Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense

(Energy, Installations, and Environment)

Department of Defense

Annual Energy Management Report

Fiscal Year 2015

June 2016

COST ESTIMATE

The estimated cost of this report for the Department of Defense is approximately $314,000 

in Fiscal Years 2015‒2016. This includes $246,000 in expenses and $68,000 in DoD labor.

Cost estimate generated on March 30, 2016 / RefID: 3-4DBD001

P00000019314

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 1 of 151
2

(This page is intentionally left blank)

P00000019315

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 2 of 151
3

Table of Contents

1. Introduction ..........................................................................................................................................7

2. Installation Energy Program Management.........................................................................................10

The Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (Installation Energy) (ODASD(IE)), 

Installation Energy Program...............................................................................................................11

Army Installation Energy Program......................................................................................................11

Department of the Navy (DON) Installation Energy Program ............................................................12

Air Force Installation Energy Program................................................................................................13

Defense Agencies Installation Energy Program..................................................................................15

3. DoD’s Progress in Reducing Energy Demand......................................................................................16

Installation Energy Demand Overview................................................................................................17

Energy Intensity ..................................................................................................................................18

Army...............................................................................................................................................23

DON................................................................................................................................................24

Air Force.........................................................................................................................................25

Defense Agencies...........................................................................................................................26

Potable Water Consumption and Intensity.........................................................................................27

Army...............................................................................................................................................28

DON................................................................................................................................................28

Air Force.........................................................................................................................................29

Defense Agencies...........................................................................................................................29

Industrial, Landscaping, and Agricultural Water Consumption..........................................................30

Non-Tactical Fleet Vehicle Petroleum Consumption...........................................................................31

Army...............................................................................................................................................32

DON................................................................................................................................................32

Air Force.........................................................................................................................................32

Defense Agencies...........................................................................................................................33

4. Increasing DoD’s Supply of Renewable Energy...................................................................................34

DoD Renewable Energy Performance.................................................................................................35

Army...............................................................................................................................................40

DON................................................................................................................................................40

Air Force.........................................................................................................................................41

Defense Agencies...........................................................................................................................42

P00000019316

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 3 of 151
4

5. Enhancing Energy Resilience...............................................................................................................44

Reporting Requirements.....................................................................................................................45

Addressing Key Near-Term Concerns..................................................................................................49

Energy Resilience Initiatives...........................................................................................................49

Strategic Partnerships....................................................................................................................49

Addressing Key Long-Term Concerns..................................................................................................50

Overview of Installation Energy Test Bed Efforts..........................................................................50

Service Initiatives ................................................................................................................................53

Army...............................................................................................................................................53

DON................................................................................................................................................54

Air Force.........................................................................................................................................55

6. Data Management and Metering .......................................................................................................57

Progress Toward Energy Metering Goals ...........................................................................................57

Army...............................................................................................................................................59

DON................................................................................................................................................59

Air Force.........................................................................................................................................61

Defense Agencies...........................................................................................................................62

7. Funding Energy Projects......................................................................................................................64

Appropriation Funded Energy Projects...............................................................................................65

Army...............................................................................................................................................66

DON................................................................................................................................................67

Air Force.........................................................................................................................................68

Energy Projects Financed Through Third-Party Mechanisms .............................................................69

Army...............................................................................................................................................70

DON................................................................................................................................................71

Air Force.........................................................................................................................................71

8. Federal Building Energy Efficiency Standards.....................................................................................72

DoD’s Progress in Meeting Sustainable Building Standards...............................................................73

DoD’s Progress Toward Meeting American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning 

Engineers (ASHRAE) 90.1 Standards...................................................................................................73

Army...............................................................................................................................................73

DON................................................................................................................................................74

Air Force.........................................................................................................................................75

P00000019317

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 4 of 151
5

Appendix A - List of Energy Acronyms...................................................................................................... A-1

Appendix B - Compliance Matrix ...............................................................................................................B-1

Appendix C - Energy Performance Master Plan.........................................................................................C-1

Appendix D - DoD Energy Performance Summary.................................................................................... D-1

Appendix E - FY 2015 Energy Intensity by Installation...............................................................................E-1

Appendix F - FY 2015 List of Energy Projects Funded by Appropriations and List of Non-Governmental 

Third-Party Funded Energy Projects..........................................................................................................F-1

Appendix G - Contact Information............................................................................................................ G-1

Appendix H - References........................................................................................................................... H-1

P00000019318

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 5 of 151
6

(This page is intentionally left blank)

P00000019319

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 6 of 151
7

1. Introduction

The Department of Defense energy program’s chief priority is supporting the ability to carry out the 

mission. Both at installations and in combat platforms, energy is a critical and vulnerable resource 

across the full range of military operations. Energy availability and resilience define the capabilities of 

weapons platforms, facilities, and equipment, while remaining a substantial expense that competes with 

other investments in both manpower and equipment. These issues compel DoD to pursue cost-effective 

measures that increase energy performance and reduce our cost of operations.

At its core, DoD’s energy program integrates three 

pillars (Figure 1-1):

• Expand Supply

• Reduce Demand

• Adapt Future Forces and Technology

DoD’s fixed installations are critical components of our 

ability to fight and win wars, accounting for nearly

30 percent of DoD’s total energy use. Our Warfighters 

cannot do their jobs without bases from which to fight, 

train, or live when they are not deployed. Simply put, 

installations support and ensure our military readiness.

An important opportunity for the Department to improve 

its energy resilience exists on its fixed installations as the Department manages over 500 installations 

worldwide, comprising nearly 300,000 buildings. The keys to transforming installation energy are 

investments in energy-efficient facilities and cost-effective energy sources for those facilities—including 

alternative energy sources—as well as the promotion of non-materiel and behavior-based solutions.

Through such initiatives, the Department can help ensure the energy resilience and reliability of a large 

percentage of the energy it manages and treat installation energy as a force multiplier in the support of 

military readiness. 

Augmenting these principles, comprehensive measurement of installation energy helps the Department 

maintain an aggressive pace toward its larger energy objectives. To that end, this Annual Energy 

Management Report (AEMR) details the Department’s FY 2015 performance toward its objectives of 

energy supply expansion, energy efficiency and demand reduction, and the adaption of future forces 

and advanced technologies on fixed installations. It also details its activities addressing climate change 

impacts to its energy portfolio, including enhancing energy resilience.

Figure 1-1: Defense Energy Approach

P00000019320

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 7 of 151
8

DoD reports on its installation energy performance in the FY 2015 AEMR.1

 Table 1-1 summarizes the 

Department’s progress toward its FY 2015 energy goals, while Appendix D presents the Department’s 

energy-related performance metrics in greater detail. As shown, although DoD fell short of its FY 2015 

goals for energy intensity reduction and renewable energy, it far exceeded its goals for potable water 

intensity and petroleum consumption reduction. 

Table 1-1: FY 2015 DoD Progress Toward Installation Energy and Water Goals2

 

1 This report includes the installation energy activities of the Air Force, Army, Navy, and Marine Corps, and the following 

Defense Agencies: Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA); Defense Commissary Agency (DeCA); Defense Finance and 

Accounting Service (DFAS); Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA); Defense Logistics Agency (DLA); Missile Defense Agency (MDA); 

National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA); National Reconnaissance Office (NRO); National Security Agency (NSA); and 

Washington Headquarters Services (WHS).

2 Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA), Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct), United States Code (U.S.C.), and 

Executive Order (EO).

P00000019321

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 8 of 151
9

The FY 2015 AEMR is compiled based upon the following mandates (Appendix B):

• Section 548 of the National Energy Conservation Policy Act (NECPA) of 1978 (title 42, United 

States Code, section 8258 [42 U.S.C. §8258]), which requires Federal agencies to describe their 

energy management activities; 

• 10 U.S.C. §2924, which requires DoD to submit to Congress an AEMR describing its installation 

energy activities; and

• 10 U.S.C. §2911, which requires DoD to establish energy performance goals for transportation 

systems, support systems, utilities, and infrastructure and facilities.

DoD distinguishes installation energy from operational energy. Whereas installation energy includes 

energy needed to power fixed installations and enduring locations as well as non-tactical vehicles 

(NTVs), operational energy is the energy required for training, moving, and sustaining military forces and 

weapons platforms for military operations—including energy used by tactical power systems and 

generators at non-enduring locations.

The remainder of this report discusses DoD’s efforts related to managing its installation energy program, 

reducing energy demand, increasing the supply of renewable energy, enhancing energy resilience, 

managing energy data and metering, funding energy projects, and reporting on Federal building energy 

standards.

P00000019322

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 9 of 151
10

(This page is intentionally left blank)

P00000019323

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 10 of 151
11

Figure 2-2: Army Installation Energy Governance Structure

Figure 2-1: Installation 

Energy Organization Chart

2. Installation Energy Program Management

The Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (Installation 

Energy) (ODASD(IE)), Installation Energy Program

The ODASD(IE) is responsible for overseeing the Department’s 

Installation Energy Program, its progress toward achieving 

installation energy goals, and achieving mission assurance in a costeffective manner. The ODASD(IE) reports to the Office of the 

Assistant Secretary of Defense (Energy, Installations and 

Environment) (OASD(EI&E)) and is responsible for issuing installation 

energy policy and guidance to DoD Components; coordinating DoD 

installation energy strategies; overseeing energy programs (e.g., 

energy efficiency, distributed and renewable energy, and energy 

resilience); engaging with the Military Services, Defense Agencies, 

and other stakeholders. The ODASD(IE) coordinates all 

congressional reports related to installation energy. Figure 2-1 

illustrates the organizational structure related to the ODASD(IE) and 

OASD(EI&E). The following sections describe the Defense 

Components’ installation energy programs.

Army Installation Energy Program

The Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for Energy and Sustainability (DASA(E&S)) is the Senior 

Energy Official for the Army. The Army Energy Team consists of the Office of the Assistant Secretary of 

the Army for Installations, Energy and Environment (OASA(IE&E)), Office of the Assistant Chief of Staff 

for Installation Management (OACSIM) and the Installation Management Command (IMCOM), Army 

National Guard (ARNG), U.S. Army Reserve (USAR), and Army Materiel Command (AMC), in 

collaboration with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Office of the Assistant Secretary of the 

Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology (OASA(ALT)), the Army Staff, other Army Offices and

Commands.

P00000019324

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 11 of 151
12

The Army’s Senior Energy and Sustainability Council (SESC) functions as the overall governance of the 

Army’s energy management efforts and provides strategic direction to integrate energy and water 

sustainability initiatives into Army plans and policies to meet Army’s missions and objectives. These 

initiatives include matters of energy and water resilience, energy and fuel efficiencies, fossil fuel 

consumption and greenhouse gas (GHG) reductions, rightsizing and downsizing of the NTV fleet, water 

efficiency and conservation, waste minimization, procurement, and high-performance sustainable 

buildings. 

Under the direction of the SESC, the Army published its Energy Security and Sustainability (ES2

) Strategy 

in May 2015. ES2 is a roadmap to foster a more adaptable and resilient force that is prepared for a 

future defined by complexity, uncertainty, adversity, and rapid change. ES2 is organized around a 

central theme that recognizes improved energy security and resilience ensure mission readiness. 

Through the ES2 goals, the Army is committed to long-term efforts that build and sustain a resilient force 

and secure resources for our installations at home and abroad.

Department of the Navy (DON) Installation Energy Program

The Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Energy, Installations, and Environment (ASN (EI&E)) is the 

designated senior DON official for energy, responsible for formulating Department-wide policies, 

procedures, advocacy and strategic plans, as well as overseeing all DON functions and programs related 

to energy. The Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Energy (DASN (Energy)) reports to ASN (EI&E) 

and is the Chairman of the DON Shore Energy Policy Board. The Office of the Chief of Naval Operations 

(CNO) Shore Installation Management Division (OPNAV-N46) is responsible for developing policy and 

programming resources for the Navy’s Installation Energy Program. OPNAV N46 also ensures 

compliance with DON shore energy goals. The Commander, Navy Installations Command (CNIC) is 

responsible for current and future shore energy requirements across warfare enterprises. CNIC N441 is 

the energy branch within the Facilities Division (N44) of the Facilities and Environmental Department, 

N4. CNIC N441 is responsible for developing and integrating shore energy requirements across the 

Shore Enterprise.

The Deputy Commandant for Installations and Logistics (DC I&L) is responsible for establishing energy 

and water management policy for Marine Corps installations per direction from the Commandant to 

comply with Federally-mandated requirements. The Assistant Deputy Commandant for Installations 

and Logistics (Facilities) serves as the single point of contact responsible for program management and 

resourcing. The Commander, Marine Corps Installations Command (MCICOM) oversees program 

planning and execution. Direct support is provided by the Director, Facilities (MCICOM GF). The Energy 

and Facility Operations Section (MCICOM GF-1) serves as the Marine Corps Installations Energy 

Program Manager.

P00000019325

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 12 of 151
13

Figure 2-3: DON Installation Energy Governance Structure

The Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC) provides facilities engineering support to the Navy 

and Marine Corps. The Deputy Commander for Public Works at NAVFAC Headquarters (HQ) serves as 

the NAVFAC Energy Officer and oversees the development of relevant energy guidance, standards, 

processes, and internal policy to NAVFAC. 

Air Force Installation Energy Program

The Air Force Energy Team comprises five entities that work together to meet the Service-wide energy 

priorities to improve resiliency, reduce demand, assure supply, and foster an energy aware culture. 

• HQ U.S. Air Force (HAF): Provides the policy, guidance, oversight, and resources to ensure an 

effective strategy is employed at all levels.

• Major Commands (MAJCOMs): Develop plans to support or supplement Air Force goals and 

strategies, execute programs, evaluate energy usage of subordinate units, and recognize the 

most successful units and energy practices.

• Air Force Civil Engineer Center (AFCEC): Advises HAF and provides assistance to the MAJCOMs 

and installations by developing plans and strategies to meet mandated energy goals. Manages 

and facilitates the execution of energy programs as the Project Program Management Office for 

installation facility energy and water conservation. Establishes outgrant Enhanced Use Lease 

(EUL) implementation guidelines and resolves program issues. Advocates use of Air Force and 

DoD resources to fund outgrant project development.

P00000019326

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 13 of 151
14

• Installations: Develop plans to support or supplement Air Force and MAJCOM goals/strategies.

Execute, measure, and evaluate the base energy usage of those plans, and nominate their most 

successful people and units for energy awards.

• Installation Energy Manager: Position required by section 543 of the NECPA (42 U.S.C. § 8253). 

The scope of duties includes, but is not limited to, responsibility and oversight for the 

installation’s Energy Management Plan, energy awareness, education and training, audits, utility 

billing, and energy and water consumption reporting.

The Air Force energy governance structure (Figure 2-4) is divided into three levels and includes the 

Energy Council, Energy Integration Board, Colonels’ Action Group, and Steering Groups. This structure is 

mandated by Air Force Policy Directive (AFPD) 90-17, Energy Management, November 29, 2011. 

Figure 2-4: Air Force Energy Governance Structure

The Air Force Energy Council provides global oversight to solve the complex energy challenges facing the 

Air Force. It acts as a deliberative body responsible for developing Air Force energy strategies,

monitoring overall attainment of those strategies and priorities, endorsing requirements, reviewing 

current Air Force energy programs, and directing corrective actions when goals and objectives are not 

met. To ensure the Air Force is addressing the energy strategies and priorities, the Energy Council 

reviews and prioritizes all initiatives prior to submittal to the Air Force Corporate Structure for funding 

decisions. The Energy Council helps garner Air Force corporate structure approval for proposed energy 

investments that will contribute to achieving Air Force energy goals.

The Council’s scope extends to all energy acquisition, use, and conservation issues within the Air Force.

This includes initiatives related, but not limited to reducing aviation, ground motor vehicle, and 

equipment fuel consumption; conserving energy use at all Air Force properties, including forward 

operating bases; developing alternative sources of energy and fuel; and identifying research and 

development opportunities.

Reporting to the Energy Council is the Integration Board, which is responsible for aligning investments to 

goals and objectives across the Air Force, including integrating and balancing energy investments.

P00000019327

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 14 of 151
15

The Energy Council and the Integration Board are directly supported by the Energy Colonels’ Action 

Group. The Colonels’ Action Group serves as the working group and is in place to disseminate 

information, track efforts, and provide a venue for Energy Steering Group (ESG) representatives to raise 

any issues that require collaboration.

Issues are addressed by the five ESGs. The steering groups are responsible for developing energy goals, 

objectives, metrics, plans, and policies, as well as identifying energy initiatives and investments 

necessary to meet the Air Force energy goals.

The HAF Steering Group Chairs provide policy, guidance, and lead functional support to the MAJCOM 

Champions. The Chairs help garner Air Force corporate structure approval for energy investments and 

efficiency savings. The MAJCOM Champions are responsible for leading efforts, including coordinating 

with other MAJCOMs, to meet energy requirements, including developing specific energy objectives, 

metrics, and requirements.

Defense Agencies Installation Energy Program

The Defense Agencies continue to develop and enhance their Installation Energy Management Program.

Each agency has a designated Senior Energy Official to administer their respective programs (Table 2-1).

Table 2-1: Defense Agencies Senior Energy Officials

The Intelligence Community (IC), in particular, has adopted a community-wide approach to maximizing 

energy and greening opportunities. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence has established an 

IC Energy Management Working Group composed of individuals with the subject matter expertise and 

authority to speak for the agency they represent.

P00000019328

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 15 of 151
16

(This page is intentionally left blank)

P00000019329

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 16 of 151
17

3. DoD’s Progress in Reducing Energy Demand

The Department is reducing its demand of installation energy by investing in efficiency and conservation 

projects on its installations. DoD continues to reduce energy costs and maximize payback in order to 

have the best return on investment with the majority of DoD investments being utilized for sustainment 

and recapitalization projects. Such projects typically involve retrofits to incorporate improved lighting;

high-efficiency heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems; double-pane windows; energy 

management control systems; and new roofs.

In addition to using appropriated funding to improve efficiency—both in the Components' own budget 

and the DoD-wide Energy Conservation Investment Program (ECIP)—DoD Components are leveraging 

private capital through the use of performance-based contracts to improve the energy efficiency of 

existing buildings. In 2011, the President issued a memorandum calling on the Federal Government to 

initiate $2 billion worth of performance-based contracts. In 2014, the President extended the goal to 

$4 billion by December 2016, of which DoD is responsible for $2.2 billion. As of January 15, 2016, the 

Department has awarded 152 projects worth over $1.29 billion.

Installation Energy Demand Overview

This section describes the scope of the Department’s installation energy demand in terms of cost and 

consumption. DoD is the single largest consuming entity in the United States, with its overall energy 

usage comparable to the state of Oregon’s annual commercial consumption.

3

 DoD operational and 

installation energy represent approximately 80 percent of total Federal energy consumption.

Installation energy is nearly five times the total energy consumption of the next closest Federal agency 

(U.S. Postal Service).4

In FY 2015, installation energy comprised approximately 22 percent of total Federal energy 

consumption.5 The Department’s FY 2015 installation energy consumption amounted to 1.1 percent of 

the total U.S. commercial sector’s energy consumption.6

 The Department’s total energy bill was $16.7 

billion. DoD spent $3.9 billion on installation energy, which included $3.7 billion to power, heat, and 

cool buildings and $0.2 billion to supply fuel to the fleet of NTVs. Installation energy represented 23

percent of the Department’s total energy expenditures. DoD consumed 211,095 billion British thermal 

units (BBtus) of installation energy, which represented 29 percent of the Department’s total energy 

 3

Energy Information Administration (EIA), U.S. States, State Profiles and Energy Estimates [online source] (Washington, D.C. 

2011, accessed March 9, 2016), available from http://www.eia.gov/state/ 4

EIA, Annual Energy Review, Table 1.11 U.S. Government Energy Consumption by Agency, FY 1975-2011 [online source] 

(Washington, D.C. September 27, 2012, accessed March 9, 2016), available from 

http://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/annual/showtext.cfm?t=ptb0111 5 EIA, Annual Energy Review 2011: Energy Consumption by Sector and Source [online source] (Washington, D.C. , 2011, 

accessed March 9, 2016), available from http://www.eia.gov/oiaf/aeo/tablebrowser/#release=EARLY2012&subject=0-

EARLY2012&table=2-EARLY2012®ion=1-0&cases=full2011-d020911a,early2012-d121011b 6

EIA, Annual Energy Outlook 2015, Energy Consumption by Sector and Source [online source] (Washington, D.C. 2015 accessed 

March 9, 2016), available on the internet at http://www.eia.gov/oiaf/aeo/tablebrowser/#release=AEO2014&subject=0-

AEO2014&table=2-AEO2014®ion=1-0&cases=ref2014-d102413a

P00000019330

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 17 of 151
18

consumption. Of that, DoD consumed 202,075 BBtus in buildings (stationary combustion) and 9,021 

BBtus in non-tactical fleet vehicles (mobile combustion). The Army is the largest consumer of 

installation energy, followed by the Air Force and DON (Figure 3-1).

Figure 3-1: DoD FY 2015 Installation Energy Consumption and Cost

Electricity and natural gas accounted for over 83 percent of DoD installation energy consumption. The 

remaining portion of installation energy consumption includes fuel oil, coal, and liquefied petroleum gas 

(LPG) (Figure 3-2). DoD’s installation energy consumption mix mirrors that of the U.S. commercial 

sector, where natural gas and electricity dominate the supply mix. 

Figure 3-2: DoD Installation Energy FY 2015 and U.S Commercial Sector Stationary Combustion Fuels by Type7

Energy Intensity

DoD measures energy intensity in Btus per gross square foot (GSF) of facility space.8 Section 543 of the 

NECPA mandates a 3.0 percent annual reduction in energy intensity relative to a baseline year (FY 2003) 

or a 30 percent overall reduction from the baseline by FY 2015. The Energy Independence and Security 

Act (EISA) 2007 further distinguishes the two categories of buildings: those subject to the energy 

 7 EIA, 2014 Monthly Commercial Sector Energy Use, Table 2.1c [online source] (Washington, D.C. February 24, 2015 accessed 

March 2, 2015), available on the internet at http://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/ 8

Energy intensity does not include energy consumption from NTVs.

P00000019331

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 18 of 151
19

intensity reduction goal and those that can be excluded.9 This section discusses energy intensity for 

DoD goal-subject buildings. 

In FY 2015, DoD consumed approximately 184,800 BBtus of energy in its goal-subject buildings and 

17,200 BBtus in goal-excluded buildings. Figure 3-3 illustrates recent historical trends in installation 

energy consumption by DoD Components across goal-subject buildings. 

Figure 3-3: FY 2015 Installation Energy Goal Subject Consumption by Military Service

DoD energy intensity has decreased since FY 2003. Figure 3-4 illustrates DoD’s and the Military Services’ 

progress toward the EISA 2007 goal. Despite falling short of the FY 2015 intensity reduction goal of 30

percent, DoD reduced its energy intensity by 19.9 percent from the FY 2003 baseline and improved by 

2.3 percent from FY 2014. While DoD continues to invest in cost-effective energy efficiency and 

conservation measures to improve goal progress, there will be challenges in future reductions. These 

challenges include (1) budget sequestration and delayed appropriations, which lead to a reduction in 

energy efficiency and conservation projects; (2) uncontrollable variables such as weather and 

temperature variability (i.e., heating and cooling degree days10), increasing installation energy use; and 

(3) a greater reliance on conducting missions at fixed installations and enduring locations (e.g., training; 

unmanned aircraft; intelligence, surveillance or reconnaissance missions), leading to an increased 

reliance on energy from fixed installations and enduring locations.

 

9 The criteria evaluated for excluding facilities include impracticability due to energy intensiveness or national security function, 

completed energy management reports, compliance with all energy efficiency requirements, or implementation of all costeffective energy projects in the buildings. This energy intensity section discusses only goal-subject buildings. Source: U.S. DOE, 

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Federal Energy Management Program, Guidelines Establishing Criteria for Excluding 

Buildings [online source] (Washington, D.C., 2006, accessed January 2, 2015), available on the Internet at 

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/femp/pdfs/exclusion_criteria.pdf. 10 Heating and cooling degree days measure the difference between daily average temperature at a location and a baseline 

temperature.

P00000019332

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 19 of 151
20

Figure 3-4: DoD Energy Intensity EISA 2007 Goal Attainment11

Further, DoD has reported its energy intensity progress to the Department of Energy (DOE) since 

FY 1975.12 Since this time, DoD has reduced its energy intensity from 182,153 BBtus in FY 1975 to 

93,963 BBtus in FY 2015 (adjusted for on-site renewables and source energy credits), a DoD energy 

intensity reduction of over 48 percent. Figure 3-5 on the next page illustrates historical trends in DoD 

reductions of energy intensity since FY 1975. These reductions were a result of substantial low- and nocost energy efficiency and conservation measures that impacted behavioral changes or project 

investments such as insulation or lighting upgrades. As these low- and no-cost energy efficiency and 

conservation initiatives continue to diminish, DoD will be challenged to make broad reductions in energy 

intensity. These challenges will become more prevalent as budget reductions continue, and priority is 

given to short-term payback rather than long-term savings. In order to continue to make progress 

toward annual congressional goals, greater focus may be required on more capital-intensive projects 

that yield greater life-cycle savings. 

 11 The DoD trend line accounts for the Defense Agencies. DoD continues to collect Navy and Marine Corps data separately. In FY 

2014, the Navy achieved an intensity reduction of 20.6 percent while the Marine Corps achieved an intensity reduction of 18.7

percent relative to their FY 2003 baseline. 12 DOE, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Federal Energy Management Program, Comprehensive Annual Energy Data 

and Sustainability Performance [online source] (Washington, D.C.,2015, accessed March 2, 2015, available from 

http://ctsedwweb.ee.doe.gov/Annual/Report/TotalSiteDeliveredEnergyConsumptionPerGrossSquareFootByFederalAgencies

ByYear.aspx.

P00000019333

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 20 of 151
21

Figure 3-5: DoD Energy Intensity Progress since FY 1975

Table 3-1 summarizes annual energy intensity reduction progress across the Department from FY 2008 

to FY 2015 as well as FY 2015 reductions from the FY 2003 baseline.

Table 3-1: Energy Intensities across DoD

P00000019334

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 21 of 151
22

In FY 2010, DoD began to track and report energy consumption and square footage at individual 

installations. This has allowed the Department to monitor energy intensity by installation as well as at 

the component level. Appendix E summarizes FY 2015 installation-level data.

The Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives directed the Secretary of Defense to 

report the energy use and energy efficiency projects of the ten largest installations as well as the 

Pentagon. Tables 3-2 and 3-3 address the congressional requirement in House Report 113-473. The 

majority of the installations below reported decreases in intensity from FY 2010 to FY 2015, with an 

average reduction of approximately 11.2 percent.

Table 3-2: 10 Largest GSF Installations Energy Use Intensity (EUI) FY 2010 – FY 2015

P00000019335

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 22 of 151
23

Table 3-3: Audit and Energy Efficiency Project Details of Installations

Army

In FY 2015, the Army reduced its energy intensity by 18

percent from its FY 2003 baseline, a 2.8 percent reduction 

from FY 2014, while continuing its two-year trend in facility 

EUI reduction despite removing 34.5 million square feet of 

Corpus Christi Army Depot

One of the top-performing Army 

installations in terms of reducing energy 

intensity from FY 2014-2015 through 

aggressive energy efficiency programs, 

metering efforts, and a large ESPC award.

P00000019336

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 23 of 151
24

building space. In FY 2015, Army achieved its highest reduction in energy consumption in the history of 

the program. The Army will continue to identify and implement the most cost-effective EUI reductions 

while still maintaining mission readiness. Progress toward this goal must be considered in the context of 

the Army's pressing requirement to reduce costly, excess square footage. 

Of 143 installations reported in the Army’s AEMR submission, 43 (30.1 percent of all installations) are on 

track to meet the energy efficiency goal by achieving at least a 30 percent reduction in EUI since FY

2003. The following are examples of energy efficiency projects in FY 2015:

• Fort Drum, NY: Achieved 100 percent of energy requirement from 60 megawatt (MW) biomass 

plant, successfully reducing garrison’s conventional energy use and lowering associated

installation EUI.

• 88th Regional Support Command, Fort McCoy, WI: Conducted active implementation of HVAC 

night setback program and lighting efficiency projects at multiple facilities to greatly reduce EUI.

• Rock Island Arsenal, IL: Achieved EUI reductions associated with 25 percent lower factory 

electrical use, 38 percent more hydro generation, 12 percent fewer heating degree days, and inprogress Energy Savings Performance Contracts (ESPC) task orders focused on lighting efficiency.

• Virginia ARNG, VA: Pursued aggressive efficiency and renewable energy programs, as well as 

implemented a statewide ESPC investment of $24 million on facility upgrades. Army Energy and 

Utility Program funds further facilitated energy reduction efforts and renewable energy 

production.

DON

In FY 2015, DON reduced its energy intensity by 22 percent, 

a 1.0 percent increase over FY 2014, relative to its FY 2003 

baseline. The Navy and the Marine Corps reduced their 

energy intensity relative to the baseline year by 21.5 percent

and 20.2 percent, respectively. Both the Navy and the 

Marine Corps expect progress to improve in FY 2016 as 

renewable projects developed and procured during FY 2015 

begin coming online. 

In FY 2015, the Navy and Marine Corps invested approximately $222 million on projects targeting 

building-level energy conservation measures (e.g., upgrades to lighting, heating and cooling systems, 

natural gas distribution main upgrades). These investments are expected to help the Navy continue to 

reduce its energy intensity. The following are examples of energy efficiency projects in FY 2015:

• Naval Support Activity (NSA) Crane: NSA Crane and Indiana University signed the NSA Crane 

Educational Partnership Agreement, in which Indiana University students will apply their talents 

toward installation management challenges. An initial project with graduate students from the 

NCBC Gulfport

Naval Construction Battalion Command 

(NCBC) Gulfport received a $50,000 rebate 

check from Mississippi Power through 

participation in their Energy Efficiency 

Program, achieving large energy savings 

through an exterior LED lighting project and 

chiller replacement project.

P00000019337

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 24 of 151
25

School of Public and Environmental Affairs resulted in a study examining energy use and 

applying behavioral science tools designed to reduce energy use.

• Naval Base (NB) Kitsap-Bremerton: A $6.6 million contract was awarded to perform energy 

efficiency measures in 11 buildings on base and the military housing area. Completion of the 

work is expected in May 2016.

• Naval Station (NS) Everett: NS Everett completed a major lighting retrofit for high mast lighting 

using light emitting plasma (LEP) technology. The installation estimated savings of at least 

$16,000 per year on maintenance costs while providing brighter and safer work areas for 

personnel.

• Naval Air Station (NAS) Jacksonville: Using ECIP funding, the Fleet Readiness Center Southeast 

Aircraft Paint and Finishing Hangar is undergoing a renovation to replace old motors with 

premium efficiency motors. These large make-up air fans will be retrofit with variable frequency 

drive fans and are expected to result in significant energy savings. The project also includes the 

implementation of a “smart” control system and the replacement of incandescent lighting with 

explosion-proof LED lighting. Overall, the project is estimated to save almost 31 million Btu

annually and approximately $864,000 in cost per year.

Air Force

In FY 2015, the Air Force reduced energy intensity by 24.3

percent from its FY 2003 baseline, a 2.0 percent increase from 

FY 2014. Both energy consumption and square footage 

decreased in FY 2015 for the Air Force.

Key contributors to consumption reduction consistently 

identified across Air Force installations include (1) realization 

of savings from prior year installation energy savings project investment, (2) energy awareness 

programs, (3) continuing ESPC and Utility Energy Services Contract (UESC) initiatives, and (4) retro/recommissioning facility HVAC systems. The following are examples of energy efficiency projects in FY 

2015:

• Hill AFB, UT: Has six active ESPCs and is in the planning stage of executing a new ESPC containing 

both process and facility improvements in 55 buildings. 

• Grand Forks AFB, ND: Conducted replacement of electrical hot water heaters with natural gas 

hot water heaters for base dormitories, saving 60 percent in energy costs. The base’s high 

pressure sodium street lights are currently being replaced with LED lights with energy cost 

reductions calculated around 60 percent and a payback of less than two years.

• Sheppard AFB, TX: Near completion of a base-wide LED retrofit for street light, parking lot, and 

building mounted exterior fixtures, as well as an interior lighting project currently in 

construction that will contribute to the removal of the remaining magnetic ballasts and T-12 

fixtures on base. A mechanical/HVAC project and a base-wide infrared heating initiative in 

Kadena AB, Japan 

A $58.5M project is underway to upgrade 

the airfield with LED lights. Replacing 

quartz and incandescent lighting with LED 

is expected to reduce consumption by 83% 

and last 40 times longer.

P00000019338

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 25 of 151
26

approximately 18 hangar/warehouse locations was also completed, costing over $9 million total 

and significantly contributing to the installation’s EUI in coming years.

Defense Agencies

In FY 2015, the Defense Agencies continued to pursue opportunities to reduce energy intensity. Some 

highlights of successes are included below.

• WHS recently completed rebuilding of chillers and repairing of water-side economizers utilizing 

river water during winter months to provide free cooling, resulting in huge benefits during FY 

2015 as river water temperatures in January and February were sufficient to offset compressor 

cooling for over two months. This helped decrease monthly electric usage at the Pentagon to 

the lowest point in over five years.

• DFAS executed a feasibility study under a UESC at Carson, CA, and an investment grade audit 

under an ESPC at Bratenahl, OH, that covers 100 percent of DCMA’s reportable facilities, with 

energy and water conservation projects identified and task orders planned for award and 

execution in FY 2016.

• DIA worked with DLA-Energy to execute a task order under DOE’s ESPC program in FY 2015. The 

ESPC will help DIA reduce energy use by an additional 9.0 percent and save $996,000 per year.

P00000019339

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 26 of 151
27

Potable Water Consumption and Intensity 

Executive Order (EO) 13423 requires Federal 

agencies to achieve a 16 percent reduction in 

potable water intensity by FY 2015 compared to a FY 

2007 baseline. EO 13693 extends the reduction goal 

to 36 percent by FY 2025 relative to the FY 2007 

baseline, which will be the specified goal in FY 2016’s AEMR publication. DoD potable water 

consumption has been decreasing since FY 2008. In FY 2015, DoD facilities consumed just over 86 billion 

gallons of potable water (Figure 3-6), with the Military Departments accounting for over 98 percent of 

total DoD potable water consumption. 

Figure 3-6: DoD Potable Water Consumption FY 2008 ‒ FY 2015

DoD’s potable water intensity in FY 2015 was 22.3 percent below its FY 2007 baseline (Figure 3-7), ahead 

of the 16 percent reduction goal.

Figure 3-7: DoD Water Intensity EO 13423 Goal Attainment – FY 2015

Potable Water includes water purchased from a 

utility (water) provider and all fresh water (e.g., 

well and streams) treated and added to the 

domestic (for human consumption) system.

P00000019340

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 27 of 151
28

Army

In FY 2015, Army’s potable water intensity was 26.5 percent below the FY 2007 baseline, a 1.8 percent

regression from FY 2014. Guided by ES2 Strategy, the Army exceeded potable water and industrial, 

landscaping, and agriculture (ILA) water conservation goals in FY 2015. Although water intensity 

increased from FY 2014 to FY 2015, the Army is ahead of schedule to reduce its potable water intensity 

by 26 percent by FY 2020 and is currently 10.5 percent ahead of the FY 2015 target. 

The Army continues to reduce water intensity by detecting and repairing leaks in potable water 

distribution systems. For example, Radford Army Ammunition Plant, VA; Tooele Army Depot, UT; and 

Fort Bragg, NC, have undertaken comprehensive modernizations of their respective water systems. By 

reducing water lost to leaks and supplementing potable water with alternative water, they achieved a 

water savings of 5 million gallons annually. The Army Reserve has achieved similar success, reducing 

multiple categories of water consumption. In FY 2015, the Army Reserve reduced potable water 

intensity by 42 percent and ILA consumption by 25 percent, spearheaded by savings at key installations 

like Fort Buchanan, Puerto Rico. 

DON

In FY 2015, DON’s potable water intensity was 16.9 percent below the FY 2007 baseline, a 1.8 percent

improvement from FY 2014. The Marine Corps improved upon its incredible progress achieved in the 

past three years, exceeding the FY 2020 target ahead of the deadline and reducing potable water 

intensity by 31.1 percent.

The Navy’s potable water intensity was 12.2 percent below its FY 2007 baseline. While the Navy did not 

meet its goal, there were a number of successes at Navy military installations:

• Region Southwest: With California calling for water cutbacks, the Region Southwest Commander 

ordered a reduction of 925 million gallons of water annually by 2020. While Southwest 

installations have already implemented key measures to reduce water consumption, including 

replacement of landscaping with drought-resistant plants and artificial turf, new potential 

projects are being identified.

• NAS Whidbey Island: The installation engaged building managers and Building Energy Monitors 

(BEMs) in efforts to identify, secure, and report water leaks for repair. 

• NAS Lemoore: A funded Environmental Security Technology Certification Program (ESTCP)

project will demonstrate ice pigging technology that can reduce water consumption associated 

with maintaining and improving water distribution systems. While there is limited 

demonstration data for sites in the U.S., ice pigging has been shown to use significantly less 

water than traditional flushing methods and could greatly support the water restrictions issued 

by California during 2015.

DON continues to install low flow fixtures, such as sink aerators, showerheads, toilets, and urinals to 

reduce potable water intensity in its buildings while implementing efforts to manage water. Similar to 

P00000019341

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 28 of 151
29

energy efficiency projects, the Navy selects water projects for their returns on investment. In many 

cases, though, water efficiency improvements are combined with other energy savings projects to 

maximize the economic benefits.

Air Force

In FY 2015, Air Force potable water intensity was 23.4 percent below the FY 2007 baseline, a 1.5 percent

improvement from FY 2014. The Air Force exceeded its FY 2015 goal through leak detection and 

infrastructure repair, fixture replacement and upgrade, irrigation system disconnection, and using nonpotable water sources for ILA water use.

The Air Force will continue to emphasize water conservation awareness through Energy Action Month 

and various other educational and public awareness avenues. Kirtland AFB, NM, has converted many 

turf grass areas to xeriscape and upgraded the primary irrigation controller to a more efficient system. 

Following an AFCEC Asset Visibility Team visit in June 2015, AFCEC is providing funding for a “Just Do It” 

water conservation measure to install aerators on more than 1,100 faucets in 30 buildings. Cape 

Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS) has replaced miles of oversized potable/fire water piping for launch 

operations with new piping that reduces leaks and reduces the amount of flushing required for clean 

drinking water. The water line projects caused an increase in water consumption last year and in early 

FY 2015 due to flushing requirements for new lines, but resulted in a major decrease in overall 

consumption throughout FY 2015 as the projects were completed.

Utilities Privatization (UP) efforts have improved water efficiency through the systematic replacement 

and repair of leaking water lines. AFERS data analysis indicates UP provides, on average, a 28 percent

water consumption reduction when compared to non-privatized systems. In addition, with the award at 

Vandenberg, the new system owner will use a new technology to recycle and reuse over 1 billion gallons 

of water per year in their line flushing operations.

