives, such as installation energy planning, 
energy resilience assessments, and black start exercises. The 
Department also pursues partnerships with other agencies, such as the 
Department of Energy.
    department of defense instruction 4170.11, installation energy 
                               management
    This formal policy provides guidance, assigns responsibilities, and 
prescribes procedures for all DoD installation energy management 
activities to include energy and climate resilience requirements. It is 
currently being rewritten to further strengthen the role of 
installation energy plans and the inclusion of energy resilience, 
climate and cybersecurity provisions.
                       installation energy plans
    Through the Installation Energy Planning (IEP) process, military 
installations are tasked with identifying mission critical loads, 
assessing energy resilience and cybersecurity gaps, and developing 
scalable and cost effective solutions to close those gaps. The Services 
are finishing IEPs for priority mission installations and are 
submitting plans for top energy consuming installations by the end of 
FY21. All remaining installations are targeted for completion by the 
end of FY22.
    The Department's IEP framework is being enhanced to address the 
short, medium, and long-term impacts of climate change. Specifically, 
climate scenario planning, using the DoD Climate Assessment Tool (DCAT) 
and the DoD Regional Sea Level Database (DRSL), is informing the 
Department's Installation Master Planning and Installation Energy 
Planning (IEP) processes. Additionally, the IEP process is being 
reviewed to potentially integrate climate objectives and weighting 
factors such as GHG reduction, the social cost of carbon, and 
environmental justice in its decision-making calculus.
    In the IEP process installations leverage a portfolio of energy 
authorities and technology solutions to close critical energy and 
climate resilience gaps. As part of its climate adaptation and 
mitigation efforts, the Department is seeking ways to increase the use 
of clean energy and other GHG reducing solutions in its pursuit of 
energy resilience. Presently, more than 15% of the electricity used by 
DoD facilities is from renewable sources, and DoD is the largest 
producer of onsite renewable energy in the federal government.
    The intermittency of clean energy technologies has historically 
presented a challenge in terms of closing energy resilience gaps 
identified in the IEP process. The Department ``moving the needle 
forward'' by exploring ways to integrate renewables with other 
technologies (i.e., micro-grids, battery energy storage, etc.) to 
overcome these challenges. IEPs are ``living documents'', and the 
Department will update them frequently to incorporate advancements in 
clean energy technologies and battery storage.
     energy resilience and conservation investment program (ercip)
    ERCIP is a subset of the Defense-Wide Military Construction 
Program, specifically intended to fund projects that improve energy 
resilience, contribute to mission assurance, save energy, and reduce 
DoD's energy costs. ERCIP accomplishes these goals through construction 
of new, high-efficiency energy systems or through modernizing existing 
energy systems.
    The ERCIP program has executed over 511 high priority projects from 
FY09-21 including the implementation of micro-grids, renewable energy 
generation (i.e., solar PV, solar thermal, wind, etc.) building 
efficiency enhancements, and utility distribution improvements [$900M+ 
portfolio].
    For example, at Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Miramar the ERCIP 
program facilitated the implementation of an installation level micro-
grid which enables the base to operate during disruptions to the 
commercial grid. The base has a power plant with both diesel and 
natural gas generation to supplement existing landfill gas and solar 
power, providing a total of 11.2 MW of on-site power generation. 
Additionally, a new energy and water operations center was built to 
consolidate the microgrid control system with other utility management 
systems at the air station.
    The Department is exploring ways to better integrate ERCIP with 
broader climate and modernization initiatives (including technology 
transfer). Additionally, as part of the NDAA for FY2021, Congress has 
provided the authority to use ERCIP with other funding sources such as 
Energy Savings Performance Contracts and Utilities Privatization.
  energy savings performance contracts (espc)/utility energy savings 
                            contracts (uesc)
    DoD seeks opportunities to enhance energy efficiency and reduce 
energy consumption as part of its efforts to strengthen energy 
resilience. Energy efficiency bolsters installation energy resilience 
by helping reduce the energy demand from distributed energy production 
resources during commercial grid disruptions. Energy efficiency is also 
a practical way that the DoD is reducing its carbon footprint in 
alignment with the tenets of EO14008, the Energy Act of 2020, the 
Federal Sustainability Framework, and broader DoD climate mitigation 
goals.
    The Department continues to utilize performance contracting (i.e., 
ESPCs/UESCs) as a significant part of its efforts to enhance energy 
resilience through energy efficiency.
    For example, through an ESPC at Marine Corps Recruitment Depot 
(MCRD) Parris Island the Marine Corps has enhanced readiness through 
the installation of a 3.5 megawatt combined heat and power plant 
(CHPP), 6.7 megawatts of solar photovoltaic panels with integrated 
energy storage, and a microgrid control system. Built above the flood 
zone, the CHPP is less susceptible to hurricanes, storms and sea level 
rise. Implementation of clean energy technologies and other equipment 
upgrades will reduce energy consumption by 88% and water consumption by 
25%. Based in part to savings from the ESPC, MCRD Parris Island 
decreased its electricity purchased from the commercial grid by more 
than 50% in FY20 compared to FY19.
    Additionally, in July 2019, the Navy awarded its largest ever ESPC 
to Naval Station Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to build a new power plant, 
improve resiliency and reliability, increase efficiency, and add 
renewable generation to this self-sufficient critical installation. The 
project will provide 12 MW of solar photovoltaic energy generation, 
battery energy storage, water and sewer improvements, major building 
system upgrades, and a dual-fuel (F76 fuel oil and Liquefied Natural 
Gas) Combined Cycle Power Plant. Annual savings for this ESPC are 
expected to reach nearly 4 million BTUs and 1 million gallons of water.
    Since 2011 the Department has awarded over $5.1B in performance 
contracts and its portfolio is the largest in the federal government. 
Due in large part to efficiencies from these contracts, the Department 
has also achieved an energy intensity reduction of 20.9% from FY 2003 
to 2019, contributing to GHG reductions.
    In furtherance of its forthcoming Climate Action Plan and in 
alignment of the Installation Energy Planning process, the Department 
is posturing itself for further performance contracting investments in 
FY2022 and beyond. The Department's efforts will be informed and 
enabled by the Energy Act of 2020.
                    10 usc 2912 energy cost savings
    The Military Services continue to leverage authority granted under 
10 U.S.C. Section 2912 to retain amounts equal to energy cost savings 
in order to fund additional energy resilience, energy efficiency, and 
installation quality of life projects. In FY2019 and FY2020, the 
Military Departments piloted efforts to retain $115M in installation 
energy cost savings using the authority. Presently, the Military 
Departments are piloting efforts to utilize funds pursuant to the 
statute and DoD financial regulations.
                other alternative financing authorities
    The Department continues to leverage other alternative financing 
authorities to implement energy resilient, climate-ready and cyber-
secure solutions. These include, but are not limited to, power purchase 
agreements (PPAs), enhanced use leases (EULs), and utilities 
privatization (UP), when supported by the business case and/or IEP.
    For example, at Edwards AFB, the Department is moving forward on an 
800 megawatt renewable energy project that could be one of the largest 
solar arrays in the country, and would be the largest in the DoD. The 
Air Force estimates the project could provide power for an average of 
238,000 homes in California, and could yield cash rent consideration up 
to $80 million throughout the expected 35-year enhanced use lease.
                      micro-reactor demonstration
    As directed in the FY 2019 National Defense Authorization Act, the 
Department of Defense is seeking to demonstrate a commercially 
developed, Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) licensed, very Small 
Modular Reactor (vSMR) to power critical loads at a permanent domestic 
military installation by December 2027. An RFP for the pilot base 
currently under development, to be issued this year; planned selection 
of a vendor by 2022 to demonstrate a micro-reactor on a DoD (Air Force) 
installation by 2027. Industry is making steady progress in developing 
advanced micro-reactors with the potential to enhance installation 
resilience through assured access to power in support of critical 
missions and remote operations. The Department will use the proposed 
demonstration to assess the energy resilience capability and the cost 
effectiveness of vSMR technology.
                          exercises and tools
    To facilitate the implementation of energy resilience policy, the 
Department is utilizing exercises and analysis tools to continually 
improve our approach.
                      black start exercises (bses)
    In accordance with U.S. Code Title 10 Section 2911 and DoD 
instruction 4170.11, the Department is performing BSEs to evaluate 
energy resilience risks to readiness while completely separated from 
the commercial electric grid. Since 2015, the Department has conducted 
over 35 site-level energy resilience assessments, tabletop exercises, 
and black start exercises to implement its policies. The lessons 
learned from these initiatives have been used to develop Department-
wide policies and procedures to drive behavioral and cultural awareness 
for installation personnel and energy managers.
    To ensure the readiness of its installations, the Department 
routinely conducts statutory ``black start exercises'' where 
installations are disconnected from the wider power grid to determine 
the resilience of on-site power generation. These black start exercises 
were completed at Fort Stewart, Fort Greely, Fort Bragg, Hanscom AFB, 
Vandenberg AFB, Joint Base McGuire- Dix-Lakehurst, and Marine Corps Air 
Station Miramar. BSEs identify critical energy vulnerabilities and 
interdependencies that could degrade critical missions, assess latent 
risks in an installations energy resilience posture, and inform the 
development of appropriate mitigations.
                        cyber secure facilities
    Given the importance of energy resilient facilities as nodes for 
projecting and sustaining power, the Department is reducing the cyber 
risks to facility related control systems (FRCS). Building on the July 
2018 Deputy Secretary of Defense memorandum, Enhancing Cybersecurity 
Risk Management for Control Systems (CS) Supporting DoD Owned Defense 
Critical Infrastructure, my office has integrated the cyber security of 
industrial control systems into energy policies and guidance.
    The Department is developing internal requirements for 'inside the 
fence' as well as requirements for external partners 'outside the 
fence' to be cyber-secure and cyber-resilient. For example, military 
installations are including cyber security considerations in the 
development of their installation energy plans, and FRCS considerations 
are now required for utility privatization agreements, ESPCs, and 
UESCs.
    We will continue to work with the Department's Chief Information 
Officer and Principal Cyber Advisor toward solutions and resources 
ensuring FRCS are defensible, survivable, and resilient to operate and 
sustain critical functions in a cyber-contested environment. My office 
also plans to incorporate relevant and timely FRCS cybersecurity 
requirements in our forthcoming rewrite of DoDI 4170.11
                               conclusion
    Thank you for the opportunity to testify on the Department's 
efforts to build resilient and climate ready installations. Your 
continued support of Department of Defense's mission and for our 
military members and their families is appreciated.
STATEMENT OF JACK SURASH, SENIOR OFFICIAL PERFORMING 
            THE DUTIES OF ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE 
            ARMY FOR INSTALLATIONS, ENERGY, AND 
            ENVIRONMENT
    Mr. Surash. Chairman Heinrich, Ranking Member Boozman, and 
Members of the Subcommittee, on behalf of the soldiers, 
families, and civilians of the United States Army, thank you 
for the opportunity to discuss how the Army is preparing for 
the challenges ahead by increasing the climate resilience of 
our infrastructure through adaption, mitigation, and 
innovation.
    The Army's efforts to maintain and/or increase the 
resilience of our installations' infrastructure is embedded 
into our policies and programs. Energy and water resilience or 
uninterrupted access to energy and water are essential for Army 
readiness and for ensuring the total Army can deploy, fight, 
and win.
    Last year the Army issued Army Directive 2020.08. It's 
entitled Army Installation Policy to Address Threats Caused by 
Changing Climate and Extreme Weather. This requires our 
installation commanders to address climate and extreme weather 
threats in all infrastructure related plans, policies, and 
procedures.
    Climate change is a direct threat to our Army. To combat 
that threat, the Army is proactively taking steps to address 
the impacts and cause of climate change and extreme weather.
    The Army Climate Assessment Tool launched in 2020 enables 
planners to identify local climate threat scenarios to inform 
master planning. The Climate Resilience Handbook was published 
as a companion to the tool and is a guide for garrisons to 
develop climate adaptation measures.
    In March of this year, the Army stood up the Army Climate 
Change Working Group, which supports the identification of key 
tasks to synchronize and direct Army activities.
    The Army Installation Strategy is the foundational document 
that drives the Army's goal for resilient installations. In 
alignment with this strategy, the Army Installation Energy and 
Water Strategic Plan sets the following vision: Army 
installation energy and water infrastructure supporting 
critical missions in the strategic support area will be 
resilient, efficient, and affordable.
    To enhance installation resilience and efficiency, the Army 
utilizes private financing through the Office of Energy 
Initiatives, leverages private sector expertise and 
partnerships through energy savings performance contracts and 
utility energy service contracts, and incorporates projects 
with resilience attributes through the Department of Defense's 
direct-funded Energy Resilience and Conservation Investment 
Program.
    Army readiness begins on our installations. Through 
adaption, mitigation, and innovation, the Army will work to 
secure the readiness and resilience of forces, functions, and 
facilities.
    Thank you very much for the opportunity to present this 
testimony and for your continued support of our soldiers, 
civilians, and families.
    [The statement follows:]
                 Prepared Statement of Mr. Jack Surash
    Chairman Heinrich, Ranking Member Boozman, and Members of the 
Subcommittee: on behalf of the Soldiers, Families, and Civilians of the 
United States Army, thank you for the opportunity to discuss how the 
Army is preparing for the challenges ahead by working to increase the 
climate resilience of our infrastructure through adaptation, 
mitigation, and innovation. My name is Jack Surash, and I am currently 
the Senior Official Performing the Duties of the Assistant Secretary of 
the Army for Installations, Energy and Environment. Previously, I 
served as the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for Energy & 
Sustainability.
                              introduction
    The Army's efforts to maintain or increase the resilience of our 
installations infrastructure is embedded into our policies and 
programs. Energy and water resilience, or uninterrupted access to 
energy and water, is essential for Army readiness and ensuring the 
Total Army can deploy, fight, and win. In line with the Secretary of 
Defense's direction, the Army is prioritizing climate change 
considerations in our missions, plans, resources, and capabilities. As 
our mitigation and adaptation efforts mature, the Army's commitment to 
climate change does not change the Army's priorities of People, 
Readiness, and Modernization. Our installation infrastructure, to 
include energy and water resources, supports critical missions and must 
be able to withstand the impacts of climate change.
                                strategy
    In September 2020, the Army issued Army Directive 2020-08 (Army 
Installation Policy to Address Threats Caused by Changing Climate and 
Extreme Weather) that requires installation commanders to address 
climate and extreme weather threats in all infrastructure-related 
plans, policies, and procedures.
    The Army Installations Strategy (AIS), published in December 2020, 
is the foundational document that drives the Army's goal for resilient 
installations. The AIS represents a pivot from an Industrial-Age 
paradigm characterized by rigidity and purpose-built specialization to 
a data-rich, reconfigurable Information Age construct. As indicated in 
the AIS, Army installations support Total Army operations to mobilize 
and project forces and capabilities anywhere in the world, at any time. 
Resilience advances the capability of systems, installations, 
personnel, and units to respond to unforeseen disruptions to quickly 
recover critical missions.
    Climate change is a direct threat to our Army. To combat that 
threat, the Army is proactively taking steps to address the cause and 
impacts of climate change and extreme weather. Recent and ongoing 
activities include:

  --Army Climate Assessment Tool (ACAT), deployed July 2020: This web-
        based tool enables installation planners to identify local 
        climate threat scenarios, to inform master planning and 
        resilience analysis.

  --Army Climate Resilience Handbook, published August 2020: A 
        companion to the ACAT and a guide for garrisons to develop 
        climate adaptation measures.

  --Army Climate Change Working Group, established March 2021: Supports 
        the identification of key tasks to immediately synchronize and 
        direct Army activities to address implications at the policy, 
        planning, and implementation levels and the development of the 
        Army Climate Action Plan.

