Operational Energy Meet Ups: Flock of Eagles Lead Army OE Effort

NOT a Flock of Eagles

This past February, the U.S. Army Rapid Equipping Force (REF) sponsored an operational energy conference at Arizona State University.  Almost all of the players in the Army appeared and described their various programs. The major teams represented were the Operations (REF), Acquisition (PM, Mobile Electric Power and others), Logistics (G4), and Training and Doctrine (Brigade Modernization Command).  The only thing missing were the folks that write the JCIDS documents that articulate the capabilities required of the force regarding operational energy.   Now that problem has been addressed.  If you need a refresher on the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS), review this post.

The Combined Arms Support Command (CASCOM) has let a one year contract to produce the appropriate Capability Development Documents and Capability Production Documents.  Using the Army Operational Energy Campaign Plan (AOECP) and draft Initial Capabilities Document (ICD) the team will have 12 months to define requirements for Army Operational Energy for the next couple of decades.  The effort is being led by COL Bruce B. McPeak, the Director of Material Systems at CASCOM, and the newest member of the OE “Flock of Eagles”.

 If you are interested in learning more about the “Flock”, head over to the Military Mobile Power Summit at the Mary M. Gates Learning Center, Alexandria VA., 19-20 September.  You will get to hear from the Navy, Marines and Army as well as DOE.  In addition to COL McPeak, COLs Newell (REF), Roege (G4), Hill (ASA,IE&E) and Cummings (represented by LTC Foster, PM-MEP) will present.  These five Colonels represent the Army’s uniformed brain trust on operational energy.  Any time you put five Colonels on a problem, you should expect rapid solutions.  The Army is leading in experimenting and researching, but until the JCIDS documents get done, it is just tinkering at the margins.  Requirements come from the JCIDS process and Requirements drive Acquisition.  If any readers attend, please give me a SitRep.  You can register for the event at- http://mobilepower.dsigroup.org/ or contact Lisa Madison at 1-347-732-5326 for more information or to register.

The USMC, which somehow seems to get by with just one Colonel, has released the data collected on energy use in SW Afghanistan.  According to the release, “This report is focused on three distinct topics.  First, the results of the recent Expeditionary Energy Office metering efforts in RC(SW), Afghanistan.  Second, presenting the lessons learned from the ExFOB 2010-2 Extended User Evaluation (EUE) focused on efficient powering and cooling of Command Operations Centers (COCs).  Lastly, presenting an explanation of variable power demand and how probability profiles can be used to understand the impact of USMC operating procedures on fuel consumption. As soon as the report is available, I will post a link.

Finally, from the USMC, the next ExFOB or BYOT (bring your own toys) is ready to go down at Camp Pendleton, Calif., Sept 17-21.  The Marine Corps' Experimental Forward Operating Base (ExFOB) process is designed to identify and evaluate commercial technologies that can increase the self-sufficiency of expeditionary forces.  ExFOB will host invited vendors to demonstrate their technologies. Fourteen companies will pay their way into the ExFOB in order to  demonstrate 19 advanced thermal efficiency technologies that provide energy efficient heating and cooling of personnel, bulk water, electronics, vehicles, and shelters.  If the Leathernecks like something, maybe they will buy a few for follow on deployment and testing.  The suite of technology, India Company 3/5 Marines tried out in late 2010 resulted in a $25M purchase for the rest of the Corps.  As in all the experimentation that is going on, significant upfront investment is required of industry, but the potential pay back maybe worth that investment. 