Defense Agencies

In FY 2015, Defense Agencies reduced their potable water intensity by 19.3 percent from the FY 2007 

baseline and continued to pursue opportunities to reduce potable water intensity.

• DeCA installed low-flow bathroom fixtures throughout DIA HQ, increasing reduction an 

additional 10 percent from FY 2014. 

• NGA identified and repaired NGA Campus East’s (NCE) backup water pond piping system, 

optimized NCE’s irrigation system, and increased focus on improving efficiencies, accuracy, and 

management capabilities.

P00000019342

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 29 of 151
30

Industrial, Landscaping, and Agricultural Water Consumption

In FY 2009, EO 13514 established a new water 

reduction goal. The goal requires Federal agencies to 

reduce ILA water consumption by 2 percent annually, 

or 20 percent by FY 2020, relative to an FY 2010 

baseline. This was extended through 2025 in EO 

13693, which is applicable beginning in FY 2016. In FY 2013, the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ)

released guidance for Federal agencies, including DoD, to improve ILA water reporting. In FY 2015, DoD 

established supplemental guidance for Components to accurately establish a baseline, measure, and

estimate ILA water use that sets Components’ baseline year to FY 2016 as opposed to EO 13693’s 

baseline year of 2010.

The Components continue to use standard methods to measure ILA consumption and identify strategies 

to reduce use. Projects such as xeriscaping, converting water-wash filtering systems to a dry filter 

system, and renovating athletic fields with artificial turf are being implemented across the Services. 

Policy changes to promote more efficient irrigation and mirroring local utilities by adopting water 

restrictions have enabled DoD to make strides in reducing consumption. 

ILA Water includes naturally occurring water (e.g., 

lake, well, river water that is not treated [fresh]) used 

in an ILA application. ILA also includes any nonpotable water purchased from a third party.

P00000019343

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 30 of 151
31

Non-Tactical Fleet Vehicle Petroleum Consumption

Section 400FF of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended by EISA Section 142, requires 

Federal agencies to achieve a 20 percent reduction in non-tactical fleet vehicle petroleum consumption 

by FY 2015 compared to a FY 2005 baseline. EO 13693 slightly reorients the goal to meet petroleum 

consumption reduction by reducing per-mile GHG emissions 30 percent by FY 2025 from a FY 2014 

baseline. Fleet vehicle fuel consumption accounts for about 4.0 percent of DoD’s installation energy

consumption and largely consists of gasoline. Diesel fuel represents 22 percent of the fuel mix while 

alternative fuels make up the remaining fleet vehicles’ fuel mix. The Military Services account for 

slightly less than 97 percent of the Department’s petroleum consumption (Figure 3-8).13

Figure 3-8: FY 2015 Fleet Vehicle Petroleum Consumption

In FY 2015, DoD fleet vehicles consumed just over 72 million gallons of gasoline equivalent (GGE), which 

includes gasoline and diesel/biodiesel blends. The mix of petroleum fuel types has remained relatively 

stable over the past seven years, and the use of alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs) has steadily increased.

In FY 2015, 11 percent of the total fleet vehicle consumption was from alternative fuels, up from 10

percent in FY 2014. Alternative fuels include biodiesel, compressed natural gas (CNG), 85 percent

ethanol fuel (E85), and hydrogen. In FY 2015, petroleum consumption was 33.6 percent below the 

baseline (Figure 3-9). DoD continues to pursue replacement of fleet vehicles with more efficient models, 

AFVs, and hybrid electric vehicles to decrease petroleum consumption.

Figure 3-9: DoD Fleet Vehicle Petroleum Consumption, EISA 2007 Goal Attainment

 13 “Other” category includes the Defense Agencies.

P00000019344

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 31 of 151
32

Army

In FY 2015, the Army enhanced sustainability and energy security by exceeding the cumulative fossil fuel 

reduction goal of 20 percent with a 41.1 percent reduction, which also exceeds the mandated FY 2020 

cumulative goal of 30 percent. The Army reduced its NTV fleet by 1,684 vehicles in FY 2015, for a total 

reduction of over 16,400 NTVs since FY11. The Army is optimizing its NTV fleet annually through the 

Vehicle Allocation Methodology (VAM) process. The strategy is to replace passenger vehicles meeting 

age or mileage criteria with hybrid, plug-in hybrid, or zero emission vehicles. Buses and larger trucks are 

being replaced with CNG or LPG vehicles. This strategy facilitates the fossil fuel reduction mandates and 

lowers GHG emissions in the most economical and mission-effective manner. For example, at Fort 

Hood, TX, the Army has fourteen 15 KW Alternating Current charging stations for Ford F-150 hybrid 

electric trucks and five 15 KW Direct Current charging stations for Nissan Leafs. These are vehicle to grid 

(V2G) enabled and can provide demand response, peak shaving, and ancillary services in the wholesale 

market as well as limited emergency backup power to critical functions.

DON

In FY 2015, the Navy and Marine Corps reduced its petroleum consumption by 25.1 percent and 42.9

percent respectively compared to its FY 2005 baseline. The DON is committed to using AFVs, fuelefficient technologies, and fleet optimization to reduce petroleum consumption and GHG emissions. In 

FY 2015, various pilot studies and testing were completed in the areas of plug-in hybrid trucks, car 

sharing, and hydrogen fueling. The Navy completed construction of six solar carports at various 

Installations within the Southwest, Mid-Atlantic, and Southeast regions. Three additional solar carports 

under construction in the Southwest region are scheduled to be completed by the end of FY 2016. 

There were 53 Electric Vehicle Charging Equipment (EVSE) stations installed at various Naval 

Installations: Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling, NB Kitsap-Bremerton, NB Kitsap Bangor, NS Everett, and 

Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) Crane. In addition, approximately 250 charging stations are 

planned to be installed across the Southwest region by end of calendar year 2016. There were also 

three E85 stations completed in 2015 throughout the Mid-Atlantic and Hawaii regions.

With petroleum consumption reduction being a critical component of increased energy resilience, the 

Marine Corps will continue to assess installation transportation requirements in consideration of 

technologies and infrastructure to reduce petroleum use. Part of the Marine Corps’ strategy is to 

optimally place AFVs at installations by considering mission, driving conditions, and fuel availability. 

Another component is to pursue existing alternative vehicle technologies and fuels such as hydrogen 

fuel cell or battery electric vehicles.

Air Force

In FY 2015, the Air Force reduced its petroleum consumption by 14.7 percent compared to its FY 2005 

baseline, falling short of the FY 2015 goal of 20 percent.

P00000019345

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 32 of 151
33

The Air Force gives procurement preference to the most fuel efficient and cost effective AFVs, hybrid 

electric vehicles, and/or plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs) that meet diverse vehicle and mission support 

requirements. Following the Air Force Vehicle Allocation Methodology Plan, the 441 Vehicle Support 

Chain Operation Squadron (VSCOS), in conjunction with the Air Force Life-Cycle Management Center 

(AFLCMC) at Robbins AFB, GA, maximizes the procurement of AFVs while considering mission 

requirements, AFV/PEV availability, and sustainment infrastructure capabilities; with emphasis on 

alternative fuel use, fuel-efficient hybrid technology, and reducing GHG emissions.

In FY 2015, the Air Force successfully deployed an all-electric vehicle fleet at Los Angeles AFB (LAAFB), 

making it the first Federal facility to do so. As of October 2015, LAAFB had converted all 43 vehicle 

authorizations to PEVs including Nissan Leaf sedans, cargo vans, 2T box trucks, Surrey Bus, and hybrid 

light-duty pickup trucks. A majority of the vehicles at LAAFB will be used to demonstrate V2G capability, 

effectively selling energy stored in the vehicle battery to the local utility in exchange for monetary 

compensation. Predicting a general shift toward more efficient and less GHG intensive vehicle 

technologies, the V2G demonstration will test both the viability of electric vehicle use in a non-tactical 

mission, as well as the use of the vehicle as an energy storage resource, providing stability to the grid 

and reducing overall power generation needs. This project represents the largest procurement of 

highway-capable PEVs for a Federal fleet, as well as a first of its kind demonstration of V2G technology 

as a means to bolster grid energy security.

Defense Agencies

In FY 2015, the Defense Agencies accounted for 2.2 percent of DoD fleet petroleum consumption and 

continued to pursue opportunities to reduce NTV consumption.

• NGA ended its U-drive program in FY 2015, completely dispersing the 30 vehicle FY14 U-drive 

fleet and reducing the agency’s petroleum consumption significantly. Additionally, the 

inventory of NGA extended lease vehicles was reduced by five vehicles. 

• NSA continues to lease hybrid and AFVs to achieve the EO 13514 goal. NSA’s current 

non-tactical fleet includes 86 hybrid vehicles and 360 AFVs.

P00000019346

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 33 of 151
34

(This page is intentionally left blank)

P00000019347

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 34 of 151
35

4. Increasing DoD’s Supply of Renewable Energy

In addition to reducing facility energy demand, DoD is increasing the supply of renewable and other 

forms of distributed (on-site) energy on installations. DoD continues to invest in cost effective 

renewable and distributed energy solutions. DoD’s strategy not only considers the cost-effectiveness of 

renewable and distributed energy solutions, but also the energy resilience benefits they could provide 

to our installations.

DoD Renewable Energy Performance

As DoD pursues renewable energy to advance its energy resilience, it also seeks to comply with legal 

requirements to increase renewable energy. The Department is subject to two renewable energy goals 

put forth in 10 U.S.C. § 2911(e) and Section 203 of the Energy Policy Act (EPAct) 2005 (42 U.S.C. 15852). 

Title 10 U.S.C. §2911(e) established a goal for DoD to produce or procure not less than 25 percent of the 

total quantity of facility energy it consumes within its facilities during FY 2025 and each fiscal year 

thereafter from renewable energy sources. DoD’s progress toward the 10 U.S.C. § 2911(e) renewable 

energy goal was 12.4 percent.

The EPAct 2005 goal measures total renewable electricity consumption as a percentage of total facility 

electricity consumption. The EPAct 2005 goal for FY 2015 is 7.5 percent. The 10 U.S.C. §2911(e) goal is 

15 percent by FY 201814 and 25 percent by FY 2025. In his 2012 State of the Union address, the 

President announced DON’s 1 gigawatt (GW) goal. The Army and Air Force subsequently established a 

goal of deploying 1 GW of renewable energy on or near their installations following the President’s 

announcement. Following these announcements, in April 2012, the Executive Office made official that 

DoD had committed to having 3 GWs of renewable energy deployed on its installations by FY 2025 

(Table 4-1). DoD also worked with CEQ, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and DOE to 

establish an implementing guidance for the newly established EO 13693, which was signed by the 

President in March 2015, and includes new renewable electric and clean energy targets. 

Table 4-1: Renewable Energy Goals: Understanding the Differences between EPAct 2005, 10 U.S.C 2911(e),

and the DoD 3 GW Initiative15

 14 This interim renewable energy goal was established as part of the Energy Performance Master Plan in the FY 2011 AEMR. See 

Appendix C for details on DoD energy goals. 15 Each Service has an independent target year for its 1 GW goal attainment.

P00000019348

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 35 of 151
36

In FY 2015, DoD did not achieve the EPAct goal. Renewable electricity consumption subject to the EPAct 

2005 goal accounted for 3.6 percent of DoD’s total electricity consumption. This is 3.9 percent below 

the FY 2015 EPAct 2005 renewable energy goal of 7.5 percent (Figure 4-1).

Figure 4-1: EPAct 2005 Renewable Energy Goal Attainment

DoD continued to make progress in achieving the 10 U.S.C. §2911(e) FY 2018 interim and FY 2025 

renewable energy goal (Figure 4-2).

Figure 4-2: 10 U.S.C §2911(e) Renewable Energy Goal

In FY 2015, purchases of Renewable Energy Credits (RECs) fell to 3.0 percent of the total renewable 

energy contribution toward the 10 U.S.C. §2911(e) goal, down from 3.6 percent in FY 2014. EPAct and 10 

U.S.C §2911(e) treat RECs for goal attainment differently. The EPAct goal requires DoD to retain RECs 

for goal attainment, while retaining RECs is not a requirement to meet the 10 U.S.C. §2911(e) goal.

P00000019349

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 36 of 151
37

RECs are a valuable financial tool 

for the development of largescale renewable energy projects.

RECs are attractive to project 

developers because they can 

lower capital (upfront) costs of 

projects. DoD strives to achieve 

an acceptable tradeoff between 

retaining RECs and taking 

advantage of the full economic 

benefits of RECs to encourage 

project development. DoD does 

not believe that procuring 

unbundled RECs is a desirable 

substitute for renewable energy production that provides energy resilience for its military installations. 

To meet the reporting requirement under title 10, section 2925, Subsection (a) (4), DoD began tracking 

RECs associated with new third-party financed renewable energy projects in FY 2012.

The Department uses various authorities to increase the supply of renewable and other distributed 

(on-site) sources of energy on its installations. DoD uses both appropriated funds and 

non-Governmental (often referred to as ‘third-party’) financing to pursue renewable energy projects.

DoD partners with private entities to enable the development of large-scale renewable (or other 

distributed) energy projects and relies on congressional appropriations to fund cost-effective, smallscale distributed generation projects. The main authorities utilized to pursue third-party financing of 

renewable energy projects are Utility Service Contracts (USCs), Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs), and 

outgrants (Table 4-2). Title 10, sections 2922(a) and 2667 are not limited to renewable energy sources 

and can also be used for non-renewable energy sources such as natural gas and other fuel types. Title 

10, section 2410(q) is limited to renewable energy sources.

P00000019350

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 37 of 151
38

Table 4-2: Funding Mechanisms

In FY 2015, DoD had over 1,390 operational renewable energy projects, compared to approximately 

1,130 reported in FY 2014. The 1,390 projects generated over 10,534 BBtus in FY 2015, which 

represents 82 percent of the total amount of renewable energy produced or procured. From these 

projects and with 26 purchases of renewable energy and RECs, which represent 15 percent and 3.0

percent of the total supply mix, respectively, DoD produced and procured approximately 12,837 BBtus 

of renewable energy in FY 2015. Geothermal electric power is by far the most significant renewable 

energy source in DoD, accounting for over 41 percent of the Department’s renewable energy generation 

portfolio. Biomass makes up about 19 percent of the DoD’s renewable supply mix. Municipal solid 

waste (MSW) is used for both electricity and steam production, and accounts for 15 percent of the 

Department’s renewable energy production. There are 810 solar photovoltaic (PV) systems throughout 

DoD that contribute approximately 13 percent of the total renewable energy produced, followed by 261

ground source heat pump (GSHP) projects contributing approximately 8.0 percent to the supply mix.

Figure 4-3 illustrates DoD’s renewable energy supply mix by technology-type. 

P00000019351

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 38 of 151
39

Figure 4-3: DoD Renewable Energy Supply Mix by Technology Type in FY 2015

The largest renewable energy project in DoD is the Navy’s China Lake geothermal power plant in 

California. The second largest renewable energy project in DoD is a waste-to-energy project at the 

Norfolk Naval Shipyard (NNSY) in Virginia that produces both electricity and steam. The largest project 

to come online in FY15 was the Army’s 17.4 MW solar PV facility at Fort Huachuca. DoD Components 

also continue to implement numerous smaller renewable energy projects. Figure 4-4 shows the 

breakout of renewable energy projects by source of energy. 

Figure 4-4: DoD Renewable Energy Projects in FY 2015

P00000019352

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 39 of 151
40

Army

In FY 2015, the Army did not achieve the EPAct renewable energy goal, consuming 1.8 percent of 

electricity from renewable energy sources. However, the Army increased performance toward the 

2911(e) goal, producing or procuring 12 percent of its electricity from renewable energy sources 

compared to 11.3 percent in FY 2014. 

Although the Army added over 40 MW of renewable energy capacity in FY 2015, the total percentage of 

EPAct eligible renewable electricity decreased from 2.0 percent in FY 2014 to 1.8 percent for FY 2015, 

whereas the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) percent renewable use increased by 0.7 

percent. The reduction stems from a concerted Army effort to move from buying green power to 

deploying generation assets on Army land. Further, 12 renewable energy projects totaling 20 MW 

capacity (mostly wind turbines and large PV arrays) were offline during FY 2015, and additional sites 

experienced decreased production output. The Army is actively working to bring these systems back to 

fully operational status. Despite these challenges, the Army did increase the NDAA percent renewable 

use by 0.7 percent. Sixty-five new projects came online in FY 2015 with a total of 40.4 MW of 

generation capacity, the highest total one-year addition in the history of the Army. Most of these 

projects, though, only produced power for a few months during the reporting period. These projects, 

coupled with over 160 MW of additional projects expected to come online in FY 2016, forecast 

continued success for the Army’s renewable energy programs.

The Army’s approach is to deploy renewable energy projects on Army land vice buying power from 

offsite is comprehensive and consistent with the energy security goals in the ES2 Strategy. The Army’s 

approach includes small-scale projects on rooftops or parking areas, as well as large utility-scale systems 

using Military Construction (MILCON) for new construction and leveraging private financing through 

available Federal and DoD authorities (Table 5.2). In FY 2015, 37.6 MW of renewable energy projects 

were financed through a variety of programs that leverage private financing, such as ESPCs, UESCs, 

PPAs, EULs or General Services Administration (GSA) area-wide utility contracts. Additionally, 2.8 MW of 

renewable electric generation was awarded through the MILCON ECIP. The Army’s investment in all 

programs will result in a surge in large-scale renewable energy projects in FY 2016. The Army is on track 

to meet the 1 GW commitment by the end of FY 2025. One key feature of these projects is that all are 

designed with an on-site power production capacity to enhance energy assurance and resiliency to our 

installations. The Army has no plans to procure off-site green energy without some form of energy 

security enhancement. A good example is Fort Drum where 90 percent of the installation’s energy 

needs are met by an on-site third party installed and operated 60 MW biomass plant.

DON

In FY 2015, the Navy did not achieve the EPAct renewable energy goal, consuming 3.4 percent of 

electricity from renewable energy sources. The Navy’s progress against the EPAct renewable goal was 

1.9 percent, whereas the Marine Corps exceeded the EPAct renewable energy goal by achieving 9.8 

P00000019353

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 40 of 151
41

percent of electricity from renewable energy sources—up from the 9.1 percent achieved in FY 2014 and 

marking the Marine Corps’ third consecutive year of exceeding the goal.

DON’s performance toward the 2911(e) goal significantly increased, producing or procuring 21.8 percent 

of electricity from renewable energy sources. Individually, the Navy produced or procured 25.9 percent 

of its electricity from renewable energy sources, which marks the third time the Navy has achieved the 

25 percent target well ahead of the FY 2025 deadline, whereas the Marine Corps produced or procured 

5.0 percent of electricity from renewable sources. 

DON has made significant strides in achieving the 2911(e) goal due to its focus on large-scale renewable 

energy projects. The main contributors to the DON’s progress toward the 2911(e) goal traditionally 

have been the geothermal plant at Naval Air Weapons Station (NAWS) China Lake in California and the 

MSW plant at NNSY in Virginia. Throughout FY 2015, DON identified, developed, and executed 

significant large-scale renewable projects across Navy and Marine Corps installations in support of 

achieving the DON’s 1 GW goal to supply 50 percent of DON energy demand with alternative sources by 

2020. Through the Renewable Energy Program Office (REPO), DON has approximately 300 MW of new 

renewable generation under contract or signed lease by the end of FY 2015, and the DON had issued 

requests for proposals (RFPs) for another 650-750 MW of renewable energy via utility contracts, PPAs, 

and outgrants. The Marine Corps was the first to execute a cost-effective large-scale project with REPO; 

in February, a real estate outgrant was awarded that resulted in the construction of a 17 MW solar 

facility at Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune. The project broke ground in July 2015 and is expected to be 

online before the end of the calendar year. Other projects under procurement are expected to start 

coming online during FY 2016 and FY 2017.

Air Force

In FY 2015, the Air Force did not achieve the EPAct renewable energy goal, consuming 6.2 percent of 

electricity from renewable energy sources. The Air Force did increase its consumption from renewable 

sources by 0.5 percent from FY 2014 as renewable electricity usage increased to 369,102 megawatthours (MWh) in FY 2015 from 292,621 MWh in FY 2014, a 26 percent increase. In FY 2015, the Air Force 

progress toward the 2911(e) goal of producing or procuring 25 percent of its total electricity from 

renewable energy sources by FY 2025 increased slightly to 6.9 percent, up from 6.7 percent in FY 2014. 

Although replacement RECs are permitted, in FY 2015 Air Force policy precluded the purchase of RECs to 

reach renewable goals. On-base electricity capacity increased to 104.3 MW in FY 2015 from 102.8 MW 

in FY 2014. Air Force performance toward the 10 USC 2911(e) goal was 6.9 percent, including both 

electric and non-electric renewable energy, versus 6.7 percent in FY 2014. Similarly, in FY 2015 

renewable energy usage from both electric and non-electric equivalent increased by 5.0 percent to 

635,279 MWh from FY 2014 levels.

Opportunities to incorporate renewable energy generation on installations continue to be a major focus 

for the Air Force. An example of this is the development and construction of the Air Force’s largest solar 

P00000019354

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 41 of 151
42

project, a 19 MW array at Nellis AFB, NV. Combined with the existing 14.2 MW solar PV array, 

renewable energy accounts for 38 percent of total energy usage at the installation. A 16.4 MW solar PV 

array was also constructed at Davis Monthan AFB, AZ using a third-party PPA contract mechanism. In 

addition, a 3.4 MW wind project was constructed at Cape Cod AFS, MA using ECIP project funds.

In FY 2015, a Notice of Intent to Award a contract (NOITA) was issued for a 6+ MW capped landfill solar 

PV project at Otis Air National Guard Base (ANGB), located on Joint Base Cape Cod, MA. A NOITA was 

also issued for a 20+ MW solar PV project at Vandenberg AFB, CA. Both projects will be funded using 

the third-party PPA contract model with an associated land lease. The installations will purchase the 

power generated from the arrays and expect to be operational before the end of 2016. 

In FY 2016, AFCEC plans to release five PPA solicitations, including a 5.4 MW waste-to-energy project at 

Dyess AFB, TX; a 5 MW solar PV project at Holloman AFB, NM; a 10 MW solar PV project at Joint Base 

MacGuire-Dix-Lakehurst (JBMDL), NJ; a 5 MW solar PV project at Laughlin AFB, TX; and a 10 MW solar 

PV project at Hanscom AFB, MA. Also, AFCEC plans to sign EULs for a 30 MW solar PV project at Eglin 

AFB, FL, and a 13 MW Solar PV project at JBMDL-Dix, NJ, combined with a 17 MW Solar EUL project at 

JBMDL–Lakehurst, NJ.

At the end of FY 2015, the Air Force had 311 renewable energy projects on 104 sites, either in operation, 

or under construction, using a variety of project delivery methods including PPA, EUL, ECIP, and 

MILCON.

The Air Force Renewable Energy Project Development (REPD) Subpanel was established to leverage 

knowledge and resources across the Air Force and coordinate renewable energy efforts. The Air Force 

expects that REPD’s Subpanel will provide leadership for and coordination of renewable energy projects 

by providing a forum, process, and tools for evaluation and decision-making.

Defense Agencies 

The Defense Agencies continue to implement renewable energy projects on their facilities. In many 

cases, Defense Agencies operate in buildings rather than campuses or installations, limiting their ability 

to implement renewable energy projects. However, Defense Agencies continue to consider 

cost-effective, small-scale, and distributed renewable energy generation. Specifically, the following are 

initiatives Defense Agencies undertook in FY 2015:

• DIA’s primary renewable energy initiative in FY 2015 was to construct a 500 KW roof-mounted 

solar PV array, which will be completed in early FY 2016, as part of the ESPC. This solar PV array 

will greatly increase DIA’s use of renewable energy. Under the terms of the ESPC, DIA will 

purchase power generated by the solar panels from the ESPC contractor at a price competitive 

with grid electricity.

• DeCA has significantly invested in test wells for geothermal and other investigation and analysis 

in support of self-generated renewable energy projects. Since none of these efforts have 

P00000019355

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 42 of 151
43

demonstrated an acceptable return on investment, DeCA had no self-generated renewable 

energy projects in FY 2015.

• NSA recently commissioned both South and North Campus Utility Plants, which maximized the 

potential of the available roof space by accommodating a combination of solar PV panels and a 

vegetative roof. Other projects in the planning and design phases will also incorporate 

renewable energy features to the extent practicable.

• NRO purchased RECs representing 60 million kilowatt-hours of renewable energy—roughly 20 

percent of the NRO’s total electric consumption—in FY 2015.

P00000019356

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 43 of 151
44

(This page is intentionally left blank)

P00000019357

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 44 of 151
45

5. Enhancing Energy Resilience

The Department must be prepared for and have 

the ability to recover from utility disruptions that 

impact mission assurance on its installations. DoD 

relies on commercial power to conduct missions 

from its installations, and these commercial power supplies can be threatened by natural hazards and 

other events. DoD recognizes that such events could result in power outages affecting critical DoD 

missions involving power projection, defense of the homeland, or operations conducted at installations 

in the U.S. directly supporting warfighting missions overseas. Therefore, it is critical for installation 

commanders to understand the vulnerabilities and risk of power disruptions that impact mission 

assurance.

DoD is pursuing a three-pronged strategy to ensure installations have resilient, available, reliable, and 

continuous power. First, two elements of the facility energy strategy are essential components to

improving energy resilience: reducing the installation’s demand for energy and expanding the supply of 

distributed (on-site) energy sources. Second, DoD is actively addressing near-term concerns by 

(1) pursuing energy resilience initiatives to prepare for and recover from energy disruptions that impact 

mission assurance on its installations; and (2) actively engaging with Federal agencies, state and local 

governments, and key industrial players to remediate risk to DoD missions associated with commercial

utility outages. Third, DoD is addressing longer-term concerns by pursuing advanced technologies that 

will help enhance the energy resilience of its installations. DoD publishes the status of its energy 

resilience program at the following: http://www.acq.osd.mil/eie/IE/FEP_Energy_Resilience.html. 

Reporting Requirements

Title 10 U.S.C §2925(a)(11) requires the reporting of utility outages at military installations. The 

following discussion addresses 10 U.S.C. §2925(a)(11).

In FY 2015, DoD conducted a survey of utility outages on military installations resulting from external, 

commercial utility interruption of its electric, gas, and water utilities. DoD Components reported 

approximately 127 utility outages that lasted eight hours or longer in FY 2015, an increase from the 

114 events reported in FY 2014. The majority of the utility outages were a result of electric disruptions, 

and included U.S. and overseas locations. The financial impact of these utility outages was 

approximately $179,087 per day.16

Table 5-1 shows the average cost of utility outages per day for data collected from FY 2013 to FY 2015. 

 16This figure is developed from utility outages that had reported financial impacts in FY 2015.

Per DoDI 4170.11, energy resilience is the ability to 

prepare for and recover from energy disruptions that 

impact mission assurance on military installations.

P00000019358

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 45 of 151
46

Table 5-1: FY 2012 – FY 2015 Cost Per Day of DoD Utility Outages17

These utility outage costs could be incorporated into business case and cost-benefit decisions when 

pursuing energy resilience projects. However, business case and cost-benefit decisions should not be 

limited to the cost avoidance of remediation actions associated with utility outages. DoD is continuing 

to identify other benefits associated with enhancing energy resilience. These benefits will consider a 

levelized cost of electricity approach that encourages more strategic, life-cycle cost effective energy 

generation solutions. For example, a levelized cost of electricity approach would quantify costs 

associated with traditional standby generators, maintenance, fuel, infrastructure, and equipment 

compared to more resilient, integrated, distributed energy generation systems and infrastructure. 

Further, the value and duration of utility outages does not include financial benefits associated with 

peak shaving, demand response, or ancillary services markets. DoD also could generate financial 

benefits from integrated, on-site energy generation systems while improving its energy resilience. 

In FY 2015, the OASD(EI&E) commissioned a study to investigate business case analysis approaches for 

energy resilience with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology – Lincoln Laboratory (MIT-LL). An 

important objective of the study is to identify energy projects that improve energy resilience and are 

cost effective on military installations. The study will consider broad, cost-effective energy resilience 

solutions to improve mission assurance on military installations.

In FY 2015, the mitigation associated with DoD utility outages include updating infrastructure, increasing 

servicing efforts with the local utility, and pursuit of emergency or redundant power supplies such as 

incorporating backup generators. These utility outages were caused by acts of nature, equipment 

failure, or planned maintenance. No malicious acts (e.g., physical, cyber) were reported as causing 

utility outages impacting installations in FY 2013, FY 2014, or FY 2015. In FY 2015, equipment failure 

(e.g., reliability or mechanical issues) accounted for over half of the reported utility outages, while the 

remaining outages were caused by planned maintenance or acts of nature (e.g., weather, storms) 

(Figure 5-1). The June 2012 derecho storms and Hurricane Sandy (in FY 2013) contributed to a larger 

proportion of outages resulting from natural events. In FY 2014, the majority of outages resulted from 

reliability concerns (equipment failure) since there was not a major natural event. Similar to FY 2014, in 

FY 2015 the majority of outages occurred due to reliability concerns and limited acts of nature.

 17 These figures are developed from utility outages that were reported with financial impacts in FY 2012, FY 2013, FY 2014, and 

FY 2015. 

P00000019359

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 46 of 151
47

Figure 5-1: FY 2015 Utility Outages by Cause

Figure 5-2 captures the average disruption time across the 127 reported utility outages by region (in 

days) from FY 2012 – 2015. In FY 2015, the average disruption time for all utility outages was 1.4 days. 

Although average outage duration significantly decreased from FY 2014, overall outages increased, 

primarily at two military installations. As in FY 2014, there were also several large outliers that skewed 

average outage duration significantly upward, primarily equipment failures at four military installations.

Figure 5-2: Average Time for Utility Outages by Region—FY 2012 to FY201518

The 10 U.S.C. §2925 and Committee on Appropriations Senate Report 113-473 analysis results help 

support on-going power resilience initiatives that address near-term concerns associated with acts of 

nature, equipment failure, and planned maintenance. Further, these results provide some clarity that 

the majority of utility disruptions are of lower duration, but that there are targeted instances where 

natural or reliability issues have caused greater duration outages and sometimes costly remediation 

 18Regions used align to those established by the U.S. Census Bureau. The Pacific division was separated out of the West region 

for analysis purposes. Census regions and divisions of the U.S. can be found at the following: 

https://www.census.gov/geo/maps-data/maps/pdfs/reference/us_regdiv.pdf.

P00000019360

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 47 of 151
48

actions. The current status of DoD’s energy resilience initiatives will be discussed further in the 

following section.

Other Reporting Requirements

Senate Armed Services Committee Report 114-79 accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act 

(NDAA) for FY 2016 requests an analysis of domestic DoD installations that are likely on gas and oil 

reserves. The DoD does not maintain an inventory of gas and oil reserves. Oil and gas under Federal 

lands are managed by the Department of the Interior under its statutory programs. DoD has no 

authority to exploit such resources. DoD was able to generate information on military installations and 

sites that were within 25 miles of the top 100 most productive natural gas reserves. Natural gas reserve 

data is not maintained by DoD and was generated by use of data from the Energy Information Agency. 

The below map provides military installations or sites which are within 25 miles of the top 100 most 

productive natural gas reserves, but it is not known whether a gas reserve is physically on these military 

installations or sites.

Exploitation of oil and gas reserves on DoD installations can have a detrimental impact upon the use of 

the installations. Such exploitation is not generally beneficial to DoD both because it can interfere with 

the use of the surface estate and because DoD receives no monetary benefit from the royalty payments 

to address the costs of such interference. There are specific instances where exploitation of oil or gas 

reserves on or near a DoD installation may provide benefit and such instances are considered on a caseby-case basis.

Figure 5-3: Military Installations within 25 Miles of 100 Most Productive Natural Gas Reserves

P00000019361

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 48 of 151
49

Addressing Key Near-Term Concerns

Energy Resilience Initiatives

OASD(EI&E) is leading energy resilience initiatives to ensure that the DoD has the ability to prepare for 

and recover from energy disruptions that impact mission assurance on military installations. Further, 

energy resilience encourages the necessary planning and capabilities to ensure available, reliable, and 

quality power to continuously accomplish DoD missions. DoD continues to pursue a number of 

initiatives to enhance the energy resilience of its military installations. 

From January 2014 to August 2014, DoD continued to lead its power resilience initiative by examining

installation adherence to key energy resilience policies. As a result of the review, DoD found that 

several policies already exist for providing guidance to Components and installation commanders to 

ensure energy resilience of military installations. 

From March 2015 to March 2016, DoD pursued and completed its update on installation and facility 

energy policy that will help raise awareness and prioritize important energy resilience requirements.

This update will assist Components to better align energy requirements with critical DoD missions, 

encourage integrated and holistic energy solutions beyond typical standby generators, and support 

continued performance to already existing requirements. Energy resilience requirements include the 

appropriate sizing of energy generation systems as well as maintenance, fueling, and testing of energy 

generation systems. DoD is now pursuing implementing guidance to this instruction.

Strategic Partnerships

DoD continues to build on its energy resilience partnerships with other Federal departments and 

agencies, and with the private sector. DoD is supporting the DOE in developing ways to ensure the 

resilience of power transformers and other critical equipment. Collaboration with utility providers and 

state and local emergency management agencies remains a central focus to enhance the resilience and 

rapid restoration of commercial grid infrastructure that supports mission critical installations and 

facilities. 

DoD will continue developing and implementing prioritized risk mitigation and remediation plans for its 

Defense Critical Infrastructure based on assessed criticality, vulnerability, and threats and hazards. The 

Department will continue developing and maturing public-private partnerships and executing programs 

and initiatives that enhance DoD’s resilience and ability to execute its critical missions, even in a 

disrupted or stressed commercial electric power environment. 

P00000019362

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 49 of 151
50

Addressing Key Long-Term Concerns

Overview of Installation Energy Test Bed Efforts

The ESTCP Installation Energy Test Bed is a cost-effective way to demonstrate new energy technologies 

in a real-world, integrated building environment to reduce risk, overcome barriers to deployment, and 

facilitate wide-scale commercialization. Emerging technologies offer a cost-effective way for DoD to 

reduce its facility energy demand, increase energy surety, and provide distributed generation and 

storage.

Projects include rigorous operational testing and assessment of life-cycle costs of new technology while 

addressing DoD-unique issues. DoD can be a sophisticated first user of successful cutting-edge, 

transformational energy technologies. The Installation Energy Test Bed funds microgrid and advanced 

installation energy management technology demonstrations to evaluate the benefits and risks of various 

approaches and configurations. Through a competitive selection process, the Installation Energy Test 

Bed has undertaken projects with multiple vendors to ensure that the Department can capture the 

benefits of diverse approaches. More information on the ESTCP is available at http://www.serdp.org/.

Next Generation Microgrids

Smart microgrids and energy storage offer a more robust and cost-effective approach to ensuring 

installation energy resilience than the 

traditional approach of backup generators 

tied to single critical loads and (limited) 

supplies of on-site fuel. Although microgrid 

systems are in use today, they are relatively 

unsophisticated, with limited ability to 

integrate renewable and other distributed 

energy sources, little or no energy storage 

capability, uncontrolled load demands, and 

“dumb” distribution that is not optimized. 

Advanced microgrids reduce installation 

energy costs on a day-to-day basis by 

allowing for load balancing and demand 

response, as well as offering DoD a pathway 

to participate in ancillary service markets, all 

of which can make holistic energy 

management more cost-effective. They also 

facilitate the incorporation of renewable and other on-site energy generation. More importantly, they 

offer energy resilience: the combination of on-site energy generation and storage, together with the 

microgrid’s ability to manage local energy supply and demand, allow installations to operate in 

Figure 5-4: Microgrid System Example

P00000019363

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 50 of 151
51

“islanded” mode, shedding non-essential loads and maintaining mission-critical loads if the electrical 

grid is disrupted (Figure 5-319).

Fort Bliss, Texas 

An integrated system of energy assets under central microgrid control can provide power that is costeffective, cleaner, and more secure than traditional operations. The project at U.S. Army Brigade 

Combat Team complex at Fort Bliss, TX, is demonstrating the benefits of such an intelligent microgrid 

tied to existing energy assets. An important aspect of the project is demonstrating both grid-tied and 

grid-independent operation, providing additional power in times of high energy demand and exhibiting 

the system’s ability to maintain power to critical operations in the event of losing a major power source. 

It will also test the ability of the microgrid technology to supply peak power and reduce GHG emissions 

and overall energy consumption. Planning tools allow power engineers to design a microgrid, 

determining the optimal arrangement and control of the distributed energy assets and loads. 

Controllers at each piece of equipment react automatically to ensure power delivery, quality, and safety. 

Optimization algorithms set points to operate equipment for energy efficiency and resilience. This 

demonstration paves the way for the implementation of this technology at a wider range of DoD 

facilities. 

Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center (Twenty-nine Palms, California) 

DoD is transforming the electrical infrastructure of Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center (MCAGCC) 

Twenty-nine Palms, CA, the Nation’s largest Marine Corps Base, to enable it to operate off the 

commercial power grid when needed. The remote base in the Mojave Desert serves a population of 

more than 27,000 military and civilian personnel who facilitate large-scale training and exercises. The 

austere conditions, limited infrastructure, and required continuity of operations place a heavy demand 

on the base’s electrical infrastructure. The base sustains its mission with more than 10 MW of power 

generated on-site by a 1.2 MW solar PV farm, 1 MW of solar PV shading (canopy), a 0.5 MW fuel cell, 

and a 7.2 MW co-generation plant. The base is tying together its disparate electrical infrastructure in an 

optimal way while serving as a test bed for new technologies.

In an initial demonstration, a central control system will enable facility managers to adjust the demand 

for electricity from buildings and substations, while dropping demand from warehouses and temporary 

trailers, to optimize the local system. A second phase will measure and improve the quality of the 

electricity flowing across the microgrid. A third phase will integrate a Sodium-Metal-Halide Battery, 

which can function in the extreme desert climate of Twenty-nine Palms, to help alleviate renewable 

energy intermittency, improve island-mode operations if the main grid goes down, reduce expensive 

“demand charges,” and reduce stress on the main transformers and other electrical equipment on base.

 19 GE Global Research, Bringing the Smart Grid to Military Bases [online source] (accessed July 1, 2012), available on the 

internet at http://ge.geglobalresearch.com/blog/bringing-the-smart-grid-to-military-bases/

P00000019364

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 51 of 151
52

Los Angeles AFB 

A demonstration just getting underway at LAAFB is focused on showing the cost-effective use of DoD 

resources in the evolving electrical power market place, in addition to the energy resilience benefits of 

microgrids. This demonstration centers on medium duty PEVs. The fast-responding energy storage 

capability of vehicle batteries can provide power to help satisfy building, local base, and wider grid 

services. Although vehicles individually are not large electricity loads or sources, when aggregated they 

can become a controlled entity able to offset the effects of variable local resources and loads. Vehicle 

charging can be costly if not managed well in relation to the prevailing utility tariff. The V2G technology 

involves optimizing charging times, enabling V2G integration, and partnering with the local utilities 

provider to exploit new ancillary service markets. This model has the potential to reduce the 

incremental cost of electric vehicles, in addition to providing the energy resilience benefits of V2G

operation. 