    These efforts to address climate change risks to Army missions will 
help strengthen Army resilience in support of global operations. Some 
effects of climate change may be unavoidable, but with improved 
infrastructure and resilient installations, we can minimize operational 
impacts and maintain Army readiness.
                      installation master planning
    Per the FY20 NDAA, 10 USC 2864 now requires the master plans for 
major military installations to address ``military installation 
resilience'' and to include the ``consideration of... energy and 
climate resiliency efforts.''
    We gain valuable insights into our existing infrastructure 
condition and capability gaps, resource access, and system operations 
and plans through planning and condition assessments. Army Installation 
Energy and Water Plans (IEWPs) outline critical mission needs, 
characterize energy and water baseline conditions, and propose 
prioritized projects and operational activities to increase energy and 
water resilience.
    IEWPs have begun to identify a wide range of deficiencies that will 
require mitigation. The challenge is resourcing projects and 
operational changes to address the highest risk energy and water 
deficiencies to critical missions amidst pressure to fund other Army 
priorities. The Army has 30 IEWPs at or near-completion; all remaining 
installations are scheduled to be completed by the end of FY 2022. 
IEWPs will be updated on a recurring basis and results will be 
incorporated into installation master plans.
               energy and water efficiency and resilience
    The Army is the largest consumer of installation energy in the 
Department of Defense, spending more than $1 billion per year on 
facility energy and water. Our installations rely, with few exceptions, 
on commercial energy and water sources to accomplish critical missions. 
The vulnerabilities in the interdependent electric grids, natural gas 
pipelines, and water resources supporting our installations jeopardize 
Army missions, installation infrastructure and security, and the Army's 
ability to project power.
    The Army Installation Energy and Water Strategic Plan, issued in 
December 2020, sets the vision, ``Army installation energy and water 
infrastructure supporting critical missions in the Strategic Support 
Area is resilient, efficient, and affordable.'' It established goals, 
strategic objectives, and targets to further efforts to build long-term 
resilience, efficiency, and affordability. Building and measuring 
resilience enables Army readiness by improving the ability to prevent 
and recover from disruptions to vital energy and water utility 
services. We are leveraging all approaches to address energy and water 
resilience.
    Comprehensive Energy and Water Evaluations (CEWEs) and Black Start 
Exercises (BSEs) are two of the methods we use to identify gaps and 
opportunities. Their results inform our IEWPs and project 
prioritization. CEWEs are directed to be accomplished by the National 
Energy Conservation Policy; they report energy and water efficiency 
opportunities on a four-year cycle. Black Start Exercises lead to the 
detection of resilience needs, and have the added benefit of resulting 
in improved communications and collaboration between the Army, local 
communities, and utility companies that service an installation. We 
have conducted BSEs at Fort Stewart, GA,
    Fort Greely, AK, Fort Bragg, NC, Fort Knox, KY, and Fort Irwin, CA, 
and we are planning exercises at Fort Hood, TX, Fort Leavenworth, KS, 
and Rock Island Arsenal, IL. These exercises revealed challenges 
including lack of defined critical building loads; critical building 
loads and communications systems not connected to backup generation; 
and backup generator failures due to lack of maintenance or 
insufficient loading. We are developing a BSE schedule to support the 
FY21 NDAA requirement for a minimum of five exercises per year starting 
in FY23.
    In FY 2020, the Army's energy use per square foot (energy use 
intensity or EUI) was 82.1 thousand BTUs per square foot. Compared to 
the FY03 baseline, the Army decreased EUI by 15.6%. Army installation 
energy efficiency and conservation efforts include reducing overall 
energy use, maximizing efficiency, implementing energy recovery and 
cogeneration opportunities, and striving to offset remaining demand 
with onsite energy generation. The Army's FY20 water use per square 
foot (water use intensity or WUI) was 38.6 gallons per square foot. 
Compared to the FY07 baseline, the Army decreased WUI by 28.2%. In 
addition to reducing overall water use and maximizing efficiency, water 
efficiency and conservation efforts include recycling and reusing water 
by shifting to alternative sources, recharging aquifers, and striving 
to offset remaining demand with onsite water sources. By reducing the 
demand for energy and water, the Army lowers its reliance on external 
sources, creating flexibility and resilience to meet mission 
requirements and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
    The Office of Energy Initiatives (OEI) is the Army's central 
program management office that develops, implements, and oversees 
privately financed, large-scale energy projects. Energy generation, 
storage, and control capabilities are favored; when combined, these 
capabilities create an ``island'' effect-enabling critical mission 
sustainment during an electrical grid outage. Their work has results in 
11 operational projects with 325 MW of energy production capacity, 
securing $627 million of private sector investment, and anticipated 
life-cycle operations and maintenance values of $603 million.
    The Army also leverages private sector expertise and partnership 
through Energy Savings Performance Contracts and Utility Energy Service 
Contracts to improve efficiency and contribute to resilience. While 
these projects target the reduction of energy and water consumption, 
they also enable Army to address maintenance and repair backlogs sooner 
than if we rely solely on constrained appropriated funds.
    The Energy Resilience and Conservation Investment Program (ERCIP) 
is the DoD's only direct-funded program targeted for energy resilience. 
The Army has been focusing on ERCIP projects to incorporate resilience 
attributes, conserve energy and water, reduce reliance on the grid, and 
construct on-site power generation and associated infrastructure. In 
FY21, the Army received $35.1 million for two ERCIP projects that add 
energy and water resilience capabilities.
    The Army's utility systems, both government owned and privatized, 
must be resilient, reliable and efficient. By investing in energy 
infrastructure and modernizing utility systems with current technology, 
we will enhance our installations' overall resilience. The Army's 
Utilities Privatization Program conveys utility systems to a non- 
government entity, usually a utility company, through a utility 
services contract. These contracts allow the Army to access private 
sector financing for up to 50 years to modernize and recapitalize 
utilities infrastructure. We have privatized 147 systems at 98 U.S. 
installations. This includes systems at 17 of 34 installations that are 
Power Projection Platforms, Mobilization Force Generation 
Installations, or both.
    The need to be resilient is now. We are advancing the development 
and use of climate adaptation and mitigation tools, renewable energy, 
energy efficiency and consumption, and water usage initiatives to 
enable Army operations. The Army will continue to collaborate with 
Congress, DoD, the other Services, private industry, utilities, and 
local communities to enhance installation resilience, efficiency and 
affordability in support of Army readiness. We will also continue 
participating in industry events, such as Department of Energy's Energy 
Exchange, to communicate, share lessons learned, and remain up-to-date 
with industry best practices.
                               conclusion
    Army Readiness begins on our installations. We need ready and 
resilient installations to ensure our Soldiers are able to properly 
train and can deploy anywhere in the world in order to fight and win 
our Nation's wars. Through adaptation, mitigation, and innovation, the 
Army will work to secure the readiness and resilience of forces, 
functions, and facilities.
    Your continued advocacy helps to ensure we will remain an 
attractive option for current and future generations who want to serve 
their Nation and retain the current force by meeting the expectations 
of an all-volunteer Army with capable, high-quality, and modernized 
installations. Thank you for the opportunity to present this testimony 
and for your continued support of our Soldiers, Civilians and Families.

    Senator Heinrich: Mr. Balocki.
STATEMENT OF JAMES BALOCKI, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY 
            OF THE NAVY FOR INSTALLATIONS, ENERGY, AND 
            FACILITIES
    Mr. Balocki. Good afternoon, Chairman Heinrich, Ranking 
Member Boozman, and Distinguished Members of the Subcommittee. 
Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today on 
behalf of the sailors and Marines in our Navy and Marine Corps 
to address climate resilience and its impacts on the Department 
of the Navy's installations and infrastructure.
    The nation has entrusted the women and men of the 
department with operating installations worldwide on its 
behalf. These bases with infrastructure investments valued at 
nearly one half a trillion dollars are central to generating, 
projecting, and sustaining naval combat power today.
    They're also an integral component of future Navy and 
Marine Corps military capabilities and they're home to our 
families.
    I'm pleased to report the department is taking action to 
integrate resiliency into our installations, how they're built 
and how they operate. While more work is still needed, today 
we're using the Defense Regional Seal Level Tool, employing the 
Naval Facilities Engineering Systems Command's Climate Change 
Handbook, and have piloted Defense Climate Assessment Tool at 
60 installations, all leading to resilience solutions.
    We've completed nearly all of the installation energy plans 
for our 95 installations and are using them to plan and 
prioritize projects to address the highest mission-related 
energy gaps.
    We're integrating resiliency into installation master plans 
with the first at the direction of Congress being completed in 
February of this year and five more scheduled for completion in 
the coming months.
    The persistent challenges that confront our naval forces in 
the face of increasing threats across every domain provides an 
opportunity to re-evaluate existing solutions. Like other 
security challenges, those presented by resilience threats are 
not insurmountable. Determining how to address them in the 
overall context of the department's priorities is the place our 
dialogue needs to begin.
    We look forward to the continued support of Congress in 
engaging with us to address these important concerns and I look 
forward to your questions.
    Thank you.
    [The statement follows:]
               Prepared Statement of Mr. James B. Balocki
    Good afternoon Chairman Heinrich, Ranking Member Boozman, and 
distinguished members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for the 
opportunity to discuss climate resilience of the Department of Navy's 
(DoN) infrastructure.
    Installations represent a visible demonstration of the nation's 
strength. The Department of the Navy generates, projects, and sustains 
naval power from installations; they are an essential component of 
current and future Navy and Marine Corps military capabilities. They 
are also home to our families. The Navy recognizes climate change as a 
national security issue and is fully aligned with the Administration 
and the Secretary of Defense on prioritizing actions to address and 
build climate resiliency.
    Naval installations' ability to plan, prepare, adapt, and recover 
from a range of threats, either individually or in combination with 
others, is an essential mission. It is also a complex one; installation 
resilience presents a multi-domain, multi-dimensional challenge. DoN 
installations face environmental threats from natural disasters and 
climate change, as well as risks to energy, water supplies and 
industrial cyber controls.
    These challenges are not insurmountable; however, deciding how and 
when to address them is both an art and a science. The decision 
calculus involved must balance the needs of current and future 
readiness with installation resilience which, by definition, includes 
design and construction standards that account for low probability, 
high consequence events. This results in assumption of risk and added 
cost to preserve and protect the Department's capital investments. With 
a real property portfolio valued at nearly one half trillion dollars, 
the Department's exposure to these threats is undeniable.
    We are witnessing a real and measurable change in the probability 
and consequences of natural events at our installations. This makes a 
clear and compelling case why we must address these risks.
    Installation resilience directly impacts the entire spectrum of 
military operations from force development through power projection and 
force sustainment. The Department is tackling these challenges 
holistically across the range of resiliency threats, by how we operate 
and the decisions we make in the planning, design, location and 
construction of facilities. The Department incorporates resiliency as a 
cross-cutting consideration in our master planning, design and 
construction, and decision-making processes, rather than as a stand-
alone program or specific set of actions.
    The Department is grateful for the support of this committee, 
enabling the recovery from a range of natural events impacting DoN 
Installations over the past four years. The Department's ability to 
restore operations following these events ensures the nation's naval 
power remains ready. We saw what was possible following the China Lake 
earthquake. Within five months of the event, funding was authorized and 
appropriated, and the first projects were awarded four months later. In 
fact, all China Lake recovery work is scheduled to be awarded by July 
30, 2021. Our successes at China Lake need to be replicated.
                       energy & water resiliency
    As our technologies and capabilities grow, so too will our Sailors' 
and Marines' need for reliable energy in future conflicts. To this end, 
the Department published in 2020 the Secretary of the Navy's 
Installation Energy Resilience Strategy, the first update since 2014. 
It reflects a fundamental shift of focus to resilience and provides 
leadership with direction to achieve energy reliability, resiliency and 
efficiency. It provides a disciplined approach to identify energy 
performance shortfalls and security gaps that impact operational 
readiness requirements, and establishes the means to mitigate those 
risks, working with DoD programs, energy utilities defense communities, 
Congress and the private sector.
    The DoN has completed energy resiliency planning at 100 percent of 
its 70 Navy bases and 26 percent of its 19 Marine Corps bases. The 
product of these efforts is an Installation Energy Plan (IEP) tailored 
to each specific base and its resident missions, which identifies 
energy gaps, both on and off the installation. We've implemented a 
governance process to ingest all this information and make mission-
informed investment decisions to close the most critical gaps first.
    We are prioritizing critical power energy resiliency projects to 
install, repair, or upgrade various generation, switchgear, control, 
and uninterruptible power systems for the Fleet and other mission 
critical activities that provide special warfare, satellite, computer, 
and radio/telecommunications capabilities around the globe. Marine 
Corps Logistics Base (MCLB) Albany became the first United States 
Marine Corps Net Zero Installation in April 2021. This significant 
energy achievement will produce as much electricity from renewable 
energy as it consumes from the community's utility providers. The 
result is improved installation resiliency, reduced reliance on 
traditional energy sources, and reduced greenhouse gas emissions.
    In fiscal years (FYs) 2020 and 2021, the Department is leveraging 
planning and design funds to invest in updated and enhanced 
installation resilience design standards and decision- making tools for 
application by leaders and technical experts Department-wide in 
addition to designing specific projects addressing critical 
installation resiliency threats and vulnerabilities. In addition, the 
department made several important investments in 2020 using alternative 
financing to improve the efficiency, reliability, and resiliency of the 
utility infrastructure:

1. At Naval Submarine Base New London, Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, and 
    Naval Support Activity Hampton Roads, Energy Savings Performance 
    Contracts provided a total of $13.9M in annual savings for the Navy 
    and guaranteed performance improvements that are designed to pay 
    the entire construction, operations and maintenance costs for the 
    next 25 years. Distributed generation enhancements at Portsmouth 
    will be achieved through the construction of a 7.4MW cogeneration 
    power plant with a battery energy storage that will enhance the 
    reliability of shipyard operations by balancing the power load with 
    micro-grid control systems.

2. In California, the Navy executed an enhanced use lease at Naval 
    Weapons Station Seal Beach Detachment Norco that will construct a 
    2.5-MW solar photovoltaic system with 2.5MW battery storage 
    capacity. The lease will provide $10M in critical infrastructure 
    improvement and build a micro-grid, making the installation more 
    resilient to grid outages and power quality disruptions.

3. In Hawaii, the Navy partnered with Kauai Island Utility Cooperative 
    to improve energy resiliency at Pacific Missile Range Facility 
    Barking Sands. A planned 19 MW solar system and 70 MWh battery 
    energy storage system sited on Navy land will supply energy to the 
    local grid and provide the installation with local, stable, 
    renewable power in the event of a grid outage.

    Installation resilience depends on innovation and flexibility. The 
Department successfully piloted the 10 U.S.C 2912 program in FY 2020, 
enabling accrued energy savings to be collected from expiring Operation 
and Maintenance (O&M) funds prior to cancellation and transferring them 
into a no-year shared energy savings O&M account. The program 
identified and documented $40.3M Navy and $4.8M in Marine Corps 
savings, which will in turn allow timely development, implementation, 
and sustainment of innovative energy saving initiatives in an effort to 
provide energy reliability, resiliency, and efficiency to enhance the 
capability of the warfighter and to mitigate security gaps.
    We have partnered with local communities, utility service 
providers, and experts in the private sector to collaborate on 
initiatives to reduce vulnerabilities, add redundancy, or improve 
energy management. In June 2020, Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) 
Miramar conducted two successful black start tests of their microgrid. 
Power provided from San Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E) was turned off, 
requiring the on-site power plant and micro-grid to support the full 
load of designated critical facilities. The black start was a 
resounding success, and the microgrid was used during California's 
historic heatwave in August 2020 to return 3.3 MW to the SDG&E power 
grid to help prevent regional brown outs. Similarly, the Navy is 
developing an Energy Resilience Readiness Exercise program built on 
multiple phases beginning with table top exercises and culminating with 
``pull the plug'' events. These exercises will measure the 
installation's resilience to conduct critical and essential missions 
while disconnected from the commercial power grid. We have already 
completed table top exercises at Kings Bay, Georgia, and in San Diego, 
California and plan to complete five more by the end of FY 2022.
    In pursuit of our goal to improve our water security and access to 
sustainable water sources in drought-prone areas, the Department is 
working on cooperative regional management action plans and a review of 
water rights to mutually benefit both the Department and local 
communities. Navy and Marine Corps installations have prioritized 
completion of the American Water Infrastructure Act (AWIA) assessments 
to address malevolent acts, natural hazards and the updating of 
emergency response plans for our community water systems.
    Additionally, to improve water conservation, we have continued 
promoting policy that minimizes potable water use for non-core mission 
functions like irrigation, and engaged with industry leaders to improve 
water conveyance and treatment systems. For example, Camp Pendleton 
improved water security, expanding reclaimed water conveyance by 
installing new 'recycled water' lines, and new reservoirs for base 
irrigation and aquifer recharge. The use of recycled water helps to 
conserve potable water for core mission functions, and increases the 
health and sustainability of the aquifer basin for the greater San 
Diego area.
                           climate resilience
    The Department views the effects of climate change as a significant 
installation resilience issue impacting readiness, and incorporates 
climate change as a cross-cutting consideration in our master planning, 
environmental conservation and restoration, design and construction, 
and decision making processes, not as a separate program or specific 
set of actions. Installations apply a variety of mitigation measures to 
maintain continuity of operations, which can range from exercising 
emergency action plans to evacuate personnel and weapons platforms 
during floods and storms to long term design adaptations to reinforce 
and raise buildings above the historic mean-high water of the 100-year 
flood plain.
    The FY 2021 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) directed the 
Services to add a resiliency component to our installation master 
plans. The DoN is pleased to announce the first of these efforts is 
complete; Naval Magazine Indian Island in Washington State accomplished 
this task in February. Four other installations: Key West, Kings Bay, 
Hampton Road and San Diego are on track to complete their updated 
master plans incorporating resilience this calendar year.
    Sea level rise and storm surge are real dangers, particularly to 
naval installations, which are mostly located along our nation's coast 
lines by the nature of their missions. The influence of high winds, 
rain, and elevated sea levels, especially in hurricane-prone areas, 
combine to impact coastal infrastructure. When new facilities are 
planned, facilities are sited to minimize the impact of these threats. 
The Department designs new facilities in accordance with the 
requirements in UFC 3-201-01, Civil Engineering, using the Department 
of Defense Regional Sea Level Rise (DRSL) data base, and the updated 
Climate Change Installation Planning Handbook, Installation Adaption 
and Resiliency (2019) to provide an analytical framework and 
methodology for mitigating flooding and environmental impacts. These 
techniques and tools use a combination of historical information, 
design criteria, and statutory requirements to aid in making design 
choices that improve the resilience of facilities and installations.

1. In California, forecast sea level rise data for the year 2100 was 
    used during the environmental planning and design phases of the new 
    Coastal Campus project at Naval Base Coronado. The design 
    configuration of five buildings was modified to incorporate the 
    1.6- to 6.5- foot science-based projected range to resist sea level 
    rise over the buildings' projected lifecycle.

2. In Virginia, the Defense Regional Sea Level Database (DRSL) was used 
    for design adaptation at Norfolk Naval Shipyard that will build 
    flood protection walls around submarine maintenance dry docks and 
    low-lying portions of the shipyard.

3. In support of our Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Program 
    (SIOP), we will complete a sea level rise study for each of our 
    four public shipyards. These studies will ensure that Shipyard Area 
    Development Plans incorporate sea level rise mitigation in all 
    future development.
                      don's approach to resilience
    We approach installation resilience challenges within the context 
of a fixed topline budget requiring the Navy and Marine Corps to 
prioritize and balance investments among competing requirements. We 
follow DoD policy and work to mitigate the effects of climate change 
through the master planning and construction processes. Given our 
mission's link to the sea, many of our facilities will remain in flood 
and hurricane-prone areas. The Department primarily employs the Mission 
Assurance Program to identify risks and impacts to our installations 
and ranges and recently we partnered with DoD to utilize the DoD 
Climate Change Assessment Tool (DCAT) at 60 installations to highlight 
climate exposure risks. Ultimately, our objective is to incorporate 
impacts from climate change and severe weather along with lessons 
learned into every aspect of our institutional planning process. We 
will continue to work with DoD to expand the implementation of DCAT and 
develop a mature and standard climate exposure tool.
    The Department has observed that more recently constructed 
buildings perform better under extreme weather and environmental 
conditions than those that were built many years ago. Hurricane 
Florence at Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune and the earthquake at Naval 
Air Weapons Station China Lake provide two recent examples where more 
recently constructed buildings performed better under extreme 
conditions than older buildings. All newly constructed or repaired Navy 
and Marine Corps buildings are designed in accordance with the most 
current standards (Unified Facilities Criteria 1-200-01 DoD Building 
Code). Our Design and construction standards change over time in 
response to changes in conditions, materials and construction 
techniques. Continuing to design in accordance with the latest 
standards allows the DoN to construct the most resilient features in 
our facilities.
    The Navy and Marine Corps conduct operational planning to ensure 
our critical missions continue regardless of any natural or man-made 
threat. Every installation has extreme weather plans, and Installation 
Commanding Officers work with local communities to plan for natural 
disasters and collaborate on shared emergency roles and 
responsibilities (e.g. mutual aid and support agreements).
    Additionally, we recognize the interdependencies between our 
installations and the surrounding communities. We must look beyond our 
fence lines and collaborate with local communities, States, other 
federal agencies, and industry leaders in the development of regional 
plans that protect military capabilities. In Hampton Roads, Virginia, 
Navy Region Mid-Atlantic has several partnerships to increase 
understanding of current and future risks of sea level rise, and storm 
surge. These risks have the potential to affect Navy operations as well 
as local emergency response plans. In California, Navy Region Southwest 
successfully worked with the California Department of Forestry and Fire 
Protection (CALFIRE) to promote joint training opportunities in an 
effort to protect key infrastructure and communities within San Diego 
County. We are seeking increased opportunities addressing similar 
issues in coordination with federal, state, and local partners at all 
our installations. Following the guidance in Executive Order 14008 and 
the newly-established Secretary of Defense Climate Working Group, the 
Department of the Navy will continue to incorporate climate risk 
analysis into installation planning and deploy new solutions to 
strengthen the resilience of critical capabilities at installations and 
with the surrounding communities. Through shared long-term vision, 
planning, and development, we continue to address and resolve community 
concerns and execute infrastructure projects, implement force 
movements, minimize financial obligations for mitigation measures, and 
maintain full naval training, testing, and operation capabilities.
                               conclusion
    Looking to the future, the Navy and Marine Corps will need to 
prioritize installation resiliency within existing resources while also 
ensuring a proper balance of capabilities, capacity, and readiness to 
maximize our naval power contribution to the Joint Force. Navy and 
Marine Corps installations will continue providing an integral element 
of that lethality, but in order to do so, must improve their resiliency 
and mission readiness through prudent planning, design, and execution 
of adaptive measures. Additionally, we will work with the Office of the 
Secretary of Defense and the other Military Departments to regularly 
update and revise the UFCs, incorporating new design and planning 
criteria to mitigate the effects of climate change. The quality of 
installation resilience directly impacts the entire spectrum of 
military operations from force development through power projection and 
force sustainment.
    I appreciate the opportunity today to discuss DoN's varied 
initiatives towards the improvement of climate resiliency on Navy and 
Marine Corps installations. The dynamic challenges faced by our naval 
forces in the face of an increasing number of operational threats 
across all domains provide an opportunity to reevaluate old assumptions 
and develop adaptable, sustainable solutions. I look forward to the 
Department's continued partnership with the Congress to make progress 
in this vital area.