The challenge for small business is that most of the OE experimentation requires vendors to bring their gear to these events, at their own cost, in hopes of a follow on purchase.  The only folks with the resources available to make the follow on purchases are the REF and USMC Expeditionary Energy Office.  If you are trying to impress someone, impress them.  Dan Nolan

Red Headed Rabble Rouser Rocks the Boat: Anderson at the Tactical (and Tasteful) Edge

This week the Association of the United States Army held their Winter Symposium in south Florida.  Yes, Florida!  Way to go AUSA!  Anyway, a couple of weeks ago I was invited by senior leadership from AUSA to moderate a panel on operational energy.  I immediately agreed and started packing my sunscreen.  A couple of days later I got a call from a more senior AUSA member of leadership to disinvite me to moderate, although they did offer to pay my cover charge if I came anyway.  When I agreed to moderate, I took on the expense of travel, hotels, etc., because I felt it was important.  When the gentleman called to waive me off, he explained it was because the senior member of the panel decide he did not want a moderator.  Interestingly, it will be the only panel that will not have a moderator.  I was assured it had nothing to do with my, sometime, contrary opinions in this page and it was a personal decision on the part of the senior officer on the panel. The gentleman that disinvited me did not have to make that personal call; he could have left it to other folks farther down the food chain.  But as I said, he is a gentleman.  I believe his assurances that it had nothing to do with my opinions.

Often, at the various energy conferences hosted by or including DOD, the group essentially sits around and sings Kumbaya.  Only rarely will someone with a known contrarian view be invited and asked to speak at these events.  Last week in Arizona, the REF broke these rules.  At their NetZero at the Tactical Edge Conference they invited BG(R) Steve Anderson to present.  Steve was one of the first senior officers in uniform to recognize the vulnerabilities associated with the profligate use of energy in theater.  As Petraus' Loggie, Anderson set about finding solutions for energy security in Iraq.  Since retiring, he has crisscrossed the Nation sounding the tocsin for operational energy security, speaking, writing and appearing on TV to get DOD to move faster in implementing energy conservation measures that could save lives in theater.  He has been a relentless critic of DOD leadership and he did not disappoint.

When Sharon Burke finished her presentation, Steve's hand shot up in the air.  Once of the folks from the REF ran over and asked him to be nice; not a good move.  Steve asked Ms. Burke how DOD could claim that energy was a priority when the new SECDEF failed to include it in his list of priorities?  Ms. Burke provided a diplomatic answer if not a very informative one. As I attempted to slide at least one seat away from Steve (never share a foxhole with anyone braver than you are) I could sense the room's displeasure at the question. "How could he treat the Army's honored guest this way?" seemed to be the question on everyone's mind.  The fact is, although it was an unpleasant question to ask, it was not unfair. 

On the final day, BG(R) Anderson got up to speak and harangued the largely Army crowd with DOD's failure to act with alacrity in securing operational energy.  The Army folks looked around and said, "Wait, we work for the Army and we are moving out smartly."  The criticism of DOD, although accurate was misplaced and the crowd did get a bit sulky.  Again, the criticism was not unfair, just poorly targeted. 

The fact remains, the REF did something brave by bringing in a known, contrary view.  One of the things I always tell any staff on which I work or works for me is, "If all of us are thinking the same way, some of us are not necessary."  We need to encourage and listen to the dissident voices out there.  Disagreement is not disrespect.   Of course, we need to be able to disagree without being disagreeable.  Dan Nolan

Net Zero Conference Part 2: A Guided Tour Down the Rabbit Hole

Make sure you packed a lunch before you start this post.  Follow me down the rabbit hole and, hurry.  We are already late!

A veritable alphabet soup of acronyms and agencies were represented at the “Net Zero to the Tactical Edge” conference at Arizona State University this week.  My goal in this post is to toss out the bread crumbs that might possibly lead business along the path to find the holy grail of the defense industry: adoption as a (fanfare of trumpets)  “Program of Record” .