Smart Power Infrastructure Demonstration for Energy Reliability and Security (SPIDERS) 

U.S. Pacific Command and U.S. Northern Command are finalizing SPIDERS, a co-sponsored Joint 

Capability Technology Demonstration (JCTD), in partnership with DOE and the Department of Homeland 

Security (DHS). The purpose is to demonstrate a cyber-secure smart microgrid architecture with the 

ability to maintain operational surety through secure, reliable, and resilient electric power generation 

and distribution. Using a three-phase approach with increasing levels of system complexity, the SPIDERS 

JCTD will culminate in the first DoD installation-wide microgrid featuring integrated smart grid 

technologies, distributed and renewable generation, energy storage, and cyber defenses with the ability 

to operate autonomously in an “islanded” mode for extended periods of time. The deployment of 

cyber-secure smart microgrids on military installations will not replace commercial power as a primary 

source, but will enable secure, sustainable backup power for critical missions, with enhanced reliability 

and endurance, at the installation scale. The results of the demonstration will help inform infrastructure 

investment decisions to reduce the mission risk of extended electric power outages at installations, 

enhancing mission assurance for DoD units and potentially assisting surrounding civilian communities in 

disaster recovery efforts.

During Phase 1, at Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam, HI, an Operational Demonstration (OD) was 

completed in January 2013, culminating in the construction and system integration of an electric 

microgrid with advanced industrial controls and dynamic load management. Phase 1 resulted in a 

39 fold increase in power reliability, a 42 percent reduction in emissions, 30.4 percent diesel fuel 

savings, and up to 90 percent renewable energy penetration. Phase 2 construction at Fort Carson, CO, 

was completed in August 2013. The OD was conducted in October 2013, during which the Fort Carson 

microgrid operated successfully through a simulated grid outage, integrating three existing diesel 

generators, a solar array, and the first ever application of electric utility trucks for V2G distributed 

backup generation and storage. Phase 3, Camp Smith, HI, the final phase of the JCTD completed the OD 

in January 2016. Based on system performance, dispatcher (operator) responses, and cyber security 

assessments, the OD was a success. This was the first completely “always on, always sensing,” 

P00000019365

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 52 of 151
53

“islandable,” and cyber-secure DoD military installation microgrid. The array of infrastructure assets, 

included office buildings, housing units, solar energy generation, energy storage, and distributed 

generators. SPIDERS greatly enhanced mission assurance, energy reliability and resiliency, and proved 

parallel capability with the local utility for future economic advantages.

The DON, NAVFAC Engineering and Expeditionary Warfare Center (EXWC), as Transition Manager,

transitioned the microgrid solutions to both the Federal Government and industry. This transition has 

been provided for all three phases through updates to Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC), a “Technology 

Transition Consolidated Report” and an Industry Day.

Industrial Control Systems

Commercial electric power providers rely on industrial control systems (ICS), which include supervisory 

control and data acquisition (SCADA) systems, distributed control systems (DSC), and other control 

system configurations, such as skid-mounted programmable logic controllers (PLC). ICS are also 

distributed in commercial and Government building equipment, such as air conditioners, utility meters, 

and programmable controllers equipped with embedded computing devices. Used by commercial 

entities and DoD, this equipment is often specified without regard to cyber security considerations and 

have become increasingly networked, interconnected, and mutually dependent and are, therefore,

potentially at risk of cyber intrusion or attack.

Focusing on relevant security specifications, DoD, in collaboration with DHS, DOE, and the National 

Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), is involved with the development of the “Guide to 

Industrial Control System Security” (NIST SP 800-82), which includes a specialized ICS Security Overlay 

applicable to all types of control systems: utilities, facilities, weapons, medical devices and equipment, 

security, and transportation. Simultaneously, DoD is in the process of adopting the NIST Risk 

Management Framework that levies the same level of protection and continuous monitoring security 

requirements for both IT systems and ICS. DoD is working with the ICS community to develop new 

procurement language, devices, patches to existing equipment, and upgrades to information technology 

security measures. Working with appropriate DoD entities, such as U.S. Cyber Command and Service 

Cyber Commands, DoD is proactively moving ahead by fielding and deploying secure ICS solutions at 

DoD installations and is sharing those solutions with other appropriate ICS stakeholders in the field of 

logistics, security, medical, transportation, and the defense industrial base.

Service Initiatives

Army

The Army recognizes the growing importance of obtaining energy resilience on its installations and 

continues to work with various entities throughout the DoD to achieve this goal. During FY 2015, the 

Army’s energy resilience efforts associated with ES2 Strategy implementation were accelerated through 

an Energy Security Integrated Process Team (ESIPT) to work across organizations to inform decisions.

P00000019366

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 53 of 151
54

The ESIPT focuses on energy resiliency for installation critical infrastructure, bringing together leadership 

at all levels of the Army as well as several stakeholder organizations dedicated to information 

technology, finance, and facility management.

The Army has completed Energy Security Assessments (ESAs) at several key Army installations to 

develop a baseline and detailed technical understanding of vulnerabilities from natural and man-made 

threats and to identify potential failure points in energy infrastructure. The ESAs also provide project 

recommendations to address these vulnerabilities and at some sites include microgrid conceptual 

designs. In FY 2015, the Army completed an ESA and microgrid conceptual design at Fort Irwin, CA, and 

initiated an ESA at Fort Huachuca, AZ. Tooele Army Depot, UT, used ECIP funds to continue its microgrid 

project, scheduled for completion in FY 2016.

The Army continues to look at alternative solutions such as microgrids and renewable energy. By using 

both UESC and ECIP project funds, the Army anticipates building a microgrid capable of meeting 

100 percent of the load at Fort Hunter Liggett. The Army is also making microgrid investments at Fort 

Bliss, Fort Sill, and Fort Carson. 

DON

The Navy energy vision identifies ends, ways, and means for increasing energy resilience. The Navy 

increases shore energy resilience by decreasing overall energy consumption, increasing the energy 

efficiency of shore systems, increasing the use of viable alternative energy sources, and increasing the 

reliability of energy for critical infrastructure. Additionally, the Navy mitigates vulnerabilities related to 

the electric grid, including power outages caused by natural disaster, accident, and physical and cyberattack, in partnership with local utility providers. 

The Navy values energy as a strategic resource with its security being fundamental to executing missions 

both afloat and ashore. NAVFAC has embarked on a comprehensive evaluation of utility infrastructure 

to determine current conditions and costs for necessary upgrades to avoid risk. Additionally, the 

NAVFAC EXWC awarded a $2.7 million contract in 2013 to build a Microgrid Test Facility at the Mobile 

Utilities Support Equipment (MUSE) Yard in Port Hueneme, CA. The facility will enable the Navy to 

conduct specific and controlled testing of microgrid concepts and components prior to field deployment.

The Navy instituted an enterprise-wide energy management program in FY 2012 to provide necessary 

oversight of the shore energy program and to address risks to critical infrastructure and mission-critical 

utility infrastructure. The Energy Resiliency Program Plan defines the means, methods, and schedules to 

assess risks, develop mitigation solutions, and identify program funding for risk remediation projects at 

facility, pier, and adjacent municipal support activities for Navy-critical electric and utility 

infrastructures. NSWC’s Mission Assurance Division (MAD), in cooperation with the NAVFAC EXWC, 

leads assessment and solutions development efforts under the Energy Security Audit Program (ESAP) to 

provide recommendations for project development. Under this program, the Navy conducted five 

installation assessments in FY 2013. Currently under review, reports detail mitigation solutions that 

P00000019367

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 54 of 151
55

increase critical utility system infrastructure resilience and provide installations with reliable power 

supply. Following review, refined solutions will be provided to the appropriate command elements for 

project development. There are currently four ESAP assessments scheduled for FY 2014. 

The Navy partnered with the Marine Corps to generate a set of top-level requirements resulting in the 

Navy and Marine Corps Smart Grid Capabilities Development Document (CDD), promulgated in FY 2013.

The goal of the Smart Grid Program is to improve day-to-day operations of building and utility 

management in a cyber-secure environment in order to save operation and energy costs and support 

mission assurance.

In FY 2015, Navy had 47 reported utility outages caused by commercial utility interruption of electrical 

utilities or water impacting the installation(s) for eight hours or longer; there were no outages reported 

related to gas, steam, or other utilities. In a reverse from last year’s pattern, 85 percent of the reported 

outages occurred outside of the continental U.S. Equipment failure was the leading cause of outages, 

followed by acts of nature. No outages were reported as the result of malicious acts. In most cases, the 

financial impact of an outage could not be estimated.

Air Force

The Air Force is always working to improve its ability to manage energy supply and demand in a way that 

enhances mission capability and readiness, while helping address the Nation’s broader energy 

challenges. The Air Force is working through integrated efforts with DoD, as well as local, regional, 

state, and Federal partners to address energy resilience at Air Force installations. Transforming the way 

installation energy is utilized—including investing in innovation, continuation of energy efficient goals 

and initiatives, and building an energy resilient force—is critical to ensuring the Air Force is equipped to 

sustain mission priorities of today while planning for the challenges of the future.

Installation energy resiliency is complex and each priority under this strategy is part of the Air Force’s 

total systems approach to improve energy resiliency. The application of energy resiliency differs among 

operations as dictated by mission need and varies by the function supported, criticality of the mission, 

and the time of need or phase of operation. The Air Force is continually identifying the energy 

requirements for each mission, understanding the options, and developing and exercising response 

plans that contribute to a ready energy posture. By reducing the energy needed and diversifying 

generation and distribution options, the Air Force relies less on an already vulnerable electrical grid 

system. An example of these efforts is currently underway at Buckly AFB, CO, where 460 Space Wing 

and their Civil Engineer Squadron (CES) are making significant mission platform and infrastructure 

improvements for a special operations facility with the help of the Air Force Installation and Mission 

Support Center (AFIMSC), Detachment (Det) 1 and AFCEC. Without increasing the current number of 

electrical feeders supplying power to the installation, AFIMSC Det 1 and AFCEC have provided plans to 

re-engineer the base’s electrical service, subsequently providing a more reliable electrical system to 

service the facility. Additionally, the Wing and CES are now working together on configuration 

management of the facility mission platforms to ensure necessary redundancy of the missions.

P00000019368

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 55 of 151
56

(This page is intentionally left blank)

P00000019369

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 56 of 151
57

6. Data Management and Metering

As the Department continues to improve its energy efficiency, accurate, real-time facility energy data is 

essential to provide a basis for effective enterprise and installation energy management. In April 2013, 

the OASD(EI&E) issued a utilities metering policy that sets an aggressive goal for deploying advanced 

meters throughout DoD to automatically and accurately measure electricity, natural gas, water, and 

steam use. In addition, the OASD(EI&E) intends to publish strategy and policy to help Components 

leverage meter data to identify savings opportunities, prioritize investment decisions, and more 

effectively manage their building energy use at the installation and enterprise levels.

Progress Toward Energy Metering Goals

Section 543 of NECPA (42 U.S.C. § 8253) required Federal agencies to install electricity meters on all 

Federal buildings by FY 2012, and the same level of natural gas and steam meters installed by FY 2016, 

with advanced meters installed to the maximum extent practicable. DoD Instruction (DoDI) 4170.11 

expands on this, requiring that electricity, natural gas, and water meters be installed on all appropriate20

facilities by FY 2012 (Table 6-1). The DoDI also requires installation of meters in conjunction with all 

MILCON, major renovation, and ESPC projects. 

Table 6-1: Metering of Appropriate Facilities – FY 2015

DoD’s utilities metering policy requires advanced meters on individual DoD-owned facilities sufficient to 

accurately capture a minimum of 60 percent of electricity and natural gas use with a goal of collecting 

85 percent use at the Component level by the end of FY 2020. In FY 2015, DoD captured 23 percent of 

electricity and 10 percent of natural gas consumption through an advanced metering system (AMS), 

increases of 4.0 percent and 3.0 percent from FY 2014, respectively. DoD reported that 195, or 23 

percent, of installations had installation-level advanced meters for electricity and 104 installations, or 10 

percent, had installation-level advanced meters for natural gas (Table 6-2). 

 20 Appropriate facilities are those for which the DoD Component has determined metering would be cost-effective and 

practical. Cost practicality is determined by each individual Service or Defense Agency.

P00000019370

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 57 of 151
58

Table 6-2: Electricity and Natural Gas AMS Progress

DoD’s metering policy also outlines the requirements for the Components to install advanced meters on 

all water-intensive facilities to measure both potable and non-potable water use, and steam meters on 

facilities connected to district steam systems to identify steam use and system losses. Table 6-3 shows 

that DoD-wide, 20 percent of water intensive facilities and 4.0 percent of facilities connected to a district 

steam system have meters connected to an AMS.

Table 6-3: Water and Steam AMS Progress

Figure 6-1 illustrates the percentage of buildings with meters connected to an AMS by utility-type: The 

figure shows that 66 percent capture electricity use, 18 percent capture water use, 15 percent capture 

natural gas use, and 1.0 percent capture steam use. Of the total number of meters connected to an 

AMS, 84 percent are advanced meters, 13 percent are pulse counters, and the remaining 3.0 percent are 

virtual meters. 

Figure 6-1: Breakdown of AMS Meters

P00000019371

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 58 of 151
59

Army

The Army issued its metering implementation plan in response to DoD’s metering policy. The plan will 

result in the direct measurement of 65 percent of total energy consumed by Army facilities across 

advanced electric, water, gas, and steam meters. The Army has installed electric meters in over 16,944 

buildings through its Army Central Meter Program, execution of ESPCs, and UP—3,800 of which are 

connected to Army’s Meter Data Management System (MDMS). The Army has also installed over 5,074 

natural gas meters, 126 steam meters, and over 2,940 water meters. 

Table 6-4 shows the percentage of installations with advanced meters and the percent of energy 

captured by an AMS as required by the DoD metering policy. Table 6-5 shows the total number of 

metered buildings, both with meters connected to an AMS and those currently not connected.

Table 6-4: FY 2015 Army Metering Profile

Table 6-5: FY 2015 Army AMS Progress

DON

In FY 2015, advanced metering systems captured over 50 percent of DON total electricity consumption, 

up from 24 percent of total electricity in FY 2014 (Table 6-6). The intended objectives of DON’s 

Advanced Meter Infrastructure (AMI) Program are to capture an estimated 85 percent of the electrical 

and natural gas consumption, as well as all facilities connected to district steam systems and waterintensive facilities at installations worldwide.

P00000019372

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 59 of 151
60

The Navy is developing enterprise-wide software and integrated metering systems to collect and pay 

utility invoices, allocate consumption and bills to tenants, and incorporate metered data in a centralized 

and accessible database. The Comprehensive Utilities Information Tracking System (CIRCUITS) enables 

energy managers to oversee the review of utilities allocation, consumption, and cost data at a facility 

level. This will allow management to make more informed energy decisions using real data. Further, 

the Navy has also recognized the importance of capturing energy consumed at the waterfront in support 

of the Navy fleet and is now integrating these areas into AMI deployment.

The Navy reported over 10,231 advanced meters connected to an AMS for electricity, around 722 for 

natural gas, nearly 2,297 for water, and 272 for steam in FY 2015 (Table 6-7). 

Table 6-6: FY 2015 Navy Metering Profile

Table 6-7: FY 2015 Navy AMS Progress

Per NDAA FY 2012 , the DON has an additional requirement to meter Navy piers so that the energy 

consumption of naval vessels while in port can accurately be measured. As of FY 2015, the Navy had 24 

installations with an estimated 525 piers/berths with meters installed for electricity consumption, 

approximately 75 percent of which were using advanced meters. Pier berths have also been metered 

with a mix of standard and advanced meters for other utilities: approximately 60 piers/berths for steam, 

and 160 for water. With over 6,700 billion BTUs of shore energy consumed at the waterfront in FY 2015, 

metered piers will continue to support region and installation efforts to engage the operational fleet in 

reducing energy consumption ashore.

P00000019373

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 60 of 151
61

In FY 2015, the Marine Corps AMS captured 24 percent of total electricity consumption, 36 percent of 

natural gas consumption, and 12 percent of water consumption (Table 6-8). The Marine Corps reported 

over 2,700 advanced meters connected to an AMS for electricity, 615 for natural gas, and a little over 

500 for water in FY 2015 (Table 6-9).

Table 6-8: FY 2015 Marine Corps Metering Profile

Table 6-9: FY 2015 Marine Corps AMS Progress

Air Force

In FY 2015, AFCEC continued to execute its meter data management plan (MDMP) including the 

deployment of the Advance Meter Reading System (AMRS) with the intention to deploy to 16 additional 

bases over the next two years. The metering program will continue to focus on the goals set forth in the 

OSD policy by planning and executing the following:

• Installation of advanced meters adequate to capture 60 percent of Air Force consumed energy.

• Deployment of AMRS to approximately 40 of the highest energy consuming installations.

• Training for AMRS users to enhance energy analysis and reduce consumption.

• Use of AMRS data to inform leadership decisions.

• Cost-benefit analysis after 60 percent of energy is captured to determine if further investments 

in ARMS should continue.

P00000019374

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 61 of 151
62

The Air Force has installed installation advanced meters for both electricity and natural gas on two of its 

installations (Table 6-10). The Air Force reported there are 37 buildings with meters connected to an 

AMS for electricity, with 27 of those being advanced meters (Table 6-11).

Table 6-10: FY 2015 Air Force Metering Profile

Table 6-11: FY 2015 Air Force AMS Progress

Defense Agencies

The Defense Agencies continue to enhance metering data management. The following are examples of 

initiatives to promote metering:

• DIA uses a building automation system (BAS) that captures energy trends on all its electrical 

utilities and currently has advanced meters in all buildings of adequate size for BAS 

implementation. In FY 2016, DIA will be identifying opportunities to add advanced natural gas 

and water metering to the BAS systems, to include advanced natural gas metering on new 

boilers being installed in DIA HQ.

• NRO provided their MDMP to OASD(EI&E) in FY 2015 and has initiated a number of projects to 

implement this plan including the monitoring of utility circuits at the distribution level; installing 

pulse meters on all gas entrances; performing a study to incorporate sewer, water, and gas to 

meters into an advanced metering system; and networking meter data to the Facility 

Management system and the enterprise facility management software in order to provide realP00000019375

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 62 of 151
63

time visibility of energy use. This data provides the opportunity to evaluate consumption 

patterns, benchmark consumption, and uncover potential anomalies.

• WHS has installed over 100 meters and sub-meters at buildings on the Pentagon Reservation.

The Pentagon metering plan will install advanced meters to capture electricity, steam, chilled 

water, natural gas, hot water, and potable water for individual buildings on the Reservation, as 

well as additional sub-meters to support operations and maintenance of mission-critical users.

WHS is also developing an energy monitoring dashboard incorporating existing and new meters 

to support energy management activities at the Pentagon. As of FY 2015, approximately 85

percent of Phase 1 meters were installed.

• NSA has undertaken an aggressive program to monitor electrical usage through its SCADA 

system. The SCADA system allows the monitoring of mission-critical systems and also building 

energy consumption. The SCADA system acts as the campus meter and allows for building-level 

analysis of energy consumption. 

P00000019376

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 63 of 151
64

(This page is intentionally left blank)

P00000019377

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 64 of 151
65

Figure 7-1: FY 2015 DoD Projects Funded by 

Appropriations, by Investment Amount

7. Funding Energy Projects

The Department continues to invest in energy and water conservation, renewable and distributed 

energy, as well as energy resilience projects using both appropriations and third-party financing.

Appendix G contains the FY 2015 list of appropriated and third-party funded projects. 

Appropriation Funded Energy Projects 

Appropriations are direct funding authorities 

through MILCON; Sustainment, Restoration, and 

Modernization (SRM); Operation and 

Maintenance (O&M); and Defense Working 

Capital Fund (DWCF) accounts. For example, ECIP

is a $150 million annual MILCON appropriation 

program centrally managed by the OSD to fund 

projects that save energy or reduce defense 

energy costs. It evaluates potential projects using 

a variety of criteria, including cost effectiveness, 

savings to investment ratio, and simple financial 

payback.

Congressional appropriations amounting to 

slightly less than $555 million funded 815

projects in FY 2015. The majority of these 

projects, over 80 percent, were energy 

conservation projects with the remainder being renewable energy and water conservation projects

(12.0 and 8.0 percent, respectively) (Figure 7-1). Table 7-1 summarizes projects funded with FY 2015 

appropriations by type, includes aggregate estimates of total project costs as well as the total number of 

funded projects. 

Table 7-1: FY 2015 DoD Appropriations21

 21 Totals include Defense Agencies. 

P00000019378

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 65 of 151
66

Table 7-1 (cont’d): FY 2015 DoD Appropriations

Army

In FY 2015, the Army spent nearly $221 million in appropriated funds for 429 energy conservation, 

renewable energy, and water conservation projects. These projects included lighting retrofits, HVAC 

improvements, and the installation of renewable energy projects such as small-scale solar PV and solar 

thermal systems. Table 7-2 summarizes the breakdown of appropriated projects and associated funding 

for the Army. Energy conservation initiatives constitute the overwhelming majority of projects—over 90 

percent of the total count and 70 percent of funding—as shown in Figure 7-2. 

Table 7-2: FY 2015 Army Appropriations

Figure 7-2: FY 2015 Army Projects Funded by Appropriations

P00000019379

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 66 of 151
67

DON

In FY 2015, DON awarded just over $224 million in appropriated funds for 199 energy conservation, 

renewable energy, and water conservation projects. These projects included building retrocommissioning, the installation of building energy management control systems, and renewable energy 

applications such as solar thermal and GSHPs. Table 7-3 summarizes the breakdown of appropriated 

projects and associated funding for the Navy and the Marine Corps. 

Table 7-3: FY 2015 DoN Appropriations

Of the total number of projects in FY 2015, 87 percent were energy conservation projects, as illustrated 

in Figure 7-3. 

Figure 7-3: FY 2015 DON Projects Funded by Appropriations

P00000019380

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 67 of 151
68

Air Force

In FY 2015, the Air Force spent $106 million in appropriated funds for 172 energy conservation, 

renewable energy, and water conservation projects. These projects included lighting and lighting 

controls upgrades, chiller and boiler improvements, building retro-commissioning, and water 

conservation investments. Table 7-4 summarizes the breakdown of appropriated projects and 

associated funding for the Air Force in FY 2015.

Table 7-4: FY 2015 Air Force Appropriations

Of the projects awarded in FY 2015, 95 percent were energy conservation projects. Water conservation

and renewable energy projects represent 3.0 percent and 2.0 percent, respectively, of the Air Force’s 

total appropriated projects. (Figure 7-4)

Figure 7-4: FY 2015 Air Force Projects Funded by Appropriations

P00000019381

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 68 of 151
69

Energy Projects Financed Through Third-Party Mechanisms 

The Department is increasingly relying on third-party financing mechanisms such as UESCs and ESPCs.

These financing vehicles allow DoD to implement energy efficiency, renewable, and distributed energy 

projects, as well as energy resilience projects without up-front appropriated funds. The Federal 

Government repays the private capital over time using cost savings generated by the implemented 

projects. In FY 2015, DoD awarded just over $292 million in non-Governmental, third-party financed 

ESPCs and UESCs. Table 7-5 summarizes the total contract awarded value of ESPCs and UESCs financed 

in FY 2015. 

Table 7-5: FY 2015 DoD Third-Party Funding

In December 2011, the President issued a challenge—the President’s Performance Contracting 

Challenge (PPCC)—to the Federal Government to award $2 billion in third-party financed energy 

efficiency projects over those next two years. DoD’s share of the Phase I goal was $1.2 billion. While 

DoD did not fully execute the goal amount before the deadline of December 31, 2013, the challenge 

increased DoD’s use of third-party financing at a time when severe budget reductions limited 

appropriated funds available for energy efficiency projects. In December 2013, building on the Phase I 

of the PPCC, the President extended the PPCC through FY 2016. As of FY 2015, DoD’s cumulative Phase I 

P00000019382

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 69 of 151
70

and Phase 2 PPCC goal target is now slightly below $2.2 billion ($2.183 billion). Figure 7-5 shows the 

breakdown of third-party financing used by DoD from the start of the PPCC in FY 2011 to FY 2015. 

Figure 7-5: FY 2011 – FY 2015 DoD Third-Party Financing

Army

In FY 2015, the Army awarded 31 ESPC task orders with an investment value of $155.8 million, and an 

additional 8 UESC projects worth $49 million, for a total of $204.8 million (Table 7-6). These projects will 

save 801 BBtus and more than $14.2 million annually, which will be used to repay the third-party 

investments over the lifetime of the contracts. The combined total of all Army ESPC and UESC 

investments over the life of the program exceeds $2.23 billion. More than 15 additional projects are 

currently under development. The Army anticipates meeting PPCC goals and awarding an average of

$150 million worth of ESPC/UESC projects each year throughout the foreseeable future.

Table 7-6: FY 2015 Army Non-Governmental Third-Party Funding

The Army has exceeded its PPCC alternative financing goal, with total ESPC and UESC awards of $926.4 

million associated with 109 task orders through the end of FY 2015. The Army leads PPCC effort with 40 

percent of all Federal implementation to date (out of 29 percent of Federal Real Property portfolio).

P00000019383

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 70 of 151
71

DON

In FY 2015, the Navy awarded approximately $39 million in estimated investment ESPC and UESC project 

value and the Marine Corps awarded approximately $28 million in investment value for a UESC project.

Project locations for awarded ESPCs and UESCs this year included Joint Base Pearl Harbor Hickam, Joint 

Expeditionary Base Little Creek-Fort Story, Fleet Readiness Center Southwest, Hadnot Point, Camp 

Johnson, Camp Geiger, Marine Corps Air Station New River, and Courthouse Bay. Once implemented, 

these contracts are projected to yield combined energy savings of nearly 100,000 million Btus annually. 

(Table 7-7).

Table 7-7: FY 2015 DON Non-Governmental Third-Party Funding

Air Force

In FY 2015, the Air Force awarded both an ESPC and UESC task order totaling just over $20 million.

These projects were awarded at Laughlin AFB and Tinker AFB and their combined savings are estimated 

at over 185,000 million Btus annually (Table 7-8).

Table 7-8: FY 2015 Air Force Non-Governmental Third-Party Funding 

P00000019384

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 71 of 151
72

(This page is intentionally left blank)

P00000019385

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 72 of 151
73

8. Federal Building Energy Efficiency Standards

In addition to retrofitting existing buildings, the Department is taking advantage of new construction to 

incorporate more energy efficient designs, material, and equipment into its building inventory with the 

goal of producing new buildings that are less expensive to own and operate, improve employee health 

and productivity, and leave a smaller environmental footprint. In FY 2013, the Department published 

UFC 1-200-02, High Performance and Sustainable Building (HPSB) Requirements, which provides 

minimum standards and coordinating guidance for planning, designing, constructing, renovating, and 

maintaining high performance and sustainable facilities that will enhance DoD mission capability by 

reducing total ownership costs. The UFC, combined with the Department’s new sustainable buildings 

policy signed in November 2013, represent comprehensive guidance to ensure DoD construction 

practices result in buildings that meet all Federal mandates related to energy and the environment, 

including the Federal Guiding Principles for HPSBs.

The Guiding Principles of Federal Leadership in HPSB are aimed at helping Federal agencies and 

organizations reduce the total ownership cost of facilities; improve energy efficiency and water 

conservation; provide safe, healthy, and productive building environments; and promote sustainable 

environmental stewardship. The five strategic principles in HPSB guide agencies to (1) use integrated 

design principles, (2) optimize energy performance, (3) protect and conserve water, (4) enhance indoor 

environmental quality, and (5) reduce the environmental impact of materials.

DoD’s Progress in Meeting Sustainable Building Standards

With over 47,000 buildings covered by sustainable building standards—many of which were constructed 

prior to establishment of the HPSB guidance—DoD faces several challenges in meeting the goals. In 

FY 2015, 511 DoD buildings met the sustainable buildings requirements. 

DoD’s Progress Toward Meeting American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and 

Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) 90.1 Standards

The Department continues to incorporate sustainable and high-performance building design elements 

to enhance energy and water system efficiencies. In FY 2016, 100 percent of new building designs 

started after FY 2007 are expected to exceed the ASHRAE 90.1-2007 energy efficiency standard by 

30 percent.

Army 

In FY 2014, the Army issued an updated Sustainable Design and Development (SDD) Policy in order to 

establish a comprehensive process to include energy and sustainability considerations as a fundamental 

part of the facility design process. This process continues to allow the Army to meet all Federal building 

performance and sustainability requirements when constructing new buildings or undertaking major

renovations.

P00000019386

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 73 of 151
74

Army’s Progress toward Meeting ASHRAE 90.1 Standards

All new Army projects designed after August 10, 2012, meet the EPAct 2005 requirement to costeffectively achieve an energy savings of at least 30 percent greater than ASHRAE 90.1-2007 standards.

For example, the ARNG began construction on six new building designs in FY 2015, exceeding the 

ASHRAE standard by 30 percent. These higher energy standards are helping the Army advance toward 

the FY 2015 goal of reducing energy consumption in new building and major renovation projects by 65

percent compared to similar buildings constructed in FY 2003, in accordance with EISA 2007, Section 

433. FY 2016 new construction and major renovations will exceed all EPAct 2005 and EISA provisions 

related to building energy efficiency.

DON

In FY 2015, 36 percent of Navy’s reported new buildings designed since 2007 were estimated to be at 

least 30 percent below the ASHRAE 90.1–2004 standards; an additional 16 percent of reported new 

buildings were estimated to be at least 30 percent below the ASHRAE 90.1–2007 standards; and another 

6.5 percent were estimated to be at least 30 percent below the ASHRAE 90.1–2010 standards. Projects 

that were not 30 percent below the standard were designed to achieve life-cycle cost-effective energy 

efficiency.

• NB Coronado: In May 2015, a ribbon cutting ceremony was held for the newly constructed 

fitness center at Naval Air Station North Island. The new facility incorporates energy savings 

initiatives such as a design that maximizes daylight throughout the building, high insulated 

windows and wall systems, solar pool and domestic water heaters, and a 337 KW PV panel 

array.

• NAS Jacksonville: A reconstruction project was underway in FY 2015 to re-engineer and 

modernize an airfield while integrating more sustainable characteristics. Design included best 

management practices regarding erosion control and storm water runoff to help preserve the 

surrounding ecosystem. Waste management construction strategies reduced demolition waste 

by recycling on-site hardscape materials that were crushed and will be re-used for the new 

runway. In addition, high efficiency LED lighting system will replace airfield lighting and yield 

estimated energy savings of $100,000 annually. 

DON’s Progress toward Meeting ASHRAE 90.1 Standards

In FY 2015, 36 percent of Navy’s reported new buildings designed since 2007 were estimated to be at 

least 30 percent below the ASHRAE 90.1–2004 standards; an additional 16 percent of reported new 

buildings were estimated to be at least 30 percent below the ASHRAE 90.1–2007 standards; and another 

6.5 percent were estimated to be at least 30 percent below the ASHRAE 90.1–2010 standards. Where 

projects were not 30 percent below the standard, the projects were designed to achieve life-cycle 

cost-effective energy efficiency.

P00000019387

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 74 of 151
75

Air Force

The Air Force works to incorporate sustainability into its new construction program in a mission 

enduring, resource efficient, and fiscally responsible manner. The Air Force continues to update policies 

to address Federal requirements, and works to meet or exceed the requirements where possible. For 

example, over 98 percent of all buildings completed in FY 2015 met the Federal HPSB standards.

Air Force’s Progress toward Meeting ASHRAE 90.1 Standards

The Air Force issued its Air Force SDD Policy Memorandum in July 31, 2007, and the SDD Implementing 

Guidance on June 2, 2011. The SDD Implementing Guidance memorandum requires all new 

construction and major renovations to fully incorporate the HPSB Guiding Principles, which include the 

requirement to be at least 30 percent more energy efficient than ASHRAE 90.1-2007. Even with the 

diversity of building types in the Air Force’s new construction program, about 80 percent of the program 

achieves or exceeds the 30 percent energy efficient requirement.

P00000019388

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 75 of 151
76

(This page is intentionally left blank)

P00000019389

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 76 of 151
A-1

Appendix A - List of Energy Acronyms

Acronym Definition

AEMR Annual Energy Management Report

AFB Air Force Base

AFCEC Air Force Civil Engineer Center

AFIMSC Air Force Installation and Mission Support Center

AFLCMC Air Force Life-Cycle Management Center

AFPD Air Force Policy Directive

AFV Alternative Fuel Vehicle

AMC Army Materiel Command

AMI Advanced Meter Infrastructure

AMRS Advanced Meter Reading Systems

AMS Advanced Metering System

ANGB Air National Guard Base

ARNG Army National Guard

ASHRAE American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers

ASN (EI&E) Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Energy, Installations and Environment

BAS Building Automation System

BBtu Billion British Thermal Unit

BEM Building Energy Monitors

Btu British Thermal Unit

CDD Capabilities Development Document

CEQ Council on Environmental Quality

CES Civil Engineer Squadron

CIRCUITS Comprehensive Utilities Information Tracking System

CNG Compressed Natural Gas

CNIC Commander, Navy Installations Command

CNO Office of the Chief of Naval Operations

DASA (E&S) Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for Energy and Sustainability

DASN (Energy) Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Energy

DC I&L Deputy Commandant for Installations and Logistics

DCMA Defense Contract Management Agency

DeCA Defense Commissary Agency

Det Detachment

DFAS Defense Finance and Accounting Service

DHS Department of Homeland Security

DIA Defense Intelligence Agency

DLA Defense Logistics Agency

DoD Department of Defense

P00000019390

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 77 of 151
A-2

Acronym Definition

DoDI Department of Defense Instruction

DOE Department of Energy

DON Department of the Navy

DSC Distributed Control Systems

DUSD (I&E) Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Installations and Environment)

DWCF Defense Working Capital Fund

E85 85 percent ethanol fuel

ECIP Energy Conservation Investment Program

EIA Energy Information Administration

EISA Energy Independence and Security Act

EO Executive Order

EPAct Energy Policy Act

ESAP Energy Security Audit Program

ES2 Energy Security and Sustainability

ESCO Energy Service Company

ESA Energy Security Assessment

ESG Energy Steering Groups

ESIPT Energy Security Integrated Process Team

ESPC Energy Savings Performance Contract

ESTCP Environmental Security Technology Certification Program

EUI Energy Use Intensity

EUL Enhanced Use Lease

EVSE Electric Vehicle Charging Equipment

EXWC Engineering and Expeditionary Warfare Center

FY Fiscal Year

GGE Gallons of Gasoline Equivalent

GHG Greenhouse Gas

GSA Electric Vehicle Charging Equipment

GSF Gross Square Foot

GSHP Ground Source Heat Pump

GW Gigawatt, 1 billion Watts

HAF Headquarters U.S. Air Force

HPSB High Performance and Sustainable Buildings

HQ Headquarters

HVAC Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning

IC Intelligence Community

ICS Industrial Control System

ILA Industrial, Landscaping, and Agriculture

IMCOM Installation Management Command

JBMDL Joint Base MacGuire-Dix-Lakehurst

P00000019391

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 78 of 151
A-3

Acronym Definition

JCTD Joint Capability Technology Demonstration

KW Kilowatt, 1 thousand Watts

KWh Kilowatt-Hour, 1 thousand Watt-hours

LAAFB Los Angeles AFB

LED Light Emitting Diode

LEP Light Emitting Plasma

LPG Liquefied Petroleum Gas

MAD Mission Assurance Division

MAJCOM Major Command

MCAGCC Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center

MCICOM Marine Corps Installations Command

MCICOM GF Marine Corps Installations Command, Director Facilities

MCICOM GF-1 Marine Corps Installations Command, Energy and Facilities Operations Section

MDA Missile Defense Agency

MDMP Meter Data Management Plan

MDMS Meter Data Management System

MILCON Military Construction

MIT-LL Massachusetts Institute of Technology – Lincoln Laboratory

MSW Municipal Solid Waste

MUSE Mobile Utilities Support Equipment

MW Megawatt, 1 million Watts

MWh Megawatt-Hour, 1 million Watt-hours

NAS Naval Air Station

NAVFAC Naval Facilities Engineering Command

NAWS Naval Air Weapons Station 

NB Naval Base

NCBC Naval Construction Battalion Command

NCE NGA Campus East

NDAA National Defense Authorization Act

NECPA National Energy Conservation Policy Act

NGA National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency

NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology

NNSY Norfolk Navy Shipyard

NOITA Notice of Intent to Award

NRO National Reconnaissance Office

NS Naval Station

NSA National Security Agency

NSA Naval Supply Activity

NSWC Naval Surface Warfare Center

NTV Non-Tactical Vehicle

P00000019392

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 79 of 151
A-4

Acronym Definition

O&M Operations and Maintenance

OACSIM Office of the Assistant Chief of Staff for Installation Management

OASA(ALT) Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology

OASA(IE&E) Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Installations, Energy and Environment

OASD(EI&E) Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment

OD Operational Demonstration

ODASD(IE) Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Installation Energy

OMB Office of Management and Budget

OPNAV-N46 CNO Shore Installation Management Division

PEV Plug-in Electric Vehicle

PLC Programmable Logic Controllers

POCC Point of Common Coupling

PPA Power Purchase Agreement

PPCC President’s Performance Contracting Challenge

PV Photovoltaic

REC Renewable Energy Credit

REPD Renewable Energy Project Development

REPO Renewable Energy Program Office

RFP Request For Proposal

SAF/IEN Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Energy

SAF/US Under Secretary of the Air Force

SCADA Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition

SDD Sustainable Design and Development

SESC Senior Energy and Sustainability Council

SPIDERS Smart Power Infrastructure Demonstration for Energy Reliability and Security

SRM Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization

UESC Utility Energy Services Contract

UFC Unified Facilities Criteria

UP Utilities Privatization

U.S. United States

USACE US Army Corps of Engineers

USAR US Army Reserve

U.S.C United States Code

USC Utility Service Contract

V2G Vehicle to Grid

VAM Vehicle Allocation Methodology

VSCOS Vehicle Support Chain Operation Squadron

WHS Washington Headquarters Service

P00000019393

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 80 of 151
B-1

Appendix B - Compliance Matrix

Subsection 

/ 

Paragraph

Description FY2015 AEMR

Chapter / Appendix Page Number

10 USC § 2925

(a)

Annual Report Related to Installations Energy Management. — Not 

later than 120 days after the end of each fiscal year, the Secretary of 

Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees an 

installation energy report detailing the fulfillment during that fiscal year 

of the energy performance goals for the Department of Defense under 

section 2911 of this title. Each report shall contain the following:

(a)(1)

A description of the progress made to achieve the goals of the Energy 

Policy Act of 2005 (Public Law 109–58), Section 2911 (e) of this title, 

Section 553 of the National Energy Conservation Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 

8259b), the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (Public Law 

110–140), and the energy performance goals for the Department of 

Defense during the preceding fiscal year.