    Senator Heinrich. Mr. Correll.
STATEMENT OF MARK CORRELL, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY 
            OF THE AIR FORCE FOR ENVIRONMENT, SAFETY, 
            AND INFRASTRUCTURE
    Mr. Correll. Chairman Heinrich, Ranking Member Boozman, 
Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to 
appear before you today.
    Installations and climate resilience are vital components 
of the Air and Space Forces combat readiness, and I thank you 
for your continued interest, leadership, and efforts to assist 
us in this area.
    The Department of the Air Force addresses installation 
resilience on five primary fronts: energy, cyber, 
infrastructure, emergency response, and climate.
    One way we accomplish energy resilience is by identifying 
system vulnerabilities through methods, such as Black Start or 
Energy Resilience Readiness Exercises. To date, the Air Force 
has conducted five Black Start exercises and an additional two 
more are scheduled for this year.
    Turning to cyber resilience, in March of this year the 
Secretary and Chief of Staff of the Air Force and Chief of 
Space Operations signed the first-ever Control Systems 
Strategic Plan and Associated Implementation Plan.
    These plans provide an actionable, enduring, and unified 
roadmap of how the Department of the Air Force can holistically 
address vulnerable control systems and infrastructure over the 
next 10 years.
    Relating to infrastructure, the Department of the Air Force 
Infrastructure Investment Strategy or I2S remains our long-term 
strategy to cost-effectively modernize and restore 
infrastructure readiness.
    This strategy enhances resiliency by proactively upgrading 
facilities through informed facility investments, the targeted 
demolition of failing facilities, and improved processes, such 
as standardizing building codes for increased efficiency.
    Next, I'd like to take a moment to recognize that 
resilience is not just about buildings and systems but also 
includes the preparedness of our airmen, guardians, and 
civilians.
    Emergency response planning is essential to ensuring that a 
base can respond quickly from an event. Routine exercises of 
installation emergency management plans ensure personnel are 
ready to face a myriad of events.
    The final focus area I'd like to address is climate 
resiliency. The Air Force has seen the impacts of natural 
disasters and other severe weather events can have on an 
installation.
    Tyndall Air Force Base being one of those examples. 
However, we also saw severe flooding at Offutt Air Force Base 
in 2019 and 28 Department of the Air Force installations were 
impacted by historic Winter Storm Uri this year.
    We continually learn from these events and adapt to meet 
current and future threats to our installations. In April of 
2020, the Department of the Air Force published a Severe 
Weather Climate Screening and Risk Assessment Playbook to give 
installation-level planners a consistent framework for 
addressing severe weather and climate hazards.
    At all levels of the Department of the Air Force, we are 
focused on ensuring installation and climate resiliency. Our 
holistic approach to installation resilience is what ensures 
Air and Space forces can provide timely and effective combat 
capability.
    Thank you again for your time today and I look forward to 
your questions.
    [The statement follows:]
               Prepared Statement of Mr. Mark A. Correll
                              introduction
    Every Department of the Air Force (DAF) mission starts and ends on 
an installation. Installations are weapon systems. We project power, 
generate readiness, test new platforms, train to support joint 
operations, and provide safe and healthy communities for our families 
at our bases. Air Force and Space Force installations serve as key 
nodes in enabling Joint Force mission success around the world. More 
than 300,000 Total Force personnel organize, train, and equip at DAF 
installations, and for thousands of Airmen, Guardians, and their 
families, installations also serve as their homes and centers of life. 
The readiness and resiliency of installations is a matter of strategic 
importance to ensure the Air Force and Space Force can always provide 
combat capability.
    Secretary of Defense Austin recently released his top three 
priorities for the Department of Defense: Defend the Nation, Take Care 
of our People, and Succeed through Teamwork. He identified tackling the 
climate crisis as one of the lines effort under the priority to defend 
the nation, elevating climate as a national security priority. Changing 
climate and severe weather events are a continual threat to our 
installations. Over the past several years, the Department of the Air 
Force has seen first-hand the impacts climate and severe weather can 
have on our installations. The Department of the Air Force is smartly 
moving forward with rebuild efforts at Tyndall Air Force Base (AFB), 
Florida, following the devastation caused by Hurricane Michael in 2018 
and Offutt AFB, Nebraska, following historic flooding in 2019. We are 
also recovering from and continuing to assess damage from the recent 
Winter Storm Uri that brought extreme cold to much of the United 
States, impacting dozens of DAF installations throughout the Midwest 
and the southern part of the country. We must continually learn from 
these events and adapt to meet current and future threats to our 
installations posed by severe weather and climate, as well as physical 
or cyber- attacks.
  the department of the air force approach to installation resilience
    Installation resilience is a multi-faceted issue that is addressed 
through a variety of efforts and funding streams. The DAF views 
installation resilience as the capability of a base to sustain the 
projection of combat power by protecting against, responding to, and 
recovering from intentional or accidental physical, cyber or naturally 
occurring events that impede air, space, or cyberspace operations. We 
take a holistic and deliberate approach to addressing installation 
resilience on four primary fronts: energy, cyber, infrastructure, and 
emergency response.
                           energy resilience
    The DAF requires reliable power and water to accomplish both 
operational and training missions. The overarching vision for the DAF's 
installation energy and water program is ``Mission Assurance through 
Energy Assurance.'' This vision is focused on securing the ability to 
perform our warfighting mission, in the face of disruptions to 
traditional sources, while simultaneously optimizing energy and water 
availability and productivity through better planning and technology 
and process improvements. The recently released Department of the Air 
Force Installation Energy Strategic Plan highlights the DAF approach to 
integrate resilience concepts and considerations at each step in the 
mission, from the strategic to tactical levels, to ensure enabling 
systems enhance mission assurance.
    Our approach to energy resilience starts with identifying system 
vulnerabilities through various methods such as mission thread analysis 
and black start or Energy Resilience Readiness Exercises (ERRE), 
developing mitigation actions and incorporating them into Installation 
Energy Plans (IEPs), and ultimately executing energy projects designed 
to improve mission resiliency. As one component of the overarching 
Installation Development Plan (IDP), IEPs identify water and energy 
requirements for each installation's critical missions, analyze 
potential vulnerabilities, and develop strategies to make enabling 
systems more resilient. By aggregating disparate elements of energy and 
water information and management, the DAF will have the means to assess 
the status of energy and water systems, and communicate the potential 
impacts on mission readiness. The IEP does this by establishing a 
baseline that outlines energy and water requirements for each missions 
on the installation (both DAF and tenant missions), and enables the 
installation to target resilient solutions.
    Black start exercises, or ERREs, are powerful tools the DAF is 
using to assess an installation's energy resilience and security. These 
exercises are designed to assess how well the installation can execute 
its primary missions should power be compromised. The Department 
executes these exercises, called Resilience Readiness Exercises (ERRE), 
out of the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Installations, 
Environment, and Energy. To date the Air Force has conducted ERREs at 
Vandenberg AFB, California, Hanscom AFB, Massachusetts, and Joint Base 
McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst (JBMDL), New Jersey. These ERREs have been 
extremely helpful in identifying energy gaps and validating response 
plans. Specifically, the most recent ERRE at JBMDL revealed hidden 
interdependencies between the installations electrical and 
communications architectures, identified issues with backup generation 
assets, and revealed a training gap with installation personnel. 
Installation leadership was also able to validate several continuity of 
operation plans could be executed during a power outage. The Air Force 
has plans to complete additional ERREs at Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio, 
and Eielson AFB, Alaska, in 2021.
                            cyber resilience
    From an installation resilience perspective, our cyber resilience 
efforts focus on preventing, detecting, and responding to unauthorized 
access to DAF facility-related control systems, such as those 
associated with airfield lighting, power and water distribution, fire 
and intrusion detection, back-up generators, and heating, ventilation, 
and air conditioning (HVAC) systems. Control systems used to be 
manually operated and maintained. As infrastructure has matured to 
become automated and network-enabled, we have gained operational 
efficiencies without enough consideration for cyber vulnerabilities or 
the ability to operate in a cyber-contested environment.
    In March of this year, the Secretary and Chief of Staff of the Air 
Force and Chief of Space Operations signed the first-ever DAF Control 
Systems Strategic Plan and associated Implementation Plan. These plans, 
which were developed over the last year by a cross-functional team from 
across the DAF, provide an actionable, enduring and unified strategy 
and high-level road map for the next 10+ years for how the DAF can 
holistically address the aggregated risk to DAF mission execution from 
vulnerable control systems and infrastructure. The Strategic Plan 
prescribes the direction, milestones, organization responsibilities and 
capability requirements to cyber-secure and defend DAF critical control 
systems.
    Following direction provided in the fiscal year (FY) 2017 National 
Defense Authorization Act and using funding from the FY17 Defense 
Appropriations Bill, the Air Force has assessed priority installations 
for cyber vulnerabilities to critical infrastructure. Additional 
efforts to improve cyber resilience include segmenting these control 
systems from the Air Force communications network, embedding 
cybersecurity subject-matter expertise in our Civil Engineer Squadrons 
to aid the cybersecurity management of these systems, and developing 
and fielding cyber-specific education and training for our facility 
maintenance field technicians. When prioritized, we are also resourcing 
the modernization and replacing replacement of obsolete control systems 
through Military Construction (MILCON) or Facility Sustainment, 
Restoration, and Modernization (FSRM) projects and addressing 
identified vulnerabilities. Lastly, we are collaborating with the cyber 
defense community to establish agile detection, coordinated response, 
and recovery when a cyber-incident occurs.
                             infrastructure
    The DAF continually accepts risk in installation investment, which 
over time leads to atrophied facilities and infrastructure. Degraded, 
older facilities are more susceptible to the effects of routine or 
severe weather events. For example, separation of roofing materials 
from a facility introduces a vulnerability where a strong wind could 
lead the weakened roof to collapse, undermining the facility's 
structural integrity and causing catastrophic failure. This was evident 
at Tyndall AFB during Hurricane Michael where facilities constructed 
more recently, using updated building codes, weathered the storm better 
than degraded or older facilities which were both constructed under 
older building codes and subject to longer term deferred maintenance. 
We also observed this during recent winter storms such as Winter Storm 
Uri. In many instances, degraded facility systems and components failed 
which caused water and fire suppression pipes to freeze and eventually 
burst.
    The DAF Infrastructure Investment Strategy (I2S) is our long-term 
strategy to cost- effectively modernize and restore infrastructure 
readiness, improve the resiliency of mission- critical nodes, and drive 
innovation in installation management practices. It serves as a 
framework for planning and building resilient installations that are 
ready to withstand and quickly recover from manmade and natural events 
which potentially impact our missions. Leveraging I2S, the DAF enhances 
resiliency by proactively upgrading facilities through targeted 
facility investments informed by powerful analytics, stabilized 
funding, application of evolving building codes and Unified Facilities 
Criteria (UFCs) through MILCON or FSRM projects, and improved processes 
such as more standardized building components to increase maintenance 
efficiency. UFCs are the Department of Defense building codes that 
implement industry standards and serve as our planning, design, and 
constructions foundation. They are updated by a tri-service panel to 
address changes in public law, military specific requirements and 
incorporate lessons learned from natural disasters, new technology, and 
industry innovation.
    Updated design criteria also come from changes to public law. In 
the FY 2019 NDAA, Congress directed OSD to update Department of Defense 
forms 1391 (DD 1391), Military Construction Project Data, submitted for 
each MILCON project to include a certification whether the project is 
located in a 100-year floodplain. The provision also required 
mitigation of flood risk for facilities that must be constructed in a 
100-year floodplain due to mission requirements by following minimum 
flood mitigation requirements of the facility being cited two or three 
feet above floodplain level, depending on mission criticality of the 
facility. Following implementation guidance provided by OSD, all DAF DD 
1391s submitted with the FY21 President's Budget request complied with 
the 100-year floodplain disclosure mandate. Additionally, the DAF is 
implementing floodplain mitigation plans for several notable MILCON 
projects. Three mission- critical campuses at Offutt AFB, which were 
destroyed by historic flooding in spring 2019, must be rebuilt in 100-
year floodplains due to mission requirements. The elevation of the 
entire site is being raised above the 100-year flood plain in 
accordance with the NDAA.
    The DAF is embracing an approach to natural infrastructure to 
enhance installation resiliency that relies on partnerships with other 
DoD organizations as well as Federal entities outside of DoD. As 
witnessed by the devastation at Tyndall and Offutt Air Force Bases, 
damage to DAF built infrastructure can be severe, but in the case of 
climactic events, they may be attenuated by environmentally-conscious 
improvements to natural infrastructure. We are embarking on such a 
partnered approach at Tyndall AFB this year, where approximately $26 
million in cost shared efforts are underway. These efforts bring 
together federal, state, non- government and academic partners to field 
test environmentally conscious improvements to natural infrastructure. 
These improvements attenuate storm energy, whether from waves or wind, 
lessening the intensity of what passes through to build infrastructure. 
Combined with built infrastructure, which applies resilience features 
such as raised floor elevations and higher wind standards, the natural 
infrastructure improvements provide a cost-effective force multiplier 
to resilience, survivability, and mission assurance. Another example is 
underway at Offutt AFB where civil works built infrastructure provides 
additional flood protection for DAF real property. In this case, the 
Missouri River Natural Resources District is repairing and improving 
levees that protect Offutt AFB. This is a $35 million project that will 
raise the levees two to three feet and widen their bases. The work 
began in September 2019 and is scheduled to be completed in May 2021. 
This is a case where a non-federal partner is providing a front line of 
defense through natural infrastructure improvements.
                           emergency response
    Improving resilience is not just about the tangible aspects of an 
installation, it also includes prepared Airmen, Guardians, and 
civilians. Even with the most state-of-the art building systems, 
installations will always be at risk due to deliberate, accidental, or 
naturally occurring events. Emergency management, disaster response, 
and continuity of operations planning are essential to ensure an 
installation can respond and recover from an incident quickly while 
continuing to execute the mission or, in more extreme situations, 
minimizing downtime. The Air Force Incident Management System uses the 
National Incident Management System as its foundation to integrate 
prevention, protection, mitigation, response, and recovery efforts 
across the installation while also synchronizing with local, state, and 
other federal agencies. Routine exercises of Installation Emergency 
Management Plans ensure personnel are ready to face any disaster. Two 
days before Hurricane Michael hit Tyndall AFB it went from a Category 2 
on a path to bypass the installation to a Category 5 with direct line 
of sight on the installation. Due to emergency management preparedness, 
emergency management exercises, and installation emergency management 
plans, Tyndall AFB evacuated all mission-capable aircraft, military 
members, and families in less than 48 hours. The result: no loss of 
life or aircraft.
                     installation planning efforts
    Our installation planning efforts impact each of the four primary 
DAF focus areas. Effective installation planning, to include assessment 
of natural and manmade threats, is critical to ensure our energy and 
infrastructure investments are effective and efficient and lead to 
ready and resilient installations. Planning efforts also help inform 
contingency and emergency response plan development and execution. In 
recent years, Congress has included numerous provisions in legislation 
specific to installation master planning efforts to enhance 
installation resilience efforts across the Department of Defense.
    The FY18, FY19, and FY20 NDAAs strengthened installation planning 
by requiring resilience be considered in each installation master plan, 
which the DAF calls Installation Development Plans, or IDPs, 
specifically including energy and climate resiliency efforts. In April 
2020, the Air Force published a Severe Weather and Climate Screening 
and Risk Assessment Playbook. This playbook gives installation-level 
planners a consistent and systematic framework to screen for severe 
weather and climate hazards, assess relative current and future risks, 
and integrate the outputs into existing planning and project 
development processes. The playbook also offers planners suggestions 
for how to adapt to hazards. As of early 2021, all major installations 
have used the playbook to complete initial assessments of installation 
exposure and risk due to severe weather and climate hazards. The 
results of these assessments will be used to develop the new FY2020 
NDAA-required Installation Resilience Component plan for DAF IDPs over 
the next several years.
    Another component plan of the IDP is the IEP. The DAF is actively 
developing IEPs for 85 major Active Duty installations. These IEPs 
provide a standardized framework for Air Force installations to 
identify risks and track and adjust requirements to advance energy and 
water resilience goals. IEPs use a 5R framework (robustness, 
redundancy, resourcefulness, response and recovery) to assess 
resilience gaps and identify how an installation plans for and performs 
in a crisis. When complete, IEPs will be a component plan to the 
installation's IDP. To date, the DAF has completed IEPs at 24 
installations and is currently developing 20 more with estimated 
completion by November 2021. The DAF is planning to initiate 15 IEPs in 
summer 2021, and complete the 26 remaining installations in two 
additional phases.
    In the 24 completed IEPs, the DAF has identified over 300 
installation-level resilience gaps, and an even larger number of 
mission-level gaps at individual buildings. These gaps range in 
priority, size, and complexity, but the DAF is evaluating all of them 
for potential mitigation through additional analysis and a follow-up 
requirement development report which focuses on actionable tasks to 
close the gap. Common gaps the DAF identified throughout the enterprise 
include lack of redundancy in electric transmission and distribution 
infrastructure, aging infrastructure past its useful life, lack of 
redundant HVAC systems for server equipment, fuel delivery and capacity 
concerns, water storage and quality concerns, lack of sufficient backup 