Before I go through the litany, here is a quick program reminder.  There are two sides to the Army: Civilian and Military.  The Secretary of the Army is over all in charge and civilian leadership reports to him.  The Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology (ASA, ALT) reports to the Sec Army.  ASA, ALT’s job is to turn requirements in to things for the Army.    On the uniformed side, the Chief of Staff (CSA) of the Army is the senior soldier in the Army, but not a commander.  The Deputy Chiefs of Staff for Operations is the G3 and the DCS, Logistics is the G4 and they report to the CSA.  The Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) is responsible for translating warfighter needs into requirements documents that allow the acquisition world to program money in order to buy stuff to meet the requirements. TRADOC reports to CSA.  Questions?

The various groups who presented represented each of these three constituencies.   The key groups were the REF, LIA, TRADOC, BMC, and Program Managers for the following areas: Mobile Electric Power, Soldier and Force Sustainment Systems.  All the presentations are here.   Here are the players.

1.       REF – Rapid Equipping Force working for the Army’s Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations (G3), reports to Vice Chief of Staff, Army

a.       Finding technology solutions to commanders’ immediate battlefield needs. The REF does not have a public facing website so they can only be reached when they come out of their burrows to see if there will be 6 more weeks of winter. Will keep you posted.

b.      Interests: Any system not already under consideration.

2.       LIA – Logistics Innovative Agency, a Field Operating Agency of the Army’s Deputy Chief of Staff for Logistics (G4)

a.       LIA's mission is to continually examine the Army's logistics capabilities, and find ways that might make it more effective and/or efficient.  LIA identifies logistics solutions that address emerging and future needs. They also have the operational energy portfolio.   If you have an energy good idea, send it to LOIA-ZXI.NCLT@conus.army.mil .  They will point you in the right direction.

b.      Interests: Any system not already under consideration.

3.       NIE/BMC - Network Integration Experimentation is a program under the Brigade Modernization Command.  BMC works for the Army Capabilities Integration Center which is part of TRADOC.  The BMC works closely with System of Systems Integration (SoSI) Directorate which is part of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics.

a.       The NIE is the first in a series of semi-annual evaluations designed to integrate and mature the Army’s tactical network and is a key element of the Army’s emerging Network Strategy.

b.      On 11 Jan, 2012, the U.S. Army, through the System of Systems Integration (SoSI) Directorate, announced that it is seeking interested industry and government sources with mature solutions to enhance existing network systems capabilities to participate in the Network Integration Evaluation (NIE) 13.1 event, scheduled to occur in Oct/Nov 2012 at Fort Bliss, Texas and White Sands Missile Range (WSMR), N.M. The NIE is a series of semi-annual evaluations designed to further integrate and mature the Army’s tactical network, and accelerate and improve the way network technologies are delivered to Soldiers.

c.       The purpose of this Sources Sought notice is to identify emerging capabilities to be evaluated against a set of entrance criteria for an opportunity to participate in NIE 13.1. This Sources Sought seeks solutions with a narrow focus

d.      Interests: Any system not already under consideration.

4.       TCM, Soldier Warrior – TRADOC Capabilities Manager, Fort Benning, GA

a.       TCM-Soldier provides intensive system management of everything worn, consumed or carried for individual Soldier use in a tactical environment to maximize lethality, command and control, survivability, sustainment, and mobility, and training.

b.      Interests:  Soldier Power.

5.       AEWE – Army Expeditionary Warrior Experiment  run by Maneuver Battle Lab, Fort Benning GA, TRADOC

a.       TRADOC’s AEWE provides capability developers, the science and technology community and industry a repeatable, credible, rigorous and validated operational experiment venue to assess possible solutions for capability gaps in concepts and materiel development efforts.  AEWE is focused on the Squad and soldier capability.

b.      Interests:  Soldier Power.

