A u g u s t 2 0 - 2 2 , 2 0 1 9 • C o l o r a d o C o n v e n t i o n C e n t e r • D e n v e r C O 1

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release: distribution unlimited.
A u g u s t 2 0 - 2 2 , 2 0 1 9 • C o l o r a d o C o n v e n t i o n C e n t e r • D e n v e r C O

Ariel Castillo, Ph.D.

ODASD(Energy)

Director

Installation Energy Resilience

2

Defense Energy Resilience Program 
A u g u s t 2 0 - 2 2 , 2 0 1 9 • C o l o r a d o C o n v e n t i o n C e n t e r • D e n v e r C O

22%

36%

29%

10% 3%

Planned

Maintenance

Equipment

Failure

Act of Nature

Other

Unknown

• Policy Drivers

▪ Title 10, United States Code

▪ National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)

▪ Department of Defense Appropriations Act

▪ DoD Instruction 4170.11(updated 16 Mar 2016), Installation Energy 

Management, Energy Resilience 

• Policy Initiatives 

▪ Operations, maintenance, and testing (OM&T) guidance

▪ Energy Resilience and Conservation Investment Program (ERCIP) guidance 

▪ Installation energy plans and alternative finance guidance 

▪ Capabilities to inform energy resilience decisions and investments:

- Mission requirements and all-hazards analyses (INL)

- Energy resilience analysis tools/exercises (MIT-LL) to prioritize budget resources or alternative 

financing projects 

- Assessing risks of alternative financing projects – Defense Energy Resilience Bank (Deloitte) 

- Services and Defense Agencies tools, processes, and activities (e.g., ISR-MC, EMIG, MTA, etc.) 

DoD Energy Resilience (ER)

FY 2018 Utility Outages

Important Public Websites: 

Details on ODASD(Energy) Energy Resilience Initiatives: http://www.acq.osd.mil/eie/IE/FEP_Energy_Resilience.html

Details on ODASD(Energy) Energy Reports: https://www.acq.osd.mil/eie/IE/FEP_Energy_Reports.html 

Energy resilience policies and capabilities are in clear 

alignment to national security and mission requirements.
A u g u s t 2 0 - 2 2 , 2 0 1 9 • C o l o r a d o C o n v e n t i o n C e n t e r • D e n v e r C O

FY18-19 NDAA Changes (snapshot)

• FY18 NDAA

▪ 10 USC Section 101(d) – Energy Resilience Definition

▪ 10 USC Section 2688 – Utilities Privatization: UP contracts include ER requirements and metrics; ER performance reporting in the annual energy 

report for UP contracts

▪ 10 USC Section 2911 – Energy: codifies Energy Resilience in policy to ensure the readiness of the armed forces

• FY19 NDAA

▪ 10 USC 2911(c) is amended with: “The Secretary of Defense shall include the energy security and resilience goals of the Department of Defense in 

the installation energy report submitted under section 2925(a) of this title for fiscal year 2018 and every fiscal year thereafter.”

▪ 10 USC 2925(a) – is amended—(1) by inserting “including progress on energy resilience at military installations according to metrics developed by the 

Secretary” after “under section 2911 of this title”;

▪ 10 USC 2925(a) summary of amended reporting requirements in annual energy report:

- Details on the downtimes (in minutes or hours) missions can afford based on their mission requirements and risk tolerances

- Details on critical energy loads in megawatts and the associated downtime tolerances for critical energy loads

- Details on the current energy resilience and emergency backup systems, including power requirements, critical missions and facilities serviced, system service life, 

OM&T costs (FY18 NDAA)

- A list of planned and awarded energy resilience projects by the DoD by military department and military installation

▪ 10 USC Section 2922(a)(d) – "The Secretary concerned shall ensure energy security and resilience are prioritized and included in

the provision and operation of energy production facilities under this section.”