power, and energy and water conservation and efficiency improvement 
opportunities.
    Following completion of IEPs, the DAF develops one or more 
installation requirement development reports which recommend executable 
projects to mitigate energy and water resilience requirements and close 
the gaps identified in the IEP. The Air Force Office of Energy 
Assurance (OEA) has accomplished nine of these reports so far, 
identifying three Energy Assurance Leases (EALs), one Energy Resilience 
and Conservation Investment Program (ERCIP) concept, one Energy Savings 
Performance Contract (ESPC) and four Utility Energy Service Contracts 
(UESCs). Overall, through IEPs and other processes, the DAF has planned 
and is currently executing 15 projects representing $904 million in 
investments to directly address climate and extreme weather resilience 
as a primary driving factor. For example, ERCIP projects will help 
defend Beale AFB and Vandenberg AFB in California against the impacts 
of the devastating wildfires the region has experienced in recent years 
and two additional projects are supporting a microgrid for Offutt AFB, 
to maintain mission essential power in case of future flooding. Out of 
these 15 projects, $750 million are budget neutral ESPC and UESC 
projects that are funded through energy conservation measures, helping 
to reduce DoD climate impacts while utilizing the latest in clean 
energy and efficient technologies from industry partners. Furthermore, 
the DAF has 20 ERCIP projects for $238M in planning or execution that 
provide climate/extreme weather resilience as an additional benefit, 
with 20+ more projects currently in early development stages with OEA. 
In total, these projects represent nearly $1.3B in planned DAF energy 
resilience investment.
    moving forward after natural disasters and severe weather events
    The DAF has seen the impacts natural disasters and severe weather 
can have on installations. Recent examples include the devastation of 
Tyndall AFB from Hurricane Michael in 2018, severe flooding of Offutt 
AFB in 2019, and historic winter storms such as Winter Storm Uri which 
impacted 28 DAF installations this year. We continually learn from 
these events and adapt to meet current and future threats to our 
installations.
    Tyndall AFB is being reconstructed as an Installation of the Future 
and includes cutting-edge approaches to ensure the installation can 
withstand future climactic threats. The built infrastructure is being 
designed and constructed using the latest UFCs. In addition, given the 
extensive level of damage, the DAF made a policy decision to design 
beyond the minimum UFC criteria for civil and structural engineering. 
The minimum design wind speed being used for all new facilities at 
Tyndall AFB is 165 miles per hour, exceeding the highest wind speed 
captured during Hurricane Michael, and incorporates best practices from 
the Florida Building Code's High Velocity Hurricane Zone for Miami-
Dade, Broward, and coastal Palm Beach Counties. Facilities are also 
being designed 14 to 19 feet above today's mean sea level, which 
incorporates a 7 foot predicted sea level rise scenario through the 
year 2100. The DAF used the DoD Regional Sea Level (DRSL) database sea 
level rise scenarios to inform development of a Design Flood Elevation 
for reconstruction at Tyndall AFB. Using DRSL data, DAF personnel 
generated spreadsheets and visualizations for several planning 
scenarios for future sea-level change, in combination with the 100-year 
floodplain elevation for Tyndall AFB. The site-specific Design Flood 
Elevation of 14 and 19 feet will ensure new facilities are built at an 
elevation above mean sea level that balances long-term risk aversion 
with minimal cost implications.
    Coastal resiliency is one of the most important aspects to the 
plan. This partnered approach includes cost-shared investments which 
combine with DAF FSRM and MILCON investments to attenuate storm energy 
through natural infrastructure before it reaches built infrastructure. 
Key partners in these efforts include the Defense Advanced Research 
Projects Agency, the United States Army Corps of Engineers Engineer 
Research and Development Center, the Readiness and Environmental 
Protection Integration Program, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration, Fish and Wildlife Service, Bay County, the Florida 
Department of Environmental Protection, the University of Florida, the 
Nature Conservancy, and the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation. 
Several key low life-cycle cost Engineering with Nature initiatives 
being explored include sand fencing, submerged shoreline stabilization, 
living shorelines, oyster reefs, and marsh and seagrass enhancements.
    The DAF is incorporating several efforts specifically targeted at 
increasing resiliency in the rebuild as well. Tyndall AFB is partnering 
with Gulf Power to install a micro-grid, which includes photovoltaic 
generation and a battery energy storage system, to provide back-up 
power to the First Air Force (1 AF)/Air Forces Northern (AFNORTH) 
compound. The 1 AF/AFNORTH HQ, plans, directs, and assesses air and 
space operations for the North American Aerospace Defense Command 
(NORAD), is currently unable to conduct uninterrupted operations should 
an outage occur. Another planned facility that directly enhances the 
Tyndall's resiliency is the Installation Resilience Operations Center 
(IROC). This capability will optimize facility operations for engineers 
and enhance situational awareness for first responders by improving the 
cybersecurity for sensors and other systems installed across the 
installation. Sensors installed on facilities across the installation 
will feed data into the IROC where it will be collected, analyzed, 
archived and distributed to various operations centers and base leaders 
to enhance the decision making process and integrate into existing DAF 
business systems. Facility operations personnel will have improved 
visibility of the status and condition of installed equipment and first 
responders will have instantaneous awareness of incidents, such as 
active shooter situations, across the installation.
    At Offutt AFB, we are consolidating and relocating facilities to 
higher ground and incorporating building techniques for facilities that 
must be rebuilt in lower areas that will minimize cleanup, recovery 
cost, and timelines should they flood in the future. To mitigate flood 
risk for the Nuclear Command, Control and Communications, Non-kinetic 
Operations and Security Forces campuses, approximately six hundred 
thousand cubic yards of fill material, or about forty thousand dump 
trucks, will be brought in. The elevation of the entire site will be 
raised to at least three feet above the 100-year floodplain. Though a 
significant effort, it will ensure personnel working out of these 
facilities can continue to execute this national strategic mission 
should Offutt AFB experience flooding in the future. Other features 
include elevating critical building systems above the first floor or to 
the roof to reduce the vulnerability and using building materials on 
the first floor less susceptible to damage when exposed to water.
    Recent extreme winter storms throughout much of the Midwest and 
southern United States had a considerable impact on DAF installations. 
Initial assessments indicate some degree of damage directly 
attributable to the storms at 28 installations. The DAF continues to 
assess the damage and will restore facilities to full mission 
capability. Though the intensity of recent winter storms was abnormal, 
DAF installations proactively prepare for extreme weather. Some 
preparatory actions are considered just-in-time, such as winterization 
of facilities and adjustments to work schedules and shop manning 
levels. Others are routine and continual processes, such as maintenance 
of facilities and generators, coordination with local utility 
providers, and implementation of contingency plans. Preparatory actions 
also include longer-term infrastructure investment efforts to modernize 
and recapitalize infrastructure and execute projects to improve 
facility and energy resiliency. The DAF will continue to assess 
installation preparations and response actions related to these 
historic storms, but several overarching themes have already emerged.
    A majority of the damage was the result of ruptured water or fire 
suppression lines due to freezing. Not only must the damaged lines be 
repaired, so must the damage to the facility caused by flooding from 
broken pipes. When this occurs, water must be shut off to the facility 
until repairs are completed. Depending on the severity of water breaks, 
larger portions of the installation may be impacted as well. Prior to 
the storms, installations enacted just-in-time winterization measures 
in an attempt to limit damage. Some of these measures include ensuring 
facility doors and windows were secured to retain as much heat as 
possible, slow dripping faucets and running toilets to reduce stagnant 
water, which is more susceptible to freezing, and installing additional 
insulation on critical infrastructure such as water system pumps. These 
just-in-time preparations and winterization actions reduced utility 
system interruptions and damage, but did not eliminate it.
    In many cases winterization actions, especially at installations in 
more southern locations where sub-freezing temperatures are uncommon, 
were simply not enough. Many facilities in these locations are not 
designed or constructed to handle sustained sub-freezing temperatures. 
Numerous facilities were constructed in accordance with building codes 
requiring less insulation than that required for facilities located in 
areas were cold is more common. Installations in Texas experienced the 
most significant water break issues, but this type of damage was not 
limited to the south. Installations in locations where harsh winter 
conditions are common start general facility winterization in late 
fall, minimizing just-in-time preparations before anticipated 
abnormally cold weather. Many installations that are used to sustained 
sub-freezing temperatures, such as FE Warren AFB in Wyoming, Minot AFB 
in North Dakota, Malmstrom AFB in Montana, and Peterson AFB in 
Colorado, still experienced frozen water or fire suppression lines that 
caused damage, just to a lesser degree.
    Facility condition is another factor that led to damage. Degraded 
roofs, walls, windows, and doors can provide a pathway for moisture to 
enter the facility, which can freeze and further damage the facility. 
Degradation of these building components also can prevent the facility 
from retaining heat well, requiring heating systems to work harder to 
keep the facility warm. In many instances, degraded heating systems 
could not keep up and failed, leading to sub-freezing temperature 
within a facility and frozen water lines. The DAF has continually 
accepted risk in installation investment leaving facilities and 
infrastructure in a degraded condition. Leveraging our long-term 
Infrastructure Investment Strategy (I2S), the DAF is seeking to restore 
the condition of facilities and infrastructure and enhance resiliency 
by proactive upgrades through targeted facility investments informed by 
analytics, stabilized funding, application of evolving building codes, 
and improved processes such as more standardized building components 
through category management.
    Coordination with utility providers, installation back-up power and 
water plans, and past infrastructure investments minimized the scope 
and impact of outages. DAF installations rely on local utility 
providers as the primary source of power and water. As a result, if the 
community experiences interruptions during a storm, the base is also at 
risk of losing service. As installations are very much part of the 
surrounding communities, partnerships and working relationships with 
local utility companies are critical. Installations are constantly 
engaging with utility partners to ensure common understanding of needs, 
identify risks, find solutions which mutually benefit the installation 
and surrounding community, and synchronize response procedures should 
to interruptions or outages occur.
    During the recent winter storms, several installations experienced 
limited power or water interruptions consistent with interruptions 
experienced by the local communities. Effective prior coordination 
helped minimize downtime. Several installations were able to 
effectively partner with local electrical power providers to minimize 
outages and mitigate impacts the installations. 72nd Air Base Wing 
Civil Engineer personnel at Tinker AFB communicated routinely with the 
local electrical power provider prior to and during the storm to ensure 
continuity of operations. The team took extraordinary measures to 
reduce heat set points in facilities across the installation and 
monitor them throughout the storm. These efforts significantly reduced 
the installation's energy consumption helping the utility provider 
stabilize the power grid and minimize rolling blackouts. Additionally, 
Offutt AFB and Altus AFB in Oklahoma were each able to coordinate with 
the local electrical power provider to conduct electrical load 
curtailment by operating on-base back-up power plants. The efforts 
lowered the installations' demand on the local power grid, enabling the 
utility provider to better support surging demand in the community.
    In addition to power and water provided by local utility companies, 
installations must have secondary sources to support mission critical 
operations should local supplies be interrupted. Secondary power is 
primarily provided by a combination of back-up generators installed on 
critical facilities and mobile generators which can be relocated as 
required to respond to changing conditions. Electrical power back-up 
plans were generally effective during the recent storms to minimize the 
impact of power interruptions to installations or localized outages on 
an installation.
    Several installations, including Minot AFB, North Dakota, Laughlin 
AFB, Texas, and Barksdale AFB, Louisiana, temporarily lost commercial 
power, but generators operated as designed to support mission 
requirements. One of the more critical instances where back-up 
generators ensured mission success was at Minot AFB. A portion of the 
missile field lost commercial power but back-up generators effectively 
kept the facilities operational until commercial power was restored.
    Installations also maintain reserve water supplies, generally in 
buried or above ground tanks, in case of outages or emergencies and in 
some cases operate water wells as a secondary source. During recent 
storms, there were few instances where water supply to an installation 
was interrupted. There were numerous instances of localized outages 
which were caused by water distribution line breaks on installations or 
the need to shut off water to select facilitates to address broken 
pipes due to freezing. With few exceptions, reserve water supplies were 
able to support mission critical operations. The most notable issue was 
at Dyess AFB, Texas. Due to an off-base power outage, which did not 
directly impact the installation, the city of Abilene was unable to 
provide water for 24 hours. The installation's emergency reserve water 
tanks were drained faster than expected due to numerous water line 
breaks in facilities around the installations. The installation was 
forced to turn off water when the emergency tanks reached 10% in order 
to preserve the remaining water for firefighting capabilities.
    The DAF has made effective past infrastructure investments, some in 
collaboration with utility providers, which have enhanced installation 
resiliency. Projects have been executed to specifically enhance power 
and water distribution infrastructure, install secondary or back-up 
power sources, and add redundancy to distribution systems through 
looped and cross-connected designs or connections to additional utility 
provider systems. Efforts to relocate overhead power lines underground 
in order to decrease the vulnerabilities of environmental conditions on 
the electrical distribution network have dramatically decreased power 
outages during wind or ice storms. Installation of back-fed circuits 
have allowed power to be re-routed in case of a localized outage or the 
need for maintenance or repair. Installations impacted by recent 
storms, such as Vance AFB, Oklahoma, Altus AFB, Little Rock AFB, 
Arkansas, Scott AFB, Illinois, Cannon AFB, New Mexico, and Grand Forks 
AFB, North Dakota, have invested significant funds over the last 
several years to enhance their electrical distribution systems by 
burying power lines and installing back-fed capabilities. Barksdale AFB 
is an example of an installation where connection to a secondary water 
provider paid off. When Barksdale's primary water source from 
Shreveport was compromised, the installation was able to switch to the 
city of Bossier, its back-up provider, for water. The redundancy 
provided by an alternate water supply minimized the length of a 
required boil water notice on Barksdale AFB.
                           milcon investments
    Each MILCON project incorporates aspects of installation resilience 
through the application of updated UFCs during design and construction. 
Facilities designed and built in accordance with the latest standards 
are more resilient to the threats posed by climate change and severe 
weather. Most of our current mission MILCON projects replace facilities 
which no longer support mission requirements or are outdated and 
susceptible to climate and severe weather threats due to their age, 
condition, or the fact they were build using now outdated design 
criteria. Energy resilience is most directly addressed through ERCIP 
projects or efforts leveraging third-party financing such as EALs, 
ESPCs, and UESCs.
    In FY20, the DAF undertook several resiliency related projects 
including designs for seven projects in Florida, Hawaii, South 
Carolina, Nebraska, North Dakota, Germany, and Japan. In FY21, the DAF 
funded designs for projects at Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling in 
Washington D.C. and another on Wake Island. All of these projects will 
address a resilience risk associated with a natural or manmade threat 
to the installation. In addition to funding project designs, FY21 funds 
were also used to enable technical analysis in support of tri-service 
UFC updates specific to installation resilience.
                               conclusion
    Ready and resilient installations are at the core of Air Force and 
Space Force mission success. Not only do we launch missions from our 
installations, they are the platform on which more than 300,000 Total 
Force personnel organize, train, and equip and are home for thousands 
of Airmen, Guardians, and their families. Natural disasters and severe 
weather have impacted DAF installations across the world over the years 
and that threat is not going away. Tackling the current climate crisis 
is a matter of national security and the DAF is committed to ensuring 
our installations are protected against the threats posed by 
deliberate, accidental, or naturally occurring events and that our 
personnel are able to respond and recover our installations should an 
event occur. We have learned and adapted after each impacting event and 
we are taking proactive action to enhance installation resilience 
across the enterprise.
    We incorporate installation resilience in all aspects of 
operations, approaching it from four fronts: energy, cyber, 
infrastructure, and response. Energy, to include electricity, natural 
gas and water, is essential to mission accomplishment. Our focus is on 
secure the ability to perform our warfighting mission in the face of 
disruptions to traditional energy sources while simultaneously 
optimizing availability and productivity through better planning and 
technology and process improvements. Our cyber resilience efforts, from 
an installations perspective, focus on preventing, detecting, and 
responding to unauthorized access to DAF facility-related control 
systems, such as those associated with power and water distribution, 
back-up generators, and HVAC systems. Infrastructure efforts ensure the 
installations themselves are ready now and in the future. Our focus is 
on limiting damage and recovery time following an event. We construct 
new facilities with MILCON and modernize existing facilities with FSRM 
using the latest design codes, which are routinely updated to address 
climate and weather risks. The DAF I2S guides investment decisions and 
business processes to restore the condition of our facilities and 
infrastructure so that that they are better able to weather a storm. We 
are also embracing innovating approaches to natural infrastructure, 
capitalizing on partnerships with other government and non-government 
agencies to enhance installation resiliency.
    The effectiveness of all of the planning and execution that goes 
into enhancing the resiliency of our installations is minimized if our 
more valuable resource, our people, are not ready to respond. Emergency 
management, disaster response, and continuity of operations planning is 
essential to ensure an installation and its people can respond and 
recover from an incident quickly while continuing to execute the 
mission or, in more extreme situations, minimizing downtime. Our 
holistic approach to installation resilience is what ensures the Air 
Force and Space Forces can provide timely and effective combat 
capability.

    Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Mr. Correll.
    We're going to proceed with questions using the standard 
five-minute rounds and Senators will be recognized in the order 
that they arrived. I will start by recognizing myself for five 
minutes.
    Mr. Kidd, we regularly fund ERCIP above the President's 
budget request, which has remained flat for a number of years 
now. However, we often hear that the demand for these projects 
exceeds available funding, and as DOD looks at climate 
exposure, particularly with regards to energy demand, we need 
to evaluate how we can proactively address energy requirements.
    Now you mentioned in your opening statement that DOD is 
exploring how to better integrate ERCIP with broader climate 
modernization initiatives, and I was hoping you could elaborate 
on that.
    Mr. Kidd. Chair, as I said in my opening remarks, ERCIP 
[off microphone.]
    Thank you. It is the ERCIP account. So right now we're 
doing some deep dives on military installations that are real 
showcases for resilience. We're presenting these to the White 
House, and in all of the installations, Army, Navy, and Air 
Force, the best installations have taken advantage of all of 
these different authorities, but the connective tissue has 
normally been an ERCIP-funded micro-grid, battery storage, 
power management, or integration of generation assets.
    So it really is the integrating budget line that allows us 
to pull all the other authorities together to build resilience 
in our installations.
    Senator Heinrich. When you look at those facilities that 
are really leaning in this area and using those funds 
creatively and coordinating the different things that you 
articulated from onsite generation to battery storage, 
etcetera, what do you see as the run-throughs there, the 
through-lines? Is it a particular leadership point of contact 
or what are the things that you see consistently among those 
facilities that are doing this really well?
    Mr. Kidd. So, sir, I'll give my view, but given that those 
facilities and some of those installations are the services, my 
colleagues may want to weigh in.
    I think the real integrating factor is innovative and 
powered and creative leadership at the garrison level. It's a 
garrison commander and an energy manager on a DPW that come 
together and say we can do this.
    So while we in the department can be directive, which we 
can and should be, we also have to be permissive to encourage 
this local initiative because that's really what I see as the 
most common integrating factor between all of the successes 
across the different installations.
    Senator Heinrich. Yeah. That's very helpful. Over the past 
2 years, the committee has provided $90 million in planning and 
design funding for the services to improve installation 
resilience.
    For the other witnesses, could you kind of walk us through 
how you're prioritizing your resilience efforts and 
particularly projects aimed at hardening the installations 
against extreme weather events and climate change?
    Mr. Surash. Sir, if I can go first, and is the audio coming 
through okay? Okay.
    So, sir, we really appreciate the resilience planning and 
design funds. For the Army, we've received a total of 24 
million and what we did is we went back to the results of the 
Climate Assessment Tool that you've heard us all talk about and 
we have specifically focused on the top 10 installations and 
for us, it's places like Yuma out in Arizona and Irwin in 
California, Huachuca in Arizona, Bliss in Texas, etcetera.
    Now for the Army, it appears that the highest risk area is 
actually desertification. You know, it's different amongst the 
services, but that's probably the top threat we have, although 
out at the Military Ocean Terminal in Concord out in 
California, riverine flooding is the main threat there.
    So we have got the entire $24 million of planning, design 
focused on these 10 installations and we are attempting to 
bring forward a range of projects, energy and hardening sorts 
of projects to address the various threats, sir.
    Senator Heinrich. Mr. Balocki.
    Mr. Balocki. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    So we've been very fortunate and been the recipient of $35 
million in fiscal year 2020 and seven million, so $42 million 
overall, and we invested it in four areas principally.
    One, studies and analysis that will lead to improvements in 
the unified facilities criteria, so leading to building code 
improvements. That's first.
    Second, developing resilience design expertise and just on 
the way over here, I learned that we've hired two resilience 
engineers at Naval Facilities Engineers Systems Command. We 
look to add more of those experts.
    Thirdly, compiling and transcribing, performing sensitivity 
analysis into geographical information systems so that leaders 
and decision-makers can see that information graphically and 
make decisions based on it rather than just from some big 
volume of books and design guides, not helpful.
    And, finally then, designing the five highest-priority 
projects that represented resiliency risks that are a result of 
the installation energy planning that we've done that's also 
been directed by the Congress and for which we've benefited.
    Thank you.
    Senator Heinrich. That's fantastic. I particularly 
appreciate the GIS aspect of that.
    Mr. Correll, I'm a little over my time, so if you could be 
fairly quick so I can get to my colleagues, but thank you. Go 
right ahead.
    Mr. Correll. [Off microphone.]
    Senator Heinrich. Great. Thank you.
    And Ranking Member Boozman, do I understand that you're 
going to yield your time to Senator Reed?
    Senator Reed. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and 
particularly thank you, Senator Boozman, for your graciousness 
and kindness. Thank you very much.
    And, gentlemen, thank you for your service. As Secretary 
Kidd pointed out, Section 2801 of the fiscal year 2020 National 
Defense Authorization Act required each major military 
installation to come up with and deliver to Congress a military 
installation resilience plan, MIR, for risks and threats from 
extreme weather and planned infrastructure requirements. 
However, we have yet to receive any of those plans.
    So beginning with Secretary Kidd, you might want to comment 
or you might defer to the services, but can you give us a quick 
status on your MIR plans and when we can expect to receive 
them?
    Mr. Kidd. Here we go.
    Senator Reed. Okay.
    Mr. Kidd. I'm learning. Senator Reed, thank you for the 
question.
    Senator Reed. Because you didn't go to college.
    Mr. Kidd. I think we went to the same college.
    Senator Reed. That's because you didn't go to college.
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. Kidd. Senator Reed, I acknowledge your point and the 
installation resilience plans are essential for the department 
and we recognize that and we acknowledge the requirement that 
is out there.
    We have completed as the department approximately 25 
percent of our installation energy plans, which are a major 
component but not the full component of your request.
    Senator Reed. Thank you. And let me just go down to get a 
sense from the services.
    Mr. Surash. Sir, the Army has about 30 of the installation 
energy and in our case water plans complete. We have about 
another hundred, plus or minus, to go. We forecast that will be 
more or less complete by about September of 2022, sir.
    Senator Reed. Okay.
    Mr. Balocki. Senator Reed, thank you. As I highlighted in 
my opening statement, we, in fact, have completed the majority, 
so 76 of the 95 Marine Corps and Navy installation energy plans 
have been completed. I've read a number of them. They're 
fascinating.
    What I would also say is we've also completed the first of 
our master plans, the master resiliency plans and incorporated 
those into the installation master plans. As I indicated, five 
more are on tap to be completed.
    I can't project here today how long that will take. It is a 
significant effort, but I would suggest that it probably will 
be about the end of the next fiscal year before those will be 
complete.
    Senator Reed. Thank you, sir.
    Mr. Balocki. September 2022.
    Senator Reed. Yeah.
    Mr. Correll. Thanks, Senator. So for the Air Force, we have 
completed our installation energy plans. We've completed 24. We 
have 20 more coming this year. We'll finish the top 75 percent 
of all of our consumption by the end of fiscal year 2022.
    More broadly on a more comprehensive level, much like the 
other services, we're still fairly nascent in developing those 
comprehensive plans. It's been our role at this point to define 
exactly what we want included in those. So much like the Army 
and Navy have said, we're using our installation development 
plans to address those but to get a more comprehensive answer 
for resilience is probably going to take us, I think, another 
year or two to do, as well.
    Senator Reed. Thank you.
    Resilience and climate change are now a part of the 
vocabulary, but they've got to be sort of part of the muscle 
memory in some respects and that gets back to training.
    What can you tell me about the integration of these issues 
into the training levels in the Defense Department, which 
starts off with, you know, introductory training, command level 
training, all the way out to the war colleges? Is there 
anything we're doing, particularly for those individuals who 
are slated to be installation commanders?
    So, Secretary Kidd, do you have comments? I have brief 
time, so.
    Mr. Kidd. Yes, sir. So this morning I briefed the Deputy 
Secretary of Defense with our Climate Adaptation and Resilience 
Plan that we're producing to deliver to the President by the 
end of this month.
    In that, there is a line of efforts, the five lines of 
efforts that we've identified that we must do over the course 
of the future. Those efforts include training. They include 
human capital. They include installation resilience. It's a 
very comprehensive approach that goes to all aspects of the 
department, and a climate-literate workforce is critical going 
forward, and we're committed to embedding that literacy across 
all changes from a GS-9 energy manager to a general officer 
planning an operation.
    Senator Reed. Thank you, sir.
    Mr. Surash. Senator, with respect to the Army, we've 
embedded this training at courses for the new garrison 
commander, the colonels, and also what we call the senior 
commander, the one or two star general.
    As a matter of fact, I just presented yesterday to the 
senior commander course on this. So we are, in fact, you know, 
embedding, you know, climate and resilience sorts of training 
in the chain of command, sir.
    Senator Reed. Thank you, sir. For the Navy?
    Mr. Balocki. I would answer similarly. There's certainly 
work to do as we're discovering more, but we are working at all 
levels of the organization to ensure that the knowledge and 
skills that are associated with resilience and response to 
climate, energy, cyber, all of the threats that represent risks 
to mission are embedded in that training.
    Thank you.
    Senator Reed. Thank you, sir.
    And, finally, the Air Force.
    Mr. Correll. Similarly, our requirement for installation 
energy emergency management plans to be exercised every year by 
each one of our installations.
    In addition, our installation commanders and our mission 
support group commanders go through emergency management 
training and we have a dedicated office at each one of our 
installations that does nothing but worry about how the 
installation will recover from whatever the negative outcome 
is, whether it be weather-related, cyber, or physical attack.
    Senator Reed. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank 
you, Senator Boozman.
    Senator Heinrich. Ranking Member Boozman.
    Senator Boozman. Thank you so much for being here and we do 
appreciate your service to our country.
    For the service witnesses, new mission is often prioritized 
over recapitalization, and recently there's been a growing 
interest and emphasis on quality of life projects which 
typically also take a backseat to new mission. Without 
additional investment in MILCON, we cannot adequately address 
all of these requirements.
    While we can build new facilities to maximize resilience 
that does not address our existing $1.2 trillion inventory.
    How will you balance projects that strictly focus on 
improving resilience with the existing demand for MILCON?
    Mr. Surash. Sir, with respect to the Army, I'll come back 
to quality of life. Quality of life is the Army's top priority. 
So when the budget arrives, you will see that plainly in our 
military construction projects as well as our focus in repair 
and modernization.
    Right along with that but further down, you know, we are 
trying to bring forward, you know, projects to bring resilience 
but, frankly, the Energy Resilience Conservation Investment 
Program, ERCIP, that Mr. Kidd spoke about is something we 
really look to, quite frankly, to target to and so we've 
appreciated what OSD has been able to do and what the Congress 
has been able to do to add additional funds to that account, 
sir.
    Mr. Balocki. Senator, thank you.
    I would posit to you that it's not necessarily an either or 
situation, that we embed resilience characteristics into every 
construction project and so everything that we build, in fact, 
creates the characteristics that we're looking for to preserve 
them going forward.
    But I'd also say and mention that we've had other 
authorities made available to us, third party financing being 
one of them, and other very unique authority. The 10 USC 2912 
authority, which allows us to capture expiring funds and put 
those against quality of life shortcomings has been very 
helpful and just this last year, we recovered $45 million of 
expiring funds and were able to put much of that out to our 
installations to help them make up some of this deficit.
    Work certainly needs to be done, but we're looking 
expansively not just to the MILCON but every authority and 
every capacity to improve that challenge that you've so aptly 
described.
    Thank you.
    Mr. Correll. Thank you. So what I would say within the Air 
Force structure, [off microphone.]
    Senator Boozman. Very good. Mr. Kidd, the department is 
using utilities privatization as an alternative way to improve 
utility infrastructure by transferring ownership and operations 
of utility systems from the government to a private or public 
entity.
    In light of the Colonial Pipeline and other such 
cyberattacks, what are we doing to ensure that systems we don't 
own but that our commanders and installations rely on are 
secure? How do you ensure resilience when you've turned the 
controls over to non-governmental entities?
    Mr. Kidd. Senator, thank you for that question.
    Briefly on utilities privatization, like all other 
partnership programs, it's a valuable tool and it's a 
partnership, and we get the most out of our utilities 
privatization programs when we partner closely, articulate what 
we want, and oversee the activities of our partner.
    Those programs are very flexible and we can go back and add 
in additional energy resilience and cyber measures to existing 
UP contracts, although that then adds cost to the energy 
commodity in question.
    In terms of cooperation with utilities and outside 
partners, the department, not this team but the department, 
working through the Department of Homeland Security, engages in 
a number of activities to collaborate with our utility 
partners, be they natural gas, electric, water, etcetera, and I 
think, as you would know, our electric utility industry is 
attacked every day, and it's very important and it's a whole of 
nation effort.
    I would suggest if you want more details, we could probably 
get some better witnesses to go into that in a different 
setting.
    Senator Boozman. No, that's good. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
    Senator Heinrich. Before we go to our colleague, I would 
just ask people be sure you turn your mics on and pull the mics 
close so that we can pick up your full commentary.
    Senator Hoeven, welcome.
    Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    In 2011, Minot had a devastating flood, 4,000 structures 
inundated, 11,000 people displaced, obviously a real challenge 
for the city and the region, but it also had an impact on the 
Minot Air Force Base.
    I want to quote from the official history of the Minot Air 
Force Base experience. ``By 26 June, seven launch facilities 
for ICBMs were not accessible to transport erectors and payload 
transporters due to damage or inundated roadways.'' So that 
means missiles could not be moved or maintained during this 
period. In other words, it was not only a flood that had an 
impact on people in the region, it affected our nuclear 
deterrent. So the DOD has a stake in flood protection for the 
region, as well.
    Currently in the region, there's an $800 million project 
underway. We broke it into eight phases. Four of the phases are 
already underway, but it's funded Federal, state, and local.
    DOD has a stake here and so I'm interested in finding out 
if there's some DOD assistance that can be provided, 
particularly when it affects our nuclear deterrent.
    So, Mr. Kidd, there's the Defense Access Roads Program and 
I'm wondering if you're aware of any other department-wide 
programs we could use to bolster the protection of the road 
network that connects the base and the missile fields in Minot 
as part of this overall flood protection effort.
    Mr. Kidd. Senator, thank you for that question.
    So in terms of climate resilience, strengthening our 
natural ecosystems is a very important part of the solution or 
green engineering, if you will, and we recognize that value 
through the Corps of Engineers and other assets.
    We have a range of programs that are intended to work with 
and build resilience at the community level. We have both the 
REPI Program and the new Community Resilience Program, and if 
you'll excuse me, I'll get to my notes real quickly.
    Basically we have two programs. The REPI Program and the 
Community Resilience Program, I can get back to you with the 
exact names, that have expanded authorities and are likely to 
have expanded funding in out years that will allow us to do 
more to build resilience at the community level.
    Senator Hoeven. Do we coordinate with you or is there 
somebody that we could connect with as a contact person to look 
into those programs?
    Mr. Kidd. Sir, you can start with me. Those are actually 
managed by two other deputy assistant secretaries at OSD level. 
So I'm speaking to their portfolios, but they do have a 
resilience component. Your staff can reach out to me and I'll 
get you in contact with them.
    Senator Hoeven. Good. Then we're going to want to connect 
with you on that. Thank you.
    Also, Mr. Correll, is it possible for the Air Force to work 
with the Army Corps of Engineers to see if there are ways to 
accelerate its work or to elevate the project on its priority 
list in light of the national security implications?
    Mr. Correll. Thank you, Senator.
    Absolutely. So, in addition to defense access roads and, I 
believe, Defense Community Investment Program that Mr. Kidd was 
referring to, which is another avenue we can use, we can 
certainly work with the installation to see where this falls on 
the priority list and what authorities we can use to work with 
Army Civil Works on flood control. So happy to do that, sir.
    Senator Hoeven. So that would be very helpful. We'll follow 
up with you, as well.
    And essentially we've got a lot of partners in this project 
and we've broken it into phases so that, you know, we could get 
as much of it going as expeditiously as possible and it's 
coming along well.
    But one of the challenges with the Corps of Engineers and 
OMB is they have a lot of different ways of doing benefit cost 
and setting priorities and all those different things and how 
they score that matters in terms of keeping the project moving 
and that's where bringing in this defense component could 
really be helpful in two different ways.
    One is if there are some programs that we can find with all 
of you that could become a partner in one or more of these 
phases that's very helpful as far as that funding, but the 
other is helping us for the benefit cost ratio because of the 
national security implications so that for Corps of Engineers 
funding that puts us higher on the priority list.
    So these are two different ways that you could help us.
    Mr. Correll. Yes, sir, happy to look into that with you.
    Senator Hoeven. All right. And again thanks to both of you 
and we'll follow up and would greatly appreciate your help, 
both on the community and the region, and obviously we greatly 
appreciate everything that our men and women in blue are doing 
up there at Minot Air Force Base.
    So thank you very much.
    Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Senator.
    Unless anyone else is up, I think we're going to go ahead 
and start our second round here, and in response to something, 
Mr. Kidd, that you said to Senator Hoeven in his question, can 
you talk a little bit about--I think you referred to it as 
green engineering, but it's often natural systems as 
infrastructure, and I think this is an area where our 
engineering expertise in the Federal Government writ large is 
really starting to understand how to use nature as 
infrastructure, wetland restoration, for example, as flood 
control.
    Can you walk us through some of those examples and what 
you're finding is effective?
    Mr. Kidd. Yes, sir. So thank you.
    So the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, you know, it has two 
oversight committees in each chamber of Congress and it's a 
national asset, not just a military asset, and it solves some 
of the nation's toughest engineering problems, and it has 
invested a significant amount of intellectual and financial 
capital to develop the capability to, as you say, engineer with 
nature or to do green engineering.
    As we talk about climate change adaptation, this is some of 
the best investment that we can make. So just two weeks ago, I 
was talking about how do we protect our installations on the 
southeast coastal corridor, and I know that none of the members 
are from Georgia and South Carolina today, but one of the best 
ways we can do that is by protecting salt marsh and mangrove 
swamps.
    So if we are doing investments in nature like that, they 
build climate resilience and protect all of those 
installations, you know, Army, Marine Corps, Navy, along the 
coastal seaboard.
    There's other examples in terms of flooding and, of course, 
aquifer replenishment. So I think we've overlooked this for too 
long and we have to get into integrating engineering with 
nature upfront at the beginning.
    Senator Heinrich. If you were writing a legislative 
proposal for infrastructure investment, would you want to make 
sure that this kind of natural systems engineering was part and 
parcel of that?
    Mr. Kidd. Sir, if I was writing a legislative proposal, I 
would first talk to my lawyer. Sir, it's just one of many 
tools, right, and we can't over-apply any of the tools that 
Congress has given us, but I think in the case of engineering 
with nature, we haven't given it enough attention and credence 
as it deserves.
    Senator Heinrich. And you've found the return on investment 
is positive and substantial?
    Mr. Kidd. Sir, I can't speak to the actual return on 
investment. Again, I would refer you to General Spellman and 
the Corps of Engineers or to come back and brief you on some of 
their specific projects. I permitted some of those projects 
when I was in the White House. Barataria is the largest natural 
ecosystem services project in the country. It's diverting 
Mississippi waters to allow sediment to rebuild land in the 
state of Louisiana which protects from climate. It protects the 
people that are there and it restores jobs and livelihood. So 
it's great example of how you can engineer with nature to 
positive benefit.
    Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Mr. Kidd.
    Mr. Correll, after Hurricane Michael destroyed part of 
Tyndall Air Force Base and damaged more than a dozen F-22s, the 
Air Force waived its traditional basing process and decided to 
move up to three F-35 squadrons to the base. It is still not 
evident to me that the Air Force made that decision with any 
consideration of future climate risk.
    Mr. Correll, I know that you are not the strategic basing 
principal. So you may need to just take this for the record. 
However, I think it's an important question to ask.
    How is the Air Force assessing climate risk as part of that 
overall strategic basing process, particularly for mission-
critical facilities? So if you would take that and get back to 
me, and if you want to add anything to that, you're welcome to 
do so, as well.
    Mr. Correll. No, I think the smart thing for me to do is 
take it back because that is out of my portfolio.
    Senator Heinrich. Mr. Balocki, with my remaining time, 
DOD's Building Code, the Unified Facilities Criteria or UFC 
needs to be updated regularly to ensure that we're not building 
facilities vulnerable to severe weather events and other risks 
and to remain relevant, the UFC needs to take in information 
from sources, like the American Society of Civil Engineers, but 
I would argue today climate science and certainly energy 
efficiency science, as well.
    What specific steps does the service take to integrate that 
kind of information into the development of new rounds of the 
UFC?
    Mr. Balocki. Actually, in preparation for the hearing, I 
did a little bit of study of codes and it's fascinating in our 
nation the Unification of Building Codes has only happened 
since 1994 and in DOD only since 2002, and, in fact, we're 
operating right now under a National Building Code 2018. The 
next version of that is coming out as we speak in this year, 
about every 3 years.
    The department works certainly with all of the technical 
experts from across ASCE, the American Society of Civil 
Engineers, as well as multiple, multiple societies that 
represent multiple buildings and trades as they integrate the 
lessons learned from events like Hurricane Michael, Hurricane 
Sally, or certainly the earthquake that we witnessed in China 
Lake, to make sure that those lessons and the resiliency that 
we need to build into the next structures that we build are 
incorporated in them, and, frankly, things like, so for example 
in hangars, fabric doors that would prevent, you know, the wind 
from blowing in objects that failed in major storms now have 
been removed, right, from the codes, something as simple as 
that.
    And so we're incorporating those lessons as they come and 
as the building codes and the professional societies that 
represent the expertise that feed those codes integrate their 
lessons learned into the codes.
    Thank you.
    Senator Heinrich. Thank you.
    Ranking Member Boozman.
    Senator Boozman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Correll, as you're aware, Little Rock Air Force Base 
suffered significant damage from the winter storm. Specifically 
54 facilities were affected from the storms. Can you confirm 
the status of the facility repairs and if any of these repairs 
were completed in a manner that increases resilience?
    Mr. Correll. Thank you, sir.
    We talked to the Civil Engineer Squadron commander at 
Little Rock in preparation for this. There's one major project 
at about $900,000 for the 29th--it's an ACC tenant unit that's 
there on the base. The remainder of the projects were smaller. 
They have put some in through contracting and as they do those 
projects, they'll try to repair them as best as possible. 
They're not designed to replace the facility in a completely 
resilient method, but they will take those opportunities as 
they do those projects.
    Senator Boozman. Very good. Some elements of design and 
construction that provide resilience have higher upfront costs 
and are not part of the UFC. For example, metal roofing is more 
expensive than other material options but significantly lower 
maintenance, a much longer life cycle and performs better in 
extreme weather, yet is not required by code and can be one of 
the first elements cut when a project comes in over budget, and 
again I'm just using that as an example. I'm not advocating 
anything.
    How do you ensure that resilience elements, such as this, 
are not removed during value engineering and cost savings 
measures?
    Mr. Balocki. I'm going to imagine since you're looking at 
me, Senator, and I think it's a good question that, although 
you haven't called me by name, you're asking me.
    What I would say is we do, in fact, see where there are 
requirements for standards that exceed the Unified Facilities 
criteria, the International Building Code, and, frankly, when 
we put those in, before engineer those out through value 
engineering or other reasons, budget, that might--we take a 
very deliberate and disciplined approach to ensure that the 
cost-benefit analysis, in fact, exactly what you're referring 
to, that the long-term survivability, sustainability, and 
maintainability of that structure is considered and frequently 
and frankly now in places like China Lake where we know we're 
going to have to rebuild to a higher standard, we're leaving 
those standards in.
    We thank the Congress for recognizing that there was going 
to be a higher upfront cost. As you know with the 1391s that we 
brought forward for China Lake, we put in a pretty large 
reserve because we knew that those standards were going to have 
to be raised to protect against future earthquakes.
    Senator Boozman. Good. So I guess really what I'm asking in 
asking the question is so you have the abilities that you all 
need when those things come up that again you can work around 
where you've got the better quality product without--would that 
be correct or do we need to help you in that regard?
    Mr. Balocki. Yes, Senator, I believe we have all the 
authority and policy inside the department we need to do that. 
If I find different, we'll come and ask.
    Senator Boozman. Good. Okay. Thank you, all. Yes, sir, go 
ahead.
    Mr. Surash. Senator, if I can add on from the Army 
standpoint, in addition to what Mr. Balocki just mentioned, for 
about the last 10 years, we've had a policy, it's called 
Sustainable Design and Development, and what this policy is 
driving the Army to do is to build the lowest live cycle 
solution that is the most sustainable solution within the 
amount that's been programmed.
    For the most part, it's the United States Army Corps of 
Engineers that's executing this. So we're asking them to do a 
lot. We're really putting the pressure on them from every 
direction, but that is a good thing to focus on so that we're 
not taking shortcuts upfront that end up costing us, you know, 
down the road, sir.
    Senator Boozman. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. 
Chairman.
    Senator Heinrich. Senator Hoeven.
    Senator Hoeven. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
    I note that, Mr. Correll, in your testimony you mentioned 
Grand Forks Air Force Base in your written testimony where 
you've invested funds to bury power lines and enhance energy 
resilience of that installation.
    We also have developed the Grand Sky Technology Park on the 
other side of the runway that has a number of top aerospace 
companies located there and that, of course, meant installing 
water and power systems to support, you know, the buildings and 
the technology investment there.
    And so those could be redundant capabilities in terms of 
water and power systems, but it's on the opposite side of the 
runway. So it's a common runway, but, you know, they're on 
separate sides of the runway complex.
    So can you talk a little bit more about community 
partnerships and how we can work together to enhance resiliency 
through the sharing of water and power resources or other 
efforts along that line?
    I think there's a real synergy there between the technology 
park and the base if they can do it.
    Mr. Correll. Absolutely. Thanks for that question.
    So the things we can do are across a broad spectrum. So, 
for example, during Winter Storm Uri, we had installations, 
like Tinker Air Force Base, which reduced its heat load, which 
helped the community meet the need. Altus Air Force Base and 
Offutt Air Force Base ran generators to reduce electrical 
demand off base. So that's one end of the spectrum where we can 
share with the community.
    When there are these kinds of outages, we don't want to be 
the shining beacon on the hill. We want to work with the 
community. So as we're developing our photovoltaic, our wind, 
and our other types of micro-grid-supported distributed 
generation, we're looking for a capability to go two-
directional with that, such that if the community needs power, 
we can push it from our installations to the community, but if 
we need power, they can push it back to us and share those.
    I think your idea at Grand Forks is extraordinary and 
something we ought to look into. If there's something on the 
other side of the runway where we can tie in, it seems like a 
simple solution, something I'd like to take a look at.
    Senator Hoeven. Well, we should definitely do that. We have 
a number of firsts there because we also have a UAS test site 
and so you've actually got a facility there where you've got 
both the military and civilian use because we have aerospace 
companies there, Northrop-Grumman, General Atomics and others 
that are using the runway as well as, of course, the Air Force 
uses the runway. So it's both military and commercial and then 
it's both manned and unmanned aircraft.
    So we've got these joint use agreements going on already 
and so we could do some more with the utilities and other 
resources.
    Mr. Correll. That sounds great. I'll take a look at it.
    Senator Hoeven. Very good. Thank you.
    Senator Heinrich. We're going to wrap here in just a few 
minutes, but I do want to follow up on the question that 
Senator Boozman raised about sort of life cycle costs versus 
upfront costs and the relationship of that to building codes.
    One of the technologies that I've seen really take leaps 
and bounds in recent years that is typically not used in a lot 
of general construction that's well above code is the use of 
air source heat pump technology for both hot water and also 
heating and cooling in buildings.
    The savings from that can be quite dramatic, but it's 
oftentimes not the thing that comes on the back of an HVAC 
truck or a plumbing truck because it's a little bit more money 
upfront and then dramatic savings over the course of the next, 
you know, 15 years of life cycle.
    Have you been able to incorporate technologies like that 
that you can prove pencil-out to the benefit of taxpayers long 
term as well as for sustainability purposes into construction 
moving forward and does that need to be addressed in things 
like the UFC?
    Mr. Kidd. Sir, thanks.
    So we have a process in place to help commercialize new and 
emerging technologies and to prove that they are cost effective 
and to encourage the uptake across the department. So the 
technology which you just mentioned, an air source heat pump 
developed in the Department of Energy in concert with the 
private sector, moved through our ESTCP Circular Program, was 
demonstrated in a National Guard Armory in Maine where it 
worked during the extremes of winter and was proven to be cost 
effective.
    We have now pushed the circular out to the rest of the 
department that says now please go forth, design in an air 
source heat pump and here's the figures that you can use for 
cost-benefit analysis, and the figures that we've used are 
probably conservative because the technology is going to 
improve further going forward.
    The department has a record of doing that. We did that for 
ground source heat pumps, ground source batteries, sort of like 
a heat storage battery, and a variety of other technologies. So 
it's not funded by this committee, but it's a good little 
program that works with DOE and the commercial sector to 
leverage the purchasing power of the department.
    Senator Heinrich. That's a great story. I did not know the 
role of DOE in sort of proving out those technologies. I know 
when I replaced a gas water heater recently with an air source 
heat pump, it was almost hard to believe the annual cost that 
was printed on the Energy Star sticker because it was so low 
and I think it's something to be proud of that our services are 
helping to, you know, make that possible.
    I want to thank all of our witnesses today and the Senators 
who participated in today's hearing.
    We look forward to continuing to work with you and the 
department to ensure that DOD is adequately equipped and 
resourced to proactively address the myriad climate resilience 
challenges as well as energy challenges facing our military 
installations.
    Finally, I will keep the hearing record open for a week and 
committee members who would like to submit written questions 
for the record should do so by 5 o'clock p.m. Wednesday, May 
26th.