6.       CBITEC -  Contingency Basing Integration Technology Evaluation Center  - Army G4 Logistics Innovation Agency and Construction Engineering Research Laboratory (CERL) in Champaign, IL.

a.       Army G4 Logistics Innovation Agency provided funding to USACE (CERL and Kansas City District) to design, construct and operate a full scale contingency base at Fort Leonard Wood, MO to conduct demonstration, assessment and evaluation of contingency basing capabilities and technologies (power, environmental, sustainable construction,  force protection) that support Army requirements and future acquisition decisions. This facility will also provide a training venue to military units and Engineer School students to learn sustainable base operations. CERL supports the Maneuver Support Center of Excellence by preparing a CBITEC master plan, technology evaluation plan, and providing a project manager, to be located at FLW, for the longterm operation of the facility.

b.      Interests:  Basing Power.

7.       PM-MEP – Project Manager, Mobile Electric Power (PM-MEP)

a.       PM-MEP’s mission is to provide standardized tactical electric power and environmental control capabilities to the Department of Defense in support of National Security.  For the Acquisition community, PM-MEP provides modernized, technologically advanced, tactical, diesel fueled, lightweight, portable, reliable, rugged, power generating systems in a variety of sizes from 2 kilowatts (kW) to 840 kW. They also are responsible for power distribution hardware.  They will be the ultimate arbiter of energy systems for adoption by all of DOD.

b.      Interests: Acquiring products as required by TRADOC. 2kW and larger.

8.       BCIL – The Base Camp Integration Lab, operated by PM, Force Sustainment Systems in Fort Devens, MA.  The BCIL works for Acquisition Corps.

a.       The 10-acre BCIL features a pair of Force Provider 150-person Expeditionary Base Camp modules modeled after forward operating bases in Afghanistan. One module is designated as the baseline control module set in the current configuration. The other module is designated as the new technologies test bed in an operational environment. Service members training at Ft. Devens will occupy the BCIL’s base camp, allowing for the integration and evaluation of immediate and future integrated expeditionary CB solutions in a realistic environment. The BCIL will provide data to substantiate and support all aspects (technologies, training, installation, maintenance, etc.) for the rapid fielding of solution sets integrated into currently deployed, developmental, and future expeditionary force sustainment and basing solutions.

b.      In order to participate in the process, vendors must first find a government partner who can access the BCIL website to download the application that the vendor then submits.  Really?  So now I have to do business development twice?  And does it have to be someone in the acquisition community that sponsors me or can I go find a buddy in the Department of Education to download the forms.   Typically, when I see something that appears to be stupid, I assume I don’t understand it and then go to school to educate myself.  If, after I do that, it still appears stupid, it is probably stupid. I am still studying this one.

I appreciate how byzantine this all appears, but I assure you it is light years ahead of the situation that existed five years ago when there was little or no energy related cross talk.   In my one on one meeting with the REF, I complained loudly (if tongue in cheek), that they were putting me out of the business of helping people understand this system.  Looking back over this, I am not changing my business model anytime soon!  Dan Nolan

Signs of the Apocalypse: Operations, Training, and ACQ on same page in AZ

I have just returned from Phoenix,  Arizona where I believe I was witness to a portend of biblical proportions, “Cats and dogs, living together, mass hysteria!” (Thank you, Dr. Venkman).   In an auditorium of a satellite campus of Arizona State University, I observed a Colonel of Operations, who actually knew the first name of a Colonel of Acquisition!  Those of you who understand the previously chasm between operations, training and doctrine, and the acquisition community will appreciate the implications of this sea change.  Where previously these two communities threw things over the wall to each other, it now appears that they are executing Manning –like (Eli, not Peyton) handoffs. Perhaps rapid equipping has come of age. This hastily arranged, low cost meeting, not without its warts, set the standard for energy conferences. 

The Army, Academia, and Industry gathered to conduct a series of briefings on processes and technologies.  The doyenne of operational energy, Sharon Burke, opened the conference entitled, “Net Zero at the Tactical Edge”.  Despite being harangued for not getting her Operational Energy implementation plan out in a timely manner and for failing to get the new SecDef to include energy in his priorities, she set a positive tone for the conference.  Anybody who can reference Jane Austen and Carl von Clausewitz in the same sentence gets a little latitude.  In her defense, the relatively new SecDef may not get it ... yet. 