4
A u g u s t 2 0 - 2 2 , 2 0 1 9 • C o l o r a d o C o n v e n t i o n C e n t e r • D e n v e r C O

Energy Resilience Capabilities

5

Integrate and align OSD and Services activities to develop integrated energy 

resilience capability to advance readiness exercises and project development

• Industry financial considerations

• Vendor & lender considerations for project development

• Appropriated and alternative finance considerations

Mission 

Requirements

Engineering, LCCA, and 

Mission Integration

• Integration of mission requirements

• Energy system/infrastructure risks

• ERA projects selection tool

• Table-top and readiness exercises

• Life cycle costs and mission tradeoffs

• Mission thread and all-hazards approaches

• Identification of mission nodes and risks

• Scenarios and mission metrics

• Quantitively demonstrate 

impact of infrastructure to 

the mission

• Inform investment actions 

to cost-effectively improve 

DoD resilience to manmade and natural threats

MIT-LL, INL, and Deloitte are 

partnering to help the DoD assess, 

test, and improve its resilience 

Outputs: 

(1) tools and exercise 

methodologies to inform 

energy resilience decisions, and 

(2) risk remediation and project 

recommendations from those 

methodologies.

Financial and Economic 

Requirements
A u g u s t 2 0 - 2 2 , 2 0 1 9 • C o l o r a d o C o n v e n t i o n C e n t e r • D e n v e r C O

DoD Energy Resilience

Tools, assessments, and exercises

6

Sicily

NAS Sigonella 1

NRTF Niscemi NAS Sigonella 2

Hawaii

JBPHH

Fort Greely

Guam

NSA 

Andersen NB Guam

NBGTS

• Tools and assessments allow 

sites to understand risks to 

critical systems and inform 

project development

• Tabletop exercises investigate 

responses and capabilities 

during an extended simulated 

outage

• “Pull-the-plug” exercises 

provide awareness of actual 

system capabilities during a 

real outage

• Adverse weather events are 

damaging our electrical 

infrastructure

• Downstream effects may 

cause outages on DoD 

installations

• Real-world testing ensures 

preparedness for an outage 

scenario

NB Kitsap Bangor

NB Kitsap Keyport

Beale AFB

Fort Irwin

Camp Pendleton

NB San Diego

NB Coronado

NB Point Loma

Camp Lejeune

NS Norfolk

JB Andrews

NSA Philadelphia

Philadelphia NSY

Fort Stewart

Dobbins ARB

Barnes ANG

Vandenberg AFB

NSB Kings Bay

Creech AFB

Hanscom AFB

Fort Bragg

Fort Hood

Analysis and Exercise 

Locations

7 2 5 16

30 energy resilience base assessments and exercises completed

- 1/5 of the Department’s electricity consumption

- > $450 million in electricity costs
A u g u s t 2 0 - 2 2 , 2 0 1 9 • C o l o r a d o C o n v e n t i o n C e n t e r • D e n v e r C O

Energy Resilience Readiness Exercises (ERRE)

• DoD exercises and tools are driven by user / base requirements

• Tests existing energy resilience and backup systems on full operational load (i.e., 

microgrids, generators, UPS, fuel, etc.)

• ERREs assess performance of electric power infrastructure

• Benefits of the energy resilience readiness exercises

▪ Drives towards requirements of the military installation (user acceptance)

▪ Finds actual gaps in infrastructure-related risks (e.g., backup power, UPS, etc.)

▪ Assists in monetizing those gaps for targeted projects on military installations

• Project opportunities and actions from exercises to ensure resilience

▪ Life cycle sustainment of energy systems and infrastructure is necessary to maintain reliability

▪ Backup power systems must be right-sized with accurate, prioritized loads to ensure effectiveness

▪ Uninterruptible power supplies (UPS/batteries) shortfalls, and maintenance improvements needed

▪ Pilot projects, advocating for resources, and larger/integrated base-wide projects

7

Site Assignment 

and Authority Initial Site Visit ERRE Planning ERRE Assessment and Recommendations