                     ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS

    [The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but 
were submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the 
hearing:]
                Questions Submitted to Mr. Richard Kidd
             Questions Submitted by Senator Martin Heinrich
    Question. How is the Air Force assessing climate risk as part of 
the strategic basing process, particularly for mission critical 
facilities?
    Answer. The Department of the Air Force accounts for climate risk 
within the strategic basing process with site surveys and the 
development of supporting construction cost estimates. The Department 
of Defense Unified Facilities Criteria, along with local building codes 
for a given location, ensure that mission critical facilities are built 
or refurbished to mitigate climate risk. The additional costs 
associated with these factors are included when comparing potential 
basing locations.
    Question. Could you provide an example or examples of readiness 
and/or national security consequences posed by Air Force bases' 
flooding vulnerabilities?
    Answer. Generally, readiness and/national security consequences of 
bases' that include flood susceptible property depend on the specific 
military activities sited within flood plains. A recent event directly 
illustrative of the consequences is the flooding of Offutt AFB in 2019, 
when the Missouri River overtopped its levee. US Strategic Command is 
located at Offutt AFB, Nebraska and it depends on the airfield and 
airfield support services for standard procedures directing national 
mission sets for Nuclear Command Control and Communications during 
times of crisis. When the airfield was inundated, no flights operations 
could occur at Offutt. Additionally, the airfield infrastructure was 
damaged and many critical airfield operations facilities destroyed. If 
this had occurred at an inopportune moment, it could have had 
significant national security consequences. The hurricane that hit 
Tyndall AFB in 2018 had similar impacts to 1st Air Force HQ, a service 
component supporting NORAD & US Northern Command. A newly (re)acquired 
Air Force installation, Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling has similar 
flooding risks. HMX-1, the unit which operates POTUS helicopters and 
has an NC3 function, sits on the low-lying north end of the base. This 
area is subject to land subsidence and is adjacent to the failing levee 
that protects the base from flooding by the adjacent Anacostia River.

                                 ______
                                 

              Questions Submitted by Senator Patty Murray
    Question. Climate change has increased the risk and extent of 
wildfires across the western United States. Last year in Washington 
state, 17 large fires burned over 273,000 acres of land across the 
state.
    How is Air Force adapting current and future operations to address 
the threat from wildfires to our military installations and military 
communities?
    Answer. The Department of the Air Force (DAF) recognizes the 
increasing threat from wildfires and has implemented numerous updates 
to our wildland fire management program. The DAF established the 
Wildland Fire Branch in 2012 to expand specialized wildland fire 
management throughout the Department. The DAF Wildland Fire Branch 
adopted National Wildfire Coordinating Group (NWCG) standards \1\ for 
all wildland fire operations, and established an Interagency Agreement 
with the National Interagency Fire Center for tracking NWCG 
qualifications of Army and DAF firefighters within the Incident 
Qualification and Certification System (IQCS) national database.
    The Department established and maintains Interagency Agreements 
with the US Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Land Management and 
Universities to provide roughly 100 full time equivalent of interagency 
field staff who implement 125,000 acres/year of prescribed fire and 
1,200 acres of mechanical fuel reduction \2\ across the US. This 
prescribed fire and fuels work protects ecosystems and critical 
infrastructure inside the installation and surrounding communities; 
helps ranges be more available for use throughout the year, and ensures 
that wildfires can be more easily suppressed. These activities are 
conducted in cooperation with installation natural resources programs, 
in accordance with installations' Integrated Natural Resource 
Management Plans and Wildland Fire Management Plans \3\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ The National Wildfire Coordinating Group (NWCG) provides 
national leadership to enable interoperable wildland fire operations 
among federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial partners. The NWCG 
Establish national interagency wildland fire operations standards.
    \2\ Mechanical treatment of hazardous fuels refers to the reduction 
of the amount of vegetation built up to dangerous levels, or changing 
the arrangement of those fuels in the environment. It can reduce the 
probability of fires; help maintain and restore health and resilient 
ecosystems and protect surrounding communities.
    \3\ Installation Wildland Fire Management Plans are only developed 
for installations with significant wildland fire potential and/or fire 
dependent ecosystems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Question. Is Air Force adequately resourced to address the growing 
threat from wildfires to include the study, planning, prevention, and 
fighting of wildfires which threaten military installations and 
military communities?
    Answer. Yes, the Department of the Air Force Wildland Fire Center 
is adequately resourced to address the growing threats from wildfires. 
The Department is leading the development of a cohesive DoD-wide 
strategy as part of the DoD Wildland Fire Working Group (WFWG), which 
has representatives from all military branches and was established to 
identify and address department-wide issues. The Department has also 
increased wildland fire training for natural resources, and fire and 
emergency services (FES) personnel; and collaborates with the Army 
Wildland Fire program through the Air Force-Army Joint Training 
Academy. The DAF and the Army, the components managing the most DoD 
lands, have also established national-level wildland fire management 
positions to ensure appropriate expertise and leadership as the 
programs adapt to ever-increasing wildland fire management challenges.
    Question. DOD has embarked on an important initiative to modernize 
installations and facilities to reduce energy use, decrease electricity 
costs, and reduce water usage in response to the challenges posed by 
climate change.
    How are new technologies and innovative solutions being leveraged 
by Air Force to meet the President's order to increase the energy and 
water efficiency of installations and facilities and ensure they are 
climate-ready?
    What role will high efficiency dehumidification systems (HEDS) have 
in the replacement and upgrade of current HVAC systems used by Air 
Force in meeting climate change goals?
    How will Air Force balance energy and water consumption while also 
addressing the threat of transmission of biological pathogens in 
buildings and ships? What role might HEDS play in these efforts?
    Answer. Improving the energy and water efficiency of its systems is 
one aspect of the Department of the Air Force's (DAF's) efforts to 
enhance its energy resilience and mitigate the impact of climate 
change. The DAF looks to use innovative technologies in support of that 
effort, and maintains an active approach to working with both public 
and private stakeholders to help develop and test new technologies. DAF 
is aware of high efficiency dehumidification systems proprietary 
technology, including the study conducted by U.S. Army Corps of 
Engineers under the Strategic Environmental Research and Development 
Program (SERDP) and Environmental Security Technology Certification 
Program (ESTCP). As DAF replaces its heating, ventilations, and air 
conditioning (HVAC) systems, DAF considers any systems that addresses 
its requirements for technical performance and cost, such as reduced 
energy consumption and improved air filtration to limit distribution of 
biological pathogens. Technology is constantly evolving and research is 
continuing to look at improving the methods to reduce pathogens in air 
and energy consumption. Once those are available, DAF will look at 
implementing those systems that best protect Airmen and Guardians in 
their work environments.

                                 ______
                                 

                Questions Submitted by Senator Jack Reed
    Question. Section 2801 of the FY20 National Defense Authorization 
Act required each major military installation to come up with and 
deliver to Congress a military installation resilience (MIR) plan, 
which is distinct from installation energy plans, to account for risk 
and threats from extreme weather events and planned infrastructure 
requirements. However, we have yet to receive any of those plans.
Can you give me an update on the status of MIR plans and when might we 
        expect to see them?
    Answer. In response to the FY20 National Defense Authorization Act 
(NDAA), an update to Air Force Instruction 32-1015, Integrated 
Installation Planning, was published in October 2020 to include an 
Installation Climate Resiliency Plan as a required component to the 
Master Plan. This new component plan will identify assets and 
infrastructure vulnerable to threats through a risk assessment process, 
as well as document planned and on-going infrastructure projects 
intended to mitigate risks/threats, community infrastructure outside 
the installation necessary to maintain mission capability, and 
associated resilience-related agreements in place with public or 
private entities.
    The target is to include an Installation Climate Resiliency Plan 
component plan template in the Master Plan for installations to use in 
FY23 to ensure consistency across the enterprise, with final completion 
occurring by Oct 2025.
    To better posture the Air Force to meet these timelines, a Severe 
Weather/Climate Screening and Risk Assessment (SWRA) Playbook was 
published in April 2020 to provide installation-level planners a 
consistent and systematic framework to screen for severe weather and 
climate hazards, assess current and future risks, and integrate the 
outputs into the existing planning process. All major installations 
completed Phases 1 and 2 of the SWRA Worksheet detailed in the Playbook 
in early 2021, which begins to provide the data required to develop the 
Installation Climate Resiliency Plan. All arctic real property excluded 
from the original task, which primarily includes small communication 
sites outside major installations, were accomplished in June 2021 in 
response to the Department of the Air Force Arctic Strategy.