The hand on the tiller for this ship was the director of the Rapid Equipping Force, Colonel Pete Newell.  I interviewed Newell previously about the role of the REF in operational energy.   Newell looks and sounds like a warfighter and he understands the complexity of the Requirements and Acquisition processes.  His take is that OE is nothing special, just another challenge commanders face on the battlefield and that it is his organization’s mission:  to find the technology solutions.  What is different is his recognition of the need to bring together the Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) and the Program Managers so that requirements can be expedited and the PMs can satisfy those requirements. This is the path to long term, secure OE.   

The team is together, but TRADOC has yet to produce the Capability Development Document necessary for the PMs to begin their acquisition process.   This is still on the shoulders of the Army Capabilities Integration Center (sorry to classmate, Keith), Combat Arms Support Command (CASCOM) and TRADOC Capabilities Manager, Soldier.  These organizations are responsible for describing the requirements for operational energy from the individual soldier to the Forward Operating Base level. 

The speakers' materials were superb, although they all prepared PC PowerPoint briefings that were butchered by the Macintosh computer used to display them.   The information they provided on the four different venues and four different processes for bringing technologies into the Army’s experimentation effort was a bit mind numbing.   I challenged COL Newell on this, and, in a surprisingly glass half full way, he pointed out that they should be thought of as four paths to success.  The REF’s Bill Garland promised to publish a simple document helping industry understand what path would suit them best.  Will let you know when and where that is available.

The best aspect of the conference was the fifteen minute meetings that industry could schedule with program managers and the REF.  The chance to sit down one on one and present technologies and receive advice in a small, dare I say, intimate setting was unparalleled.   More on this, the pathways, and advice to conference hosts in the next post.  Dan Nolan

Shysters, Bozos and Making it So: Tactical Power Conference Review

A month into the New Year and DOD has hosted two energy conferences with many more on the horizon.  Couple of weeks ago, the Army hosted a Net Zero Installation conference in Chicago.  Last week I arrived in D.C. (in the snow) for the IDGA Tactical Power Sources Summit (TPSS).   On behalf of the state of Florida, I would respectfully remind you conference planners that it is ok to avoid misery in winter weather.  Orlando, Tampa and Miami are open for business.  I appreciate that constrained budgets make travel for government folks difficult.  I assume that is why the Program Manager for Mobile Electric Power (PM-MEP) decided not to drive up from Belvoir to Alexandria for the Tactical Power Summit.  At least I hope that was the reason.

The three day TPSS started with an industry focus day.  The highlight of that day was the presentation by Mike Bergey of Bergey Windpower.  Bergey has been in the small wind business for over thirty five years and has seen them come and go.  Part of his presentation was about the kind of folks one finds in the energy industry.  Usually you will be dealing with the good, honest people who believe in their product and the benefits it will bring their customers.  But there are also Bozos and Shysters.  The Bozos are “Clueless on physics and engineering - don’t know what they don’t know”.   Well intended, but generally unaware that their sales claims are so much hot air.  The Shyster, on the other hand, is “ Aware that their claims are bogus and don’t care”.  They depend on the general public wanting to believe that there’s been a performance or cost breakthrough or that the laws of physics have been suspended for this product.  One technique is to state a physical property of all reputable products in a given line as a unique attribute of their systems.  Mike’s favorite in the small wind industry is to refer to a system as “bird friendly”.  All small wind systems are “bird friendly”, but the Shyster will claim that moniker as their own special attribute.  These traits are not limited to the wind industry. 