3, 4, 5 16,25,32,41

(a)(2) A table detailing funding, by account, for all energy projects funded 

through appropriations. Appendix F F-1

(a)(3)

A table listing all energy projects financed through third party financing 

mechanisms (including energy savings performance contracts, outgrants, 

utility energy service contracts, utility privatization agreements, and 

other contractual mechanisms), the duration of each such mechanism, an 

estimate of the financial obligation incurred through the duration of each 

such mechanism, whether the project incorporates energy security into 

its design, and the estimated payback period for each such mechanism.

Appendix F F-28

(a)(4)

In addition to the information contained in the table listing energy 

projects financed through third party financing mechanisms, as required 

by paragraph (3), the table also shall list any renewable energy 

certificates associated with each project, including information regarding 

whether the renewable energy certificates were bundled or unbundled, 

the purchasing authority for the renewable energy certificates, and the 

price of the associated renewable energy certificates.

4 35

P00000019394

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 81 of 151
B-2

Subsection 

/ 

Paragraph

Description FY2015 AEMR

Chapter / Appendix Page Number

(a)(5)

A description of the actions taken to implement the energy performance 

master plan in effect under Section 2911 of this title and carry out this 

chapter during the preceding fiscal year

3, 4 15,32

(a)(6) A description of the energy savings realized from such actions. 3, 4 15,32

(a)(7)

An estimate of the types and quantities of energy consumed by the 

Department of Defense and members of the armed forces and civilian 

personnel residing or working on military installations during the 

preceding fiscal year, including a breakdown of energy consumption by 

user groups and types of energy, energy costs, and the quantities of 

renewable energy produced or procured by the Department.

3,4 15,32

(a)(8)

A description of the types and amount of financial incentives received 

under Section 2913 of this title during the preceding fiscal year and the 

appropriation account or accounts to which the incentives were credited.

3, 7 17,60

(a)(9)

A description and estimate of the progress made by the Military 

Departments to meet the certification requirements for sustainable 

green-building standards in construction and major renovations as 

required by section 433 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 

2007 (Public Law 110–140; 121 Stat. 1612).

8 67

(a)(10)

A description of steps taken to determine best practices for measuring 

energy consumption in Department of Defense facilities and installations, 

in order to use the data for better energy management.

6 53

(a)(11)

Details of utility outages at military installations including the total 

number and locations of outages, the financial impact of the outage, and 

measures taken to mitigate outages in the future at the affected location 

and across the Department of Defense.

5 41

P00000019395

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 82 of 151
B-3

Subsection 

/ 

Paragraph

Description FY2015 AEMR

Chapter / Appendix Page Number

(a)(12) A description of any other issues and strategies the Secretary determines 

relevant to a comprehensive and renewable energy policy. 4 32

10 USC § 2911

(a)(1)

Energy Performance Goals. The DoD shall submit to the congressional 

defense committees the energy performance goals for the Department of 

Defense regarding transportation systems, support systems, utilities, and 

infrastructure and facilities.

Appendix C C-1

(b)(1)

Energy Performance Master Plan. The DoD shall develop a 

comprehensive master plan for the achievement of the energy 

performance goals of the Department of Defense, as set forth in laws, 

executive orders, and Department of Defense policies.

Appendix C C-1

(e)(2)

Interim Renewable Energy Goal. Requires the DoD to establish an interim 

FY 2018 goal for the production or procurement of facility energy from 

renewable sources. 4, Appendix C 32, C-1

Senate Armed 

Services Committee 

National Defense 

Authorization Act For 

Fiscal Year 2016

Report to accompany 

S.1376 (Report 114-

49)

p. 212-213

Analysis of domestic Department of Defense installations’ gas and oil 

reserves. The Assistant Secretary for Energy, Installations and 

Environment, is directed to provide an analysis of major Department of 

Defense installations with likely gas and oil reserves, the expected quality 

of the reserves, the estimated costs and savings of producing gas and oil, 

the statutory and regulatory challenges in implementing related energy 

development projects, mission and environmental impacts, and 

recommendations of which installations, if any, may benefit from such 

development.

5 44

P00000019396

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 83 of 151
B-4

Subsection 

/ 

Paragraph

Description FY2015 AEMR

Chapter / Appendix Page Number

DoD Appropriations 

Bill, 2016, Committee 

on Appropriations 

Report 114-139

p. 88

Energy Efficiency Report for DoD Facilities. Submit a report on the 

energy use and energy efficiency projects at the Pentagon and the ten 

largest DoD facilities; include, but is not limited to, an analysis of energy 

use at the Pentagon Reservation and the ten largest DoD facilities; an 

accounting, including dates, of when energy audits and energy efficiency 

projects have been conducted at such facilities; and any potential savings 

associated with efficient lighting systems. SECDEF report.

3 20

P00000019397

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 84 of 151
C-1

Appendix C - Energy Performance Master Plan

Introduction

The Energy Performance Master Plan 

(hereafter referred to as Master Plan) 

aligns investments to energy objectives, 

enables consistent Department-wide 

decision-making, and establishes metrics 

to evaluate DoD’s progress against the 

energy performance goals. The Master 

Plan was established and reported in the FY 2011 AEMR. The goals outlined in the Master Plan align 

with the Department’s facility energy strategy designed to reduce energy costs and improve the energy 

resilience of fixed installations. The Department’s facility energy strategy focuses on promoting 

efficiency, reducing costs, and supporting the mission. The key elements of the facility energy strategy 

are (Figure 1.0): 

• Expand Supply

• Reduce Demand

• Adapt Future Forces and Technology

In FY 2011, the then Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of 

Defense for Installations and Environment (ODUSD(I&E))–

now the Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense 

for Installations and Environment (ODASD(IE))–developed its 

energy performance goals and its first Master Plan with input

from DoD Components. The energy performance goals will be 

reviewed and reported annually, while the Master Plan will be 

updated periodically in the AEMR. However, DoD Components are 

required to submit their facility energy investment projections for the Future 

Years Defense Program (FYDP) as part of their Master Plan submittal. The DoD Components’ 

submissions to the President Budget, investment profile, energy benefit analyses, and narratives will be 

the basis for any periodic updates of the Master Plan within the AEMR. 

Facility energy is the energy necessary to support the 

functions of over 500 fixed installations on nearly 29 

million acres of land within the United States and 

internationally. This energy is distinct from operational 

energy which consists largely of mobility fuel that is used 

by operational aircraft, ships, and tanks, as well as 

generators at forward operating bases. 

Figure 1.0: Defense Energy Approach

P00000019398

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 85 of 151
C-2

Energy Performance Goals

The ODASD(IE) currently oversees the Department’s facility energy program. ODASD(IE) collaborated 

with the Military Departments and Defense Agencies to develop its energy performance goals. These 

energy performance goals of DoD have not changed from its previous submittal, and Table 1.0 

summarizes the three DoD facility energy performance goals. The table defines these goals and 

describes the associated measures, methods of measurement, and metrics. Table 1.1 summarizes DoD’s 

targets for each goal, including the interim FY 2018 renewable goal (also part of last year’s submittal).

Table 1.0: DoD Energy Performance Goals

Goal Description Uniform Measure Method of 

Measurement

Metric

Improve Energy 

Efficiency

Decrease installation 

energy consumption 

and improve energy 

intensity.

Energy consumption1 per 

gross square foot (energy 

intensity).

Energy intensity 

reduction.

British thermal 

units per 

thousand gross 

square feet 

(Btu/ Thousand 

GSF)

Increase 

Renewable 

Energy

Increase the production 

and procurement of onbase renewable energy.

Electric and non-electric 

renewable energy 

production and 

procurement.

Electric and nonelectric renewable 

energy produced or 

procured compared 

to electricity 

consumption. 

Billion Btu 

(BBtu)

Decrease 

Petroleum 

Consumption

Decrease petroleum 

consumption in fleet 

vehicles.

Fleet vehicle petroleum 

consumption.2

Fleet vehicle 

petroleum 

consumption 

reduction.

Gallons of 

gasoline 

Equivalent 

(GGE) 1

Energy consumption includes electricity, natural gas, fuel oil, propane, purchased steam and hot water, and coal. 

2

Petroleum includes gasoline, diesel, and the diesel portion of biodiesel (B20).

Table 1.1: Energy Performance Goals Annual Targets

Target FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY25

Energy Efficiency -18% -21% -24% -27% -30% -31.5% -33% -34.5% -36% -37.5% -

Renewable 

Energy

- - - - - - - +15% - - +25%

Petroleum 

Consumption 

-12% -14% -16% -18% -20% -22% -24% -26% -28% -30% -

DoD will update this Master Plan periodically to address new information, changes in energy 

performance goals, and to identify the investments necessary to achieve those goals. DoD’s 

commitment to meeting the energy performance goals also supports compliance with energy statutes, 

regulations, and Executive Orders (EOs). Accordingly, the energy performance goals continue to 

advance the DoD facility energy mission, vision, and strategy.

P00000019399

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 86 of 151
D-1

Appendix D - DoD Energy Performance Summary

P00000019400

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 87 of 151
D-2

i. NECPA/EISA Energy Goal Subject Buildings ii. NECPA/EISA Energy Goal Excluded Buildings

P00000019401

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 88 of 151
E-1

Appendix E - FY 2015 Energy Intensity by Installation

Component Installation Name City State / Country

Total Site Delivered 

Energy

(BBTU)

Goal Subject

Gross Square 

Footage 

('000 SF)

Goal Subject

Intensity 

(BTU/SF)

Goal Subject

ARMY 63RD REGIONAL SUPPORT 

COMMAND MOFFETT FIELD CALIFORNIA 259 5,770 44,854

ARMY 81ST REGIONAL SUPPORT 

COMMAND FORT JACKSON SOUTH CAROLINA 292 4,636 62,949

ARMY 88TH REGIONAL SUPPORT 

COMMAND FORT MCCOY WISCONSIN 800 9,958 80,337

ARMY 99TH REGIONAL SUPPORT 

COMMAND JOINT BASE MDL NEW JERSEY 397 6,562 60,448

ARMY 9TH MISSION SUPPORT 

COMMAND HONOLULU HAWAII 7 173 39,480

ARMY ABERDEEN PG ABERDEEN MARYLAND 2,562 14,136 181,219

ARMY ADELPHI LABORATORY CTR HYATTSVILLE MARYLAND 201 1,136 176,655

ARMY ALABAMA ARNG MONTGOMERY ALABAMA 171 3,520 48,628

ARMY ALASKA ARNG FORT RICHARDSON ALASKA 42 305 137,902

ARMY ANNISTON ARMY DEPOT ANNISTON ALABAMA 1,259 9,548 131,893

ARMY ARIZONA ARNG PHOENIX ARIZONA 72 1,525 47,180

ARMY ARKANSAS ARNG CAMP ROBINSON ARKANSAS 284 4,262 66,572

ARMY BLUE GRASS ARMY DEPOT RICHMOND KENTUCKY 128 4,214 30,363

ARMY CALIFORNIA ARNG SACRAMENTO CALIFORNIA 163 5,555 29,379

ARMY CAMP ZAMA JAPAN FPO JAPAN 660 9,939 66,386

ARMY CARLISLE BARRACKS CARLISLE PENNSYLVANIA 118 1,101 107,030

ARMY COLORADO ARNG ENGLEWOOD COLORADO 80 556 143,417

ARMY CONNECTICUT ARNG HARTFORD CONNECTICUT 85 1,181 71,914

P00000019402

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 89 of 151
E-2

Component Installation Name City State / Country

Total Site Delivered 

Energy

(BBTU)

Goal Subject

Gross Square 

Footage 

('000 SF)

Goal Subject

Intensity 

(BTU/SF)

Goal Subject

ARMY CORPUS CHRISTI AD CORPUS CHRISTI TEXAS 343 2,302 148,814

ARMY DC ARNG (MOB) WASHINGTON DISTRICT OF 

COLUMBIA 54 589 91,256

ARMY DELAWARE ARNG WILMINGTON DELAWARE 33 654 50,734

ARMY DEVENS RFTA DEVENS MASSACHUSETTS 109 1,282 84,680

ARMY DUGWAY PROVING GROUND DUGWAY UTAH 269 2,283 117,608

ARMY FLORIDA ARNG SAINT AUGUSTINE FLORIDA 82 2,780 29,619

ARMY FORT A P HILL BOWLING GREEN VIRGINIA 94 1,501 62,365

ARMY FORT BELVOIR FORT BELVOIR VIRGINIA 1,256 15,355 81,814

ARMY FORT BENNING FORT BENNING GEORGIA 1,999 20,927 95,518

ARMY FORT BLISS EL PASO TEXAS 1,417 22,912 61,833

ARMY FORT BRAGG FORT BRAGG NORTH CAROLINA 3,270 33,012 99,068

ARMY FORT BUCHANAN FORT BUCHANAN, CATANO PUERTO RICO 115 1,681 68,471

ARMY FORT CAMPBELL FORT CAMPBELL KENTUCKY 1,723 17,152 100,428

ARMY FORT CARSON COLORADO SPGS COLORADO 1,313 14,204 92,409

ARMY FORT DETRICK FORT DETRICK MARYLAND 1,129 3,482 324,248

ARMY FORT DRUM FORT DRUM NEW YORK 750 11,371 65,922

ARMY FORT GEORGE MEADE FORT MEADE MARYLAND 691 5,807 118,924

ARMY FORT GORDON AUGUSTA GEORGIA 940 10,540 89,138

ARMY FORT GREELY DELTA JUNCTION ALASKA 242 1,032 234,719

ARMY FORT HAMILTON NEW YORK CITY NEW YORK 78 839 92,992

ARMY FORT HOOD KILLEEN TEXAS 1,947 20,760 93,806

ARMY FORT HUACHUCA FORT HUACHUCA ARIZONA 447 5,458 81,949

ARMY FORT HUNTER LIGGETT FORT HUNTER LIGGETT CALIFORNIA 59 1,359 43,576

ARMY FORT IRWIN FORT IRWIN CALIFORNIA 352 4,035 87,162

ARMY FORT JACKSON COLUMBIA SOUTH CAROLINA 979 10,507 93,169

P00000019403

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 90 of 151
E-3

Component Installation Name City State / Country

Total Site Delivered 

Energy

(BBTU)

Goal Subject

Gross Square 

Footage 

('000 SF)

Goal Subject

Intensity 

(BTU/SF)

Goal Subject

ARMY FORT KNOX FORT KNOX KENTUCKY 1,030 11,100 92,748

ARMY FORT LEAVENWORTH FORT LEAVENWORTH KANSAS 406 4,404 92,075

ARMY FORT LEE FORT LEE VIRGINIA 889 10,519 84,497

ARMY FORT LEONARD WOOD FORT LEONARD WOOD MISSOURI 1,462 12,801 114,197

ARMY FORT MCCOY SPARTA WISCONSIN 401 6,698 59,803

ARMY FORT POLK FORT POLK LOUISIANA 693 8,473 81,796

ARMY FORT RILEY FORT RILEY KANSAS 1,153 12,214 94,397

ARMY FORT RUCKER FORT RUCKER ALABAMA 538 5,881 91,488

ARMY FORT SILL FORT SILL OKLAHOMA 1,162 10,433 111,372

ARMY FORT STEWART FORT STEWART GEORGIA 1,315 15,020 87,571

ARMY FORT WAINWRIGHT FORT WAINWRIGHT ALASKA 2,190 7,167 305,509

ARMY GEORGIA ARNG ATLANTA GEORGIA 126 1,786 70,801

ARMY GUAM ARNG (MOB) FPO GUAM 11 186 56,559

ARMY HAWAII ARNG HONOLULU HAWAII 25 1,007 24,896

ARMY HAWTHORNE AAP (GOCO) HAWTHORNE NEVADA 117 9,665 12,139

ARMY HOLSTON AAP (GOCO) KINGSPORT TENNESSEE 165 1,835 89,907

ARMY IDAHO ARNG BOISE IDAHO 88 726 120,675

ARMY ILLINOIS ARNG CAMP LINCOLN ILLINOIS 173 2,565 67,290

ARMY INDIANA ARNG INDIANOPOLIS INDIANA 402 4,052 99,181

ARMY IOWA AAP (GOCO) MIDDLETOWN IOWA 379 4,008 94,623

ARMY IOWA ARNG JOHNSTON IOWA 162 3,029 53,394

ARMY JOINT BASE LEWIS MCCHORD TACOMA WASHINGTON 2,123 25,699 82,621

ARMY JOINT BASE MYER-HENDERSON FORT MYER VIRGINIA 372 3,821 97,485

ARMY KANSAS ARNG TOPEKA KANSAS 115 1,456 79,148

ARMY KENTUCKY ARNG FRANKFORT KENTUCKY 88 1,605 54,741

ARMY KWAJALEIN ATOLL FPO MARSHALL ISLANDS 826 3,140 262,908

P00000019404

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 91 of 151
E-4

Component Installation Name City State / Country

Total Site Delivered 

Energy

(BBTU)

Goal Subject

Gross Square 

Footage 

('000 SF)

Goal Subject

Intensity 

(BTU/SF)

Goal Subject

ARMY LAKE CITY AAP (GOCO) INDEPENDENCE MISSOURI 967 1,132 854,514

ARMY LETTERKENNY ARMY DEPOT CHAMBERSBURG PENNSYLVANIA 474 4,663 101,615

ARMY LIMA JSMC LIMA OHIO 519 1,617 321,200

ARMY LOUISIANA ARNG JOHNSON BARRACKS LOUISIANA 168 3,097 54,139

ARMY MAINE ARNG CAMP KEYES MAINE 53 1,029 51,399

ARMY MARYLAND ARNG BALTIMORE MARYLAND 79 1,234 63,979

ARMY MASSACHUSETTS ARNG MILFORD MASSACHUSETTS 67 1,818 36,760

ARMY MCALESTER AAP MCALESTER OKLAHOMA 447 10,213 43,748

ARMY MICHIGAN ARNG LANSING MICHIGAN 374 3,841 97,305

ARMY MILAN AAP (GOCO) MILAN TENNESSEE 21 3,613 5,893

ARMY MILITARY OCEAN TML CONCORD CALIFORNIA 11 249 42,289

ARMY MINNESOTA ARNG CAMP RIPLEY MINNESOTA 285 4,091 69,545

ARMY MISSISSIPPI ARNG JACKSON MISSISSIPPI 264 5,921 44,540

ARMY MISSOURI ARNG JEFFERSON CITY MISSOURI 149 1,852 80,567

ARMY MONTANA ARNG HELENA MONTANA 75 1,369 55,011

ARMY MOT SUNNY POINT SOUTHPORT NORTH CAROLINA 17 363 47,934

ARMY NEBRASKA ARNG LINCOLN NEBRASKA 107 1,613 66,423

ARMY NEVADA ARNG CARSON CITY NEVADA 30 583 52,178

ARMY NEW HAMPSHIRE ARNG CONCORD NEW HAMPSHIRE 39 651 59,339

ARMY NEW JERSEY ARNG LAWRENCEVILLE NEW JERSEY 134 1,215 110,329

ARMY NEW MEXICO ARNG SANTA FE NEW MEXICO 69 783 87,510

ARMY NEW YORK ARNG LATHAM NEW YORK 169 2,502 67,686

ARMY NORTH CAROLINA ARNG RALEIGH NORTH CAROLINA 124 1,426 87,167

ARMY NORTH DAKOTA ARNG BISMARK NORTH DAKOTA 133 1,753 76,144

ARMY OHIO ARNG COLUMBUS OHIO 175 3,392 51,498

ARMY OKLAHOMA ARNG OKLAHOMA CITY OKLAHOMA 124 1,907 65,102

P00000019405

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 92 of 151
E-5

Component Installation Name City State / Country

Total Site Delivered 

Energy

(BBTU)

Goal Subject

Gross Square 

Footage 

('000 SF)

Goal Subject

Intensity 

(BTU/SF)

Goal Subject

ARMY OREGON ARNG SALEM OREGON 105 2,097 49,976

ARMY PARKS CSTC DUBLIN CALIFORNIA 46 1,209 37,734

ARMY PENNSYLVANIA ARNG ANNVILLE PENNSYLVANIA 354 4,920 71,990

ARMY PICATINNY ARSENAL DOVER NEW JERSEY 544 3,306 164,679

ARMY PINE BLUFF ARSENAL WHITE HALL ARKANSAS 314 3,611 86,821

ARMY PRESIDIO OF MONTEREY MONTEREY CALIFORNIA 191 2,645 72,060

ARMY PUEBLO CHEMICAL DEPOT PUEBLO COLORADO 28 3,669 7,621

ARMY PUERTO RICO ARNG (MOB) SAN JUAN PUERTO RICO 55 1,501 36,516

ARMY RADFORD AAP (GOCO) RADFORD VIRGINIA 198 2,078 95,221

ARMY RED RIVER DEPOT TEXARKANA TEXAS 674 7,246 93,084

ARMY REDSTONE ARSENAL HUNTSVILLE ALABAMA 1,295 14,340 90,278

ARMY RHODE ISLAND ARNG CRANSTON RHODE ISLAND 61 1,252 48,794

ARMY ROCK ISLAND ARSENAL ROCK ISLAND ILLINOIS 689 6,473 106,427

ARMY SCRANTON AAP SCRANTON PENNSYLVANIA 12 385 30,753

ARMY SIERRA ARMY DEPOT HERLONG SIERRA ORD-D CALIFORNIA 132 5,191 25,500

ARMY SOLDIER SYSTEMS CTR, NATICK MASSACHUSETTS 109 1,044 104,406

ARMY SOUTH CAROLINA ARNG COLUMBIA SOUTH CAROLINA 120 1,418 84,330

ARMY SOUTH DAKOTA ARNG RAPID CITY SOUTH DAKOTA 61 1,243 48,825

ARMY TENNESSEE ARNG NASHVILLE TENNESSEE 140 2,403 58,169

ARMY TEXAS ARNG CAMP MABRY TEXAS 177 3,256 54,509

ARMY TOBYHANNA ARMY DEPOT TOBYHANNA PENNSYLVANIA 592 4,588 129,109

ARMY TOOELE ARMY DEPOT TOOELE UTAH 81 3,778 21,466

ARMY USAG ANSBACH FPO GERMANY 323 7,049 45,806

ARMY USAG BAVARIA FPO GERMANY 1,435 24,368 58,894

ARMY USAG BENELUX FPO BELGIUM 136 3,114 43,671

ARMY USAG DAEGU TAEGU SOUTH KOREA 492 6,320 77,807

P00000019406

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 93 of 151
E-6

Component Installation Name City State / Country

Total Site Delivered 

Energy

(BBTU)

Goal Subject

Gross Square 

Footage 

('000 SF)

Goal Subject

Intensity 

(BTU/SF)

Goal Subject

ARMY USAG DETROIT ARSENAL HARRISON TOWNSHIP MICHIGAN 271 1,966 137,782

ARMY USAG HAWAII WAHIAWA HAWAII 822 14,649 56,108

ARMY USAG HUMPHREYS CAMP HUMPHREYS SOUTH KOREA 693 8,058 86,029

ARMY USAG MIAMI MIAMI FLORIDA 92 812 113,140

ARMY USAG RED CLOUD UIJONG BU SOUTH KOREA 1,074 9,829 109,309

ARMY USAG RHEINLAND-PFALZ FPO GERMANY 1,193 24,482 48,722

ARMY USAG STUTTGART FPO GERMANY 615 8,322 73,907

ARMY USAG VICENZA FPO ITALY 626 7,958 78,691

ARMY USAG WIESBADEN FPO GERMANY 637 11,803 53,936

ARMY USAG YONGSAN SEOUL SOUTH KOREA 978 8,354 117,083

ARMY UTAH ARNG DRAPER UTAH 102 1,785 57,289

ARMY VERMONT ARNG COLCHESTER VERMONT 57 1,114 51,050

ARMY VIRGIN ISLANDS ARNG (MOB) FPO VIRGIN ISLANDS 10 301 33,123

ARMY VIRGINIA ARNG FORT PICKETT VIRGINIA 177 3,315 53,442

ARMY WASHINGTON ARNG CAMP MURRAY WASHINGTON 51 834 61,595

ARMY WATERVLIET ARSENAL WATERVLIET NEW YORK 310 2,152 143,973

ARMY WEST POINT MIL RESERVATION WEST POINT NEW YORK 965 7,104 135,818

ARMY WEST VIRGINIA ARNG CHARLESTON WEST VIRGINIA 206 2,107 97,769

ARMY WHITE SANDS MISSILE RANGE WHITE SANDS NEW MEXICO 299 4,286 69,876

ARMY WISCONSIN ARNG MADISON WISCONSIN 203 2,076 97,731

ARMY WYOMING ARNG CHYENNE WYOMING 79 823 95,480

ARMY YUMA PROVING GROUND YUMA ARIZONA 139 1,799 77,504

NAVY CAMP LEMONNIER DJBOUTI FPO DJBOUTI 820 1,331 615,973

NAVY CBC GULFPORT MS GULFPORT MISSISSIPPI 144 4,661 30,998

NAVY CFA CHINHAE FPO KOREA, REPUBLIC 

OF 28 419 67,279

P00000019407

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 94 of 151
E-7

Component Installation Name City State / Country

Total Site Delivered 

Energy

(BBTU)

Goal Subject

Gross Square 

Footage 

('000 SF)

Goal Subject

Intensity 

(BTU/SF)

Goal Subject

NAVY CFA OKINAWA JA FPO JAPAN 53 805 66,422

NAVY CFA SASEBO JA FPO JAPAN 286 4,318 66,204

NAVY CFA YOKOSUKA JA FPO JAPAN 2,826 13,642 207,175

NAVY FRC EAST CHERRY POINT NC CHERRY POINT NORTH CAROLINA 548 1,926 284,408

NAVY JB ANACOSTIA BOLLING JOINT BASE ANACOSTIA 

BOLLING

DISTRICT OF 

COLUMBIA 427 4,769 89,480

NAVY JEB LITTLE CREEK-FORT STORY VA VIRGINIA BEACH VIRGINIA 608 6,071 100,105

NAVY NAF ATSUGI JA FPO JAPAN 522 4,204 124,137

NAVY NAF EL CENTRO CA EL CENTRO CALIFORNIA 66 1,194 55,025

NAVY NAF MISAWA JA FPO JAPAN 9 18 505,556

NAVY NAS CORPUS CHRISTI TX CORPUS CHRISTI TEXAS 278 2,912 95,313

NAVY NAS FALLON NV FALLON NEVADA 195 2,188 89,132

NAVY NAS JACKSONVILLE FL JACKSONVILLE FLORIDA 940 8,244 113,994

NAVY NAS JRB FORT WORTH TX FORT WORTH TEXAS 267 3,434 77,854

NAVY NAS JRB NEW ORLEANS LA NEW ORLEANS LOUISIANA 180 2,283 78,717

NAVY NAS KEY WEST FL KEY WEST FLORIDA 300 2,926 102,526

NAVY NAS KINGSVILLE TX KINGSVILLE TEXAS 106 1,195 88,301

NAVY NAS LEMOORE CA LEMOORE CALIFORNIA 243 3,575 67,860

NAVY NAS MERIDIAN MS MERIDIAN MISSISSIPPI 175 1,602 109,101

NAVY NAS OCEANA VA VIRGINIA BEACH VIRGINIA 749 7,676 97,517

NAVY NAS PATUXENT RIVER MD PATUXENT RIVER MARYLAND 1,003 8,283 121,129

NAVY NAS PENSACOLA FL PENSACOLA FLORIDA 1,027 11,480 89,424

NAVY NAS SIGONELLA IT FPO ITALY 217 3,113 69,724

NAVY NAS WHIDBEY ISLAND WA OAK HARBOR WASHINGTON 422 3,914 107,747

NAVY NAS WHITING FIELD MILTON FL MILTON FLORIDA 123 1,337 91,870

P00000019408

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 95 of 151
E-8

Component Installation Name City State / Country

Total Site Delivered 

Energy

(BBTU)

Goal Subject

Gross Square 

Footage 

('000 SF)

Goal Subject

Intensity 

(BTU/SF)

Goal Subject

NAVY NAVBASE CORONADO SAN 

DIEGO CA SAN DIEGO CALIFORNIA 1,312 13,917 94,284

NAVY NAVBASE GUAM FPO GUAM 460 7,863 58,470

NAVY NAVBASE KITSAP BREMERTON 

WA BREMERTON WASHINGTON 1,984 13,749 144,309

NAVY NAVBASE POINT LOMA CA SAN DIEGO CALIFORNIA 422 6,317 66,869

NAVY NAVBASE SAN DIEGO CA SAN DIEGO CALIFORNIA 1,129 9,201 122,755

NAVY NAVBASE VENTURA CTY PT 

MUGU CA POINT MUGU CALIFORNIA 340 9,223 36,837

NAVY NAVHOSP BEAUFORT SC BEAUFORT SOUTH CAROLINA 84 431 194,408

NAVY NAVHOSP BREMERTON WA BREMERTON WASHINGTON 86 329 262,219

NAVY NAVHOSP CAMP PENDLETON CA CAMP PENDLETON CALIFORNIA 118 1,353 86,844

NAVY NAVHOSP GUAM FPO GUAM 60 333 179,580

NAVY NAVHOSP OKINAWA JA FPO JAPAN 68 629 107,790

NAVY NAVHOSP TWENTYNINE PALMS 

CA TWENTYNINE PALMS CALIFORNIA 45 218 207,523

NAVY NAVMAG INDIAN ISLAND WA PORT HADLOCK WASHINGTON 14 346 41,301

NAVY NAVSTA EVERETT WA EVERETT WASHINGTON 120 1,496 80,154

NAVY NAVSTA GREAT LAKES IL GREAT LAKES ILLINOIS 1,342 9,528 140,797

NAVY NAVSTA GUANTANAMO BAY CU FPO CUBA 1,065 6,687 159,320

NAVY NAVSTA MAYPORT FL JACKSONVILLE FLORIDA 196 2,901 67,518

NAVY NAVSTA NEWPORT RI NEWPORT RHODE ISLAND 607 6,125 99,179

NAVY NAVSTA NORFOLK VA NORFOLK VIRGINIA 2,130 16,217 131,349

NAVY NAVSTA PEARL HARBOR HI PEARL HARBOR HAWAII 705 19,464 36,202

NAVY NAVSTA ROTA SP FPO SPAIN 188 4,194 44,800

NAVY NAVSUPPU SARATOGA SPRINGS 

NY SARATOGA SPRINGS NEW YORK 3 205 14,439

P00000019409

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 96 of 151
E-9

Component Installation Name City State / Country

Total Site Delivered 

Energy

(BBTU)

Goal Subject

Gross Square 

Footage 

('000 SF)

Goal Subject

Intensity 

(BTU/SF)

Goal Subject

NAVY NAWS CHINA LAKE CA CHINA LAKE CALIFORNIA 552 4,651 118,665

NAVY NIOC SUGAR GROVE WV SUGAR GROVE WEST VIRGINIA 19 211 87,773

NAVY NOSC MIDLANT WASHINGTON 

DC NORFOLK VIRGINIA 80 716 111,913

NAVY NOSC MIDSOUTH MILLINGTON TENNESSEE 18 398 45,653

NAVY NOSC MIDWEST GREAT LAKES ILLINOIS 30 1,453 20,571

NAVY NOSC NE NEWPORT RI NEWPORT RHODE ISLAND 31 451 68,537

NAVY NOSC NORTHWEST EVERETT WA EVERETT WASHINGTON 34 325 104,831

NAVY NOSC SOUTHWEST SAN DIEGO 

CA SAN DIEGO CALIFORNIA 14 470 29,915

NAVY NSA ANDERSEN FPO GUAM 384 6,977 54,994

NAVY NSA ANNAPOLIS MD ANNAPOLIS MARYLAND 746 5,848 127,536

NAVY NSA BAHRAIN FPO BAHRAIN 255 2,650 96,174

NAVY NSA BETHESDA BETHESDA MARYLAND 1,137 7,748 146,789

NAVY NSA CRANE IN CRANE INDIANA 783 4,242 184,606

NAVY NSA HAMPTON ROADS VA NORFOLK VIRGINIA 987 7,503 131,527

NAVY NSA MECHANICSBURG PA MECHANICSBURG PENNSYLVANIA 749 12,202 61,366

NAVY NSA MID SOUTH MILLINGTON TN MILLINGTON TENNESSEE 197 2,533 77,710

NAVY NSA MONTEREY CA MONTEREY CALIFORNIA 137 1,820 75,516

NAVY NSA NAPLES IT FPO ITALY 377 5,699 66,161

NAVY NSA ORLANDO FL ORLANDO FLORIDA 22 306 70,359

NAVY NSA PANAMA CITY FL PANAMA CITY BEACH FLORIDA 201 1,458 137,606

NAVY NSA SOUDA BAY GR FPO GREECE 33 490 67,367

NAVY NSA SOUTH POTOMAC 

DAHLGREN VA DAHLGREN VIRGINIA 2,230 6,571 339,346

NAVY NSA WASHINGTON DC WASHINGTON NAVY YARD DISTRICT OF 

COLUMBIA 1,762 11,750 149,970

P00000019410

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 97 of 151
E-10

Component Installation Name City State / Country

Total Site Delivered 

Energy

(BBTU)

Goal Subject

Gross Square 

Footage 

('000 SF)

Goal Subject

Intensity 

(BTU/SF)

Goal Subject

NAVY NSF DIEGO GARCIA FPO INDIAN OCEAN 694 2,729 254,481

NAVY NSS NORFOLK NAVAL SHIPYARD 

VA NORFOLK VIRGINIA 1,052 7,568 138,944

NAVY NSY BOS PORTSMOUTH NH PORTSMOUTH NEW HAMPSHIRE 1,109 3,853 287,724

NAVY PMRF BARKING SANDS HI KEKAHA HAWAII 59 695 85,525

NAVY SINGAPORE AREA COORDINATOR FPO SINGAPORE 29 632 46,566

NAVY SUBASE KINGS BAY GA KINGS BAY GEORGIA 725 5,335 135,826

NAVY SUBASE NEW LONDON CT GROTON CONNECTICUT 626 3,245 193,060

NAVY WPNSTA EARLE COLTS NECK NJ COLTS NECK NEW JERSEY 152 1,290 118,078

NAVY WPNSTA SEAL BEACH CA SEAL BEACH CALIFORNIA 95 2,098 45,219

NAVY WPNSTA YORKTOWN VA YORKTOWN VIRGINIA 207 5,705 36,347

NAVY WV ABL MINERAL CO SHORT GAP WEST VIRGINIA 641 1,129 567,635

USMC CG MCAGCC TWENTYNINE 

PALMS CA TWENTYNINE PALMS CALIFORNIA 1,013 6,865 147,531

USMC CG MCB CAMP BUTLER JA FPO JAPAN 1,083 17,454 62,041

USMC CG MCB CAMP LEJEUNE NC CAMP LEJEUNE NORTH CAROLINA 3,091 24,887 124,215

USMC CG MCB CAMP PENDLETON CA CAMP PENDLETON CALIFORNIA 942 21,099 44,647

USMC CG MCCDC QUANTICO VA QUANTICO VIRGINIA 976 8,344 116,927

USMC CG MCLB ALBANY GA ALBANY GEORGIA 317 7,032 45,145

USMC FIRST MCD GARDEN CITY LI NY LONG ISLAND NEW YORK 71 166 430,482

USMC MARBKS WASHINGTON DC WASHINGTON DISTRICT OF 

COLUMBIA 49 623 79,069

USMC MARCORCRUITDEP PARRIS 

ISLAND SC PARRIS ISLAND SOUTH CAROLINA 488 3,935 124,112

USMC MARCORCRUITDEP SAN DIEGO 

CA SAN DIEGO CALIFORNIA 223 2,798 79,786

USMC MARFORRES NEW ORLEANS NEW ORLEANS LOUISIANA 138 1,860 74,022

P00000019411

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 98 of 151
E-11

Component Installation Name City State / Country

Total Site Delivered 

Energy

(BBTU)

Goal Subject

Gross Square 

Footage 

('000 SF)

Goal Subject

Intensity 

(BTU/SF)

Goal Subject

USMC MARINE CORPS AIR STATION 

CAMP PENDLETON CAMP PENDLETON CALIFORNIA 31 885 34,802

USMC MCAS BEAUFORT SC BEAUFORT SOUTH CAROLINA 185 2,548 72,732

USMC MCAS CHERRY PT NC CHERRY POINT NORTH CAROLINA 762 6,524 116,810

USMC MCAS IWAKUNI JA FPO JAPAN 698 6,373 109,554

USMC MCAS MIRAMAR SAN DIEGO CALIFORNIA 155 5,718 27,055

USMC MCAS YUMA AZ YUMA ARIZONA 196 3,107 63,190

USMC MCB HAWAII KANEOHE BAY KANEOHE BAY HAWAII 320 6,765 47,375

USMC MCLB BARSTOW CA BARSTOW CALIFORNIA 238 4,625 51,440

USMC MCMWTC BRIDGEPORT CA BRIDGEPORT CALIFORNIA 57 373 152,842

USMC MCSF BLOUNT ISLAND FL JACKSONVILLE FLORIDA 23 1,099 21,165

AIR FORCE ABRAHAM LINCOLN CAPITAL 

AIRPORT SPRINGFIELD ILLINOIS 25 332 73,916

AIR FORCE AIR NATIONAL GUARD 

READINESS CENTER (ANGRC) ANDREWS AFB MARYLAND 24 348 70,172

AIR FORCE ALPENA COUNTY REGIONAL 

AIRPORT ALPENA MICHIGAN 42 565 74,619

AIR FORCE ALTUS AIR FORCE BASE ALTUS OKLAHOMA 266 2,421 109,806

AIR FORCE ANDERSEN AIR FORCE BASE FPO GUAM 3 61 48,361

AIR FORCE ARKANSAS NATIONAL GUARD LITTLE ROCK ARKANSAS 274 4,336 63,192

AIR FORCE ARNOLD AIR STATION ARNOLD A F STATION TENNESSEE 618 1,794 344,337

AIR FORCE ATLANTIC CITY INTERNATIONAL 

AIRPORT EGG HARBOR TOWNSHIP NEW JERSEY 47 495 94,525

AIR FORCE AVIANO AIR BASE FPO ITALY 283 4,220 66,945

AIR FORCE BANGOR INTERNATIONAL 

AIRPORT (ANG) BANGOR MAINE 56 511 110,391

AIR FORCE BARKSDALE AIR FORCE BASE BARKSDALE AF BASE LOUISIANA 450 5,096 88,348

P00000019412

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 99 of 151
E-12

Component Installation Name City State / Country

Total Site Delivered 

Energy

(BBTU)

Goal Subject

Gross Square 

Footage 

('000 SF)

Goal Subject

Intensity 

(BTU/SF)