                                 ______
                                 

             Questions Submitted by Senator Lisa Murkowski
    Question. We have seen a dramatic increase in competition with 
other nations, namely Russia, in the Arctic. It's more important than 
ever to take all risks into consideration to ensure our ability to 
project power in this part of the world. I have worked to ensure that 
the Department of Defense is very aware of the potential that the loss 
of stable permafrost has for military installations in Alaska.
    In the FY211 NDAA, Congress required the Department of Defense to 
update its 2014 adaptation roadmap to include a discussion of a long 
list of hazards, one of which is the potential damage to natural and 
constructed infrastructure from thawing permafrost and sea ice. This 
was to be updated by February 1, 2022, a deadline that has not yet 
passed. However, can you provide a brief update on infrastructure you 
have seen damaged by the destabilization of permafrost?
    Answer. Destabilization of permafrost has caused structural damage 
to facilities in Arctic locations such as Eielson AFB and Thule AB. The 
majority of damage being cracks in walls, floors or foundations, which 
are prioritized through the asset management process based on the 
criticality and condition of the facility. At Eielson AFB, a project to 
add/alter an existing conventional munitions facility found the 
facility had severe settlement issues due to thawing permafrost and a 
cracking foundation. A recommendation was made to cancel the original 
FY18 project, demolish the existing facility, and build a new 
Conventional Munitions Maintenance facility ($15.5M FY19 project) on a 
new deep pile foundation system on the old site, to mitigate permafrost 
issues.
    At Thule Air Base in Greenland, the U.S. Army Cold Regions Research 
and Engineering Laboratory, and the Construction Engineering Research 
Laboratory and Geotechnical and Structures Laboratory, developed 
solutions for runway damage caused by thawing permafrost. A new 
technology incorporating buried extruded foam insulation boards was 
used to mitigate for permafrost during a repaving project in the 
summers of 2015 and 2016; the runway is also painted with white paint 
which provides additional protection to prevent thawing of native 
permafrost soils.
    Question. Do you foresee any possibility of impact to military 
readiness in Alaska and the Arctic resulting from the destabilization 
of the ground beneath our military infrastructure?
    Answer. There are no known significant negative impacts to existing 
mission readiness that have not been mitigated. New construction will 
need to include mitigation of thawing permafrost, which may result in 
increases to cost and time.
    Question. Are you able to predict any kind of impact on future 
budget requests needed to fix damage caused by thawing permafrost? How 
are you adjusting your current military construction practices to take 
this risk into account, and possibly mitigate the need for large scale 
spending to fix issues that may arise from current practices?
    Answer. At this time, we are unable to quantify the impact of 
thawing permafrost since it is not tracked specifically as part of 
facilities' sustainment projects. Through the installations' Climate 
Resiliency Plan, a new Component Plan of the Installation Development 
Plan required in the FY20 NDAA, climate impacts and associated projects 
will be more effectively identified and assessed.
    UFC 1-200-01, Department of Defense Building Code, identifies the 
UFC 3-130 series to plan and design projects in the Arctic Region. 
Although these UFCs are currently being updated by the US Army Corps of 
Engineers, installations are still using them. UFC 3-130-02, Site 
Selection and Development--Arctic and Subarctic Construction, promotes 
avoiding permafrost sites if possible; UFC 3-130-04, Foundations for 
Structures--Arctic and Subarctic Construction, details appropriate 
measures to protect facilities if permafrost is unavoidable; and UFC 3-
130-07, Buildings--Arctic And Subarctic Construction, provides overall 
building codes for construction within the Arctic Region.
    Question. We have heard repeated warnings about the contribution of 
melting sea ice and permafrost loss to coastal erosion in Air Force Air 
Stations around Alaska. Can you provide any updates on the status of 
these assets with regards to how they are being impacted by the loss of 
permafrost and sea ice?
    Answer. The USAF recently tasked installations to conduct a self-
assessment of environmental impacts based on guidance in the Air Force 
Severe Weather & Climate Hazard Screening and Risk Assessment Playbook. 
For assessments received to date, most installations identified 
permafrost thawing as a low threat with the exception of Thule AS 
(Medium Risk) and Eielson (Extremely High Risk). Coastal erosion was 
not identified as a significant risk in assessments returned to date, 
although flooding caused from large rain events and annual spring 
thawing were reported. The Air Force is analyzing the results of the 
assessments as they are received to develop a better understanding of 
the issues faced.
    The Air Force has also contracted the University of Alaska-
Anchorage and BEM Systems to complete the report, North Slope Coastal 
Erosion Study and Vulnerability Analysis. The report will help to 
project future shoreline conditions and assess risk due to coastal 
erosion on the North Slope of Alaska at the Oliktok Long Range Radar 
Site and Barter Island Long Range Radar Site.

                                 ______
                                 

          Questions Submitted by Senator Shelley Moore Capito
    Question. Many of the highest levels of the PFAS and PFOA are found 
on and near military bases due to the continuous use of firefighting 
foam.
    What impacts are we still seeing from this literal ``forever 
chemical?''
    Answer. The Department of the Air Force (DAF) evaluated 203 Active/
Reserve, Air National Guard (ANG) and BRAC installations where aqueous 
film-forming foam (AFFF) may have been released to the environment due 
to past mission activities. AFFF was identified very early on as the 
overwhelming mass of perfluorinated alkylated substances (PFAS), 
specifically perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic 
acid (PFOA), potentially released to the environment by the Department. 
Therefore the DAF approach has been to focus our CERCLA investigation 
and sampling where there are known releases of AFFF, to aggressively 
address the issue. The evaluation confirmed releases of PFAS to the 
environment at 190 installations. DAF has also identified PFOS/PFOA 
impacts to human drinking water at 33 installations.
    Question. Do you think appropriate action has been taken to at 
least begin cleanup and mitigation?
    Answer. DAF has proactively responded to PFOS/PFOA releases above 
the EPA's lifetime Health Advisory (HA) levels attributable to DAF 
mission-related activities by following the CERCLA process to identify 
and investigate releases, determine the appropriate response actions 
based on risk, and prioritize responses and cleanup. The DAF's main 
priority is to protect our Airmen and Guardians workforce and their 
families who live and work on our installations, as well as residents 
of the surrounding communities by addressing risks to human health and 
the environment caused by DAF activities.
    The Department is investigating and addressing PFOS/PFOA in 
drinking water on DAF installations, and reporting results in annual 
Consumer Confidence Reports (CCR), which are drinking water quality 
reports that community water systems are required by law to deliver to 
customers each year. DAF takes action to provide alternative drinking 
water sources as soon as practicable. The Department takes swift action 
to address drinking water impacts on-base and provides alternative 
drinking water when PFOS and/or PFOA attributable to DAF activities is 
found in drinking water at levels above the EPA HA level of 70 parts 
per trillion (ppt). DAF's actions are consistent with EPA's recommended 
actions. Similarly, DAF takes quick action to address off-base drinking 
water if PFOS/PFOA releases attributable to DAF activities have 
impacted off-base drinking water at concentrations above the EPA HA 
levels.
    Such response actions include providing bottled water, point-of-use 
filtration, whole-house filtration, municipal water supply hookup, 
municipal water treatment, and new well drilling. DAF has implemented 
human drinking water response actions at 33 installations as of 31 May 
2021. Because of DAF efforts to date, as far as we are aware, no one is 
consuming water above the PFOS/PFOA EPA HA level attributable to DAF 
activities.
    DAF is currently conducting Site Inspections under the 
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act 
(CERCLA), the federal cleanup statue, at 190 locations to determine 
whether per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) releases occurred 
and, if so, whether human drinking water was, or may be, impacted; as 
of 31 May 2021, while all DAF Site Inspections are currently underway, 
22% have been completed.
    DAF has determined that of the 190 Site Investigations, 189 
installations are warranted to continue to the next step in the CERCLA 
response process, which is the Remedial Investigation. The purpose of 
the Remedial Investigation is to determine the nature and extent of 
PFAS and to conduct risk assessments for human health and the 
environment. 25% of the required Remedial Investigations have been 
initiated as of 31 May 2021. Please be assured that at any time during 
the CERCLA process DAF identifies a need for action to protect human 
health, we will take action to address immediate threats to public 
health.
    In addition to measure to address PFAS releases, DAF has efforts 
underway to avoid future PFAS releases. DAF limits use of AFFF to 
emergency responses; approved research and development (R&D) and 
training. Whenever there is an uncontained release--such as during an 
emergency response to an aircraft crash -DAF takes immediate action to 
ensure containment and removal, treating is as a hazardous spill 
response to limit environmental effects.
    All DAF installations have transitioned from legacy AFFF (C8) to 
the more environmentally friendly AFFF (C6) formulation. DAF is working 
through the Department of Defense (DoD) PFAS Task Force to identify 
long-term replacement formulations for facilities and airfields to meet 
the FY2020 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) requirement for 
the DoD to replace all fluorinated AFFF stockpiles by October 2023. DAF 
is supporting the DoD PFAS Task Force, with the Navy as the lead, in 
researching and testing fluorine free foam (FFF); evaluating courses of 
action and new technologies; and modifying and testing existing AFFF 
systems to use FFF.

                                 ______
                                 

                 Questions Submitted to Mr. Jack Surash
             Questions Submitted by Senator Martin Heinrich
    Question. How is the Army developing infrastructure to manage and 
mitigate the impact of droughts on military installations? What 
resourcing shortfalls exist in preparing installations for this hazard?
    Answer. The Army is currently collaborating with the Office of the 
Secretary of Defense and the other Military Services to produce a joint 
methodology to accomplish water management and security assessments in 
compliance with the FY21 National Defense Authorization Act, Section 
2827. These assessments will include, as required by the law, an 
evaluation of each military installation's water security risks related 
to drought-prone climates. The assessments will enable prioritization 
of the installations which are experiencing the greatest risks to 
sustainable water management and security and face the most severe 
existing or potential adverse impacts to mission assurance as a result 
of such risks to inform Army's understanding of resourcing requirements 
to address these risks. In addition, the Army Climate Assessment Tool 
(ACAT) identifies climate change impact scenarios for Army 
installations, including risk of drought. Infrastructure modification 
and new construction needs are assessed and identified through the 
installation master planning process, which now requires consideration 
of climate threats, water security, and drought hazard risk, in 
accordance with 10 U.S.C 2864 and DoD and Army policies. For example, a 
recent Army policy directive to address threats caused by changing 
climate and extreme weather requires master plans to incorporate and 
address ACAT projections. As climate change accelerates, the need for 
climate-linked investments will likely increase. Given the relative 
newness of the requirement for installation master plans to incorporate 
a military installation resilience component, the ``in progress'' 
status of the water management and security assessment methodology, and 
the time needed to budget and execute the master plan revisions, it is 
projected that a comprehensive understanding of Army's resourcing 
shortfalls associated with drought risks will not be fully understood 
for approximately 3 years.
    Question. Could you provide an example or examples of readiness 
and/or national security consequences posed by Army bases' flooding 
vulnerabilities?
    Answer. Flooding vulnerabilities on Army installations pose risks 
to readiness because flooding can impede military units from training 
on impacted lands. Flooding can have serious national security 
consequences which undermines infrastructure for power or water 
critical to military operations, or prevents the launching of vehicles 
and other power projection activities. Flooding can inundate airports 
and roads, erode land beneath critical facilities, knock out power and 
water services, damage buildings and equipment, and endanger personnel 
health and safety.

                                 ______
                                 

              Questions Submitted by Senator Patty Murray
    Question. Climate change has increased the risk and extent of 
wildfires across the western United States. Last year in Washington 
state, 17 large fires burned over 273,000 acres of land across the 
state.
    How is Army adapting current and future operations to address the 
threat from wildfires to our military installations and military 
communities?
    Answer. There is high-level awareness of the increasing threat that 
wildfire poses and the influence of the changing climate and vegetation 
on wildland fire activity. Army is participating in a DoD-led 
initiative to establish a DoD Wildland Fire Management Strategy. 
Additionally, new Army wildland fire management guidance was finalized 
in March and provides current guidance on wildland fire planning, 
programming, roles and responsibilities, training and equipment 
standards, and clarification on funding sources. The guidance addresses 
updating installation Integrated Wildland Fire Management Plans to 
include wildfire hazard assessments, Army Climate Assessment Tool model 
inputs, and alignment with national wildland fire management planning 
initiatives. At the local level, these plans also outline local 
procedures to modify or limit current training activities due to daily 
fire hazard ratings and outlines the advisory engagement process 
between wildland fire managers and range control personnel to determine 
acceptable activities or mitigation requirements based on weather/fuel 
conditions. Future operations are analyzed through the NEPA process 
with assessment of wildland fire impacts and potential mitigation 
activities.
    Question. Climate change has increased the risk and extent of 
wildfires across the western United States. Last year in Washington 
state, 17 large fires burned over 273,000 acres of land across the 
state.
    Is Army adequately resourced to address the growing threat from 
wildfires to include the study, planning, prevention, and fighting of 
wildfires which threaten military installations and military 
communities?
    Answer. It is always a challenge in a budget constrained 
environment to attain sufficient resources to meet wildland fire 
management program goals through related research, studies, analysis, 
fuel management projects, and proactive wildfire suppression. That 
being said, there is broad support for necessary funding of wildland 
fire and other climate threat related activities. Installation programs 
are operational with continued broad application of prescribed fire to 
maintain and attain fire resistant landscapes. In addition, 
installations have various inter-federal agency and mutual aid 
agreements with state and local authorities to ensure the ability to 
provide for wildfire response. A significant investment in wildland 
fire research is occurring through DoD funded programs including the 
Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program (SERDP), 
Environmental Security Technology Certification Program (ESTCP) and US 
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Engineer Research and Development 
Center (ERDC) Construction Engineering Research Laboratory (CERL). For 
Army, CERL established a comprehensive wildfire hazard analysis model 
to assess and triage (High, Medium, Low) the wildfire risk for Army 
installations. This model factors in remote sensing data, land use, 
active training ranges as ignition sources, and fire frequency in 
addition to the installation's response capacity. Other initiatives 
seek to specifically address climate change impact forecasts for 
wildfire threats by examining fire history and frequency at Army 
installations.
    Question. DOD has embarked on an important initiative to modernize 
installations and facilities to reduce energy use, decrease electricity 
costs, and reduce water usage in response to the challenges posed by 
climate change.
    How are new technologies and innovative solutions being leveraged 
by Army to meet the President's order to increase the energy and water 
efficiency of installations and facilities and ensure they are climate-
ready?
    Answer. The DoD solicits ideas for new technologies and innovative 
solutions in a variety of ways, including the Strategic Environmental 
Research and Development Program (SERDP) and the Energy Security 
Technology Certification Program (ESTCP). These solicitations result in 
the selection and funding of studies which seek to validate performance 
of proposed technologies within DoD environments and scenarios. Study 
results, which identify promising technologies, are then communicated 
to the Army's installations through various means, such as subject 
matter expert training and workforce development forums. In addition, 
certain infrastructure project funding programs, such as the Energy 
Resilience Conservation and Investment Program (ERCIP), attempt to 
incentivize adoption of proven new technologies by prioritizing 
projects which include them within their scope.
    Question. What role will high efficiency dehumidification systems 
(HEDS) have in the replacement and upgrade of current HVAC systems used 
by Army in meeting climate change goals?
    Answer. HEDS is proven to manage humidity to reduce the incidence 
of mold growth and is currently in use at two installations. Lessons 
learned will be shared within the Army's installation management 
community, and the annual cycle of review and revision of design-
driving Unified Facilities Criteria, such as 3-410-01, Heating, 
Ventilating, and Air Conditioning Systems, will consider technology 
requirement updates based upon lessons learned.
    Question. How will Army balance energy and water consumption while 
also addressing the threat of transmission of biological pathogens in 
buildings? What role might HEDS play in these efforts?
    Answer. HEDS promises to reduce moisture content of conditioned air 
thereby reducing the likelihood of mold growth and contamination.

                                 ______
                                 

                Questions Submitted by Senator Jack Reed
    Question. Section 2801 of the FY20 National Defense Authorization 
Act required each major military installation to come up with and 
deliver to Congress a military installation resilience (MIR) plan, 
which is distinct from installation energy plans, to account for risk 
and threats from extreme weather events and planned infrastructure 
requirements. However, we have yet to receive any of those plans.
    Can you give me an update on the status of MIR plans and when might 
we expect to see them?
    Answer. In September 2020, the DOD published a revised Unified 
Facilities Criteria, 2-100-01, Installation Master Planning, which 
provided the governing DoD policy needed to drive the DoD-wide 
incorporation of the new military installation resilience planning 
component into the installation master planning process. In 
conjunction, the Army regulation on Real Property Master Planning is 
nearing completion of a revision to reiterate and enforce this new 
requirement. Given the relative newness of the requirement for 
installation master plans to incorporate a military installation 
resilience component, the time needed to incorporate these increased 
requirements into the budget, and then execute the planning activities, 
it is projected that the first MIR plans won't be completed until the 
end of FY22.

                                 ______
                                 

             Questions Submitted by Senator Lisa Murkowski
    Question. Regarding the future of the Combined Heat & Power Plant 
at Fort Wainwright (CHPP), I understand the Environmental Impact 
Statement (EIS) is currently being finalized after receiving comments 
during the open period. There have been a significant number of 
concerns presented to my office regarding deficiencies with the EIS.
    Has the United States Army Garrison (USAG) conducted a full 
analysis of the impacts of each alternative on the installation as well 
as the communities?
    Answer. As a preliminary matter, we are in the middle of the EIS 
process, and it would not be correct to say that we are finalizing the 
study.
    The Army prepared a Draft EIS, which evaluated the potential 
direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts associated with implementing 
reasonable alternatives of the Proposed Action as well as a No Action 
Alternative. This Draft EIS was prepared in accordance with the 
National Environmental Policy Act. Many commenters feel that additional 
analysis is required. The Army will analyze these comments and make a 
determination if additional analysis is needed.
    Question. As part of that analysis, is the U.S. Army aware of the 
potential devastating socioeconomic impacts and potential job losses 
for each alternative?
    Answer. The Fort Wainwright garrison is aware of the socioeconomic 
impacts. The Draft EIS included analysis of three action alternatives 
and the no-action alternative. The action alternatives under 
consideration are:

                Alternative 1: Build New Coal CHPP
                Alternative 2: Build New Dual-Fuel Combustion Turbine 
                Generator CHPP
                Alternative 3: Install Distributed Natural Gas Boilers

    The Draft EIS concluded that Alternative 2 and Alternative 3 would 
result in long-term, significant, localized adverse socioeconomic 
impacts on the coal mining sector in Healy. The reduction of coal sales 
and mining jobs under Alternative 2 and Alternative 3 would result in 
long-term, minor to significant, localized adverse economic impacts on 
children and low-income populations in Healy. The Army received a 
substantial amount of comments on the draft EIS, including comments 
related to socioeconomic impacts. As the Army works through the high 
volume of comments, due consideration will be given to socioeconomic 
impacts.
    Question. Regarding the future of the Combined Heat & Power Plant 
at Fort Wainwright (CHPP), I understand the Environmental Impact 
Statement (EIS) is currently being finalized after receiving comments 
during the open period. There have been a significant number of 
concerns presented to my office regarding deficiencies with the EIS.
    The next milestone will be for Installation Management Command 
(``IMCOM'') to declare a preferred alternative and issue a record of 
decision before the end of this Fiscal Year. Can you provide me insight 
on the preferred alternative of the USAG?
    Answer. It is important to note the following steps must be taken 
before a record of decision can be issued:

1. Develop responses to public comments on the Draft EIS.

2. Determine if a supplemental Draft EIS is required; this would 
    involve an additional public comment period. If a supplemental EIS 
    is required, record of decision approval is planned for 3Q FY23.