The rest of the conference featured an array of government technical folks, mostly from the Navy and Marine Corps.  One of the successes touted by the PM, Expeditionary Power, Mike Gallagher and by the Deputy Director of the Marine Expeditionary Energy Office, Gayle von Eckartsberg, was a program called

Ground Renewable Expeditionary Energy System (GREENS).  GREENS was the system developed out of an ExFOB charette that was taken to Afghanistan by India Company, 3/5 Marines.  It was so successful that the Commandant directed that it be turned into a program of record and issued, as appropriate, to the rest of the Corps.  From experimental systems in January 2011 to program of record in November 2011 has to be some kind of a record.  In contrast, the Army announced that the ICD written  in 2010 could be approved in the next 30 days.  This means that sometime this year, the Army might have a CDD which could provide the requirements that the Acquisition community requires to actually produce systems. 

I asked Gayle V and Mike Gallagher how they pulled off the astounding feat of transitioning GREENS so fast.  I got an immediate response. The short answer was that GREENS was in Mike’s acquisition pipeline previously and was accelerated by an Urgent Statement of Need (USON) received in May 2011.  “Having already been designated as an Abbreviated Acquisition Program, program efforts and documentation had already been tailored.  The USON effectively just compressed what should have been a 24 month period to a six month period of time to get systems into theater.  All programmatic efforts, documentation, and reviews required still had to take place, but on a much compressed timeline”.  Lots of hard works was required to do things like reprogram funds in the year of execution, accelerate tests, verify equipment status and a thousand other details necessary.  As Mike Gallagher noted, “Working them all in parallel, vice serial execution and review, was truly awe-inspiring.” Guess it helps when the Commandant says, “Make it so”. 

 If the acquisition world recognizes where the operational world is going, they can get a jump on meeting urgent needs swiftly.  You can wait on a Requirement for JCIDS or meet the need.   I hope DOD is encouraging that kind of risk taking in this current, rarified budgetary atmosphere.

One final point for the folks that hold these conferences.  If you are going to charge hundreds of dollars to vendors to attend, you need to make sure the right players are there and the right topics are discussed.  At the Net Zero Installation conference in Chicago, the tract on energy conservation was eliminated.  Really? The key to energy security is reducing requirements and they drop that?  At the TPSS, focused on Operational Energy, there was no one from Sharon Burke’s office, no one from PM, MEP and no one from the Rapid Equipping Force.   Those are enormous gaps.  The excuse for having these things in DC is to make it cheaper for the Government to attend.  And in most of the offices I just mentioned, a third stringer is fine (in fact usually better than their heavily scripted bosses).  Oh, by the way.  The REF and Arizona State are hosting a “Net Zero at the Tactical Edge Conference” next month.  Details are here.   Asst. Secretary of Defense for Operational Energy Plans and Programs, REF Director, PM-MEP and Logistics Innovation Agency will all attend and present.  And it’s only a hundred bucks!  See you there.  Dan Nolan

The Normally Strong Grid's Self Inflicted Wounds

So only a few days ago you saw a post here about grid lessons from Hurricane Irene. Now we're back with another major grid event and I'm not sure what to call it other than the recent Arizona, San Diego and Mexico outage ... SanMexiZona outage perhaps?

Investigations are still being conducted, but what do we know so far? Well, a transmission maintenance issue impacted a substation in Arizona, and then:

• Cascading failure reached into California and Mexico, knocking power out to millions
• And caused 2 nuclear facilities to shut down
• Navy and Marine bases turn to back-up diesel generators and kept non-essential personnel home
• And many other types of trouble you'd expect from a black out in a large US city ensued, driving cost estimates into the hundreds of millions.

It's weird. In some ways the grid is a beast, capable of absorbing the worst insults and continuing operations largely unaffected. It virtually scoffs at earthquakes, raging fires, hurricanes, tornadoes ... and across the Pacific, even Godzilla stomping out of Tokyo Bay once in a while. Sure, some outages occur in the areas where equipment is destroyed. But the grid is usually a master of defense and containment.