ERREs are driven by 

national security and 

mission requirements 

Similar to 

findings from 

ERA tool and 

assessments
A u g u s t 2 0 - 2 2 , 2 0 1 9 • C o l o r a d o C o n v e n t i o n C e n t e r • D e n v e r C O

Sample Integrated ER Projects

Energy Resilience Analysis (ERA) Tool and Assessments

• Consolidated generation at the substation / critical feeder level

▪ Large emergency diesel generators or natural gas cogeneration with dual fuel capability

▪ Improvements in infrastructure for a reliable distribution system on the base requires consideration

▪ Reduces the maintenance burden on base personnel -> could improve the reliability to operate during an outage

▪ Inverter and transfer switching at other building loads with portable generation options could offer cost effective solution 

• Solar PV through alternative financing could (in the appropriate region) provide electricity to the 

installation at below market rates

▪ For islanded operation the appropriate inverter functionality and costs would need to be considered in requirements

▪ Potential to offset fuel requirements during grid outages (technical and cost tradeoffs must also be considered)

• Installation of targeted microgrids at identified critical loads could improve resilience

▪ Must consider technical and economics of incorporating additional infrastructure:

- Upgraded distribution system including additional switching capability

- Installation wide communication and control of the energy system 

- Automated meters and systems to capture consumption and reliability performance

8

All ERA tool, assessments, 

and project recommendations 

driven by national security and 

mission requirements 

ERA tool required for ERCIP 

investment decisions
A u g u s t 2 0 - 2 2 , 2 0 1 9 • C o l o r a d o C o n v e n t i o n C e n t e r • D e n v e r C O

Summary

• Policy and requirements

▪ Sustained focus over the course of many years

▪ Shift focus to execution of policy and requirements

• Implementing installation energy resilience

▪ Identifying and funding energy resilience gaps and requirements

- Remediation of sustainment risks found during assessments and readiness exercises

- Implementation of longer-term, integrated energy resilience projects (ERAT, IEPs, etc.)

▪ Constrained O&M, MILCON, and ERCIP appropriations 

▪ Leveraging alternative financing to fund energy resilience and close gaps

- Clearly defined energy resilience requirements in contracts

▪ Enabling energy resilience personnel/technical capabilities to implement readiness 

exercises and for sustained energy resilience project development

9
A u g u s t 2 0 - 2 2 , 2 0 1 9 • C o l o r a d o C o n v e n t i o n C e n t e r • D e n v e r C O

ODASD(Energy) Energy Resilience Timeline

Electric Power Resilience Working Group Established

2013

2014

2015

2016

2012

2017

2018

2019

2020

DoD Electric Power Resilience Memo Released – first definition and requirements established

Study to Investigate Business Case Analysis Approaches for ER Commissioned with MIT-LL

DoDI 4170.11 Updated – codified ER definition and requirements

MIT-LL Study and Initial Development of ERA Tool Completed

OM&T Strategy and Implementation Guidance Released

RFI Released for Study of Alternative Financing For ER Projects

RFQ Released for Study of Alternative Financing For ER Projects

First ERCIP Guidance to Include ER Released

Demand Response Guidance Updated to Include ER

IEP Requirements Updated to Include ER

Policy on ESPC/UESC Contracts Updated to Include ER

Utilities Privatization Guidance Updated to Include ER

First AEMRR Guidance to Include ER Metrics and Standards Issued

First ERCIP Guidance to Require MIT-LL ERA Tool Output For Project Selection

Shift from energy “security” to “resilience”

Broadened initiative from “electric” to “energy”

Numerous policies, guidance, procedures, 

tools, and exercises are complete.

So what’s next?

1

st Energy Resilience Readiness Exercise (ERRE)

2

nd ERRE

3

rd ERRE

ERREs planned
A u g u s t 2 0 - 2 2 , 2 0 1 9 • C o l o r a d o C o n v e n t i o n C e n t e r • D e n v e r C O 11