Goal Subject

AIR FORCE BARNES MUNICIPAL AIRPORT 

ANG WESTFIELD MASSACHUSETTS 44 480 92,438

AIR FORCE BEALE AIR FORCE BASE BEALE AFB CALIFORNIA 252 3,093 81,562

AIR FORCE BIRMINGHAM INTERNATIONAL 

AIRPORT BIRMINGHAM ALABAMA 34 365 92,082

AIR FORCE BOISE AIR TERMINAL (ANG) BOISE IDAHO 27 566 47,915

AIR FORCE BRADLEY INTERNATIONAL 

AIRPORT (ANG) WINDSOR LOCKS CONNECTICUT 31 402 76,692

AIR FORCE BUCKLEY AIR FORCE BASE AURORA COLORADO 128 1,506 85,093

AIR FORCE BUCKLEY AIR FORCE BASE AURORA COLORADO 73 588 123,895

AIR FORCE BURLINGTON INTERNATIONAL 

AIRPORT (ANG) SOUTH BURLINGTON VERMONT 23 479 47,641

AIR FORCE CAMP BLANDING MILITARY 

RESERVATION (ANG) STARKE FLORIDA 4 124 33,790

AIR FORCE CAMP MURRAY ANG STATION TACOMA WASHINGTON 11 294 37,925

AIR FORCE CAMP PENDLETON MILITARY 

RESERVATION(ANG) VIRGINIA BEACH VIRGINIA 6 124 44,919

AIR FORCE CAMP PERRY ANG STATION PORT CLINTON OHIO 6 103 54,854

AIR FORCE CANNON AIR FORCE BASE CANNON AFB NEW MEXICO 347 3,056 113,390

AIR FORCE CARSWELL AIR RESERVE STATION FORT WORTH TEXAS 16 360 45,111

AIR FORCE CHANNEL ISLANDS ANG STATION PORT HUENEME CALIFORNIA 13 345 39,072

AIR FORCE CHARLESTON AIR FORCE BASE CHARLESTON SOUTH CAROLINA 730 8,719 83,744

AIR FORCE CHARLOTTE/DOUGLAS INT 

AIRPORT (ANG) CHARLOTTE NORTH CAROLINA 36 569 62,970

AIR FORCE CHEYENNE REGIONAL AIRPORT CHEYENNE WYOMING 48 432 110,417

AIR FORCE COLUMBUS AIR FORCE BASE COLUMBUS MISSISSIPPI 149 1,539 97,115

AIR FORCE DANE COUNTY REGIONAL 

AIRPORT-TRUAX FIELD MADISON WISCONSIN 36 476 74,853

P00000019413

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 100 of 151
E-13

Component Installation Name City State / Country

Total Site Delivered 

Energy

(BBTU)

Goal Subject

Gross Square 

Footage 

('000 SF)

Goal Subject

Intensity 

(BTU/SF)

Goal Subject

AIR FORCE DAVIS-MONTHAN AIR FORCE 

BASE TUCSON ARIZONA 332 4,426 75,014

AIR FORCE DES MOINES INTERNATIONAL 

AIRPORT ANG DES MOINES IOWA 35 417 83,573

AIR FORCE DOBBINS AIR RESERVE BASE MARIETTA GEORGIA 91 1,014 90,168

AIR FORCE DOVER AIR FORCE BASE DOVER DELAWARE 449 3,508 128,007

AIR FORCE DULUTH INTERNATIONAL 

AIRPORT (ANG) DULUTH MINNESOTA 58 479 121,357

AIR FORCE DYESS AIR FORCE BASE ABILENE TEXAS 280 3,271 85,659

AIR FORCE EARECKSON AIR STATION ADAK STATION ALASKA 379 2,768 136,842

AIR FORCE EDWARDS AIR FORCE BASE LANCASTER CALIFORNIA 706 6,687 105,647

AIR FORCE EGLIN AIR FORCE AUXILIARY 

FIELD #9 EGLIN AFB FLORIDA 482 4,341 110,921

AIR FORCE EGLIN AIR FORCE BASE VALPARAISO FLORIDA 1,194 10,596 112,717

AIR FORCE EIELSON AIR FORCE BASE MOOSE CREEK ALASKA 27 302 88,377

AIR FORCE EIELSON AIR FORCE BASE MOOSE CREEK ALASKA 2,058 3,988 515,993

AIR FORCE ELLINGTON FIELD HOUSTON TEXAS 41 523 77,820

AIR FORCE ELLSWORTH AIR FORCE BASE ELLSWORTH AFB SOUTH DAKOTA 475 4,315 110,093

AIR FORCE EWVRA SHEPHERD FIELD ANG MARTINSBURG WEST VIRGINIA 75 640 117,297

AIR FORCE FAIRCHILD AIR FORCE BASE AIRWAY HEIGHTS WASHINGTON 16 362 45,193

AIR FORCE FAIRCHILD AIR FORCE BASE AIRWAY HEIGHTS WASHINGTON 417 4,136 100,725

AIR FORCE FORBES FIELD ANG TOPEKA KANSAS 47 481 97,963

AIR FORCE FORT SMITH MUNICIPAL 

AIRPORT ANG FORT SMITH ARKANSAS 20 418 48,589

AIR FORCE FORT WAYNE INTERNATIONAL 

AIRPORT FORT WAYNE INDIANA 40 430 92,767

AIR FORCE FRANCIS E WARREN AIR FORCE 

BASE CHEYENNE WYOMING 373 3,117 119,731

P00000019414

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 101 of 151
E-14

Component Installation Name City State / Country

Total Site Delivered 

Energy

(BBTU)

Goal Subject

Gross Square 

Footage 

('000 SF)

Goal Subject

Intensity 

(BTU/SF)

Goal Subject

AIR FORCE FRANCIS S GABRESKI AIRPORT 

(ANG) WESTHAMPTON BEACH NEW YORK 39 360 108,500

AIR FORCE FRESNO YOSEMITE 

INTERNATIONAL FRESNO CALIFORNIA 22 444 49,482

AIR FORCE FT INDIANTOWN GAP ANG 

STATION ANNVILLE PENNSYLVANIA 17 348 49,598

AIR FORCE GENERAL MITCHELL 

INTERNATIONAL APT (ANG) MILWAUKEE WISCONSIN 34 384 88,620

AIR FORCE

GENERAL WAYNE A. DOWNING 

PEORIA INTERNATIONAL 

AIRPORT (ANG)

PEORIA ILLINOIS 33 448 74,018

AIR FORCE GOODFELLOW AIR FORCE BASE SAN ANGELO TEXAS 225 2,574 87,246

AIR FORCE GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE GRAND FORKS AFB NORTH DAKOTA 287 2,623 109,462

AIR FORCE GREAT FALLS IAP ANG GREAT FALLS MONTANA 34 428 78,598

AIR FORCE GRISSOM AIR RESERVE BASE KOKOMO INDIANA 103 1,047 98,415

AIR FORCE GULFPORT-BILOXI REGIONAL 

AIRPORT (ANG) GULFPORT MISSISSIPPI 32 639 49,484

AIR FORCE HANSCOM AIR FORCE BASE BEDFORD MASSACHUSETTS 579 2,436 237,672

AIR FORCE HARRISBURG IAP MIDDLETOWN PENNSYLVANIA 25 330 76,818

AIR FORCE HECTOR INTERNATIONAL 

AIRPORT (ANG) FARGO NORTH DAKOTA 37 492 75,366

AIR FORCE HICKAM AFB HICKAM A F BASE HAWAII 37 1,048 35,382

AIR FORCE HILL AIR FORCE BASE OGDEN UTAH 1,869 12,536 149,110

AIR FORCE HOLLOMAN AIR FORCE BASE ALAMOGORDO NEW MEXICO 603 5,389 111,954

AIR FORCE HOMESTEAD AIR RESERVE BASE HOMESTEAD FLORIDA 62 1,112 55,414

AIR FORCE HULMAN REGIONAL AIRPORT TERRE HAUTE INDIANA 50 393 128,397

AIR FORCE INCIRLIK AIR BASE ADANA FPO TURKEY 257 4,809 53,425

P00000019415

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 102 of 151
E-15

Component Installation Name City State / Country

Total Site Delivered 

Energy

(BBTU)

Goal Subject

Gross Square 

Footage 

('000 SF)

Goal Subject

Intensity 

(BTU/SF)

Goal Subject

AIR FORCE JACKSON INTERNATIONAL 

AIRPORT FLOWOOD MISSISSIPPI 51 546 93,205

AIR FORCE JACKSONVILLE IAP ANG JACKSONVILLE FLORIDA 27 470 57,489

AIR FORCE JBSA - LACKLAND SAN ANTONIO TEXAS 3,908 35,340 110,581

AIR FORCE JEFFERSON BARRACKS ANG 

STATION LEMAY MISSOURI 13 220 60,591

AIR FORCE JOE FOSS FIELD ANG SIOUX FALLS SOUTH DAKOTA 40 425 93,106

AIR FORCE JOINT BASE ANDREWS-NAVAL 

AIR FACILITY WASHINGTON ANDREWS AFB MARYLAND 40 490 82,041

AIR FORCE JOINT BASE ANDREWS-NAVAL 

AIR FACILITY WASHINGTON ANDREWS AFB MARYLAND 596 5,711 104,274

AIR FORCE JOINT BASE ELMENDORF-FT 

RICHARDSON ELMENDORF AFB ALASKA 53 556 94,784

AIR FORCE JOINT BASE ELMENDORF-FT 

RICHARDSON ELMENDORF AFB ALASKA 1,621 11,789 137,482

AIR FORCE KADENA AIR BASE KADENA AIR BASE 

OKINAWA JAPAN 1,235 23,664 52,198

AIR FORCE KEESLER AIR FORCE BASE BILOXI MISSISSIPPI 675 6,721 100,420

AIR FORCE KELLY FIELD ANNEX (LACKLAND 

AFB) LACKLAND AFB TEXAS 35 378 93,783

AIR FORCE KEY FIELD AIR NATIONAL GUARD MERIDIAN MISSISSIPPI 31 409 75,672

AIR FORCE KIRTLAND AIR FORCE BASE ALBUQUERQUE NEW MEXICO 18 310 58,839

AIR FORCE KIRTLAND AIR FORCE BASE ALBUQUERQUE NEW MEXICO 720 6,940 103,736

AIR FORCE KLAMATH FALLS AIRPORTKINGSLEY FIELD KLAMATH FALLS OREGON 34 486 69,218

AIR FORCE KUNSAN AIR BASE KUNSAN KOREA, REPUBLIC 

OF 334 3,885 86,008

AIR FORCE LAJES FIELD FPO PORTUGAL 71 2,574 27,413

P00000019416

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 103 of 151
E-16

Component Installation Name City State / Country

Total Site Delivered 

Energy

(BBTU)

Goal Subject

Gross Square 

Footage 

('000 SF)

Goal Subject

Intensity 

(BTU/SF)

Goal Subject

AIR FORCE LAMBERT ST LOUIS IAP ANG ST. LOUIS MISSOURI 17 294 57,721

AIR FORCE LANGLEY AIR FORCE BASE LANGLEY AFB VIRGINIA 1,137 12,141 93,668

AIR FORCE LAUGHLIN AIR FORCE BASE DEL RIO TEXAS 103 1,790 57,469

AIR FORCE LINCOLN MUNICIPAL AIRPORT 

(ANG) LINCOLN NEBRASKA 31 355 86,028

AIR FORCE LITTLE ROCK AIR FORCE BASE LITTLE ROCK ARKANSAS 29 311 92,026

AIR FORCE LITTLE ROCK AIR FORCE BASE LITTLE ROCK ARKANSAS 396 3,344 118,385

AIR FORCE LOS ANGELES AIR FORCE BASE EL SEGUNDO CALIFORNIA 96 1,109 86,366

AIR FORCE LOUISVILLE INTERNATIONAL 

AIRPORT - STANDIFORD FIELD LOUISVILLE KENTUCKY 27 417 65,923

AIR FORCE LUIS MUNOZ MARIN 

INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAROLINA PUERTO RICO 26 475 54,926

AIR FORCE LUKE AIR FORCE BASE GLENDALE ARIZONA 237 3,656 64,754

AIR FORCE MACDILL AIR FORCE BASE TAMPA FLORIDA 513 5,083 100,964

AIR FORCE MALMSTROM AIR FORCE BASE MALMSTROM AFB MONTANA 485 2,995 161,860

AIR FORCE MANSFIELD LAHM AIRPORT ANG MANSFIELD OHIO 40 353 112,776

AIR FORCE MARCH AIR RESERVE BASE RIVERSIDE CALIFORNIA 119 1,971 60,193

AIR FORCE MARCH AIR RESERVE BASE RIVERSIDE CALIFORNIA 43 303 140,759

AIR FORCE MARTIN STATE AIRPORT ANG MIDDLE RIVER MARYLAND 31 442 71,041

AIR FORCE MAXWELL AIR FORCE BASE MONTGOMERY ALABAMA 685 5,806 117,993

AIR FORCE MCCONNELL AIR FORCE BASE WICHITA KANSAS 285 2,576 110,683

AIR FORCE MCCONNELL AIR FORCE BASE WICHITA KANSAS 79 701 113,081

AIR FORCE MCENTIRE JOINT NATIONAL 

GUARD BASE EASTOVER SOUTH CAROLINA 39 448 87,768

AIR FORCE MCGHEE TYSON AIRPORT LOUISVILLE TENNESSEE 82 834 98,777

AIR FORCE MCGUIRE AIR FORCE BASE MCGUIRE AFB NEW JERSEY 1,305 13,035 100,152

AIR FORCE MCGUIRE AIR FORCE BASE MCGUIRE AFB NEW JERSEY 63 437 144,073

P00000019417

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 104 of 151
E-17

Component Installation Name City State / Country

Total Site Delivered 

Energy

(BBTU)

Goal Subject

Gross Square 

Footage 

('000 SF)

Goal Subject

Intensity 

(BTU/SF)

Goal Subject

AIR FORCE MEMPHIS INTERNATIONAL 

AIRPORT MEMPHIS TENNESSEE 55 586 93,737

AIR FORCE MINNEAPOLIS-ST PAUL IAP-AIR 

RESERVE STN MINNEAPOLIS MINNESOTA 39 467 84,069

AIR FORCE MINNEAPOLIS-ST PAUL IAP-AIR 

RESERVE STN MINNEAPOLIS MINNESOTA 71 710 99,592

AIR FORCE MINOT AIR FORCE BASE MINOT AFB NORTH DAKOTA 519 4,112 126,170

AIR FORCE MISAWA AIR BASE MISAWA AFB JAPAN 1,203 7,882 152,614

AIR FORCE MOFFETT FLD ANG MOUNTAIN VIEW CALIFORNIA 13 392 34,413

AIR FORCE MONTGOMERY REGIONAL 

AIRPORT (ANG) BASE MONTGOMERY ALABAMA 34 505 66,574

AIR FORCE MOODY AIR FORCE BASE MOODY AF BASE GEORGIA 202 2,905 69,477

AIR FORCE MORON AIR BASE MORAN AB SPAIN 30 733 40,682

AIR FORCE MOUNTAIN HOME AIR FORCE 

BASE ELMORE IDAHO 298 3,313 89,867

AIR FORCE NASHVILLE INTERNATIONAL 

AIRPORT NASHVILLE TENNESSEE 27 465 58,194

AIR FORCE NELLIS AIR FORCE BASE LAS VEGAS NEVADA 838 9,268 90,390

AIR FORCE NEW CASTLE COUNTY AIRPORT WILMINGTON DELAWARE 29 339 86,283

AIR FORCE NEW ORLEANS NAS ANG BELLE CHASSE LOUISIANA 34 567 59,471

AIR FORCE NIAGARA FALLS IAP-AIR RESERVE 

STATION NIAGARA FALLS NEW YORK 8 183 43,115

AIR FORCE NIAGARA FALLS IAP-AIR RESERVE 

STATION NIAGARA FALLS NEW YORK 92 700 131,614

AIR FORCE NORTH HIGHLANDS ANG 

STATION NORTH HIGHLANDS CALIFORNIA 6 133 44,060

AIR FORCE OFFUTT AIR FORCE BASE OFFUTT A.F.B. NEBRASKA 811 6,329 128,210

P00000019418

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 105 of 151
E-18

Component Installation Name City State / Country

Total Site Delivered 

Energy

(BBTU)

Goal Subject

Gross Square 

Footage 

('000 SF)

Goal Subject

Intensity 

(BTU/SF)

Goal Subject

AIR FORCE OSAN AIR BASE OSAN AFB KOREA, REPUBLIC 

OF 681 7,658 88,971

AIR FORCE OTIS AIR NATIONAL GUARD BASE OTIS ANGB, MASHPEE MASSACHUSETTS 60 727 82,421

AIR FORCE PATRICK AIR FORCE BASE PATRICK AFB FLORIDA 777 7,153 108,658

AIR FORCE PEASE INTERNATIONAL 

TRADEPORT PORTSMOUTH NEW HAMPSHIRE 49 536 92,108

AIR FORCE PETERSON AIR FORCE BASE COLORADO SPRINGS COLORADO 2,246 6,794 330,583

AIR FORCE PETERSON AIR FORCE BASE COLORADO SPRINGS COLORADO 0 #DIV/0!

AIR FORCE PITTSBURGH IAP-AIR RESERVE 

STN MOON PENNSYLVANIA 49 570 86,018

AIR FORCE PITTSBURGH INTERNATIONAL 

AIRPORT (ANG) CORAOPOLIS PENNSYLVANIA 58 450 129,244

AIR FORCE PORTLAND INTERNATIONAL 

AIRPORT PORTLAND OREGON 55 821 67,089

AIR FORCE QUONSET STATE AIRPORT ANG NORTH KINGSTOWN RHODE ISLAND 43 399 108,772

AIR FORCE RAF ALCONBURY FPO UNITED KINGDOM 116 1,291 89,504

AIR FORCE RAF CROUGHTON FPO UNITED KINGDOM 109 691 158,017

AIR FORCE RAF FAIRFORD FAIRFORD UNITED KINGDOM 34 1,084 31,402

AIR FORCE RAF LAKENHEATH LAKENHEATH UNITED KINGDOM 632 7,585 83,343

AIR FORCE RAF MILDENHALL MILDENHALL UNITED KINGDOM 261 2,975 87,795

AIR FORCE RAMSTEIN AIR BASE RAMSTEIN GERMANY 1,029 15,837 64,995

AIR FORCE RENO TAHOE INTERNATIONAL 

AIRPORT RENO NEVADA 23 404 57,030

AIR FORCE RICKENBACKER INTERNATION 

AIRPORT (ANG) COLUMBUS OHIO 52 534 96,854

AIR FORCE ROBINS AIR FORCE BASE ROBINS AF BASE GEORGIA 65 716 90,433

AIR FORCE ROBINS AIR FORCE BASE ROBINS AF BASE GEORGIA 1,839 12,307 149,450

AIR FORCE ROSECRANS MEMORIAL AIRPORT ST. JOSEPH MISSOURI 24 390 62,308

P00000019419

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 106 of 151
E-19

Component Installation Name City State / Country

Total Site Delivered 

Energy

(BBTU)

Goal Subject

Gross Square 

Footage 

('000 SF)

Goal Subject

Intensity 

(BTU/SF)

Goal Subject

AIR FORCE SALT LAKE CITY INTERNATIONAL 

AIRPORT ANG SALT LAKE CITY UTAH 42 501 83,174

AIR FORCE SAVANNAH/HILTON HEAD 

INTERNATIONAL AP GARDEN CITY GEORGIA 48 905 52,928

AIR FORCE SCHENECTADY COUNTY AIRPORT 

ANG SCOTIA NEW YORK 42 428 97,570

AIR FORCE SCHRIEVER AIR FORCE BASE COLORADO SPRINGS COLORADO 324 1,671 193,692

AIR FORCE SCOTT AIR FORCE BASE BELLEVILLE ILLINOIS 29 340 86,294

AIR FORCE SCOTT AIR FORCE BASE BELLEVILLE ILLINOIS 528 4,905 107,743

AIR FORCE SELFRIDGE ANG BASE MOUNT CLEMENS MICHIGAN 187 1,609 115,979

AIR FORCE SEYMOUR JOHNSON AIR FORCE 

BASE SEYMOUR JOHNSON AFB NORTH CAROLINA 287 3,211 89,377

AIR FORCE SHAW AIR FORCE BASE SHAW AF BASE SOUTH CAROLINA 334 3,333 100,093

AIR FORCE SHEPPARD AIR FORCE BASE WICHITA FALLS TEXAS 640 7,310 87,531

AIR FORCE SIOUX GATEWAY AP/COL. BUD 

DAY FIELD(ANG) SIOUX CITY IOWA 37 477 77,191

AIR FORCE SKY HARBOR INTERNATIONAL 

AIRPORT PHOENIX ARIZONA 18 276 65,833

AIR FORCE SPANGDAHLEM AIR BASE FPO GERMANY 367 7,430 49,408

AIR FORCE SPRINGFIELD BECKLEY 

MUNICIPAL AIRPORT SPRINGFIELD OHIO 40 504 79,246

AIR FORCE STEWART INTERNATIONAL 

AIRPORT NEWBURGH NEW YORK 102 833 122,737

AIR FORCE SYRACUSE HANCOCK FIELD ANG SYRACUSE NEW YORK 45 462 96,883

AIR FORCE TINKER AIR FORCE BASE OKLAHOMA CITY OKLAHOMA 2,951 18,819 156,822

AIR FORCE TOLEDO EXPRESS AIRPORT ANG SWANTON OHIO 28 379 73,166

AIR FORCE TRAVIS AIR FORCE BASE FAIRFIELD CALIFORNIA 441 6,213 70,948

P00000019420

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 107 of 151
E-20

Component Installation Name City State / Country

Total Site Delivered 

Energy

(BBTU)

Goal Subject

Gross Square 

Footage 

('000 SF)

Goal Subject

Intensity 

(BTU/SF)

Goal Subject

AIR FORCE TUCSON INTERNATIONAL 

AIRPORT TUCSON ARIZONA 48 647 74,668

AIR FORCE TULSA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT TULSA OKLAHOMA 38 368 102,826

AIR FORCE TYNDALL AIR FORCE BASE PANAMA CITY BEACH FLORIDA 340 3,859 88,119

AIR FORCE USAF ACADEMY AIR FORCE ACADEMY COLORADO 861 6,621 129,983

AIR FORCE VANCE AIR FORCE BASE ENID OKLAHOMA 124 1,369 90,811

AIR FORCE VANDENBERG AIR FORCE BASE LOMPOC CALIFORNIA 460 4,713 97,696

AIR FORCE VOLK FIELD CAMP DOUGLAS WISCONSIN 50 672 74,167

AIR FORCE W K KELLOGG AIRPORT BATTLE CREEK MICHIGAN 42 410 101,390

AIR FORCE WESTOVER AIR RESERVE BASE SPRINGFIELD MASSACHUSETTS 177 1,626 108,579

AIR FORCE WHITEMAN AIR FORCE BASE KNOB NOSTER MISSOURI 547 3,670 148,924

AIR FORCE WILL ROGERS WORLD AIRPORT OKLAHOMA CITY OKLAHOMA 26 355 73,887

AIR FORCE WILLOW GROVE AIR RESERVE 

STATION HORSHAM PENNSYLVANIA 41 516 79,845

AIR FORCE WRIGHT PATTERSON AIR FORCE 

BASE WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB OHIO 2,469 15,053 164,047

AIR FORCE YEAGER AIRPORT ANG CHARLESTON WEST VIRGINIA 42 420 100,214

AIR FORCE YOKOTA AIR BASE YOKOTA AFB JAPAN 1,215 9,375 129,575

AIR FORCE YOUNGSTOWN-WARREN 

REGIONAL AIRPORT ARS VIENNA OHIO 84 742 112,722

DCMA DCMA(1) CARSON CALIFORNIA 9 85 100,588

DCMA DCMA(2) BRATENAHL OHIO 10 78 124,231

DECA 99TH REGIONAL SUPPORT 

COMMAND CORAOPOLIS PENNSYLVANIA 7 43 157,442

DECA ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND ABERDEEN MARYLAND 9 62 139,355

DECA ALTUS AIR FORCE BASE ALTUS OKLAHOMA 9 58 147,414

DECA ARNOLD AIR STATION ARNOLD A F STATION TENNESSEE 4 23 184,783

P00000019421

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 108 of 151
E-21

Component Installation Name City State / Country

Total Site Delivered 

Energy

(BBTU)

Goal Subject

Gross Square 

Footage 

('000 SF)

Goal Subject

Intensity 

(BTU/SF)

Goal Subject

DECA AVIANO AIR BASE FPO ITALY 8 64 124,219

DECA BANGOR INTERNATIONAL 

AIRPORT (ANG) BANGOR MAINE 5 29 177,241

DECA BARKSDALE AIR FORCE BASE BARKSDALE AF BASE LOUISIANA 13 104 123,846

DECA BEALE AIR FORCE BASE BEALE AFB CALIFORNIA 6 75 86,000

DECA BEALE AIR FORCE BASE BEALE AFB CALIFORNIA 12 88 140,227

DECA BEALE AIR FORCE BASE BEALE AFB CALIFORNIA 8 27 295,185

DECA BUCKLEY AIR FORCE BASE AURORA COLORADO 10 77 132,857

DECA CAMP CASEY TONG DU CHON KOREA, REPUBLIC 

OF 2 17 88,824

DECA CAMP HENRY TAEGU KOREA, REPUBLIC 

OF 1 8 76,250

DECA CAMP HENRY TAEGU KOREA, REPUBLIC 

OF 2 16 116,875

DECA CAMP HENRY TAEGU KOREA, REPUBLIC 

OF 6 38 146,053

DECA CAMP HUMPHREYS FPO KOREA, REPUBLIC 

OF 4 19 211,579

DECA CAMP RED CLOUD UIJONG BU KOREA, REPUBLIC 

OF 1 11 58,182

DECA CAMP RED CLOUD UIJONG BU KOREA, REPUBLIC 

OF 1 10 108,000

DECA CAMP ZAMA SAGAMIHARA JAPAN 10 186 53,280

DECA CAMP ZAMA SAGAMIHARA JAPAN 6 67 87,910

DECA CAMP ZAMA SAGAMIHARA JAPAN 2 13 129,231

DECA CAMP ZAMA SAGAMIHARA JAPAN 1 2 275,000

DECA CANNON AIR FORCE BASE CANNON AFB NEW MEXICO 7 58 115,172

DECA CARLISLE BARRACKS CARLISLE PENNSYLVANIA 7 60 123,833

P00000019422

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 109 of 151
E-22

Component Installation Name City State / Country

Total Site Delivered 

Energy

(BBTU)

Goal Subject

Gross Square 

Footage 

('000 SF)

Goal Subject

Intensity 

(BTU/SF)

Goal Subject

DECA CBC GULFPORT MS GULFPORT MISSISSIPPI 8 31 266,452

DECA CHARLESTON AIR FORCE BASE CHARLESTON SOUTH CAROLINA 12 86 137,674

DECA CHARLESTON AIR FORCE BASE CHARLESTON SOUTH CAROLINA 12 64 184,063

DECA COLUMBUS AIR FORCE BASE COLUMBUS MISSISSIPPI 4 49 82,449

DECA COMBAT SUPPORT TRAINING 

CENTER AND CAMP PARKS DUBLIN CALIFORNIA 2 8 198,750

DECA COMFLEACT SASEBO JA SASEBO JAPAN 3 20 130,000

DECA COMFLEACT SASEBO JA SASEBO JAPAN 5 24 198,333

DECA COMFLEACT YOKOSUKA JA YOKOSUKA JAPAN 16 96 166,979

DECA COMFLEACT YOKOSUKA JA YOKOSUKA JAPAN 15 86 177,558

DECA CSO NAS MOFFETT FIELD CA MOFFETT FIELD CALIFORNIA 3 52 66,731

DECA DAVIS-MONTHAN AIR FORCE 

BASE TUCSON ARIZONA 14 115 124,870

DECA DOVER AIR FORCE BASE DOVER DELAWARE 4 78 57,436

DECA DUGWAY PROVING GROUND DUGWAY UTAH 3 18 151,667

DECA DYESS AIR FORCE BASE ABILENE TEXAS 8 80 93,750

DECA EDWARDS AIR FORCE BASE LANCASTER CALIFORNIA 7 60 109,333

DECA EGLIN AIR FORCE BASE VALPARAISO FLORIDA 16 107 153,645

DECA EGLIN AIR FORCE BASE VALPARAISO FLORIDA 12 63 197,143

DECA EIELSON AIR FORCE BASE MOOSE CREEK ALASKA 7 42 168,571

DECA ELLSWORTH AIR FORCE BASE SAN ANGELO SOUTH DAKOTA 10 72 134,028

DECA FAIRCHILD AIR FORCE BASE AIRWAY HEIGHTS WASHINGTON 13 85 149,765

DECA FLEET ACTIVITIES CHINHAE KS CHINHAE KOREA, REPUBLIC 

OF 2 11 160,909

DECA FORT BELVOIR FORT BELVOIR VIRGINIA 19 129 146,744

DECA FORT BENNING COLUMBUS GEORGIA 0 3 156,667

DECA FORT BENNING COLUMBUS GEORGIA 19 118 163,898

P00000019423

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 110 of 151
E-23

Component Installation Name City State / Country

Total Site Delivered 

Energy

(BBTU)

Goal Subject

Gross Square 

Footage 

('000 SF)

Goal Subject

Intensity 

(BTU/SF)

Goal Subject

DECA FORT BLISS EL PASO TEXAS 15 123 120,894

DECA FORT BRAGG FORT BRAGG NORTH CAROLINA 12 95 123,158

DECA FORT BRAGG FORT BRAGG NORTH CAROLINA 23 118 197,797

DECA FORT BUCHANAN GUAYNABO PUERTO RICO 11 95 115,053

DECA FORT CAMPBELL FORT CAMPBELL KENTUCKY 16 122 134,590

DECA FORT CARSON COLORADO SPRINGS COLORADO 16 122 128,607

DECA FORT DETRICK FREDERICK MARYLAND 5 58 91,034

DECA FORT DETRICK FREDERICK MARYLAND 7 39 172,564

DECA FORT DRUM EVANS MILLS NEW YORK 13 83 156,265

DECA FORT GEORGE G MEADE FORT MEADE MARYLAND 17 118 142,458

DECA FORT GORDON AUGUSTA GEORGIA 11 92 124,348

DECA FORT GREELY DELTA JUNCTION ALASKA 4 25 174,800

DECA FORT HAMILTON NEW YORK CITY NEW YORK 7 50 136,800

DECA FORT HOOD KILLEEN TEXAS 10 106 97,642

DECA FORT HOOD KILLEEN TEXAS 27 128 211,328

DECA FORT HUACHUCA SIERRA VISTA ARIZONA 10 78 123,077

DECA FORT JACKSON COLUMBIA SOUTH CAROLINA 13 130 101,231

DECA FORT KNOX MIDDLETOWN KENTUCKY 13 122 103,525

DECA FORT LEAVENWORTH FORT LEAVENWORTH KANSAS 13 74 170,541

DECA FORT LEE FORT LEE VIRGINIA 25 242 103,347

DECA FORT LEE FORT LEE VIRGINIA 9 81 116,790

DECA FORT LEONARD WOOD FORT LEONARD WOOD MISSOURI 12 71 167,746

DECA FORT MCCOY SPARTA WISCONSIN 3 16 196,250

DECA FORT POLK FORT POLK LOUISIANA 11 82 129,268

DECA FORT RILEY FORT RILEY KANSAS 17 113 152,920

DECA FORT RUCKER FORT RUCKER ALABAMA 9 85 105,176

P00000019424

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 111 of 151
E-24

Component Installation Name City State / Country

Total Site Delivered 

Energy

(BBTU)

Goal Subject

Gross Square 

Footage 

('000 SF)

Goal Subject

Intensity 

(BTU/SF)

Goal Subject

DECA FORT SILL FORT SILL OKLAHOMA 10 102 93,235

DECA FORT STEWART HINESVILLE GEORGIA 12 95 126,105

DECA FORT STEWART HINESVILLE GEORGIA 9 58 152,414

DECA FORT WAINWRIGHT FORT WAINWRIGHT ALASKA 20 104 196,923

DECA FRANCIS E WARREN AIR FORCE 

BASE CHEYENNE WYOMING 7 77 91,169

DECA GOODFELLOW AIR FORCE BASE SAN ANGELO TEXAS 7 57 125,263

DECA GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE GRAND FORKS AFB NORTH DAKOTA 4 41 93,415

DECA HANSCOM AIR FORCE BASE BEDFORD MASSACHUSETTS 10 74 131,486

DECA HILL AIR FORCE BASE OGDEN UTAH 18 87 205,747

DECA HOLLOMAN AIR FORCE BASE ALAMOGORDO NEW MEXICO 8 69 112,174

DECA INCIRLIK AIR BASE ADANA FPO TURKEY 1 15 95,333

DECA INCIRLIK AIR BASE ADANA FPO TURKEY 7 67 104,478

DECA JBAB ANACOSTIA BOLLING WASHINGTON DISTRICT OF 

COLUMBIA 11 72 159,306

DECA JBPHH PEARL HARBOR - HICKAM 

HAWAII PEARL HARBOR HAWAII 10 98 105,306

DECA JBPHH PEARL HARBOR - HICKAM 

HAWAII PEARL HARBOR HAWAII 13 115 116,609

DECA JBSA - FORT SAM HOUSTON FORT SAM HOUSTON TEXAS 16 104 155,673

DECA JBSA - LACKLAND SAN ANTONIO TEXAS 21 117 179,402

DECA JBSA - RANDOLPH SAN ANTONIO TEXAS 15 97 159,278

DECA JNTEXPBASE LITTLE CREEK FS VA NORFOLK VIRGINIA 14 100 138,400

DECA JOINT BASE ANDREWS-NAVAL 

AIR FACILITY WASHINGTON ANDREWS AFB MARYLAND 17 113 147,168

DECA JOINT BASE ELMENDORF-FT 

RICHARDSON ELMENDORF AFB ALASKA 17 105 158,286

P00000019425

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 112 of 151
E-25

Component Installation Name City State / Country

Total Site Delivered 

Energy

(BBTU)

Goal Subject

Gross Square 

Footage 

('000 SF)

Goal Subject

Intensity 

(BTU/SF)

Goal Subject

DECA JOINT BASE LEWIS-MCCHORD TACOMA WASHINGTON 17 148 111,757

DECA JOINT BASE LEWIS-MCCHORD TACOMA WASHINGTON 12 105 114,571

DECA JOINT BASE MYER-HENDERSON 

HALL ARLINGTON VIRGINIA 7 74 100,811

DECA KADENA AIR BASE KADENA AIR BASE 

OKINAWA JAPAN 16 87 181,954

DECA KEESLER AIR FORCE BASE BILOXI MISSISSIPPI 14 98 142,041

DECA KIRTLAND AIR FORCE BASE ALBUQUERQUE NEW MEXICO 15 108 140,648

DECA KUNSAN AIR BASE KUNSAN KOREA, REPUBLIC 

OF 4 16 253,125

DECA LAJES FIELD FPO PORTUGAL 5 58 94,138

DECA LANGLEY AIR FORCE BASE LANGLEY AFB VIRGINIA 12 103 115,243

DECA LANGLEY AIR FORCE BASE LANGLEY AFB VIRGINIA 17 103 161,553

DECA LAUGHLIN AIR FORCE BASE DEL RIO TEXAS 5 75 67,733

DECA LITTLE ROCK AIR FORCE BASE LITTLE ROCK ARKANSAS 10 100 95,300

DECA LOS ANGELES AIR FORCE BASE EL SEGUNDO CALIFORNIA 10 75 127,600

DECA LUKE AIR FORCE BASE GLENDALE ARIZONA 11 102 104,118

DECA MACDILL AIR FORCE BASE TAMPA FLORIDA 15 171 89,591

DECA MALMSTROM AIR FORCE BASE MALMSTROM AFB MONTANA 9 68 134,706

DECA MARCH AIR RESERVE BASE RIVERSIDE CALIFORNIA 11 117 94,274

DECA MARINE CORPS BASE QUANTICO 

VA QUANTICO VIRGINIA 15 121 125,868

DECA MAXWELL AIR FORCE BASE MONTGOMERY ALABAMA 11 87 130,230

DECA MAXWELL AIR FORCE BASE MONTGOMERY ALABAMA 6 42 137,619

DECA MCAGCC TWENTYNINE PALMS 

CA TOPAZ CALIFORNIA 7 57 120,000

P00000019426

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 113 of 151
E-26

Component Installation Name City State / Country

Total Site Delivered 

Energy

(BBTU)

Goal Subject

Gross Square 

Footage 

('000 SF)

Goal Subject

Intensity 

(BTU/SF)

Goal Subject

DECA MCAGCC TWENTYNINE PALMS 

CA TOPAZ CALIFORNIA 2 13 149,231

DECA MCAS CHERRY POINT NC CHERRY POINT NORTH CAROLINA 8 59 135,932

DECA MCAS IWAKUNI JA IWAKUNI JAPAN 5 32 151,250

DECA MCAS MIRAMAR SAN DIEGO CALIFORNIA 13 91 147,033

DECA MCAS YUMA AZ YUMA ARIZONA 5 34 147,647

DECA MCB CAMP LEJEUNE NC CAMP LEJEUNE NORTH CAROLINA 10 76 131,184

DECA MCB CAMP LEJEUNE NC CAMP LEJEUNE NORTH CAROLINA 7 46 148,261

DECA MCB CAMP PENDLETON CA CAMP PENDLETON CALIFORNIA 3 20 130,500

DECA MCB CAMP PENDLETON CA CAMP PENDLETON CALIFORNIA 15 113 134,425

DECA MCB CAMP S D BUTLER 

OKINAWA JA ZUKERAN JAPAN 12 291 41,031

DECA MCB CAMP S D BUTLER 

OKINAWA JA ZUKERAN JAPAN 10 59 166,949

DECA MCB CAMP S D BUTLER 

OKINAWA JA ZUKERAN JAPAN 5 31 175,806

DECA MCB CAMP S D BUTLER 

OKINAWA JA ZUKERAN JAPAN 6 31 200,968

DECA MCB HAWAII KANEOHE KANEOHE HAWAII 13 77 170,390

DECA MCCONNELL AIR FORCE BASE WICHITA KANSAS 8 56 142,143

DECA MCGUIRE AIR FORCE BASE MCGUIRE AFB NEW JERSEY 2 18 93,333

DECA MCGUIRE AIR FORCE BASE MCGUIRE AFB NEW JERSEY 17 103 160,485

DECA MCLB ALBANY GA ALBANY GEORGIA 5 37 139,730

DECA MCLB BARSTOW CA BARSTOW CALIFORNIA 3 22 131,364

DECA MCRD BEAUFORT PI SC PARRIS ISLAND SOUTH CAROLINA 5 44 117,727

DECA MCSPTACT KANSAS CITY MO BELTON MISSOURI 3 24 131,667

DECA MINOT AIR FORCE BASE MINOT AFB NORTH DAKOTA 8 56 149,107

P00000019427

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 114 of 151
E-27

Component Installation Name City State / Country

Total Site Delivered 

Energy

(BBTU)

Goal Subject

Gross Square 

Footage 

('000 SF)

Goal Subject

Intensity 

(BTU/SF)