But then a little thing happens during routine maintenance and a big chunk of the grid unexpectedly swoons. Amory Lovins and others on the 2008 DoD Science Board (DSB) task force on Energy identified the US grid as brittle and a threat to CONUS military readiness. Here's Lovins in 2010:

The US electrical grid ... is very capital-intensive, complex, technologically unforgiving, usually reliable, but inherently brittle. It is responsible for 98–99 percent of U.S. power failures, and occasionally blacking out large areas within seconds—because the grid requires exact synchrony across subcontinental areas … and can be interrupted by a lightning bolt, rifle bullet, malicious computer program, untrimmed branch, or errant squirrel.

Seems like some of the worst behaviors we see in the grid are avoidable. In addition to the many other benefits we often describe to regulators and general public with the Smart Grid build out, improvements to reliability have got to be high on the list, if not #1.

Image credit: KUSI News San Diego
(Cross-posted from the Smart Grid Security Blog)

Transparency in the DOD Energy Effort: Zoomies Set the Standard

The Air Force just concluded their Renewable Energy Symposium at Ventana Canyon, Tucson, Arizona. Over the course of the two day discussion, the group discussed Corporate Energy, Congressional Energy Perspective (from Rep. Giffords’ office), industry trends and technology, technology, technology. For those of you, like me, who did not attend, the AF has made most of the information available. The same day as the conference closed. Very impressive. As a former information operator I understand the impact of timely information. One way to tamp down uncertainty is to provide knowledge as quickly and as succinctly as possible.

The Air Force, specifically, the Air Force Civil Engineering Support Agency, had the website up and the information out within hours of COL David Uselman and COL Patrick Kumashiro’s closing remarks. In a market place where information has been slow to be shared (or created), the USAF has set the standard in transparency. As far as the substance, that will take a little time to review.

The next opportunity to excel will be the Air Force & Army Energy Forum 19-20 July in DC. Again, for those who are not able to attend but have questions you would like asked, please add them to the comment section and I will take them with me. All in good taste, of course! Dan Nolan

Navy Vets in Key Energy Security Positions: NERC CISO

This post comes to you via the DOD Energy Blog's sister site, the Smart Grid Security Blog.

--------------------------------------

Just so you know, there was a shift in the force recently as Michael Assante stepped down from the CISO position and NERC sought an able replacement. This post (and this NERC announcement) informs you that, happily, the new CISO has been installed and we're back on track.

Good thing too, cause the electricity generating, transmitting (if not yet, distributing) industry is being pulled in two seemingly opposing directions: on one hand, the desire the demonstrate compliance with CIPS 002-009; while on the other, high anxiety that:

• CIPS 010 and 011 are much different than 002-009 (see summary from James Holler here) and unless they're phased in VERY gradually, that means trouble
• The new CIPS are based largely on security control standards like those in NIST SP 800-53 "Recommended Security Controls for Federal Information Systems and Organizations." Again, a whole different enchilada in terms of detail than what's in 002-009
• This will force huge changes (and likely, commensurate new expenses) for utilities trying make the best of limited human resources, time and funds

Maybe there's a loose connection of sorts here. I recall that the SP 800-53 controls are referenced in DOD 8500.x security policies (see DITSCAP and DIACAP). Michael Assante was a Naval intel officer and seems to me he did a great job during his tenure at NERC. Now Mark Weatherford, recently the CISO for the states of California and Colorado, also comes to the office with a solid Navy pedigree. From the NERC announcement on him:

Weatherford began his career as a Naval Cryptologic Officer, where he led the Navy’s Computer Network Defense operations and the Naval Computer Incident Response Team. Weatherford has a bachelor’s degree from the University of Arizona and a master’s degree from the Naval Postgraduate School.

One thing we've seen in our talks with CISOs and other security professionals in the utilities and ISO/RTOs is the prevalence of prior military (though not always Naval) experience, including folks who did crypto and other cyber security related jobs when they were slightly less "seasoned."

