[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 11]
[House]
[Pages 14954-14955]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




        DEFENSE SCIENCE BOARD REPORT ON REDUCING THE FUEL BURDEN

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 3, 2001, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Stearns) is recognized 
during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.
  Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, as we begin debate this week on a 
comprehensive energy package, I want to bring to the attention of my 
colleagues a recently released report by the Defense Science Board 
entitled, ``More Capable Warfighting Through Reduced Fuel Burden.'' The 
bill we bring on the House floor will talk about lots of conservation 
measures, but we should also look to the Federal Government, which has 
a large use of energy.
  The bill we will be considering is an omnibus energy bill, H.R. 4, 
Securing America's Energy Future Act, and provides, among other things, 
incentives for the efficient use of energy and investments in new 
energy efficient technologies.
  The Federal Government is beholden under this legislation to take the 
lead in reducing energy consumption. If they are asking the American 
people to reduce energy consumption, obviously the Federal Government 
should do so, too, and to realign its focus on using energy efficient 
technologies.
  The report released by the Defense Science Board highlights the need 
for the Department of Defense to also realign its focus on using energy 
efficient technologies, too. This was quoted in the report: ``Military 
fuel consumption for aircraft, ships, ground vehicles and facilities 
makes the Department of Defense the single largest consumer of 
petroleum in America, perhaps in the world.''
  The United States has deployed its forces more times during the 
entire Cold War period. As a result, our fuel requirements have also 
risen. The report goes on to quote that ``the Naval force depends each 
day on million of gallons of fuel to operate around the globe. The Air 
Force. . .spends approximately 85 percent of its fuel budget to 
deliver, by airborne tankers, just 6 percent off its annual jet fuel 
usage.''
  Mr. Speaker, it is without a doubt that fuel cost is directly 
associated with our military readiness. As we struggle with Congress' 
current budget allocations to provide the military with the funds 
needed to elevate our readiness levels, provide for pay increases, 
health care and housing, we would be remiss if we did not examine ways 
for the Department of Defense to increase its attention on energy 
efficiency.
  By no means, however, should the Department of Defense sacrifice 
performance requirements just to save a few gallons of fuel. I doubt 
that any Member would propose such action. However, the DSB report 
recommends including energy efficiency as a requirement under DOD's 
procurement process and investing in new improvements through the 
science and technology community. It is a significant step in the 
direction of curtailing energy consumption in a responsible manner 
while maintaining the performance in overall military capability.
  The report also notes that the Department of Defense Joint Vision 
2010 and 2020 ``explicitly recognize that improving platform and system 
level fuel efficiency improves agility, while concurrently reducing 
deployment times and support/logistic requirements.'' All of us must 
remember the buildup of our forces between Desert Shield and Desert 
Storm. Most would agree that

[[Page 14955]]

never would an adversary allow such a cushion for the U.S. to position 
itself for battle. The DSB report states, ``The largest element of the 
total fuel cost in DOD is the cost of delivery.''
  So naturally, improving on the daily use of fuel for both combat and 
support units could reduce the logistics need while allowing units to 
deploy and remain in the field for a sustained period of time. Though 
H.R. 4 allows for Federal agencies, including the Department of 
Defense, to acquire specific Energy Star products, I believe we should 
extend the focus to weapons platforms and logistic requirements. As we 
move to lighter, more mobile forces, it is imperative that we improve 
our logistics capability and reduce the logistics tail.
  Finally, the report notes that ``efficiency is a strong component of 
agility.'' I hope my colleagues will keep this in mind as we continue 
debate on energy policy and as it applies to all aspects of this 
country, including our Federal Government and the Department of 
Defense.

                          ____________________