Goal Subject

DECA MISAWA AIR BASE MISAWA AFB JAPAN 10 82 125,000

DECA MOODY AIR FORCE BASE MOODY AF BASE GEORGIA 9 64 132,969

DECA MOUNTAIN HOME AIR FORCE 

BASE ELMORE IDAHO 6 54 115,741

DECA NAF ATSUGI JA ATSUGI JAPAN 6 32 171,875

DECA NAF EL CENTRO CA EL CENTRO CALIFORNIA 2 13 180,769

DECA NAS CORPUS CHRISTI TX CORPUS CHRISTI TEXAS 9 46 187,391

DECA NAS FALLON NV FALLON NEVADA 3 40 81,250

DECA NAS JACKSONVILLE FL JACKSONVILLE FLORIDA 16 88 177,955

DECA NAS JRB FT WORTH TX FORT WORTH TEXAS 16 93 170,968

DECA NAS JRB NEW ORLEANS LA BELLE CHASSE LOUISIANA 8 47 177,660

DECA NAS KEY WEST FL STOCK ISLAND FLORIDA 3 21 154,286

DECA NAS KINGSVILLE TX KINGSVILLE TEXAS 2 15 149,333

DECA NAS LEMOORE CA LEMOORE NAS CALIFORNIA 6 44 145,000

DECA NAS MERIDIAN MS MERIDIAN MISSISSIPPI 6 32 173,125

DECA NAS OCEANA VA VIRGINIA BEACH VIRGINIA 16 110 145,091

DECA NAS PENSACOLA FL PENSACOLA FLORIDA 11 74 155,000

DECA NAS SIGONELLA IT SIGONELLA SICILY ITALY 9 68 135,588

DECA NAS WHIDBEY ISLAND WA OAK HARBOR WASHINGTON 10 66 157,273

DECA NAS WHITING FLD MILTON FL MILTON FLORIDA 4 22 188,182

DECA NATIONAL TRAINING CENTER 

AND FORT IRWIN FORT IRWIN CALIFORNIA 7 57 125,439

DECA NAVAL AIR STATION PAX RIVER PATUXENT RIVER MARYLAND 8 56 143,214

DECA NAVAL BASE KITSAP BREMERTON 

WA BREMERTON WASHINGTON 9 61 145,902

DECA NAVAL BASE KITSAP BREMERTON 

WA BREMERTON WASHINGTON 7 48 150,208

P00000019428

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 115 of 151
E-28

Component Installation Name City State / Country

Total Site Delivered 

Energy

(BBTU)

Goal Subject

Gross Square 

Footage 

('000 SF)

Goal Subject

Intensity 

(BTU/SF)

Goal Subject

DECA NAVAL STATION GREAT LAKES IL GREAT LAKES ILLINOIS 10 60 162,000

DECA NAVAL STATION NEWPORT RI NEWPORT RHODE ISLAND 9 46 195,870

DECA NAVAL SUPPORT ACTIVITY 

CRANE CRANE INDIANA 1 8 142,500

DECA NAVBASE CORONADO SAN DIEGO CALIFORNIA 11 78 136,410

DECA NAVBASE CORONADO SAN DIEGO CALIFORNIA 8 46 181,087

DECA NAVBASE GUAM AGANA GUAM 18 187 94,118

DECA NAVBASE GUAM AGANA GUAM 12 57 210,000

DECA NAVBASE SAN DIEGO CA SAN DIEGO CALIFORNIA 15 128 118,438

DECA NAVBASE VENTURA CTY PT 

MUGU CA POINT MUGU CALIFORNIA 8 65 129,692

DECA NAVSTA EVERETT WA EVERETT WASHINGTON 11 60 185,833

DECA NAVSTA MAYPORT FL JACKSONVILLE FLORIDA 9 71 122,817

DECA NAVSTA NORFOLK VA NORFOLK VIRGINIA 12 79 149,873

DECA NAVSTA ROTA SP ROTA SPAIN 8 50 150,600

DECA NAVSUBASE NEW LONDON CT GROTON CONNECTICUT 9 57 157,895

DECA NAVSUBASE NEW LONDON CT GROTON CONNECTICUT 5 28 168,214

DECA NAVSUPPACT ANNAPOLIS ANNAPOLIS MARYLAND 8 48 172,292

DECA NAVSUPPACT MIDSOUTH 

MEMPHIS TN MILLINGTON TENNESSEE 11 61 178,197

DECA NAVSUPPACT NAPLES IT NAPLES ITALY 13 85 150,941

DECA NAVSUPPACT NORFOLK NSY PORTSMOUTH VIRGINIA 11 62 179,839

DECA NAWS CHINA LAKE CHINA LAKE CALIFORNIA 3 24 120,417

DECA NELLIS AIR FORCE BASE LAS VEGAS NEVADA 15 130 114,385

DECA NSA ANDERSEN ANDERSEN AB GUAM 11 122 86,393

DECA NSA SARATOGA SPRINGS NY SARATOGA SPGS NEW YORK 4 22 169,091

DECA NSA SOUTH POTOMAC DAHLGREN VIRGINIA 2 15 157,333

P00000019429

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 116 of 151
E-29

Component Installation Name City State / Country

Total Site Delivered 

Energy

(BBTU)

Goal Subject

Gross Square 

Footage 

('000 SF)

Goal Subject

Intensity 

(BTU/SF)

Goal Subject

DECA NSY PORTSMOUTH KITTERY MAINE 5 28 190,714

DECA OFFUTT AIR FORCE BASE OFFUTT A.F.B. NEBRASKA 17 120 142,250

DECA OSAN AIR BASE OSAN AFB KOREA, REPUBLIC 

OF 3 60 55,667

DECA OSAN AIR BASE OSAN AFB KOREA, REPUBLIC 

OF 3 49 71,020

DECA PATRICK AIR FORCE BASE PATRICK AFB FLORIDA 9 103 85,146

DECA PETERSON AIR FORCE BASE COLORADO SPRINGS COLORADO 14 102 134,608

DECA PICATINNY ARSENAL DOVER NEW JERSEY 5 22 210,455

DECA PRESIDIO OF MONTEREY MONTEREY CALIFORNIA 9 111 80,541

DECA RAF ALCONBURY FPO UNITED KINGDOM 11 77 141,688

DECA RAF CROUGHTON FPO UNITED KINGDOM 3 20 152,500

DECA RAF LAKENHEATH LAKENHEATH UNITED KINGDOM 19 112 166,250

DECA RAF MENWITH HILL FPO UNITED KINGDOM 5 34 161,471

DECA RAF MILDENHALL MILDENHALL UNITED KINGDOM 2 14 167,857

DECA RAMSTEIN AIR BASE RAMSTEIN GERMANY 3 37 75,946

DECA RAMSTEIN AIR BASE RAMSTEIN GERMANY 24 178 134,494

DECA RAMSTEIN AIR BASE RAMSTEIN GERMANY 16 95 168,632

DECA RAMSTEIN AIR BASE RAMSTEIN GERMANY 10 59 171,186

DECA RAMSTEIN AIR BASE RAMSTEIN GERMANY 8 41 194,146

DECA REDSTONE ARSENAL HUNTSVILLE ALABAMA 12 81 144,938

DECA ROBINS AIR FORCE BASE ROBINS AF BASE GEORGIA 9 70 135,286

DECA ROCK ISLAND ARSENAL ROCK ISLAND ILLINOIS 3 33 91,818

DECA ROCK ISLAND ARSENAL ROCK ISLAND ILLINOIS 7 54 123,519

DECA SCHOFIELD BARRACKS WAHIAWA HAWAII 14 92 155,652

DECA SCOTT AIR FORCE BASE BELLEVILLE ILLINOIS 18 114 156,754

P00000019430

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 117 of 151
E-30

Component Installation Name City State / Country

Total Site Delivered 

Energy

(BBTU)

Goal Subject

Gross Square 

Footage 

('000 SF)

Goal Subject

Intensity 

(BTU/SF)

Goal Subject

DECA SELFRIDGE ANG BASE MOUNT CLEMENS MICHIGAN 7 76 92,237

DECA SEYMOUR JOHNSON AIR FORCE 

BASE SEYMOUR JOHNSON AFB NORTH CAROLINA 10 66 152,121

DECA SHAW AIR FORCE BASE SHAW AF BASE SOUTH CAROLINA 10 61 166,557

DECA SHEPPARD AIR FORCE BASE WICHITA FALLS TEXAS 11 81 134,198

DECA SPANGDAHLEM AIR BASE FPO GERMANY 5 44 123,409

DECA SUBASE KINGS BAY GA KINGS BAY GEORGIA 9 53 161,698

DECA TINKER AIR FORCE BASE OKLAHOMA CITY OKLAHOMA 20 87 228,391

DECA TOBYHANNA ARMY DEPOT TOBYHANNA PENNSYLVANIA 3 22 135,455

DECA TRAVIS AIR FORCE BASE FAIRFIELD CALIFORNIA 16 97 159,794

DECA TYNDALL AIR FORCE BASE PANAMA CITY BEACH FLORIDA 8 76 107,237

DECA US ARMY GARRISON ANSBACH ANSBACH GERMANY 3 38 72,632

DECA US ARMY GARRISON ANSBACH ANSBACH GERMANY 7 58 125,862

DECA US ARMY GARRISON 

BAUMHOLDER BAUMHOLDER GERMANY 5 32 166,250

DECA US ARMY GARRISON BENELUX BRUSSELS BELGIUM 8 46 175,652

DECA US ARMY GARRISON 

GRAFENWOEHR GRAFENWOHR GERMANY 1 14 77,143

DECA US ARMY GARRISON 

GRAFENWOEHR GRAFENWOHR GERMANY 7 52 129,231

DECA US ARMY GARRISON 

GRAFENWOEHR GRAFENWOHR GERMANY 11 55 206,000

DECA US ARMY GARRISON HEIDELBERG HEIDELBERG GERMANY 27 789 34,068

DECA US ARMY GARRISON HOHENFELS HOHENFELS GERMANY 5 38 132,368

DECA US ARMY GARRISON 

KAISERSLAUTERN KAISERLAUTERN GERMANY 5 52 94,808

DECA US ARMY GARRISON LIVORNO LIVORNO ITALY 3 26 124,615

P00000019431

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 118 of 151
E-31

Component Installation Name City State / Country

Total Site Delivered 

Energy

(BBTU)

Goal Subject

Gross Square 

Footage 

('000 SF)

Goal Subject

Intensity 

(BTU/SF)

Goal Subject

DECA US ARMY GARRISON SCHINNEN SCHINNEN NETHERLANDS 5 24 206,667

DECA US ARMY GARRISON STUTTGART STUTTGART GERMANY 3 41 71,220

DECA US ARMY GARRISON STUTTGART STUTTGART GERMANY 5 64 85,469

DECA US ARMY GARRISON STUTTGART STUTTGART GERMANY 3 18 175,000

DECA US ARMY GARRISON STUTTGART STUTTGART GERMANY 2 5 396,000

DECA US ARMY GARRISON VICENZA VICENZA ITALY 9 55 156,364

DECA US ARMY GARRISON WIESBADEN WIESBADEN GERMANY 11 62 170,000

DECA USAF ACADEMY AIR FORCE ACADEMY COLORADO 9 67 130,299

DECA VANCE AIR FORCE BASE ENID OKLAHOMA 6 34 164,706

DECA VANDENBERG AIR FORCE BASE LOMPOC CALIFORNIA 6 83 70,723

DECA WEST POINT MILITARY 

RESERVATION WEST POINT NEW YORK 13 73 182,740

DECA WHITE SANDS MISSILE RANGE LAS CRUCES NEW MEXICO 4 32 132,813

DECA WHITEMAN AIR FORCE BASE KNOB NOSTER MISSOURI 8 61 135,902

DECA WRIGHT PATTERSON AIR FORCE 

BASE WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB OHIO 14 123 116,504

DECA YOKOTA AIR BASE YOKOTA AFB JAPAN 21 81 260,000

DECA YONGSAN GARRISON SEOUL KOREA, REPUBLIC 

OF 3 89 35,281

DECA YONGSAN GARRISON SEOUL KOREA, REPUBLIC 

OF 13 94 137,021

DECA YONGSAN GARRISON SEOUL KOREA, REPUBLIC 

OF 1 7 205,714

DECA YUMA PROVING GROUND YUMA ARIZONA 3 23 124,783

DFAS DFAS LIMESTONE LIMESTONE MAINE 9 141,000 61

DFAS DFAS ROME ROME NEW YORK 26 332,000 78

DIA DLOC WAREHOUSE LANDOVER MARYLAND 18 267 67,753

P00000019432

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 119 of 151
E-32

Component Installation Name City State / Country

Total Site Delivered 

Energy

(BBTU)

Goal Subject

Gross Square 

Footage 

('000 SF)

Goal Subject

Intensity 

(BTU/SF)

Goal Subject

DIA JOINT BASE ANACOSTIA BOLLING WASHINGTON DISTRICT OF 

COLUMBIA 237 1,325 178,657

DIA ROWE BLDG AND ULC 

1/RIVANNA STATION CHARLOTTESVILLE VIRGINIA 33 184 181,957

DLA DEFENSE DISTRIBUTION CENTER, 

SUSQUEHANNA NEW CUMBERLAND PENNSYLVANIA 347 7,633 45,493

DLA DEFENSE DISTRIBUTION DEPOT 

SAN JOAQUIN TRACY CALIFORNIA 101 5,123 19,678

DLA DEFENSE SUPPLY CENTER 

COLUMBUS COLUMBUS OHIO 294 3,865 76,088

DLA DEFENSE SUPPLY CENTER 

RICHMOND RICHMOND VIRGINIA 253 4,579 55,246

NGA NGA SPRINGFIELD VIRGINIA 673 6,653 101,082

NSA FORT GEORGE G MEADE FORT MEADE MARYLAND 2,530 11,279 224,311

WHS FORT BELVOIR FORT BELVOIR VIRGINIA 112 1,854 60,663

WHS WASHINGTON HQS SERVICE ARLINGTON VIRGINIA 1,208 7,622 158,510

P00000019433

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 120 of 151
F-1

Appendix F - FY 2015 List of Energy Projects Funded by Appropriations and

List of Non-Governmental Third-Party Funded Energy Projects

LIST OF ENERGY PROJECTS FUNDED BY APPROPRIATIONS

Project

Estimated 

Financial 

Obligation 

($000s)

ARMY 220,857

Energy Conservation 155,083

402 GEIGER FIELD: REPLACE EXISTING BOILER 78

AASF: REPLACE OF MAIN ELECTRICAL PANELS 489

AASF BANGOR: 75 KW CHP COGENERATION SYSTEM 500

AASFRC: LED RETROFIT 365

AFRC: HVAC UPGRADE 44

AKRON: HVAC REPLACEMENT 80

ALBERT LEA ARMORY: HIGH EFFICIENCY LIGHTING 1,576

ANDERSON READINESS CENTER: DDC CONBTROLS UPDATE AND DATA CENTER EFFICIENCY 

RETROFIT 375

ANNISTON ARMY DEPOT: ENERGY MANAGEMENT CONTROL UPGRADE 4,105

ARARNG: PEC PTAC EMCS 622

ARARNG: PEC LED LIGHTING #1 177

ARARNG: PEC LED LIGHTING #2 107

ARARNG: PEC LED LIGHTING #3 110

ARARNG: CMTC 1370 ERU 182

ARARNG: CMTC 1584 HVAC 189

ASHLAND FMS: INTERIOR LIGHTING UPGRADE TO LED 17

AVCRAD: REPLACE HVAC 50

AVRC, BANGOR : HVAC/DHW REPLACEMENT 15,600

BARTONVILLE JAFRC: UPGRADE HVAC W/MINOR ELECTRICAL 2,604

BENTON ARMORY: INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR LIGHTING UPGRADE TO LED 40

BERLIN ARMORY: ADDITIONAL INSULATION INSTALLED DURING ROOFING REPLACEMENT 47

BILLINGS AFRC: REPLACE DX COOLING WITH CHILLED WATER SYSTEM 280

BLDG 2, CAMP JOHNSON: REPLACED STEAM BOILER AND PIPING WITH NG FIRED HOT 

WATER SYSTEM 33

BLDG 2, CAMP JOHNSON: WHOLE BUILDING RETROFIT TO LED INCLUDING EXTERIOR 7

BLDG 34, CAMP MURRAY : REPLACE EXISTING BOILER 354

BLDG 36, CAMP MURRAY: REPLACE EXISTING BOILER 65

BLDG 7, CAMP JOHNSON: WHOLE BUILDING RETROFIT TO LED INCLUDING EXTERIOR 128

BLDG 7, CAMP JOHNSON: REPLACED TWO ROOFTOP AC UNITS 28

P00000019434

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 121 of 151
F-2

Project

Estimated 

Financial 

Obligation 

($000s)

BLDG 8, CEATS: WHOLE BUILDING RETROFIT TO LED INCLUDING EXTERIOR 28

BLUEFIELD ARMORY: REPLACE SINGLE PANE WINDOWS WITH INSULATED WINDOWS. 269

BNGC BC165: EXTERIOR LIGHTING UPGRADE TO LED 6

BNGC BC179: INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR LIGHTING UPGRADE TO LED 9

BNGC USP&FO MVSA: NET ZERO SECURITY FOR MVSA INSTALLING LED POLE LIGHTS AND 

GROUND MOUNTED SOLAR PV ARRAY 178

BOONE AASF/ARMORY/FMS 19A25-AASF1 AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE HANGAR : 

CONSTRUCT CONDUIT AND INSTALL ELECTRICAL OUTLET FOR UAV POWER MODULE 18

BOONE AASF/ARMORY/FMS 19A25-ARMRY ARNG : REPLACE HEAT EXCHANGER AND 

BURNER ON WEST BOILER 45

BOONE AASF/ARMORY/FMS 19A25-ARMRY ARNG : ARMORY REPLACE FOTS ROOM AIR 

CONDITIONING 9

BOONE AASF/ARMORY/FMS 19A25-ARMRY ARNG ARMORY: INSTALL EGX100 AND 

CONNECT EXISTING METER TO NETWORK 3

BOWLING GREEN FMS: INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR LIGHTING UPGRADE TO LED 34

BROOKPARK: HVAC REPLACEMENT 130

BUILDING 10, CAMP JOHNSON: TOTAL RETROFIT FROM FLUORESCENT TO LED WITH 

CONTROLS 76

CAMP DAWSON: ENERGY IMPROVEMENTS - MULTIPLE BUILDINGS 22

CAMP DODGE 19901-B2000 BUILDING 2597 : RENOVATE BARRACKS 235

CAMP DODGE JMTC 19901-10170 : DIESEL/JP8 TO VEH DISP PUMP REPLACE FUEL 

DISPENSING SYSTEM AT W4600 10

CAMP DODGE JMTC 19901-A0100 : PROPOSED REPLACE CHECK VALVE ON CHILLER 3 15

CAMP DODGE JMTC 19901-A0100 BUILDING 3850: REPAIR FAN DRIVES ON COOLING 

TOWERS 4N AND 4S 4

CAMP DODGE JMTC 19901-A0100 BUILDING 3850: INSTALL ECC AND CONNECT EXISTING 

METER TO NETWORK 10

CAMP DODGE JMTC 19901-A0100 BUILDING 3850 : REPAIR EXTERIOR ENTRY DOORS 27

CAMP DODGE JMTC 19901-A0100 BUILDING 3850 : REMODEL SUITE 159 FOR JAG STAFF 19

CAMP DODGE JMTC 19901-A0100 BUILDING 3850 : REPAIR HUB ROOM VENTILATION BY 

INCREASING COOLING CAPACITY 10

CAMP DODGE JMTC 19901-A1700 BUILDING 3726 : REMODEL AND REPAIR DODGE HOUSE 

KITCHEN AND EXTERIOR 131

CAMP DODGE JMTC 19901-A26Q0 BUILDING 3753 : REPAIR HVAC 7

CAMP DODGE JMTC 19901-A26Q0 BUILDING 3753 : REMODEL EAST BEDROOM AND 

BATHROOM 22

CAMP DODGE JMTC 19901-B1400 BUILDING : REPLACE HVAC SYSTEM 8

CAMP DODGE JMTC 19901-B2100 BUILDING 2599 : RENOVATE BARRACKS 235

CAMP DODGE JMTC 19901-B2200 BUILDING 3555 : RENOVATE BARRACKS 235

CAMP DODGE JMTC 19901-BP123 BLDG 2589 : CONSTRUCT PAD BP123 AND REPLACE 

HVAC SYSTEM FOR BLDG B1600 8

P00000019435

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 122 of 151
F-3

Project

Estimated 

Financial 

Obligation 

($000s)

CAMP DODGE JMTC 19901-BP124 BLDG 2591 : CONSTRUCT PAD BP124 AND REPLACE 

HVAC SYSTEM FOR BLDG B1700 8

CAMP DODGE JMTC 19901-DF100 BUILDING 2572 : ADDITION-RENOVATION 904

CAMP DODGE JMTC 19901-FS087 : FACILITY SIGN ELECTRONIC BY UNIT BARRACKS 

PURCHASE AND INSTALL LIGHTED DIGITAL INFORMATION SIGN NEAR S52 71

CAMP DODGE JMTC 19901-GAS00 : REPAIR GAS LEAK ALONG MAINTENANCE DRIVE 14

CAMP DODGE JMTC 19901-M0900 BUILDING 5513 : RENOVATE AND CONSTRUCT 

ADDITION 1,235

CAMP DODGE JMTC 19901-RGS16 RGS-16 MOD REC FIR RG : REPAIR PNEUMATIC 

TARGETRY AIR COMPRESSOR COMPONENTS 7

CAMP DODGE JMTC 19901-S0302 BUILDING 2323 : CONSTRUCT ELECTRICAL EXTENSION 

FOR RELOCATION OF ROWPU/TWPS 45

CAMP DODGE JMTC 19901-S0302 BUILDING 2323 : RENOVATE LIGHTING SYSTEM 9

CAMP DODGE JMTC 19901-S1400 BUILDING 3203 : REPLACE ROOFING 17

CAMP DODGE JMTC 19901-S210A BUILDING 2198 : REMODEL AND CONSTRUCT COVERED 

TRAINING AREA 360

CAMP DODGE JMTC 19901-S3400 BUILDING 2287 : ADDITION/RENOVATION 3,417

CAMP DODGE JMTC 19901-S34P0 BUILDING 2277 : CONSTRUCT GAS LINE AND INSTALL 

EXHAUST VENT FOR PARTS WASHER 5

CAMP DODGE JMTC 19901-S5100 BUILDING 1365 : RENOVATE ENERGY-RELATED BUILDING 

COMPONENTS 716

CAMP DODGE JMTC 19901-S7000 BUILDING 1285 : REPLACE LEAKING UNDERGROUND 

CHILLER LINE 245

CAMP DODGE JMTC 19901-S7100 BUILDING 1212: INSTALL ECC AND CONNECT EXISTING 

METER TO NETWORK 7

CAMP DODGE JMTC 19901-TF003 : REPLACE ELECTRICAL TRANSFORMER NORTH OF S70 48

CAMP DODGE JMTC 19901-TF110 : CONSTRUCT NEW PAD AND INSTALL NEW 

TRANSFORMER FOR M09 37

CAMP DODGE JMTC 19901-TK007 : CONSTRUCT ABOVE-GROUND FUEL STORAGE TANK SYS 

FOR A01 EMERG GENERATOR; DEMOLISH TWO UST'S 274

CAMP DODGE JMTC 19901-W37Q0 BUILDING 2469 : REMODEL KITCHEN 11

CAMP DODGE JMTC 19901-W38Q0 W-38Q : FAMILY HOUSING OTHER THAN MILITARY 

REMODEL KITCHEN 12

CAMP DODGE JMTC 19901-W39Q0 BUILDING 2477 : REMODEL KITCHEN 11

CAMP DODGE JMTC 19901-W4600 BUILDING 3447: CONSTRUCT CONDUIT FOR 

ELECTRICAL SERVICE AND WIRE NEW AIR COMPRESSOR 14

CAMP DODGE JMTC 19901-WP052 BUILDING W42 : CONSTRUCT PAD AND INSTALL 

REDUNDANT COOLING SYSTEM FOR DATA ROOM AT W42 47

CAMP GEORGE WEST (BLDG. 122 & 123): LIGHTING RETROFIT 25

CAMP JOHNSON : AUTOMATIC TRANSFER SWITCH FOR LOAD SHEDDING AND 

CURTAILABLE RATE 188

CAMP JOHNSON, BLDG 15: WHOLE BUILDING RETROFIT TO LED INCLUDING EXTERIOR 98

CAMP RILEA: BUILDING ENVELOPE (WINDOWS) 304

P00000019436

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 123 of 151
F-4

Project

Estimated 

Financial 

Obligation 

($000s)

CAMP RILEA: BUILDING ENVELOPE (WINDOWS) 282

CAMP RIPLEY MTA: 27B40-02198 REHABILITATION INCLUDED INSULATION, LED LIGHTING, 

HIGH EFF. HEATING SYSTEMS, HVAC CONTROL SYSTEM 1,652

CAMP RIPLEY MTA: 27B40-11001 GSHP INSTALLATION 1,636

CAMP RIPLEY MTA: 27B40-07001 BLDG REHAB PROJECT 2,591

CAMP RIPLEY MTA: 27B40-15002 COMPUTER ROOM AC REPLACEMENT 339

CAMP RIPLEY MTA: 27B40-09001 FURNACE REPLACEMENT 4

CAMP RIPLEY MTA: 27B40-10001 FURNACE REPLACEMENT 5

CAMP RIPLEY MTA: AUDIT COMPONENT OF STATE OF MINNESOTA GUARUNTEED ENERGY 

SAVINGS PROGRAM 126

CAMP WITHYCOMBE: CENTRALIZE COMPRESSED AIR SYSTEM 404

CAMPBELLSVILLE ARMORY: EXTERIOR LIGHTING UPGRADE TO LED 17

CEDAR RAPIDS AFRC/FMS 19336-FMS01 : VEHICLE MAINTENANCE SHOP RELOCATE HEAT 

PUMP 5

CENTRAL CITY ARMORY: INTERIOR LIGHTING UPGRADE TO LED 15

CHILLICOTHE ARMORY: REPLACE LIGHTIUNG 15

COLUMBIA ARMORY: ADD DDC CONTROLS 27

COLUMBUS: BOILER REPLACEMENT 102

CRESTWOOD ARMORY: REPAIR HVAC SYSTEMS 2,204

CRESTWOOD ARMORY: UPGRADE ELECTRICAL AND LIGHTING SYSTEMS 2,079

DAVENPORT AASF/ARMORY 19B05-AASF3 : CONSTRUCT CONDUIT FOR UNDERGROUND 

ELECTRICAL POWER FOR SECURITY INDUCTION LOOPS FOR WEST GATE 4

DAVENPORT AASF/ARMORY 19B05-AASF3 : CONSTRUCT EXTERIOR SECURITY LIGHT 3

DESOTO ARMORY: REPLACED INT LIGHTS 10

DETROIT ARSENAL: POWER FACTOR CORRECTION ON ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM 

FOR GSPEL FACILITY 62

DETROIT ARSENAL: INSTALL VFD CONTROL FOR ENGINE COOLING &HX COOLING 44

DETROIT ARSENAL: CONNECT HIGH BAY LIGHT FIXTURES IN BLDG 203 TO EMS 35

DRFTA: REPAIR/REPLACE CONTROLS MULTIPLE FACILITIES 175

DRFTA: ADD SMART ELECTRIC STRIPS MULTIPLE FACILITIES 627

DRFTA: REPAIR/RPLACE HVAC MULTIPLE FACILITIES 480

DRFTA: REPAIR/REPLACE LIGHTS MULTIPLE FACILITIES 270

DRFTA: REPAIR/REPLACE DOMESTIC HOT WATER MULTIPLE FACILITES 1,031

DRFTA: REPAIR/REPLACE BUILDING ENVELOPE MULTIPLE FACILITIES 800

DRFTA: HVAC REPLACEMENT - MULTIPLE FACILITIES 6

DUBUQUE ARMORY 19B30-ARMRY ARNG : CONSTRUCT CONDUIT AND ELECTRICAL POWER 

TO AIR COMPRESSOR 1

DUNBAR ARMORY: REPLACE SINGLE PANE WINDOWS WITH INSULATED WINDOWS. 323

ELWOOD: BOILER REPLACEMENT 80

P00000019437

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 124 of 151
F-5

Project

Estimated 

Financial 

Obligation 

($000s)

ENOSBURG ARMORY: ADDITIONAL INSULATION INSTALLED DURING ROOFING 

REPLACEMENT 41

ESTHERVILLE ARMORY 19B40-ARM02 : REPLACE WATER HEATER WITH TWO GASPOWERED TANKLESS WATER HEATERS 18

FARMINGTON ARMORY: REPLACED INT LIGHTS 10

FESTUS ARMORY: REPLACED INT LIGHTS 16

FORT AP HILL: CONVERT FUEL OIL HEATING SYSTEMS TO HEAT PUMPS 287

FORT AP HILL: REPLACE FUEL OIL BOILER WITH HIGH EFFICIENT FURNACE 78

FORT AP HILL: CONVERT FUEL OIL BOILER TO PROPANE 47

FORT AP HILL: REPLACE STEAM WATER HEATER WITH PROPANE TANK-LESS 64

FORT BELVOIR: POST -WIDE DDC EMCS 2,400

FORT BELVOIR: REPAIR HVAC SYSTEM BLDG 220 OAA 2,995

FORT BENNING: SMART STRIPS FOR DESKTOP 174

FORT BENNING: RETROCOMMISSION FACILITIES, PHASE 4 418

FORT BENNING: RETROCOMMISSION FACILITIES, PHASE 6 493

FORT BENNING: RETROCOMMISSION FACILITIES, PHASE 5 500

FORT BENNING: RETROCOMMISSION FACILITIES, PHASE 8 481

FORT BENNING: PARKING LOT LIGHTING TO LED AT HARMONY CHURCH 357

FORT BRAGG: REPLACE 16 MOTORS W/VFDS 1BCT, C-AREA BUILDINGS 149

FORT BRAGG: UMCS INTEGRATION AND REPAIR HVAC UNITS IN 8-5050 117

FORT BRAGG: REPLACE D-3915 HVAC CONTROL AND OCCUPANCY SENSORS 80

FORT BRAGG: REPLACE FUEL OIL BOILER TO HEAT PUMP, N-7101 1,850

FORT BRAGG: REPLACE FUEL OIL BOILER TO HEAT PUMP, M-7858 128

FORT BRAGG: WATER SOURCE HEAT PUPS, COOLING TOWER, AND DDC FOR 2-1105 139

FORT BRAGG: RETROCOMMISSIONING POPE 1,500

FORT CAMPBELL: BOILERS, RAD HEAT, AX CONTROLS 900

FORT CARSON: B&B BARRACKS MECHANICLA ROOM REPLACEMENTS 4

FORT DODGE ARMORY/FMS 19B55-ARMRY : CONSTRUCT A 30-AMP CIRCUT WITH 

RECEPTACLE IN FOTS ROOM 2

FORT DODGE ARMORY/FMS 19B55-ARMRY ARNG : ARMORY REPLACE DDC SYSTEM 

CONTROLLERS 25

FORT DRUM: REPAIR / REPLACE HVAC SYSTEM P10732 (CLS VL) 292

FORT DRUM: RENOVATE, DEMO OFFICES & INSTALL A/C, T3897 (CLASSROOM) 400

FORT DRUM: REPAIR / REPLACE HVAC CONTROL SYSTEM P11115 (ODR) 29

FORT DRUM: REPAIR ATTIC SPACE (INSTALL INSULATION & VENTILATION) P219 (GEN INSTR 

BLDG) 641

FORT DRUM: REPAIR / REPLACE SMALL BUILDING CONTROLS (41 BUILDINGS) 98

FORT DRUM: REPLACE BOILER, P2312 (COMMUNICATION CENTER) URGENT 13

FORT DRUM: REPAIR BUILDING CONTROL SYSTEM P10122 (BARRACKS) 125

FORT DRUM: REPAIR LIGHTING AT 25 STREET INTERSECTIONS, CANTONMENT AREA 54

P00000019438

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 125 of 151
F-6

Project

Estimated 

Financial 

Obligation 

($000s)

FORT DRUM: REPAIR / REPLACE AC UNIT, RM 143, P2065 (BASOPS) 649

FORT DRUM: REPR HVAC SYSTEM P10100 (DRM) 2

FORT DRUM: REPAIR / RENOVATE & INSTALL A/C, P10510 (BN HQ) 47

FORT DRUM: REPAIR HVAC IN COMMUNICATION ROOM, P10400 (BDE HQ) 139

FORT DRUM: REPR / REPL HOT WATER HEATERS 2EA, 20368 (BRKS) 48

FORT DRUM: REPAIR HVAC IN COMMUNICATION ROOM, P10200 (BDE HQ) 48

FORT DRUM: REPAIR HVAC IN COMMUNICATION ROOM, P10500 (DIVARTY HQ) 26

FORT GEORGE MEADE: WIRELESS CONTROLS 423

FORT GEORGE MEADE: SMART POWER STRIPS 212

FORT GEORGE MEADE: LED WALL PACKS 181

FORT HOOD: UMCS INTEGRATION 813

FORT HOOD: INSTALLATION OF VARIABLE SPEED DRIVE (VSD) RETROFIT KITS IN CEPS 

(B21022,B37015) 1,014

FORT HOOD: ADD BUILDINGS TO CENTRAL PLANT-LCNC 896

FORT HOOD: REPLACE MULTI-ZONE AHU, CONDENSING UNIT & CONTROLS 237

FORT HOOD: HVAC REPLACEMENT AND ADD DDC CONTROLS 356

FORT HOOD: CEP 10017 CHILLER REPLACEMENT W/VSD 1,085

FORT HOOD: CEP 33007 CHILLER REPLACEMENT W/VSD 526

FORT LEAVENWORTH: REPLACE QUARTZ SECURITY LIGHTING ON PRISON (USDB, JRCF) IDF 

PERIMETER FENCE WITH LED 198

FORT LEAVENWORTH: MORE EFFICIENT BURNERS FOR USDB BOILERS 100

FORT LEAVENWORTH: REPLACE INCANDESCENTS AND CFLS WITH LED BULBS. INSTALL 

PROGRAMMABLE THERMOSTATS 59

FORT RUCKER: HEAT RECOVERY CHILLER 352

FORT RUCKER: HEAT RECOVERY CHILLER 475

FT RILEY: REPAIR 1502 HIGH BAY INDOOR LIGHTING, QUTM 55

FT RILEY: BOILER FLUE DAMPER INSTALLATION, QUTM 93

FT RILEY: BLDG 722 LIGHTING/INSULATION, QUTM 186

FT RILEY: REPAIR ACP LIGHTING ESTES AND 12TH ST 118

FT. MEADE 159: REPLACE ALL PTAC UNITS 72

FT. MEADE 54: HVAC REPLACEMENT & DDC CONTROLS, CONVERT FROM STEAM TO 

NATURAL GAS HEAT 15

FT. MEADE 60: HVAC REPLACEMENT & DDC CONTROLS 37

FULTON ARMORY: REPLACE LIGHTING 8

FWATTS: INSTALL ESTERIOR LED FIXTURES 32

GALVA ARMORY: ELECTRICAL REHAB 1,020

GENERAL JONES ARMORY: REPLACE AND REPAIR HVAC SYSTEMS 2,233

GEORGETOWN: INSTALL LED LIGHTING AND ENERGY EFFICIENT UTILITIES 11

GOWEN FIELD: BLDG 307 LED LIGHTING 66

P00000019439

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 126 of 151
F-7

Project

Estimated 

Financial 

Obligation 

($000s)

GOWEN FIELD: FMS#2 LED LIGHTING 16

GOWEN FIELD: ASP STADIUM LED LIGHTING 82

GQ012: REPLACE AHU/CHILLER 216

GQ012: REPLACE AHU/CHILLER 167

GREAT FALLS AFRC: CORRECT PROBLEMS AND IMPROVE EXISTING GROUND SOURCE HEAT 

PUMP SYSTEM. 452

HAROLD L. DISNEY TRAINING SITE: EXTERIOR LIGHTING UPGRADE TO LED 3

HI-ARNG: CHILLER REPLACEMENT AND HVAC RETROFIT 1,200

HI-ARNG: LED LIGHTING RETROFIT 49

HI-ARNG: DIRECT DIGITAL CONTROLS 58

HI-ARNG: HVAC SYSTEM REPLACEMENT 800

HI-ARNG: EXTERIOR LED LIGHTING RETROFIT 101

HI-ARNG: PARKING LOT FIXTURE LED RETROFIT 18

HI-ARNG: EXTERIOR LED LIGHTING RETROFIT 99

HOPKINSVILLE ARMORY: INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR LIGHTING UPGRADE TO LED 29

HVAC REPLACEMENT BLDG 32: REPLACE EXISTING BOILER 141

INDIANAPOLIS CSMS: AIR COMPRESSOR REPLACEMENT 43

IOWA CITY ARMORY 19C00-ARMRY ARNG ARMORY : UPGRADE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM FOR 

EMERGENCY GENERATION TO ALL AREAS 35

JACKSON FMS: INTERIOR LIGHTING UPGRADE TO LED 13

JBM-HH: INSTALL LED LIGHTING IN BUILDING 39 FORT MCNAIR DC AND LIGHT OCCUPANCY 

SENSORS - VARIOUS BUILDINGS 210

JBM-HH: INSTALL / REPLACE OLD / AGING AND INEFFICIENT CHILLERS AT AFH NCO 

QUARTERS (MYER MCNAIR) 1,100

JEFFERSON BARRACKS: REPLACED LIGHTING 5

JEFFERSON CITY ARMORY: REPLACED LIGHTING 20

JOINT BASE LEWIS-MCCHORD: CONVERT 70+ BUILDINGS FROM CENTRAL PLANT HEATING 

SYSTEMS TO INDIVIDUAL NATURAL GAS BOILERS 15

KANKAKEE JAFRC: UPGRADE HVAC W/MINOR ELECTRICAL 2,187

KANSAS CITY ARMORY: REPLACED LIGHTING 20

KEYSER ARMORY: REPLACE SINGLE PANE WINDOWS WITH INSULATED WINDOWS. 257

KNOXVILLE ARMORY 19C35-ARMRY ARNG : REPLACE LATRINE WATER HEATER 12

LAARNG: STATEWIDE (18 FACILITIES) EMCS INSTALLATION 186

LE MARS ARMORY 19C40-ARMRY ARNG ARMORY : REPLACE RTU FOR ORDERLY AND 

WEIGHT ROOMS 6

LEXINGTON ARMORY: INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR LIGHTING UPGRADE TO LED 19

LEXINGTON FMS: INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR LIGHTING UPGRADE TO LED 17

LITCHFIELD ARMORY: 27B35-09001 LITCHFIELD BLDG REHAB 1,164

LONDON FMS: INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR LIGHTING UPGRADE TO LED 20

MADISON: BOILER REPLACEMENT 107

P00000019440

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 127 of 151
F-8

Project

Estimated 

Financial 

Obligation 

($000s)