Well, as you'll see from Holler's summary, if not your own hands-on experience in the compliance trenches, it may well be a rough ride moving from the relatively light-weight original CIPS, which really just went fully live on 1 Jan of this year, to the industrial strength 010 and 011. I for one am pulling for Mark to do a great job and wish him every success. We all have a job to do, but his is a key role in this.

DOD Solar Facilities Build Out Beginning in Sunny Places

Its solar wall notwithstanding, Alaska's Elmendorf AFB going to have to wait for large scale solar thermal or photovoltaics. Going well beyond current LEED sustainability standards, the Navy is pushing the envelope on net zero buildings and communities in Hawaii. Follow this DOE link to read about a significant DOD housing implementation called Forest City in Honolulu.

As for the Air Force, not one to rest on its 14 MW Nevada/Nellis AFB laurels, up next is 6 more MWs in Arizona at Davis-Monthan AFB.

Meanwhile, as you should know by now, the Army is making progress on its whopper (500 MW - 1 GW) of a solar deployment in the Mojave desert at Fort Irwin in CA.

Photo Credit: DOE EERE

DOD Beginning to See the Light

Beginning, that is, if you don't count the 14 MW installation at Nellis AFB in Nevada which has now been in place a couple of years. I'm sure there are more, but here are two press releases forwarded to me last week, announcing another ambitious solar deployment by the Air Force and a 1 GW (potential) whopper by the Army. Like the Nellis project before them, the financing is every bit as innovative as the technology. First, here's the Air Force one:

TUCSON, Ariz.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Housing developer Actus Lend Lease, SolarCity®, Tucson Electric Power (TEP), and financing parties National Bank of Arizona and U.S. Bancorp Community Development Corporation (USBCDC) are working to create one of the nation’s largest distributed, community-wide solar power systems at Soaring Heights Communities at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base. Upon completion, the community is expected to be the largest solar-powered community in the continental U.S. The solar systems are expected to produce more than 10 million kilowatt hours of electricity annually—sufficient to provide an estimated 75 percent of the residents’ energy use next year—and could eventually offset 100 percent of Soaring Heights Communities’ electricity use.

Full Air Force Press Release here. And now for the Army:

LOS ANGELES, Oct 15 (Reuters) - The U.S. military is tackling a new mission in the field of alternative energy, moving to power up a 500-megawatt solar facility at Fort Irwin's sprawling desert complex in California.The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers tapped ACCIONA Solar Power, a unit of Spain's Acciona SA (ANA.MC), and Clark Energy Group to develop the project, which launched its first phase on Thursday. The project, located at the Army's largest training range in California's Mojave Desert, could grow as large as 1 gigawatt in the future.

Full Army Press Release here. Not one to rest on its geothermal laurels (see: China Lake), I'm sure the Navy has a solar response up its sleeves. Stay tuned.

Photo Credit: Mike Baird at Flickr

DOD Renewables Deployment Update

IEEE provides a nice round-up of current and near-future DOD renewables deployments.  At 11.9% today, DOD is working overtime to reach its goal of 25% renewable power by 2025. Here's a few of them for you (I've listed capacities when provided):

• 270 MWs of geothermal @ China Lake, California (now) 
  
• 14 MWs of solar @ Nellis AFB, Nevada (now)
  
• 3.8 MWs of wind @ Guantanamo Bay, Cuba (now)
  
• 30 MWs of geothermal @ Naval Air Station Fallon, Nevada (coming)
• Geothermal @ Hawthorne Army Depot, Nevada (coming)
• Wind @ Naval Air Station Corpus Christi, Texas (coming)
• 8+ MWs of solar, biomass, geothermal @ McGuire AFB, New Jersey (coming)
  
• Solar and wind @ Fort Huachuca, Arizona (now)
• Solar @ Fort Drum, New York (now)

Lots of activity, lots of opportunity. In the face of tremendous budget pressures, renewables projects have to pay for themselves, and quickly. Fortunately, for most of these, when coupled with renewables incentives in certain states, that's exactly what's happening.