3. Prepare a Final EIS and make it available to the public. The Final 
    EIS must identify a preferred alternative.

4. A 30-day waiting period following the Final EIS notice of 
    availability.

5. Prepare a ROD that addresses any additional comments received in the 
    30-day period.

    It would not be possible to complete all of these steps by the end 
of this FY, and completion by the end of the CY would be very 
difficult. The NEPA process must be done correctly. We cannot sacrifice 
quality for speed.
    Question. We have seen a dramatic increase in competition with 
other nations, namely Russia, in the Arctic. It's more important than 
ever to take all risks into consideration to ensure our ability to 
project power in this part of the world. I have worked to ensure that 
the Department of Defense is very aware of the potential that the loss 
of stable permafrost has for military installations in Alaska.
    In the FY21 NDAA, Congress required the Department of Defense to 
update its 2014 adaptation roadmap to include a discussion of a long 
list of hazards, one of which is the potential damage to natural and 
constructed infrastructure from thawing permafrost and sea ice. This 
was to be updated by February 1, 2022, a deadline that has not yet 
passed. However, can you provide a brief update on infrastructure you 
have seen damaged by the destabilization of permafrost?
    Answer. Army has not seen any Army infrastructure damaged by the 
destabilization of permafrost at Fort Wainwright, Alaska (FWA) or Joint 
Base Elmendorf Richardson (JBER).
    Question. Do you foresee any possibility of impact to military 
readiness in Alaska and the Arctic resulting from the destabilization 
of the ground beneath our military infrastructure?
    Answer. The Army's Arctic strategy explicitly acknowledges the 
potential risk from climate change and includes a task to address it: 
``Assess impact of climate change on physical infrastructure. Thawing 
permafrost can impact the integrity of infrastructure, to include 
Soldier and Civilian housing and utilization of training areas. 
Examination and monitoring of the Arctic operational environment 
supports domain awareness while also supporting performance 
enhancements to sensors. Through detection of permafrost conditions, 
the Army can better understand its impact on infrastructure.'' While 
not an infrastructure concern, the Arctic strategy also notes that 
thawing permafrost has the potential to release previously frozen 
bacteria and viruses that may introduce new disease vectors.
    Question. We have seen a dramatic increase in competition with 
other nations, namely Russia, in the Arctic. It's more important than 
ever to take all risks into consideration to ensure our ability to 
project power in this part of the world. I have worked to ensure that 
the Department of Defense is very aware of the potential that the loss 
of stable permafrost has for military installations in Alaska.
    Are you able to predict any kind of impact on future budget 
requests needed to fix damage caused by thawing permafrost? How are you 
adjusting your current military construction practices to take this 
risk into account, and possibly mitigate the need for large scale 
spending to fix issues that may arise from current practices?
    Answer. We do not have an estimate for impact on the budget at this 
time and are seeking funds to complete a study to do so. However, 
because Army infrastructure on JBER and Fort Wainwright is largely 
constructed on non-permafrost soils, there is not likely to be a 
catastrophic impact on existing facilities. Military construction 
practices already take the risk of permafrost into account, to avoid 
costs during construction and in the future. The Alaska District Corps 
of Engineers is the design and construction agent for Army construction 
in Alaska. It is their standard operating procedure to use best 
engineering practices to avoid or mitigate impacts from permafrost and 
changing climate conditions. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has 
performed extensive geotechnical sampling across Fort Wainwright to map 
the discontinuous permafrost. Geotechnical investigations are completed 
early in the building process to identify any areas of concern. This 
has allowed us to select building sites that are not underlain by 
permafrost. Even so, experience with construction in an Arctic 
environment is a requirement in Alaska District military construction 
contracts. To date, permafrost impacts have not been a concern at JBER 
and are minimal at FWA.

                                 ______
                                 

          Questions Submitted by Senator Shelley Moore Capito
    Question. Many of the highest levels of the PFAS and PFOA are found 
on and near military bases due to the continuous use of firefighting 
foam.
    What impacts are we still seeing from this literal ``forever 
chemical?''
    Answer. The health and safety of our Soldiers, their Families, Army 
Civilian Workforce, and the communities surrounding installations is a 
top priority for the Army. Since, the U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency (EPA) issued its non-regulatory lifetime Health Advisory (HA) in 
2016, the Department of Defense and the Army began working to: first 
evaluate whether Army drinking water systems had been impacted by PFOS/
PFOA above the HA, and where drinking water was above the HA, take 
action to mitigate impacts; and second, to begin assessing whether 
there were releases or potential releases of PFAS from Army activities 
and take appropriate cleanup actions under the Comprehensive 
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) 
nationwide. While scientists are still studying the health effects of 
exposure to PFAS and more research is needed, some studies have shown 
that certain PFAS may affect human health. The Army supports DoD's 
efforts to regularly collaborate with other federal agencies and 
scientific organizations to maintain awareness of the evolving science 
regarding potential PFAS health impacts, toxicity, and exposure. This 
updated information is used as the Army continues through the CERCLA 
cleanup process.
    Additionally, to eliminate or minimize future releases and 
potential impacts, the Army no longer uses Aqueous Film-Forming Foam 
(AFFF) for training, maintenance or testing. Since 2016, AFFF has only 
been used for fire emergencies, and action is taken after each 
emergency use to limit environmental effects. Furthermore, the Army is 
working toward replacement of PFAS-containing AFFF, the main source of 
environmental releases of PFOS/PFOA on Army installations.
    Question. Do you think appropriate action has been taken to at 
least begin cleanup and mitigation?
    Answer. Yes. The Army takes its cleanup responsibilities seriously 
and conducts environmental restoration following the federal cleanup 
law, the CERCLA, which provides a consistent nationwide approach. To 
date, the Army is conducting or has completed a Preliminary Assessment/
Site Inspection (PA/SI) at 335 installations where PFAS may have been 
used, stored, or released. The PA/SI phase is the first step in the 
PFAS investigation, and the Army expects approximately 70% of 
installations will progress to the Remedial Investigation (RI) phase at 
the completion of the SI phase. Importantly, where Army is the source 
of a PFAS release, the Army has taken immediate measures, such as 
installing treatment systems and filters as appropriate, to ensure that 
drinking water does not contain PFOS/PFOA above the EPA's PFOS/PFOA HA 
level. Our mitigation efforts and CERCLA actions, along with Army's 
efforts to reduce reliance on PFAS-containing AFFF have been an 
effective start to mitigation and cleanup of PFAS releases from Army 
activities.

                                 ______
                                 

                Questions Submitted to Mr. James Balocki
             Questions Submitted by Senator Martin Heinrich
    Question. Could you provide an example or examples of readiness 
and/or national security consequences posed by Navy bases' flooding 
vulnerabilities?
    Answer. The Department of the Navy's mission requires many of its 
installations to be located in coastal areas. We are mindful of risks 
posed by sea level rise and storm surge, especially in areas prone to 
hurricanes and typhoons. The Department is working to protect our 
installations from sea level rise and storm surge by incorporating 
mitigation measures into master planning and design of new construction 
and facilities restoration and modernization projects. Where necessary, 
we have (or will) develop projects like the one currently underway at 
Norfolk Naval Shipyard, VA to build flood protection walls around the 
submarine maintenance dry docks and low-lying portions of the shipyard. 
Similarly, the Pier 8 Renovation at Naval Base San Diego, CA 
incorporates elevating the pier's replacement piles to account for 
modeled sea level rise; sea level rise data for the year 2100 was used 
during environmental planning and design phases of the new Coastal 
Campus project at Naval Base Coronado, CA; and finally the Test Range 
Support Facility project at Naval Support Activity Panama City, FL is 
being built to better withstand hurricanes and flooding.
    The consequence of failing to address these and similar low 
probability, high consequence vulnerabilities is the degradation or 
loss of readiness capabilities they each support.

                                 ______
                                 

              Questions Submitted by Senator Patty Murray
    Question. Climate change has increased the risk and extent of 
wildfires across the western United States. Last year in Washington 
State, 17 large fires burned over 273,000 acres of land across the 
state.
    How is Navy adapting current and future operations to address the 
threat from wildfires to our military installations and military 
communities?
    Answer. Navy addresses wildfire threats in each installation's 
Wildfire Action Plan, which is a component of the base's Integrated 
Natural Resources Management Plan. The Wildfire Action Plan is tailored 
to each installation; it is developed based on local conditions. Each 
plan allows Navy to modify the natural habitat to reduce the risk of 
wildfire. It is reviewed and updated periodically.
    Navy Region Northwest (NRNW) is planning and executing timber sales 
as part of our overall forest management plan to enable forest thinning 
and reduce the risk and severity of wildfires. The Region is also 
implementing corridor clearing to reduce or mitigate wildfire hazards. 
The corridors are 50-foot wide buffers adjacent to roads and munitions 
magazines established through vegetation control or removal, pruning 
and selective tree thinning.
    Question. Is Navy adequately resourced to address the growing 
threat from wildfires to include the study, planning, prevention, and 
fighting of wildfires which threaten military installations and 
military communities? (OPNAV & MCICOM response)
    Answer. Yes. Funding is managed by the Navy Forestry Program via 
collections from the sale of forest products. Navy is currently working 
in collaboration with the other military services to develop a cohesive 
strategy for wildfire. The purpose of the DOD wildland fire cohesive 
strategy is to identify opportunities for the DOD to work 
collaboratively among stakeholders (USFS, DOI, BLM, BIA, USFWS, States, 
Universities/CESU Network and NGOs). The strategy includes the 
reduction of wildfire potential and impacts, protection of investments 
and critical infrastructure, personnel and public safety, protection 
and enhancement of natural resources, and implementation of ecosystem 
management goals and objectives on DOD-managed lands, all while 
maintaining the ability of those lands to meet the DOD mission.
    Question. DOD has embarked on an important initiative to modernize 
installations and facilities to reduce energy use, decrease electricity 
costs, and reduce water usage in response to the challenges posed by 
climate change.
    How are new technologies and innovative solutions being leveraged 
by Navy to meet the President's order to increase the energy and water 
efficiency of installations and facilities and ensure they are climate-
ready?
    Answer. The Navy has partnered with energy service companies 
(ESCOs) for many years incorporating new energy-efficiency technologies 
into Energy Savings Performance Contracts (ESPC's). The Navy has also 
collaborated with the Office of the Secretary of Defense on numerous 
Energy Security Technology Coordination Program (ESTCP) projects. These 
projects include implementation of advanced energy storage, 
utilization, and harvesting methods (solar, wind, battery, fuel cell, 
electric-vehicle infrastructure) and efficient control of utilities and 
resilience technologies on an installation.
    Below are examples of new technologies and innovative solutions the 
Navy is leveraging, including several research, development, test and 
evaluation (RDT&E) programs, to meet the President's order.

  --New standards for modeling and design of microgrids, updated to 
        incorporate the most cost-effective and efficient use of 
        energy-systems on Navy installations.

  --Smart Grid technology to leverage energy data in optimizing 
        operations that increase efficiency and resilience while 
        reducing consumption.

  --Marine hydrokinetic technologies, such as wave/ocean energy, are in 
        development or deployed for demonstration. Ocean-energy devices 
        were developed and installed in collaboration with Department 
        of Energy (DOE), the University of Washington, and University 
        of Hawaii. These technologies demonstrate harvesting and grid-
        scale distribution of energy through in-water column turbines 
        (Puget Sound) and the motion of buoys through collection of 
        wave-energy (Kaneohe Bay Marine Corps Base).

  --Collaboration with the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) 
        to enable an increase of energy-efficiency and resilience 
        projects and establish appropriate cybersecurity measures.

  --Navy Installation designers now have the latest in commercial and 
        advanced energy- system modeling tools. Developed in 
        collaboration with the Naval Postgraduate School (NPS), 
        National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) and Oak Ridge 
        National Laboratories, these tools enable design of 
        installations to meet net-zero energy goals while withstanding 
        catastrophic climactic weather events.

  --Wastewater Optimization for Energy design models, developed through 
        the Navy Shore Readiness Energy research program, now reflect 
        the latest in wastewater treatmenttechnologies. Demonstration 
        sites can be found across the Department of the Navy (DON) at 
        NAS Jacksonville, JB Pearl Harbor Hickham, NSA Hampton Roads 
        and MCB Camp Pendleton.

    Question. What role will high efficiency dehumidification systems 
(HEDS) have in the replacement and upgrade of current HVAC systems used 
by Navy in meeting climate change goals
    Answer. The Naval Facilities Engineering Systems Command is 
researching the life cycle cost, operation and performance of high 
efficiency dehumidification systems (HEDS). At the conclusion of the 
analysis the DON will be a better understanding of HEDS as a potential 
replacement option for HVAC systems.
    Question. How will Navy balance energy and water consumption while 
also addressing the threat of transmission of biological pathogens in 
buildings and ships? What role might HEDS play in these efforts?
    Answer. The Navy incorporates efficient energy and water 
consumption into overall planning for installation resiliency. As 
indicated above, the Navy is currently analyzing the life cycle cost, 
operation and performance of high efficiency dehumidification systems 
(HEDS) and potential use.

                                 ______
                                 

                Questions Submitted by Senator Jack Reed
    Question. Section 2801 of the FY20 National Defense Authorization 
Act required each major military installation to come up with and 
deliver to Congress a military installation resilience (MIR) plan, 
which is distinct from installation energy plans, to account for risk 
and threats from extreme weather events and planned infrastructure 
requirements. However, we have yet to receive any of those plans.
    Answer. Resilience component incorporation is focused on out most 
vulnerable sites first; they are being incorporated into installation 
master plans as part of the plan maintenance. Naval Magazine Indian 
Island was completed in February 2021; planning to incorporate 
resilience into all master plans by the end of 2022.

                                 ______
                                 

              Questions Submitted to Shelley Moore Capito
    Question. Many of the highest levels of the PFAS and PFOA are found 
on and near military bases due to the continuous use of firefighting 
foam.
    Answer. What impacts are we still seeing from this literal 
``forever chemical?'' The Department of the Navy (DoN) has been taking 
an aggressive, proactive approach to addressing known and suspected 
PFAS releases from our facilities over the past five years. Starting in 
2016 following EPA's issuance of their lifetime health advisory (HA) 
for two PFAS, namely PFOS and PFOA, DoN has sampled drinking water on 
all Navy and Marine Corps installations world-wide and taken action to 
ensure there is not PFOS and/or PFOA above the HA levels. This was re-
confirmed in 2020. Additionally, where DoN suspected past PFAS releases 
could have been migrating from our facilities to off-base drinking 
water supplies, the Department has worked with our regulatory partners 
and communities to sample these water sources. Where HA exceedance were 
identified, DoN took immediate action to eliminate this exposure by 
providing alternative water (e.g. bottled water) for drinking and 
cooking and has worked with the public or private entity to implement 
long term solutions. At this point, no one is drinking water with PFOS 
and/or PFOA on or near DoN Installations, where we are the known source 
of the PFAS release.
    Question. Do you think appropriate action has been taken to at 
least begin cleanup and mitigation?
    Answer. Yes. DoN made it a priority to first identify where there 
were potential drinking water exposures to PFOS and/or PFOA above the 
HA levels and cut off those exposures, as described above. The 
Department completed a comprehensive review of all installations to 
determine where there are known or suspected PFAS releases and has 
initiated investigations at all these facilities. DoN continues to 
collaborate with our regulatory partners and community members as the 
investigations proceed to ensure we confirm where PFAS releases are 
from our former operations, communicate this information transparently, 
and determine the appropriate response actions.

                                 ______
                                 

                Questions Submitted to Mr. Mark Correll
             Questions Submitted by Senator Martin Heinrich
    Question. Does the DAF consider extreme weather when undertaking 
strategic basing decisions? Please explain how the DAF takes climate 
change into account in its analysis within the strategic basing 
process.
    Answer. The Department of the Air Force strategic basing process 
considers extreme weather when the required environmental analysis is 
conducted. Environmental risks are analyzed and mitigation requirements 
are assessed and factored into the final decision. Extreme weather 
mitigation requirements associated with building codes can affect 
project cost. This may increase the estimates to construct facilities 
and make climate vulnerable locations less cost competitive relative to 
other sites.

                                 ______
                                 

               Questions Submitted by Senator John Hoeven
    Question. How could DoD and/or DAF partner with state/local 
partners or are you using Defense Access Roads (DAR) authority to help 
support the road, flood prevention project at Minot AFB, ND?
    Answer. Yes we have used the DAR authority to address roads 
inundated by the flooding in 2011 at Minot AFB. Projects raised the 
impacted roads and stabilized slopes. Currently, the installation has 
no flood prevention projects planned.
    Question. At Grand Forks AFB, ND, there is a facility across the 
runway that could lend itself to a partnership on power resiliency. 
Please provide a commitment/tentative timeline to research this 
partnership, specifically taking into account whether the effort could 
qualify/be incorporated into an Enhanced Use Lease agreement?
    Answer. Through the use of Installation Energy Plans (IEPs), the 
Department of the Air Force (DAF) is working aggressively to identify 
potential projects to enhance its energy resilience. DAF expects to 
complete an IEP for Grand Forks AFB in Fiscal Year 2024. The IEP will 
identify potential opportunities for resilience improvements, and 
possible funding mechanisms for those improvements (e.g. an Enhanced 
Use Lease agreement) and opportunities for community partnerships. 
While not energy related, the DAF works closely with Grand Forks 
community to cultivate several partnerships through the Air Force 
Community Partnership program, such as shared medical and fire 
training, and are actively pursuing several other opportunities.

                          SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS

    Senator Heinrich. We appreciate the department responding 
to them in a reasonable period of time, and with that, we stand 
adjourned.
    Thank you all very much.
    [Whereupon, at 4:06 p.m., Wednesday, May 19 the 
subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene at a time subject to 
the call of the Chair.]