MARION READINESS CENTER: REPLACEMENT OF HVAC AND LIGHTING 1,603

MARSHALL ARMORY: REPLACE LIGHTING 4

MARSHALLTOWN ARMORY 19C50-ARMRY : REPLACE TWO WATER HEATERS 18

MONTICELLO ARMORY: 53KW GROUND MOUNT SOLAR PV ARRAY 171

MONTROSE: REPLACED FAULTY PNEUMATIC CONTROLS WITH DDC. 8

MTN WRFR SCHL CEATS: WHOLE BUILDING RETROFIT TO LED INCLUDING EXTERIOR 163

MTN WRFR SCHL CEATS: REPLACED DOMESTIC WATER HEATER 71

MUNCIE: BOILER REPLACEMENT 136

MUSCATINE AFRC 19536-AFRC0 ARMED FORCES RESERVE CENTER : INSTALL ECC AND 

CONNECT EXISTING METER TO NETWORK 4

NC: JFHQ RETRO-COMMISSIONING 24

NC: ENERGY MASTER PLAN 50

NEWARK: HVAC REPL 102

OELWEIN ARMORY 19C90-ARMRY ARNG : ARMORY REPLACE FAILING WATER HEATER 10

OSKALOOSA ARMORY 19C95-ARMRY ARNG : RENOVATE ARMORY AND CONVERT PORTION 

OF MVSB1 2,153

OWENSBORO READINESS CENTER: 216KW GROUND MOUNT SOLAR PV ARRAY 510

PARKERSBURG ARMORY: REPLACE SINGLE PANE WINDOWS WITH INSULATED WINDOWS. 182

PENDELTON AASF: 150KW 815

PERU: BOILER REPLACEMENT 175

PICATINNY ARSENAL: REPLACE LIGHT SWITCHES W/OCCUPANCY SENSORS & CONTROLS 349

PIGMAN RC: INSULATED ACCOUSTIC CEILING 68

POPLAR BLUFF ARMORY: REPLACED INT LIGHTS 37

PT. PLEASANT ARMORY: REPLACE SINGLE PANE WINDOWS WITH INSULATED WINDOWS. 159

RED OAK ARMORY 19D15-ARMRY ARNG : ARMORY REPLACE LINTELS ON FOUR FIRST 

FLOOR WINDOWS 10

RENSSELAER: BOILER REPLACEMENT 116

RICHMOND AFRC: EXTERIOR LIGHTING UPGRADE TO LED & 252KW GROUND MOUNT 

SOLAR PV ARRAY 658

RICHMOND ARMORY: EXTERIOR LIGHTING UPGRADE TO LED 20

ROCK ISLAND ARSENAL: REPLACE 5,452 FLUORESCENT TUBES WITH LED TUBES 95

ROCK ISLAND ARSENAL: REPLACE 814 FLUORESCENT FIXTURES WITH LED FIXTURES, BLDG 

210 129

ROCK ISLAND ARSENAL: REPLACE 373 FLUORESCENT FIXTURES WITH LED FIXTURES, BLDG 

211-3 14

ROCK ISLAND ARSENAL: REPLACE 40 HID LAMPS WITH LED FIXTURES, NORTH SIDE, BLDG 

222 140

ROCK ISLAND ARSENAL: REPLACE 40 HID LAMPS WITH LED FIXTURES, SOUTH SIDE, BLDG 

223 150

ROCK ISLAND ARSENAL: REPLACE HID LIGHTS WITH LED, BLDG 114 70

P00000019441

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 128 of 151
F-9

Project

Estimated 

Financial 

Obligation 

($000s)

ROCK ISLAND ARSENAL: REPLACE FAILED STEAM TRAPS, BLDG 350 55

ROCK ISLAND ARSENAL: REPLACE FAILED CEILING INSULATION, BLDG 112 59

ROCK ISLAND ARSENAL: ADDED CEILING INSULATION & CLOSED CEILING/ROOF VENTS, 

BLDG 144 10

ROLLA ARMORY: REPLACE LIGHTING 14

ROSEBURG ARMORY: ARMORY ENERGY RETROFIT 1,940

RRTC, NORWICH: WHOLE BUILDING RETROFIT TO LED INCLUDING EXTERIOR 13

RRTC, NORWICH: VENTILATION RE-COMMISSIONING 324

RRTC, NORWICH: VFDS FOR HOT WATER PUMPS 29

RRTC, NORWICH: ADD SPRAY FOAM INSULATION TO EVES 36

RRTC, NORWICH: CO2 DEMAND CONTROL FOR VENTILATION 126

SALEM AASF HANGAR 1: ENERGY RETROFIT, BUILDING ENVELOPE 45

SALEM AASF, HGR 2: BOILER REPLACEMENT 89

SALEM AASF, HGR 2: DDC 109

SALEM FMS: LIGHTING 108

SALEM JFHQ: LIGHTING UPGRADE 411

SALEMN: BOILER REPLACEMENT 103

SCANNELL: REPLACE LIGHTING TO LED 584

SEATTLE READINESS CENTER: REPLACE EXISTING BOILER 112

SHELDON ARMORY 19D35-ARMRY : REPLACE EXTERIOR DOOR AND FRAME 6

SIERRA ARMY DEPOT: LIGHTING CONTROL AND LED RETROFIT 1,030

SIERRA ARMY DEPOT: LIGHTING CONTROL AND LED RETROFIT 1,030

SOUTH DAKOTA STATEWIDE: VARIOUS WORK ORDERS INCORPORATING LIGHTING, HVAC 

REPLACEMENT 162

STATE WIDE LIGHTING FACILITIES: STATEWIDE LIGHTING RETROFIT 2,800

SULLIVAN READINESS CENTER: UPGRADE HVAC 883

TEXAS ARMY NATIONAL GUARD: BUILDING AUTOMATED CONTROLS & EMS/UMCS 384

TEXAS ARMY NATIONAL GUARD: CAMP MABRY STREET LIGHT LED UPGRADES 65

TEXAS ARMY NATIONAL GUARD: MULTIPLE CENTRAL TEXAS FACILITY INTERIOR AND 

EXTERIOR LED LIGHTING UPGRADES 62

TEXAS ARMY NATIONAL GUARD: CAMP BULLIS RC IMPROVEMENTS 180

TOMPKINSVILLE ARMORY: EXTERIOR LIGHTING UPGRADE TO LED 5

TYNDALL: BOILER REPLACEMENT 110

UMATILLA TRAINING CENTER: BIOMASSS CENTRAL HEATING PLANT 6,600

USAG ANSBACH: REPLACE WINDOWS IN HANGAR # 5508 128

USAG ANSBACH: REPLACE EXT LIGHTS BY LEDS 45

USAG ANSBACH: REPLACE EXT LIGHTS BY LEDS 58

USAG BAVARIA: UPGRADE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM AND REPLACE INEFFICIENT LIGHTING 

SYSTEM. 1,100

P00000019442

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 129 of 151
F-10

Project

Estimated 

Financial 

Obligation 

($000s)

USAG BAVARIA: REPLACE OVERAGED BAS CONTROL IN BLDG 6 90

USAG BAVARIA: REPAIR ROOF DAMAGES BLDG. 332 30

USAG BAVARIA: INSTALL AIR EXCHANGE SYSTEM BLDG. 41 86

USAG BAVARIA: REPLACE FAILING BAS CONTROLLERS IN BLDGS 332, 334, 344 AND 346 300

USAG BAVARIA: RENOVATE BLDG. 1 15

USAG BAVARIA: MODERNIZE UEMCS REMOTE SUBSTATIONS MULTIPLE CAMPS 90

USAG BAVARIA: REPLACE FAILING HIGH VOLTAGE CABLES, PHASE VII, REV I 1,000

USAG BAVARIA: REPLACE ROOF CONSTRUCTION BLDG 710 1,000

USAG BAVARIA: REPAIR HEATING/SAFETY/UEMCS ALBERTSHOF TROOP BILLETS 1139-1143 69

USAG BAVARIA: MODERNIZE EXISTING HVAC AND CONNECT TO EMCS 23

USAG BAVARIA: WINDOW SENSOR CONTROLS FOR RADIATORS 450

USAG BAVARIA: INSTALL OCCUPANCY SENSORS FOR INTERIOR SPACES 2,800

USAG BAVARIA: REPLACE NON-PROGRAMMABLE RADIATOR THERMOSTATS WITH 

PROGRAMMABLE MODELS 244

USAG BAVARIA: ADDITIONAL BLDG.. INSULATION AND WEATHERSTRIPPING 170

USAG BAVARIA: REPLACE INCANDESCENT LIGHTS WITH LED 127

USAG BAVARIA: LIGHTING CONTROLS 8

USAG BAVARIA: ELECTRICAL/MECHANICAL ENERGY CONSERVATION MEASURES 27

USAG BAVARIA: HEATING CONTROLS 94

USAG BAVARIA: INSTALL OVERHEAD INFRARED HEATING 89

USAG BAVARIA: INCREASE BUILDING INSULTATION 229

USAG BAVARIA: T-8 FLUORESCENT LIGHTING UPGRADE 435

USAG BAVARIA: UPGRADE WALL AND DISPLAY CABINET LIGHTING 113

USAG BAVARIA: INSTALL PLASTIC STRIP CURTAINS OVER WAREHOUSE DOOR OPENINGS 59

USAG BENELUX: IMPROVE HVAC SYSTEMS AND CONNECT THEM TO EMCS AT CHIEVRES AIR 

BASE 200

USAG DAEGU: REPAIR DETERIORATED INTERIOR FLUORESCENT WITH LED 71

USAG DAEGU: REPAIR DETERIORATED WEATHER STRIPPING FOR DOORS 507

USAG DAEGU: REPAIR DAMAGED EXISTITNG SHOWER HEAD REDUCERS 193

USAG DAEGU: REPLACE HEATING AND AC EQUIPMENT (20+) 1,595

USAG DAEGU: REPLACE AC SYSTEM (20+) 1,800

USAG FT GREELY: REPLACE ROOF B601 1,191

USAG FT GREELY: REPAIR B605 ENVELOPE 929

USAG JAPAN: REPLACE A/C FOR

SERVER ROOM

(EXCHANGE, B425,

CAMP ZAMA)

91

USAG JAPAN: REPAIR BY REPLACE

HVAC SYSTEM FOR

UPH (B781, CZ)

469

P00000019443

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 130 of 151
F-11

Project

Estimated 

Financial 

Obligation 

($000s)

USAG JAPAN: REPLACE HVAC

SYSTEM (UPH,

B782) CAMP ZAMA

442

USAG JAPAN: REPLACE OUTSIDE CHILLER UNIT (B216) 295

USAG JAPAN: REPLACE A/C SYSTEM (B109) 163

USAG JAPAN: REPLACE A/C SYSTEM AT TELECOMM SWITCH ROOM (B210) 35

USAG JAPAN: REPLACE OUTSIDE CHILLER UNIT (B218) 237

USAG JAPAN: REPLACE A/C

SYSTEM (B102) 73

USAG RED CLOUD: REPAIR / REPLACE EXISTING DETERIORATED LIGHTING FIXTURE WITH 

LED , EAST CASEY, CP CASEY 223

USAG RED CLOUD: REPLACE STREET LIGHT WITH LED LIGHTS, SWISS / SWEDE 225

USAG RED CLOUD: INSTALL NATURAL DAY LIGHTING SYSTEM FOR MOTOR POOL EAST SIDE, 

CP CASEY 288

USAG RED CLOUD: INSTALL NATURAL DAY LIGHTING SYSTEM FOR MOTOR POOL WEST 

SIDE, CP CASEY 571

USAG RED CLOUD: INSTALL NATURAL DAY LIGHTING SYSTEM FOR WARE HOUSE AT CP 

CASEY 45

USAG RED CLOUD: REPLACE OIL FIRED BOILER SYSTEM WITH NATURAL GAS BOILER 

SYSTEM FOR BUILDINGS IN 1/72D ARMOR UNIT AREA (PH #11) 649

USAG RED CLOUD: REPLACE OIL FIRED BOILER SYSTEM WITH NATURAL GAS BOILER 

SYSTEM FOR BUILDINGS IN 210TH FIRS BDE UNIT AREA (PH #13) 576

USAG RHEINLAND-PFALZ

: REPLACE SWITCHING CABINET & CONNECT FIBER OPTIC CABLES FOR EMCS 283

USAG RHEINLAND-PFALZ

: REPLACE INSULATION OF HVAC SYSTEMS 20

USAG RHEINLAND-PFALZ

: UPGRADE EMCS COMPONENTS 450

USAG RHEINLAND-PFALZ

: UPGRADE THERMAL INSULATION AND PAINT EXTERIOR OF BUILDING 8079 105

USAG RHEINLAND-PFALZ

: UPGRADE ROOF AND WALL THERMAL INSULATION AND PAINT EXTERIOR OF BLDG 8062 52

USAG RHEINLAND-PFALZ

: UPGRADE ROOF AND WALL THERMAL INSULATION AND PAINT EXTERIOR OF BLDG 8061 220

USAG RHEINLAND-PFALZ

: UPGRADE ROOF AND WALL THERMAL INSULATION AND PAINT EXTERIOR OF BLDG 8060 220

USAG RHEINLAND-PFALZ

: UPGRADE ROOF AND WALL THERMAL INSULATION AND PAINT EXTERIOR OF BLDG 8059 274

USAG RHEINLAND-PFALZ

: UPGRADE ROOF AND WALL THERMAL INSULATION AND PAINT EXTERIOR OF BLDG 8056 280

USAG RHEINLAND-PFALZ

: UPGRADE ROOF AND WALL THERMAL INSULATION AND PAINT EXTERIOR OF BLDG 8053 280

USAG RHEINLAND-PFALZ

: UPGRADE ROOF AND WALL THERMAL INSULATION AND PAINT EXTERIOR OF BLDG 8038 284

P00000019444

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 131 of 151
F-12

Project

Estimated 

Financial 

Obligation 

($000s)

USAG RHEINLAND-PFALZ

: UPGRADE ROOF AND WALL THERMAL INSULATION AND PAINT EXTERIOR OF BLDG 8035 220

USAG RHEINLAND-PFALZ

: UPGRADE ROOF AND WALL THERMAL INSULATION AND PAINT EXTERIOR OF BLDG 8013 220

USAG RHEINLAND-PFALZ

: UPGRADE ROOF AND WALL THERMAL INSULATION AND PAINT EXTERIOR OF BLDG 8006 220

USAG RHEINLAND-PFALZ

: UPGARDE ROOF & REP WALL THERMAL INSULATION AND PAINT EXTERIOR OF BLDG 8074 220

USAG RHEINLAND-PFALZ

: UPGRADE ROOF AND WALL THERMAL INSULATION AND PAINT EXTERIOR OF BLDG 8066 284

USAG RHEINLAND-PFALZ

: REPLACE HEATING LINE FR 8085 TO 8092 146

USAG RHEINLAND-PFALZ

: UPGRADE MAIN WATER SUPPLY LINE BETWEEN 8018 AND 8033 116

USAG RHEINLAND-PFALZ

: UPGRADE THERMAL INSULATION AND PAINT EXTERIOR OF BUILDING 8070 100

USAG RHEINLAND-PFALZ

: UPGRADE THERMAL INSULATION AND PAINT EXTERIOR OF BUILDING 8071 116

USAG RHEINLAND-PFALZ

: REPLACEMENT OF LIGHTS & INSTALLATION OF LIGHTING AND POWER CONTROLS 40

USAG RHEINLAND-PFALZ

: INSTALL SENORS FOR INTERIOR LIGHTING 400

USAG RHEINLAND-PFALZ

: REPLACE LUMINAIRES INTERIOR / EXTERIOR 80

USAG RHEINLAND-PFALZ

: INSTALLATION OF ENERGY EFFICIENT LIGTHS AND LIGHT CONTROL 16

USAG RHEINLAND-PFALZ

: INSTALL LIGHTS & LIGHT CONTROLS IN BLDG. 3116 450

USAG RHEINLAND-PFALZ

: INSTALL SENSORS FOR INTERIOR LIGHTING 33

USAG RHEINLAND-PFALZ

: UPGRADE AND INSULATE ROOF COVERING OF BLDG # 1375 350

USAG RHEINLAND-PFALZ

: UPGRADE AND INSULATE ROOF COVERING #1349 15

USAG RHEINLAND-PFALZ

: UPGRADE AND INSULATE ROOF SHEETS, ROOF COVERING #4A 350

USAG RHEINLAND-PFALZ

: ENERGY EFFICENT UPGRADE 112

USAG RHEINLAND-PFALZ

: UPGRADE ROOFS, 3557 AND 3570 30

USAG STUTTGART: REPAIR PARKING LIGHTS 94

USAG STUTTGART: REPAIR PARKING LIGHTS 101

USAG STUTTGART: REPLACE STREET LIGHTS 145

USAG VICENZA: E8-41088-3J - REPLACE ASP#7 PERIMETER LIGHTING FIXTURES 147

P00000019445

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 132 of 151
F-13

Project

Estimated 

Financial 

Obligation 

($000s)

USAG VICENZA: E8-41250-9J - REMOVE REPLACE OBSOLETE LIGHT POLES - EDERLE 599

VARIOUS: CEWE SUPPORT 5,000

VARIOUS: BUILDING AUTOMATION REQUIREMENTS 2,000

WALTON ARMORY: 19.8 KW ROOF MOUNT SOLAR PV ARRAY 61

WATERLOO AASF/ARMORY 19D65-AASF2 AC MAINT HGR : TUCKPOINT AND REPLACE 

CRACKED EXTERIOR BRICKS, CAULK WINDOW LINTELS 15

WATERLOO AASF/ARMORY 19D65-AASF2 AC MAINT HGR : MODIFY ELECTRICAL PANEL TO 

CONNECT FUEL POINT TO BACKUP GENERATION 2

WATERLOO AASF/ARMORY 19D65-AASF2 AC MAINT HGR : CONSTRUCT CONDUIT AND 

INSTALL 30 AMP CIRCUIT WITH RECEPTACLE 5

WATERLOO ARMORY/FMS 19D70-ARMRY: REPLACE COOLING UNIT IN FOTS ROOM 3

WATERLOO ARMORY/FMS 19D70-ARMRY ARNG ARMORY : REPLACE EXTERIOR WALL 

PACKS AND PARKING LIGHT FIXTURES FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY 42

WATERVLIET ARSENAL: REPLACE MAIN ELECTRICAL SUBSTATION, POST 4,276

WATERVLIET ARSENAL: REPLACE ELECTRIC CABLE, SUB 3A4 TO 3B4 106

WATERVLIET ARSENAL: REPLACE ELECTRIC DISTRIBUTION CABLES 374

WATERVLIET ARSENAL: REPLACE SUMMER STEAM BOILER 983

WELCH ARMORY: REPLACE SINGLE PANE WINDOWS WITH INSULATED WINDOWS. 270

WENATCHEE RC: INSTALL EIFS 125

WHITEMAN AFB ARMORY: REPLACE LIGHTING 20

WILLIAMSTOWN AFRC: INSTALL EXTERIOR LED FIXTURES 22

Renewable Energy 56,291

AFRC BRUNSWICK: GEO THERMAL, SOLAR PV, SOLAR DOMESTIC HOT WATER, RAIN WATER 

COLLECTION, AND GREEN ROOF INSTALLATION 24,683

BUCKEYE TS B2103: ROOFTOP PV SOLAR 77

BUCKEYE TS B2105: ROOFTOP PV SOLAR 175

CAMP ATTERBURY: HYBRID SOLAR PV AND WIND 48

CAMP ATTERBURY: HYBRID SOLAR PV, SOLAR THERMAL AND WIND 117

CAMP ATTERBURY: HYBRID SOLAR PV AND SOLAR THERMAL 85

CGJMTC: COMPRESSED NATURAL GAS VIRTUAL CAPTURE PIPELINE INSTALLATION 891

CHP 4, CEATS: 40 KW ROOFTOP ARRAY 132

FLORENCE TS L5030: ROOFTOP ARRAY 17

FORT GEORGE MEADE: SOLAR THERMAL ROOF AT GAFFNEY POOL 303

FORT GEORGE MEADE: SOLAR THERMAL ROOF AT 6400 BARRACK 304

FORT HUNTER LIGGETT: 5MW PVS WITH 3MW HR BATTERY STORAGE 22,000

FREEPORT ARMORY: HVAC REHAB 1,740

HI-ARNG: SOLAR RENEWABLE ENERGY 300

JOINT READINESS CENTER, CEATS: 114 KW ROOFTOP 410

PPMR-FMO: SOLAR COVERED PKING 302

RRTC, NORWICH: WOOD PELLET BOILER SYSTEM 456

P00000019446

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 133 of 151
F-14

Project

Estimated 

Financial 

Obligation 

($000s)

USAG BAVARIA: INSTALL SOLAR HEATING SYSTEM AT BLDG. 88 - USAG HOHENFELS 90

USAG BAVARIA: INSTALL ROOFTOP PV AND REMOVE ASBESTOS FROM CEILINGS IN 

BUILDINGS 1250, 1170, AND 1171. 200

USAG DAEGU: SOLAR TUBE LIGHTING 2,032

USAG STUTTGART: INSTALL SOLAR PANELS 259

USAG STUTTGART: INSTALL SOLAR PANELS 259

USAG STUTTGART: INSTALL SOLAR PANELS 259

USAG STUTTGART: INSTALL SOLAR PANELS 259

USAG STUTTGART: INSTALL SOLAR PANELS 259

USAG VICENZA: INSTALL PV SYSTEM ON VARIOUS BUILDING AT CAMP EDERLE 634

Water Conservation 9,483

AFRC: WATER TREATMENT INSTALL 30

ANNISTON ARMY DEPOT: WATER DISTRIBUTION REPAIR 1,200

ANNISTON ARMY DEPOT: WATER STORAGE TANK 542

CAMP RIPLEY MTA: WATER DISTRIBUTION STUDY RESEARCHING SYSTEM CONDITION AND 

LEAK DISCOVERY SYSTEMS 196

DRFTA: REPAIR/REPLACE WATER FIXTURES MULTIPLE FACILITIES 279

FAIRFIELD FMS 19B50-OMS12 ARNG VEH MAINT : UPGRADE DRINKING WATER QUALITY BY 

INSTALLING FILTER TO FAUCET IN BREAKROOM 1

FORT BRAGG: REPLACE SHOWER HEADS IN PFCS AND BARRACKS 55

GOWEN FIELD: BLDG 911 PARKING AREA XERISCAPE 40

NC: WATER MASTER PLAN 50

PIGMAN RC: ADA TOILET/SINKS/SHOWERS; SPRINKLERS; FIRE PUMP; 599

USAG BAVARIA: LOW-FLOW SHOWERHEADS 32

USAG BAVARIA: PLUMBING 71

USAG DAEGU: REPAIR DAMAGED EXISTING AERATORS REDUCERS 230

USAG JAPAN: REPAIR BY REPLACEMENT - POTABLE WATER PIPES (PHASE 1 OF 4) 414

USAG JAPAN: REPAIR BY REPLACEMENT -

STEAM LINES (PHASE 3 OF 3) 913

USAG JAPAN: REPLACE HEATING AND DOMESTIC

HOT WATER PIPIES) 198

USAG JAPAN: REPLACE WATER MAIN 194

WATERVLIET ARSENAL: REPLACE WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM, POST 4,439

NAVY 201,933

Energy Conservation 173,374

CAMP LEMONNIER DJIBOUTI: ECIP - ENERGY EFFICIENT LIGHT FIXTURES 1,046

CAMP LEMONNIER DJIBOUTI: PERIMETER LIGHTING EFFICIENCY UPGRADE 473

CFA SASEBO JA: ECIP - MULTI-FACILITY DDC UPGRADE, CFAS 5,680

CFA SASEBO JA: SASEBO - C20562 ENERGY EFFICIENT LIGHTING FOR BLDG. 430 FLEET GYM 

-EM- 102

P00000019447

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 134 of 151
F-15

Project

Estimated 

Financial 

Obligation 

($000s)

CFA SASEBO JA: ENERGY - REMOVE STEAM HEATED DHW SYSTEM/REPLACE W/POU 

ELECTRIC TANKLESS WATER HEATERS B155 352

CFA YOKOSUKA JA: REPLACE OVERSIZED 710KW AUR COMPRESSOR MOTOR WITH 290KW. 

BLDG 1938 838

JB PEARL HARBOR HICKAM HI: WR 838812 ENERGY - INSTALL HEAT PUMPS IN BUILDING 

1770 285

JB PEARL HARBOR HICKAM HI: ENERGY HID LIGHTING RETROFIT PHNSY 1,869

JB PEARL HARBOR HICKAM HI: IDIQ RETROCOMMISSIONING SERVICES, OAHU, HI 2,389

JB PEARL HARBOR HICKAM HI: FLC EXTERIOR LIGHTING RETROFIT WITH UNICOR 120

JB PEARL HARBOR HICKAM HI: REPLACE PIPING/DUCT INSULATION AT BLDGS 2131H, 

2133H, 2140H, 2141H 165

JEB LITTLE CREEK FORT STORY VA: ENERGY SAVING RCX AND DDC UPGRADE 2,000

JOINT BASE ANACOSTIA BOLLING: ENERGY, REPAIR LIGHTING FIXTURES 1,428

JOINT BASE ANACOSTIA BOLLING: EQUIPMENT UPGRADES BLDG 18 298

JOINT BASE ANACOSTIA BOLLING: ENERGY REPAIR LEAKS HTHW LINES 1,190

NAF ATSUGI JA: WASTEWATER OPTIMIZATION PROJECT 690

NAF EL CENTRO CA: ENERGY - BARRACKS WEATHERSTRIPPING AND SHIELDS 169

NAF MISAWA JA: RETROCOMMISSIONING VARIOUS BUILDING 362

NAS CORPUS CHRISTI TX: DDC CONTROLS FOR 16 BUILDINGS 1,777

NAS CORPUS CHRISTI TX: ENERGY - NASCC VARIOUS PARKING & WALKWAY LED LIGHT 

REPLACEMENT 231

NAS CORPUS CHRISTI TX: UPGRADE WATER PLANT FACILITIES BLDG W-1 (MAIN WATER 

DISTRIBUTION FACILITY PUMP-HOUSE) 985

NAS FALLON NV: FY15 RME - REPAIR MISC LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT 177

NAS JACKSONVILLE FL: B850 & B848A HVAC REWORK MODERNIZATION 321

NAS JACKSONVILLE FL: B848/B858/B962 HVAC REWORK MODERNIZATION 512

NAS JRB FORT WORTH TX: TINKER AFB TACAMO FACILITY ENERGY IMPROVEMENTS 1,730

NAS KINGSVILLE TX: REPLACE POOL COVER AND INSTALL SOLAR DHW SYSTEM 248

NAS MERIDIAN MS: ENERGY - CHILLER REPLACEMENT, BLDG 218 647

NAS OCEANA VA: ENERGY IMPROVEMENTS FOR MULTIPLE BLDGS NASO/DN RM12-3816 2,044

NAS OCEANA VA: REPLACE ROOF BLDG 127-TAYLOR HALL 1,560

NAS OCEANA VA: REPLACE ROOF BLDG 127-HOPPER HALL 610

NAS PENSACOLA FL: ENERGY - ECM FACILITY ENERGY IMPROVEMENT FOR BLDG 4143 394

NAS PENSACOLA FL: INSTALL RADIANT HEATERS IN BLDG 3221 416

NAS PENSACOLA FL: REPAIR CORRY BEQ 3701 8,335

NAS PENSACOLA FL: REPAIR CORRY BEQ 3709 4,973

NAS PENSACOLA FL: REPAIR CORRY BEQ 3710 4,974

NAS PENSACOLA FL: REPAIR B781 FRO NOSC 4,489

NAS PENSACOLA FL: HVAC CORRY GYM 889

NAS WHIDBEY ISLAND: ENERGY - REPAIR INDUSTRIAL CONTROL SYSTEM (ICS) RM12-3093 8,166

P00000019448

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 135 of 151
F-16

Project

Estimated 

Financial 

Obligation 

($000s)

NAS WHIDBEY ISLAND: ENERGY - FLIGHTLINE_FENCE LINE_EXTERIOR BLDG LIGHTING 413

NAVAL BASE KITSAP: ENERGY - RETROCOMMISSIONING 3 FLOORS OF B/290 AND ALL OF 

B/997 310

NAVAL BASE KITSAP: NORTHWEST BUMED HVAC AND LIGHTING MODERNIZATION 103

NAVAL BASE KITSAP: (B2YR47) ENERGY - RETRO-COMMISSIONING AND PERISCOPE SHOP 

HVAC UPGRADE, B/7000 BANGOR 95

NAVAL BASE KITSAP: REROOF/ADD INSULATION, B-15S 118

NAVAL BASE KITSAP: CAULK/RESEAL WINDOW SOUTH SIDE B-82 800

NAVAL BASE KITSAP: UPGRADE A/C CHILLER B-894 515

NAVAL BASE KITSAP: REROOF/ADD INSULATION, B-206 925

NAVAL BASE KITSAP: KEYPORTREROOF B-206 AND ADD R-22 INSULATION 200

NAVAL BASE KITSAP: KEYPORT B-894 CHILLER UPGRADE 423

NAVAL BASE KITSAP: KEYPORT B-1003 CRAC REPLACEMENTS 321

NAVAL BASE KITSAP: KEYPORT B-5092 HVAC AND LIGHTING UPGRADES 350

NAVAL HOSPITAL/NAVAL SUPPORT FACILITY BEAUFORT: STEAM LINE REPLACEMENT 1,193

NAVAL HOSPITAL/NAVAL SUPPORT FACILITY BEAUFORT: LED STREET LIGHT REPLACEMENT 308

NAVAL STATION EVERETT: ENERGY - RECOMMISSIONING & MODERNIZATION 1,075

NAVAL STATION EVERETT: RM12-3880 ENERGY - HVAC, LIGHTING AND WATER 

MODERNIZATION 300

NAVAL STATION NORFOLK VA: ENERGY - LED LIGHTING FOR C9 AND N30 AUDITORIUMS 107

NAVAL STATION NORFOLK VA: LED LIGHTING FOR AIRFIELD 2,556

NAVAL STATION NORFOLK VA: ENERGY - MULTIPLE BUILDING HVAC IMPROVEMENTS 976

NAVAL STATION NORFOLK VA: W-143 REPLACE HVAC SYSTEM IN NMCI AREA. 9,502

NAVAL STATION NORFOLK VA: REPLACE UNDERGROUND STEAM LINE NS NORFOLK GATE 5 227

NAVAL STATION NORFOLK VA: REPLACE UNDERGROUND STEAM LINE DECATUR AVE & PIER 

10 302

NAVAL SUBMARINE BASE NEW LONDON: PHASE 2 BUILDING OPTIMIZATION AND 

RETROCOMMISSIONING. 3,364

NAVBASE GUAM: ESRM ENERGY EFFICIENT ENTRANCE LIGHTING FOR MULTIPLE 

BUILDINGS, NBG RM 13-0654 300

NAVBASE GUAM: ESRM ENERGY - FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS FOR EFFICIENCY, BLDGS 2, 

3169, 1981 & 200NZ NBG 1,686

NAVBASE GUAM: ESRM PROJECT EXTERIOR BUILDING LIGHTS, VARIOUS LOCATIONS, NBG 

RM14-2167 213

NAVBASE POINT LOMA: ENERGY UPGRADE HAVC AND BOILERS B544 2,907

NAVBASE POINT LOMA: ENERGY- UPGRADE LIGHTING & CHILLED WATER SYSTEM, 

BUILDING 58 367

NAVSTA GREAT LAKES IL: TINKER AFB TACAMO 1,617

NAVSTA GUANTANAMO BAY CU: FY15_RME - LIGHTING MODERNIZATION FOR 20 

FACILITIES 659

NAVSTA GUANTANAMO BAY CU: FY15_RME-MINI SPLIT UPGRADES FOR 27 FACILITIES 1,140

P00000019449

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 136 of 151
F-17

Project

Estimated 

Financial 

Obligation 

($000s)

NAVSTA MAYPORT FL: ENERGY - BLDG 1980 NAVY LODGE HVAC UPGRADES AND RCX 403

NAVSTA MAYPORT FL: ENERGY - BLDG 1556 HVAC UPGRADES AND RCX 354

NAVSTA MAYPORT FL: ENERGY - BUILDING 338 HVAC OPTIMIZATION AND RETROCOMISSIONING 696

NAVSTA MAYPORT FL: ENERGY - FACILITIES ENERGY CONSERVATION MEASURE 987

NAVSTA NEWPORT RI: BOILER CONTROLS BLDG A6 NHCNE 65

NAVSTA NEWPORT RI: NEWPORT PLANT OPTIMIZATION & STEAM BACKPRESSURE TURBINE 2,860

NAVSTA NEWPORT RI: MODIFICATIONS BOILER PLANT A6 NEWPORT 315

NAVSTA NEWPORT RI: REPL STEAM DISTRIBUTRION PIPING BLDG 11 65

NAVSTA NEWPORT RI: REPL STEAM DISTRIBUTRION PIPING BLDG 15 TO 13 150

NAVSTA NEWPORT RI: REPL STEAM DISTRIBUTRION PIPING NUWC LOWER RD 350

NAVSTA NEWPORT RI: REPLACE 2 EXPANSION JOINTS STEAM DISTRIB 15

NCBC GULFPORT: ENERGY- INTERIOR LED UPGRAGES MULTIPLE BUILDINGS 995

NSA ANDERSEN : NSA ANDERSEN, DHW AIR TO WATER HEAT PUMPS, 2 BEQ BUILDINGS 840

NSA ANDERSEN : NSA ANDERSEN; ENERGY EFFICIENT ENTRANCE LIGHTING 78 BLDGS 724

NSA ANDERSEN : NSA ANDERSEN GUAM; FACILITY ENERGY IMPROVEMENTS; 26 BLDGS 1,340

NSA ANDERSEN : NSA ANDERSEN GUAM; FACILITY ENERGY IMPROVEMENTS 5 BUILDINGS 

& VENDING MACHINE CONTROLS 1,008

NSA ANDERSEN : NSA ANDERSEN GUAM; FACILITY ENERGY IMPROVEMENTS; 7 BLDGS 1,092

NSA ANDERSEN : NSA ANDERSEN UPGRADE ENERGY EFFICIENT LIGHTING, MULT BLDGS 7,157

NSA ANNAPOLIS MD: ENERGY: REPAIR HVAC SYSTEM, HALSEY FIELD HOUSE 556

NSA ANNAPOLIS MD: UPGRADE VARIOUS BUILDING LIGHTING SYSTEMS 1,940

NSA BETHESDA MD: E- RME FY15: ENERGY REPAIRS, BLDG 26, 50, 60, 61 RM13-0051) 1,819

NSA BETHESDA MD: BLDG 16 CHILLER 1A REPLACEMENT 2,500

NSA CRANE: B-1909 BOILER REPLACEMENT 109

NSA CRANE: B-3319 BOILER REPLACEMENT 131

NSA HAMPTON ROADS VA: ENERGY CONSERVATION IMPROVEMENTS HQ OPCON CENTER -

NH 95 4,000

NSA HAMPTON ROADS VA: INSTALL CIP LINER AND REPLACE LATERALS - JFSC NORTH NSA 

NORFOLK 3,733

NSA HAMPTON ROADS VA: REPLACE ROOFS AT SDA 204,205,210,211 655

NSA MECHANICSBURG: ENERGY - HVAC ENERGY REPLACEMENT AND UPGRADE 4,650

NSA MECHANICSBURG: ENERGY- NSA MECH ENVELOPE UPGRADES BLDGS 14 AND 214 3,910

NSA MECHANICSBURG: ENERGY - REPLACE EXTERIOR LIGHTING WITH LED 1,216

NSA MECHANICSBURG: NSA MECH HVAC ENERGY REPLACEMENT AND UPGRADE RM12-

3779 3,936

NSA MECHANICSBURG: NSA MECH BLDG 405 REPLACE SIDING WITH HIGHLY INSULATED 

METAL PANELING 143

NSA MECHANICSBURG: REPLACE FURNACES IN BUILDINGS 302, 403, REPAIR 301 1,415

NSA MECHANICSBURG: REPLACE CAFÉ HVAC SYSTEM 979

P00000019450

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 137 of 151
F-18

Project

Estimated 

Financial 

Obligation 

($000s)

NSA MECHANICSBURG: REPLACE SIDING - BLDG. 410 1,159

NSA MECHANICSBURG: REPLACE BOILER, NOSC ERIE PA 1,040

NSA MECHANICSBURG: REF C4VZZT REPLACE (2) WATER HEATING TANKS @ BLDG 5 NSA-P 

SITE 326

NSA MECHANICSBURG: REPLACE ROOF ON BUILDING 608B 435

NSA MECHANICSBURG: BLDG 643 AT PNY REPLACE OVERHEAD DOORS, MOTORS AND 

CONLTRS, AND REPLACE WINDOWS 320

NSA MECHANICSBURG: BLDG 03 AT NSA P HVAC IMPROVEMENTS CAFETERIA 1,055

NSA MECHANICSBURG: REPLACE BOILER, NOSC ERIE PA 700

NSA MECHANICSBURG: BLDG 312 ROOF COATING / SEALING SYSTEM 435

NSA MECHANICSBURG: NDS P INSTALL CEILING MOUNTED FANS IN GYM BLDG 8 108

NSA MECHANICSBURG: BLDG 309 NSA M INSTALL NEW GAS FIRED BOILER 500

NSA MID SOUTH MILLINGTON TN: ENERGY - STREET LIGHTING UPGRADE TO LED FIXTURES 308

NSA MONTEREY CA: B330 INGERSOL HALL HVAC IMPROVEMENTS 1,480

NSA MONTEREY CA: B-339 FACILITY ENERGY IMPROVEMENTS AT DUDLEY KNOX LIBRARY 2,029

NSA MONTEREY CA: NSAM STEAM DISTRIBUTION REPAIRS AND INSULATION 2,836

NSA NAPLES IT: SRME RM14-2160 - HE STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS AT CAPO 301

NSA SOUDA BAY GR: B49 ENERGY IMPROVEMENTS 664

NSA SOUDA BAY GR: B56 ENERGY IMPROVEMENTS 856

NSA SOUDA BAY GR: LED T8 UPGRADES 314

NSA SOUDA BAY GR: B48 ENERGY IMPROVEMENTS 604

NSA SOUTH POTOMAC: DL FY15 HVAC & LIGHTING B117 & 411 417

NSA WASHINGTON: CENTAL BOILER PLANT MONITORING 3,875

NSF DIEGO GARCIA: REPLACE T12 LIGHTING RETROFIT UPH 2, 8, 12, 15, 17, 24, NGIS 12 & 

NGIS 27 325

NSF DIEGO GARCIA: REPLACE T12 LIGHTING RETROFIT UPH14, 23 & 25 88

NSF DIEGO GARCIA: REPLACE T12 LIGHTING RETROFIT NGIS 3, 4, 5 & 16 89

NSF DIEGO GARCIA: REPLACE T12 LIGHTING RETROFIT, UPH 1, 6, 9 & 13 205

NSS NORFOLK NAVAL SHIPYARD VA: REPAIR CIP NNSY WATERFRONT AREA (PHASE B) 585

NSS NORFOLK NAVAL SHIPYARD VA: REPAIR CIP WATER STREET SJCA 293

NSY BOS PORTSMOUTH: B153, ENERGY & BLDG REPAIR NUCLEAR MATERIAL INSPECTION 4,151

NSY BOS PORTSMOUTH: REPLACE STEAM DISTRIBUTION PIPING AT BERTH 6 462

Renewable Energy 3,541

JB PEARL HARBOR HICKAM HI: EXISTING PV SYSTEM RETROCOMMISSIONING 229

NAF MISAWA JA: 100KW SOLAR PV BUILDING 988 511

NAF MISAWA JA: INSTALL 135KW SOLAR - BUILDING 976 MISAWA 679

NAVSTA GUANTANAMO BAY CU: FY15_RME - SOLAR DOMESTIC HOT WATER FOR 5 

FACILITIES 743

NAVSTA ROTA SP: ENERGY - SOLAR PANELS POOL WATER BLDG 45 588

P00000019451

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 138 of 151
F-19

Project

Estimated 

Financial 

Obligation 

($000s)

NSF DIEGO GARCIA: INSTALL 75KW PV SOLAR UPH 7 791

Water Conservation 25,018

CFA OKINAWA: CAMP SHILDS AND WB LOW FLOW FIXTURES 50 BUILDINGS 1,295

JOINT BASE ANACOSTIA BOLLING: FY15 ENERGY PLUMBING UPGRADES TO VARIOUS 

BLDGS, JBAB 344

NAVAL BASE KITSAP: ENERGY-WATER CONSERVATION 1,003

NAVAL BASE KITSAP: (B2YR8Y) ENERGY - WATER FIXTURE RETROFITS, BANGOR 2,347

NAVAL BASE KITSAP: (B2YR95) ENERGY - RETROFIT WATER FIXTURES, PSNS 1,965

NAVAL BASE VENTURA COUNTY: FY15 RM-E RM13-0132, WATER FIXTURE UPGRADE, SNI 1,041

NAVBASE GUAM: REPAIR SEWER LINE INFILTRATION/INFLOW, NBG 5,348

NAVSTA NEWPORT RI: SEWER SYSTEM INFLOW & INFILTRATION REDUCTION 397

NAVSTA NEWPORT RI: REPAIR SEWER SYSTEM PH 3 1,823

NAVSTA NEWPORT RI: REPAIR WATER SERVICE NUWC AREA 3,300

NAVSTA NEWPORT RI: REPLACE WATER DISTRIB SYSTEM PIPING NUWC SERVICE AREA 3,245

NAVSTA NEWPORT RI: REPL GATE VALVE BLDG 68 LOAD 24

NAVSTA NEWPORT RI: REPL GATE VALVE SHIP LOAD PIER 2 150

NSA ANNAPOLIS MD: HIGH EFFICIENCY WATER CONSERVATION RETROFIT FOR VARIOUS 

BUILDINGS 591

NSA ANNAPOLIS MD: UPGRADE VARIOUS BUILDING WATER CONSUMING SYSTEMS 518

NSA BAHRAIN: WATER CONSERVATION FOR VARIOUS BLDGS AT NSA 359

NSA MECHANICSBURG: BLDG. 311A - REPLACE DOMESTIC WATER LINES & LATERAL 

SEWAGE LINES 435

NSA MECHANICSBURG: NSA P BLDG 2B 2D RENNOVATE MENS RESTROOM 325

NSA MECHANICSBURG: NSA P BLDG 36 RENNOVATE MENS/WOMENS RESTROOM 160

NSA SOUDA BAY GR: NON-POTABLE WATER IRRIGATION SYSTEM UPGRADE 348

USMC 22,110

Energy Conservation 22,110

MCAS CAMP PENDLETON: REPAIRS INOPERABLE PHOTOVOLTAIC SYSTEM, VARIOUS 

PACKAGE UNIT ECONOMIZERS, VARIOUS ROOFTOP PACKAGE UNITS, AND EXHAUST FANS. 351

MCAS CAMP PENDLETON: INSTALL MECHANICAL VARIABLE DIFFUSERS AND ADJUST 

DIFFUSERS. 15

MCAS CAMP PENDLETON: REPAIR BUILDING MANAGEMENT SYSTEM COMMUNICATION 

LINES TO BUILDING DIRECT DIGITAL CONTROLLERS. 241

MCAS CAMP PENDLETON: REPAIRS BY REPLACEMENT EXISTING NATURAL GAS AMI METER, 

VARIOUS BUILDING HVAC, AND ASSOCIATED DDC. 356

MCAS CAMP PENDLETON: INSTALLS NEW AMI ELECTRICAL METERS, LED LIGHTING, DDC 

COMPONENTS, AND OCCUPANCY SENSORS. 56

MCAS MIRAMAR: REPLACE EXISTING FLUORESCENT LIGHTING FIXTURES WITH ENERGY 

EFFICIENT DIMMABLE LED LUMINAIRES. 875

MCB CAMP BUTLER: RETROFIT/REPLACE EXISTING OLD AND INEFFICIENT MECHANICAL 

EQUIPMENT WITH MORE EFFICIENT OPTIONS. 716

P00000019452

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 139 of 151
F-20

Project

Estimated 

Financial 

Obligation 

($000s)

MCB CAMP BUTLER: RETROFIT/REPLACE EXISTING OLD AND INEFFICIENT MECHANICAL 

EQUIPMENT WITH MORE EFFICIENT OPTIONS. 106

MCB CAMP BUTLER: RETROFIT/REPLACE EXISTING OLD AND INEFFICIENT MECHANICAL 

EQUIPMENT WITH MORE EFFICIENT OPTIONS. 281

MCB CAMP BUTLER: RETROFIT/REPLACE EXISTING OLD AND INEFFICIENT MECHANICAL 

EQUIPMENT WITH MORE EFFICIENT OPTIONS. 264

MCB CAMP BUTLER: RETROFIT/REPLACE EXISTING OLD AND INEFFICIENT MECHANICAL 

EQUIPMENT WITH MORE EFFICIENT OPTIONS. 910

MCB CAMP BUTLER: THIS PROJECT REPLACES ALL THE EXISTING SINGLE & DOUBLE FACE 

EXIT SIGNS WITH LIGHT EMITTING CAPACITORS (LEC) EXIT SIGNS. 1,564

MCB CAMP PENDLETON: THIS PROJECT WILL REPAIR EXISTING DDC CONTROLS IN 

MULTIPLE BUILDINGS. 280

MCB CAMP PENDLETON: THIS PROJECT WILL CONNECT AND INTEGRATE DDC CONTROLS IN 

MULITPLE BUILDINGS. 1,849

MCB CAMP PENDLETON: THIS PROJECT WILL REPAIR EXISTING DDC CONTROLS IN 

MULTIPLE BUILDINGS. 32

MCB CAMP PENDLETON: THIS PROJECT WILL REPAIR EXISTING DDC CONTROLS IN 

MULTIPLE BUILDINGS. 1,362

MCB CAMP PENDLETON: THIS PROJECT WILL REPAIR EXISTING DDC CONTROLS IN 

MULTIPLE BUILDINGS. 57

MCB CAMP PENDLETON: REPLACE BOILER IN BUILDING 210628 THAT HAS EXCEEDED ITS 

USEFUL LIFE. 1,000

MCB HAWAII: THIS PROJECT WILL MODIFY THE DUCTWORK ASSOCIATED WITH PAC-2 AT 

BLDG. 6003. 48

MCLB ALBANY: REPAIR NATURAL GAS DISTRIBUTION MAIN SERVING THE CENTRAL 

SECTION OF BASE. 3,850

MCLB ALBANY: REPAIR NATURAL GAS DISTRIBUTION MAIN SERVING THE CENTRAL 

SECTION OF BASE. 1,930

MCLB ALBANY: REPAIR NATURAL GAS DISTRIBUTION MAIN SERVING THE CENTRAL 

SECTION OF BASE. 2,213

MCMWTC BRIDGEPORT: THE PROJECT WILL REPLACE LIGHTING, EXISTING GARAGE DOORS 

WITH INSULATED UNITS, AND ALL THERMOSTATS WITH PROGRAMMABLE TYPE 

THERMOSTATS.

121

MCMWTC BRIDGEPORT: THE PROJECT WILL REPLACE LIGHTING, EXISTING GARAGE DOORS 

WITH INSULATED UNITS, AND ALL THERMOSTATS WITH PROGRAMMABLE TYPE 

THERMOSTATS.

99

MCMWTC BRIDGEPORT: THE PROJECT WILL REPLACE LIGHTING, EXISTING GARAGE DOORS 

WITH INSULATED UNITS, AND ALL THERMOSTATS WITH PROGRAMMABLE TYPE 

THERMOSTATS.

110

MCMWTC BRIDGEPORT: THE PROJECT WILL REPLACE LIGHTING, EXISTING GARAGE DOORS 

WITH INSULATED UNITS, AND ALL THERMOSTATS WITH PROGRAMMABLE TYPE 

THERMOSTATS.

57

MCMWTC BRIDGEPORT: THE PROJECT WILL REPLACE LIGHTING, EXISTING GARAGE DOORS 

WITH INSULATED UNITS, AND ALL THERMOSTATS WITH PROGRAMMABLE TYPE 

THERMOSTATS.

57

P00000019453

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 140 of 151
F-21

Project

Estimated 

Financial 

Obligation 

($000s)

MCMWTC BRIDGEPORT: THE PROJECT WILL REPLACE LIGHTING, EXISTING GARAGE DOORS 

WITH INSULATED UNITS, AND ALL THERMOSTATS WITH PROGRAMMABLE TYPE 

THERMOSTATS.

242

MCMWTC BRIDGEPORT: THE PROJECT WILL REPLACE LIGHTING, EXISTING GARAGE DOORS 

WITH INSULATED UNITS, AND ALL THERMOSTATS WITH PROGRAMMABLE TYPE 

THERMOSTATS.

119

MCMWTC BRIDGEPORT: THE PROJECT WILL REPLACE LIGHTING, EXISTING GARAGE DOORS 

WITH INSULATED UNITS, AND ALL THERMOSTATS WITH PROGRAMMABLE TYPE 

THERMOSTATS.

227

MCMWTC BRIDGEPORT: THE PROJECT WILL REPLACE LIGHTING, EXISTING GARAGE DOORS 

WITH INSULATED UNITS, AND ALL THERMOSTATS WITH PROGRAMMABLE TYPE 

THERMOSTATS.

56

MCMWTC BRIDGEPORT: THE PROJECT WILL REPLACE LIGHTING, EXISTING GARAGE DOORS 

WITH INSULATED UNITS, AND ALL THERMOSTATS WITH PROGRAMMABLE TYPE 

THERMOSTATS.

40

MCMWTC BRIDGEPORT: THE PROJECT WILL REPLACE LIGHTING, EXISTING GARAGE DOORS 

WITH INSULATED UNITS, AND ALL THERMOSTATS WITH PROGRAMMABLE TYPE 

THERMOSTATS.

103

MCMWTC BRIDGEPORT: THE PROJECT WILL REPLACE LIGHTING, EXISTING GARAGE DOORS 

WITH INSULATED UNITS, AND ALL THERMOSTATS WITH PROGRAMMABLE TYPE 

THERMOSTATS.

47

MCSF BLOUNT ISLAND: THIS PROJECTS INCLUDES REPAIR BY REPLACEMENT OF TWO 

MULTI-ZONE AHUS WITH MORE EFFICIENT VAV UNITS. 393

MCSF BLOUNT ISLAND: THIS PROJECT INCLUDES INSTALLATION OF SOLAR INFLECTOR 

SHIELDS ON WINDOWS IN BUILDING 100. 133

MCSF BLOUNT ISLAND: THIS PROJECT INCLUDES INSTALLATION OF A SKYLIGHTS AND 

LIGHTING CONTROLS FOR DAYLIGHTING IN BUILDING 450. 518

MCSF BLOUNT ISLAND: THIS PROJECT INCLUDES INSTALLATION OF A SKYLIGHTS AND 

LIGHTING CONTROLS FOR DAYLIGHTING IN BUILDING 550. 144

MCSF BLOUNT ISLAND: THIS PROJECT INCLUDES THE REPAIR BY REPLACEMENT OF FAN 

TERMINAL UNITS WITH VAV TERMINAL UNITS IN BUILDING 100. 902

MCSF BLOUNT ISLAND: THIS PROJECT INCLUDES THE REPAIR BY REPLACEMENT OF FAN 

TERMINAL UNITS WITH VAV TERMINAL UNITS IN BUILDING 100. 266

MCSF BLOUNT ISLAND: INTEGRATED LIGHTING CONTROL FOR BUILDING 350 LIGHTING 

AND THE BMS SYSTEM FOR BUILDINGS 361 AND 454. 120

AIR FORCE 106,361

Energy Conservation 91,454

ABRAHAM LINCOLN CAPITAL AIRPORT: REPAIR BLDG 1 ENV 5,300

ABRAHAM LINCOLN CAPITAL AIRPORT: ENERGY: REPAIR EMCS & METERS 740

ABSTON ANG STATION: ENERGY: UPGRADE LIGHTING 120

AFCEC: ENERGY; AMRS LABOR SPT/DEPLOYMEN 2,500

ANDERSEN AIR FORCE BASE: UPGRADED EXTERIOR LIGHTING BASEWIDE 45

ANDREWS AIR FORCE BASE (113 FW): UPGRADE TO LED LIGHTING 91

ATLANTIC CITY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT: BOILER DECENTRALIZATION & MULTIPLE ECMS 1,550

P00000019454

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 141 of 151
F-22

Project

Estimated 

Financial 

Obligation 

($000s)

ATLANTIC CITY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT: OCCUPANCY SENSORS 5

AVIANO AIR BASE: REPLACE A/C UNITS WITH HIGH EFFICIENCY UNITS, MULTI FACS 40

AVIANO AIR BASE: REPAIR HVAC CONTROLS, MULTI 366

AVIANO AIR BASE: REPAIR HVAC CONTROLS, MULTI 190

BANGOR INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT (ANG): ENERGY: REPAIR HEAT SYSTEMS 1,850

BANGOR INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT (ANG): CONVERT FROM OIL TO GAS B536, 505 100

BIRMINGHAM INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT: EOY: RPR BOILERS, B141/142 330

BUCKLEY ANG BASE: ENERGY: INSTALL INFRARED HEAT 1,200

BURLINGTON INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT (ANG): ENERGY: UPGRADE HIGH BAY LIGHT 130

CAMP BLANDING MILITARY RESERVATION (ANG): REPAIR HVAC BUILDING 4295 106

CAMP MURRAY ANG STATION: ENERGY: MULTIPLE CONS MEAS 570

CAMP PERRY ANG STATION: REPLACE 27 EXTERIOR HID STREET LIGHTS WITH LED 8

CANNON AIR FORCE BASE: NRG-INSTALL TREATED WW IRRIGATION SYSTEM 230

COLUMBUS AIR FORCE BASE: REPAIR HVAC, B440 497

COLUMBUS AIR FORCE BASE: CONSOLODATE LIBRARY/COMMUNITY SUPPPORT 225

COLUMBUS AIR FORCE BASE: RENOVATE B900 COMM OPS 1,028

COLUMBUS AIR FORCE BASE: REPAIR HVAC SYSTEMS NDI, B246 250

COLUMBUS AIR FORCE BASE: REPAIR HVAC TOWER/RAPCON 325

COLUMBUS AIR FORCE BASE: REPAIR HVAC PMEL, B327 462

COLUMBUS AIR FORCE BASE: REPAIR HVAC, B712 CHAPEL 1,684

COLUMBUS AIR FORCE BASE: REPAIR HVAC B1030 1,525

COLUMBUS AIR FORCE BASE: RENOVATE B820 1,300

CREECH AIR FORCE BASE: REPAIR WALL PACK LIGHTING MULTI FACILITIES 394

DANE COUNTY REGIONAL AIRPORT-TRUAX FIELD: PHASE 2 RETRO-COMMISH B406 160

DANE COUNTY REGIONAL AIRPORT-TRUAX FIELD: AIRFIELD TOWER LIGHTING 155

DANE COUNTY REGIONAL AIRPORT-TRUAX FIELD: BASE FACILITY EXTERIOR LIGHTING 80

DOBBINS AIR RESERVE BASE: REPAIR HVAC B945 525

DOBBINS AIR RESERVE BASE: EOY REPAIR HVAC B920 420

DOTHAN REGIONAL AIRPORT (ANG) STATION: ENERGY: UPGRADE LIGHTING 110

DULUTH INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT (ANG): UPGRADE INEFFICIENT RAMP LIGHTING TO 

HIGH EFFICIENCY LIGHTING 55

DULUTH INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT (ANG): UPGRADE INEFFICIENT LIGHTING AROUND BASE 

TO HIGH EFFICIENCY SYSTEMS 10

EDWARDS AIR FORCE BASE: RETROFIT LIGHTS MULTI BLDGS PH 1 4,500

EGLIN AIR FORCE BASE: REPLACE HVAC & LIGHTS AT BLDG 8640 3,850

EIELSON AIR FORCE BASE: UPGRADE INTERIOR LIGHTING SYSTEM IN BLDG. 3127 BUILDING 

TO LED W/CONTROLS 45

EIELSON AIR FORCE BASE: ENERGY CONS: REPLACE MOTORS AND INSTALL VFDS (MULTI) 889

P00000019455

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 142 of 151
F-23

Project

Estimated 

Financial 

Obligation 

($000s)

ELMENDORF AIR FORCE BASE: UPGRADE INEFFICIENT LIGHTING AROUND BASE TO HIGH 

EFFICIENCY SYSTEMS 166

ELMENDORF AIR FORCE BASE: RE-CONNECT BLDGS 4309, 15437, 8515, AND 15364 TO 

BACS 45

ELMENDORF AIR FORCE BASE: REPAIR HVAC SYSTEMS MULTI FAC PHASE 3 519

ELMENDORF AIR FORCE BASE: REPAIR HVAC SYSTEMS MULTI FAC PHASE 4 1,067

ELMENDORF AIR FORCE BASE: REPAIR HVAC SYSTEMS MULTI FAC PHASE 5 1,467

ELMENDORF AIR FORCE BASE: REPAIR HVAC SYSTEMS MULTI FAC PHASE 6 325

ELMENDORF AIR FORCE BASE: REPAIR HVAC SYSTEMS MULTI FAC PHASE 7 859

ELMENDORF AIR FORCE BASE: CONSTRUCT EMCS CONNECTIONS 18 FACILITIES PHASE 2 

JBER-R 3,048

FAIRCHILD AIR FORCE BASE: EOY RPR HVAC HANGAR B1037 125

FAIRCHILD AIR FORCE BASE: EOY RPR HVAC HANGAR B1029 125

FAIRCHILD AIR FORCE BASE: EOY HVAC B1033 125

FORT SMITH MUNICIPAL AIRPORT ANG: REPLACE BOILERS, BLDG 208 & 216 94

FRANCIS S GABRESKI AIRPORT (ANG): ROOFTOP AHU2 REPLACEMENT BLDG. 250 170

FT WORTH (CARSWELL): ENERGY: REPLACE BOILERS 300

FT WORTH (CARSWELL): REPLACE HVAC MXG GRP B1675 340

FT WORTH (CARSWELL): REPAIR HQ HVAC BLDG 1672 315

FT WORTH (CARSWELL): REPAIR HVAC BLDG. 1675 335

FT WORTH (CARSWELL): OCCUPANCY SENSOR INSTALLED, SOME HALLWAY FIXTURES 

DEACTIVATED 30

GENERAL WAYNE A. DOWNING PEORIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT (ANG): REPLACE 

INDUCTION WITH LED AND UPGRADE T8 132

GULFPORT-BILOXI REGIONAL AIRPORT (ANG): REPLACE 12 A/C UNITS 35

HANCOCK FIELD ANG: REPLACEMENT OF TWO BOILERS IN MEDICAL BUILDING 14

HARRISBURG IAP: REPLACE HIGH BAY HID WITH LED 120

HARRISBURG IAP: REPLACE HIGH BAY HID WITH LED AT THE PETROLEUM OPERATIONS 

BLDG. 68 10

HARRISBURG IAP: REPLACEMENT OF 44 URINAL FLUSHOMETERS 4

HARRISBURG IAP: REPLACE EXTERIOR HID WALLPACKS WITH LED 2

HARRISBURG IAP: REPLACE FLUORESCENT FIXTURES WITH LED TYPE TROFFER CONF. 

ROOM BLDG. 81 1

HARRISBURG IAP: REPAIR 3 EXTERIOR LIGHT PHOTOCELLS $ 

- 

HICKAM AIR FORCE BASE: ENERGY: UPGRADE LIGHTING 1,100

HICKAM AIR FORCE BASE: UPGRADED HVAC COMPONENTS MULTIPLE BUILDINGS 200

HICKAM AIR FORCE BASE: UPGRADED LIGHTING IN B3392 TO LED 90

HILL AIR FORCE BASE: NATURAL GAS METERING 251

HILL AIR FORCE BASE: STEAM METERING 405

P00000019456

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 143 of 151
F-24

Project

Estimated 

Financial 

Obligation 

($000s)

HORSHAM AGS: DESTRATIFICATION FANS IN HANGAR 335 14

HULMAN REGIONAL AIRPORT: ENERGY: HVAC ECONOMIZER, B 38 280

INCERLIK AIR BASE ADANA: REPLACE EXTERIOR LIGHTING WITH NRG EFFICIENT, BASEWIDE 

PH-3 286

JACKSON INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT: REPLACE CHILLER, BLDG 126 105

JACKSONVILLE IAP ANG: ENERGY: UPGRADE HID LIGHTING 480

JACKSONVILLE IAP ANG: UPGRADE AIRCRAFT SHELTER LIGHTING 16

JB ANDREWS: REPLACING EXTERIOR LIGHTS WITH HIGH EFFICIENCY LED, BASEWIDE 1,250

KAHULUI COMMUNICATION STATION: ENERGY: UPGRADE LIGHTING 60

KALAELOA ANG: ENERGY: UPGRADE LIGHTING 100

KEAUKAHA MILITARY RESERVATION: ENERGY: UPGRADE LIGHTING 120

KIRTLAND AIR FORCE BASE: INSTALL LED STREET AND PARKING LOT LIGHTS 260

KIRTLAND AIR FORCE BASE: ENERGY: UPGRADE LIGHTING SYS 680

KLAMATH FALLS AIRPORT-KINGSLEY FIELD: UPGRADED LIGHTING IN B310 TO LED 3

KLAMATH FALLS AIRPORT-KINGSLEY FIELD: INSTALLED ADDITIONAL CONTROLS IN 

MULTIPLE BUILDINGS 1

KLAMATH FALLS AIRPORT-KINGSLEY FIELD: REMOVED HOT WATER BOILER FROM ENGINE 

SHOP 2

LANGLEY AIR FORCE BASE: REPAIR IR GAS HEATING CONTROL STRATEGY, MULTIPLE 

FACILITIES 239

LANGLEY AIR FORCE BASE: REPAIR CORROSION CONTROL HVAC AND CONTROLS, F.342 277

LAUGHLIN AIR FORCE BASE: ENER-UPGRADE EXTERIOR LIGHTING, BASEWIDE 911

LITTLE ROCK: THERMAL STORAGE 1,101

LOUISVILLE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT - STANDIFORD FIELD: BUILDING 810 RENOVATION -

AS WELL, TARGETS T12 FIXTURES (ENERGY ONLY) 6

LUIS MUNOZ MARIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT: EXTERIOR LIGHTING UPGRADE PHASE 1 35

LUIS MUNOZ MARIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT: EXTERIOR LIGHTING UPGRADE PHASE 2 37

MARCH AIR RESERVE BASE: REPLACED EXISTING BOILERS WITH TANKLESS HOT WATER 

HEATERS 20

MCCONNELL AIR FORCE BASE: PRQE142822 REPLACED STREET AND PARKING LOT 

LIGHTING. 159

MCGHEE TYSON AIRPORT: UPGRADE BASE EXTERIOR LIGHTING 710

MCGHEE TYSON AIRPORT: REPLACE INDOOR GAS HEATER (150 MBH OUTPUT) 2

MCGHEE TYSON AIRPORT: REPLACE HIGH PRESSURE SODIUM LIGHTS WITH T-5 5

MCGHEE TYSON AIRPORT: REPLACE 20 TON CONDENSER 40

MCGUIRE AIR FORCE BASE: REPLACEMENT LIGHTS 11

MCGUIRE AIR FORCE BASE: UPGRADE LIGHTING, B3369 67

MINNEAPOLIS ST PAUL INTL AIRPORT: INSTALL SOLAR FLIM ON SIMULATOR TRAINING 

FACILITY WINDOWS 9

MINOT AIR FORCE BASE: VARIABLE FREQUENCY DRIVES MULTIPLE FACILITIES 134

P00000019457

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 144 of 151
F-25

Project

Estimated 

Financial 

Obligation 

($000s)

MISAWA AIR BASE: INST EMCS 8 BLDGS 1,775

MISAWA AIR BASE: HAS ENERGY IMPROVEMENTS, PH4 2,450

MISAWA AIR BASE: INST EMCS, HASS AND BOILER PLANT BLDG1337 1,636

MISAWA AIR BASE: INST FIBER FOR THREE TOWERS (NORTH SIDE) 390

MISAWA AIR BASE: INST FIBER LINES TO 7 PUMP HOUSES 818

MISAWA AIR BASE: INST EMCS CONTROLS TO FIBER LINES FOR 7 PUMP HOUSES 810

MISAWA AIR BASE: INST A/C CONTROL MUSTANG/STARFIGHTER COURT AND FULL 

CONTROL TO PUMP HOUSES 660

MISAWA AIR BASE: INST FIBER LINES FROM BLDGS 119,328, 822 TO 12 485

MISAWA AIR BASE: INST FIBER LINES FOR 8 BLDGS TO 1806 813

MOFFETT FLD ANG: EOY BASEWIDE HVAC REPAIR 400

MONTGOMERY REGIONAL AIRPORT (ANG) BASE: ENERGY: UPGRADE HID LIGHTING 280

MONTGOMERY REGIONAL AIRPORT (ANG) BASE: ENERGY: REPLACE CHILLER B1502 390

MONTGOMERY REGIONAL AIRPORT (ANG) BASE: EMERGENCY: REPAIR BOILER 80

MOODY AIR FORCE BASE: REPAIR BUILDING ENVELOPE, MULTIPLE FACILITIES 1,982

MOODY AIR FORCE BASE: REPLACE EXTERIOR LIGHTING BASEWIDE 3,600

MOUNTAIN HOME AIR FORCE BASE: REPLACE STREET LIGHTS W/LED 1,466

MOUNTAIN HOME AIR FORCE BASE: REPAIR ENVELOPE & LIGHTING UPGRADE FAC. 201 224

NASHVILLE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT: REPLACE CHILLER, BLDG 801 96

NEW ORLEANS NAS ANG: HVAC SYSTEM REPLACEMENT, BLDG 41 165

NEW ORLEANS NAS ANG: REPLACE CHILLER HANGAR B5 540

NEW ORLEANS NAS ANG: EOY HVAC B265 160

NEW ORLEANS NAS ANG: EOY REPAIR HVAC O&T B24 250

NEW ORLEANS NAS ANG: EOY REPAIR HVAC B473 190

NEW ORLEANS NAS ANG: EOY REPAIR HVAC B149 108

NEW ORLEANS NAS ANG: EOY REPLACE HVAC B386 93

NIAGARA FALLS IAP-AIR RESERVE STATION: BOILER REPLACEMENT AND HVAC CONTROLS 

UPGRADE. 211

PETERSON AIR FORCE BASE: REPAIR HVAC, MULTIPLE FACILITIES 95

QUONSET STATE AIRPORT ANG: REPLACE LIGHTING BUILDING 2 62

RENO TAHOE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT: PAINTED EXTERIOR WALLS AND ROOF OF THREE 

BUILDINGS WITH RADIANT BARRIER PAINT 220

RENO TAHOE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT: ENERGY: RPR EXTERIOR LIGHTING 55

ROBINS AIR FORCE BASE: RPR/UPG PUMPS, WATER SUP TREATMENT, BLDG 174 221

ROSECRANS MEMORIAL AIRPORT: ENERGY: RPR EXTERIOR LIGHTING 352

SALT LAKE CITY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT ANG: ENERGY: UPGRADE LIGHTING BASE 266

SAN DIEGO ANG STATION: REPLACED CHILLER 30

SCHENECTADY COUNTY AIRPORT ANG: ENERGY: DESTRAT FANS B7 & 8 73

P00000019458

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 145 of 151
F-26

Project

Estimated 

Financial 

Obligation 

($000s)

SCHRIEVER AIR FORCE BASE: REPAIR BY REPLACING VAV CONTROLLERS 2ND-3RD FLR'S 

BLDG 300 115

SCHRIEVER AIR FORCE BASE: REPAIR BY REPLACING LIGHTS W/ LED, B600 150

SCHRIEVER AIR FORCE BASE: REPAIR BY REPLACING BOILERS, MULTI-FACILITIES 180

SCOTT AIR FORCE BASE: REPAIR DDC SYSTEMS - BASEWIDE 350

SEPULVEDA NATIONAL GUARD STATION: UPGRADED WALKWAY LIGHTING FROM 

INCANDESCENT TO LED 1

SEYMOUR JOHNSON AIR FORCE BASE: REPAIR HEAT PUMPS, AHU CONTROLS, AC, 

MULTIPLE BLDGS 148

SEYMOUR JOHNSON AIR FORCE BASE: REPAIR CHILLERS & BOILERS 199

SEYMOUR JOHNSON AIR FORCE BASE: REPAIR DDC CONTROLS, MULTI BLDGS 205

SIOUX GATEWAY AP/COL. BUD DAY FIELD(ANG): ENERGY: REPAIR DDC & HVAC 1,200

SPANGDAHLEM AIR BASE: INSTALL REVOLVING DOOR AND DE-STRATIFICATION FANS B520 292

SPANGDAHLEM AIR BASE: INSTALL VACANCY SENSORS MULTI-FACILITIES 4,800

SPANGDAHLEM AIR BASE: EMCS IN 53 BUILDINGS 116

TINKER AIR FORCE BASE: SUSTAIN REPAIR HVAC/UTILITIES, B/230, PH 2 70

TINKER AIR FORCE BASE: INSTALL PAINT HANGAR HEAT RECOVERY & CONTROLS 3,609

TUCSON INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT: ENERGY MULTI FAC LIGHTING 900

TULSA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT: UPGRADE INTERIOR LIGHTING 290

TULSA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT: UPGRADE EXTERIOR LIGHTING 150

USAF ACADEMY: REPLACE SHOWER HEADS 50

VANDENBERG: UPGRADE LIGHTING IN 80 BUILDINGS 2,965

VOLK FIELD: REPLACE/INSTALL EXTERIOR AREA LIGHTING WITH LED 10

W K KELLOGG AIRPORT: ENERGY: UPGRADE LIGHTS BOILERS 400

WRIGHT PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE: UPGRADE LIGHTING - AREA B 493

WRIGHT PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE: REPAIR FACILITIES - JUST DO IT ECM'S FROM 

ENERGY AUDIT 116

Renewable Energy 5,309

ANDREWS AIR FORCE BASE: SOLAR HEATING WALL TO HANGARS 2,3 AND 4 900

OFFUTT AIR FORCE BASE: GEOTHERMAL B-160, 499, 565, 803,809 2,869

VANDENBERG AIR FORCE BASE: GROUND MOUNTED PV 1,540

Water Conservation 9,598

GENERAL MITCHELL INTERNATIONAL APT (ANG): WATER MAIN LEAK/BREAK 18

AFMC LITTLE ROCK: REPLACE CONTROL VALVES 5 TANK 1,000

AFSPC LOS ANGELES: REPLACE IRRIGATION AND CONTROLS 840

MULTIPLE AFSPC: COMMAND WIDE IRRIGATION REDUCTION 7,451

SCHRIEVER AIR FORCE BASE: MAINTAIN BY REPLACING EXISTING BLUEGRASS WITH 

BUFFALOGRASS 289

DEFENSE AGENCIES 3,713

Energy Conservation 3,713

P00000019459

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 146 of 151
F-27

Project

Estimated 

Financial 

Obligation 

($000s)

CAMP HENRY: IMPROVE LIGHTING 84

DEFENSE SUPPLY CENTER: REPLACE OFFICE FLUORSCENT LIGHTING WITH LED LIGHTS AND 

CONTROLS 1,805

DEFENSE SUPPLY CENTER RICHMOND: REPLACE 32F CHILLER (S) 158

DEFENSE SUPPLY CENTER RICHMOND: REPLACE BOILER - 31K (S) 202

DEFENSE SUPPLY CENTER RICHMOND: REPLACE AC IN WEIGHT ROOM 33D (S) 75

LIMESTONE: PROPANE CONVERSION 400

NAS SIGONELLA IT: INSTALL GLASS DOORS ON REFRIGERATED DISPLAY CASES 52

OSAN AIR BASE: IMPROVE LIGHTING 277

RAF LAKENHEATH: INSTALL GLASS DOORS ON REFRIGERATED DISPLAY CASES 194

SUSQUEHANNA: BUILDING 82 - INFIL OLD WINDOWS 15

SUSQUEHANNA: BUILDING 83 - INFIL OLD WINDOWS 15

SUSQUEHANNA: BUILDING 84 - INFIL OLD WINDOWS 15

SUSQUEHANNA: BUILDING 84 - REPLACE HVAC AND ENVELOPE REPAIRS 340

SUSQUEHANNA: BUILDING 79- REPLACE ROOF AND SIDING ADD INSULATION 22

SUSQUEHANNA: BUILDING 400 - HVAC REPAIRS 4

SUSQUEHANNA: BUILDING 149 - REPLACE FAILED HEATING SYSTEM 25

SUSQUEHANNA: BUILDING 2012 - REPAIR HVAC SYSTEM 30

GRAND TOTAL 554,967

P00000019460

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 147 of 151
F-28

LIST OF NON-GOVERNMENTAL THIRD PARTY FUNDED ENERGY PROJECTS

Project

Investment 

Value of 

ESPC/UESC 

($000s)

ARMY 204,768

ESPC 155,761

ABERDEEN PROVING GROUNDS 239

CARLISLE BARRACKS 3,963

CORPUS CHRISTI ARMY DEPOT 26,078

FORT BLISS 4,518

FORT BLISS 13,158

FORT CARSON 6,623

FORT HAMILTON 17,049

FORT LEAVENWORTH 2,312

FORT LEAVENWORTH 837

FORT MCCOY 315

LETTERKENNY ARMY DEPOT 1,074

MCALESTER ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT 4,004

NATICK SOLDIER SYSTEMS CENTER 856

NATICK SOLDIER SYSTEMS CENTER 207

NATICK SOLDIER SYSTEMS CENTER 348

NATICK SOLDIER SYSTEMS CENTER 218

NATICK SOLDIER SYSTEMS CENTER 1,583

NATICK SOLDIER SYSTEMS CENTER 174

PUERTO RICO ARMY NATIONAL GUARD 50

RED RIVER ARMY DEPOT 238

ROCK ISAND JMTC FACILITIES 72

ROCK ISAND JMTC PROCESS 1,781

ROCK ISLAND ARSENAL GARRISON 22,416

ROCK ISLAND ARSENAL GARRISON 580

TOBYHANNA ARMY DEPOT 186

USAG BAUMHOLDER 9,710

USAG BAVARIA (HOHENFELS) 2,150

USAG DAEGU 919

USAG DAEGU 15,547

USAG FT GREELY 554

VIRGINIA ARNG 18,000

UESC 49,007

FORT CAMPBELL 5,025

P00000019461

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 148 of 151
F-29

Project

Investment 

Value of 

ESPC/UESC 

($000s)

FORT CAMPBELL 2,283

FORT CAMPBELL 7,509

FORT CAMPBELL 540

FORT DETRICK 17,400

FORT HUNTER LIGGETT 3,546

JOINT BASE LEWIS-MCCHORD 2,726

REDSTONE ARSENAL 9,978

NAVY 38,887

ESPC 33,664

FRC SOUTHWEST 25,000

JB PEARL HARBOR HICKAM HI 8,664

UESC 5,223

JEB LITTLE CREEK FORT STORY VA 5,223

USMC 28,700

UESC 28,700

MCB CAMP LEJEUNE 28,700

AIR FORCE 20,092

ESPC 911

LAUGHLIN AFB 911

UESC 19,181

TINKER AFB 19,181

GRAND TOTAL 292,447

P00000019462

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 149 of 151
G-1

Appendix G - Contact Information

Please contact the following individuals with questions regarding the FY 2015 AEMR: 

Ariel S. Castillo, Ph. D.

ODASD(IE)

571-372-6858

ariel.s.castillo.civ@mail.mil

Joshua H. Brown

ODASD(IE)

571-372-6826

joshua.h.brown13.ctr@mail.mil

P00000019463

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 150 of 151
H-1

Appendix H - References

Energy Information Administration (EIA), Annual Energy Review, Table 1.11 U.S. Government Energy 

Consumption by Agency, Fiscal Years 1975-2011 [online source] (Washington, D.C. September 27, 2012, 

accessed March 9, 2016), available from: 

http://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/annual/showtext.cfm?t=ptb0111.

Energy Information Administration (EIA), Annual Energy Review 2011: Energy Consumption by Sector 

and Source [online source] (Washington, D.C., 2011, accessed March 9, 2016), available from: 

http://www.eia.gov/oiaf/aeo/tablebrowser/#release=EARLY2012&subject=0-EARLY2012&table=2-

EARLY2012®ion=1-0&cases=full2011-d020911a,early2012-d121011b.

Energy Information Administration (EIA), 2013 Monthly Commercial Sector Energy Use, Table 2.1c 

[online source] (Washington, D.C. December 24, 2013 accessed March 9, 2016), available from: 

http://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/.

Energy Information Administration (EIA), U.S. Overview [online source] (Washington, D.C. 2011, 

accessed March 9, 2016), available from: 

http://www.eia.gov/state/seds/data.cfm?incfile=/state/seds/sep_sum/html/rank_use_gdp.html&sid=U

S.

Energy Information Administration (EIA), U.S. States, State Profiles and Energy Estimates [online source] 

(Washington, D.C. 2011, accessed March 9, 2016), available from http://www.eia.gov/state/

U.S. Census Bureau, Census Regions and Division of the United States, [online source] (Washington, D.C., 

2014, accessed March 9, 2016), available from: https://www.census.gov/geo/mapsdata/maps/pdfs/reference/us_regdiv.pdf.

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Federal Energy Management 

Program, Comprehensive Annual Energy Data and Sustainability Performance [online source] 

(Washington, D.C.,2015, accessed March 9, 2016, available from: 

http://ctsedwweb.ee.doe.gov/Annual/Report/TotalSiteDeliveredEnergyConsumptionPerGrossSquareFo

otByFederalAgenciesByYear.aspx.

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Federal Energy Management 

Program, Guidelines Establishing Criteria for Excluding Buildings [online source] (Washington, D.C., 2006, 

accessed March 9, 2016), available from: 

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/femp/pdfs/exclusion_criteria.pdf.

P00000019464

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 299-74 Filed 06/28/18 Page 151 of 151