NDAA Requires Cost-Benefit Analysis of Energy Programs

WASHINGTON — As part of the bill drawing controversy for its detainee provisions, the National Defense Authorization Act signed into law by President Barack Obama on Dec. 31, 2011, authorizing funding for the Department of Defense., including its energy management goals, and national security programs of the Department of Energy.

The bill — adopted for the 50th consecutive year — aims to terminate troubled programs and activities and approve efficiencies to apply savings to higher priority programs.

The passage results in cuts of about $1.7 billion from the President’s budget for military construction and family housing projects, such as overseas military construction deemed unnecessary or ahead of need.

Measures to raise energy standards include establishing goals to achieve 25 percent renewable energy by 2025, submitting an investment plan for implementing the Army’s Net Zero pilot programs and authorizing $200 million in funding for the Rapid Innovation Program for increased investments in technologies that will improve energy efficiency, enhance energy security, and reduce the Department’s dependence on fossil fuels.

The bill also transfers $27 million for the Marine Corps Expeditionary Energy Office to reduce logistical resupply convoys, increase energy efficiency and reduce risk to Marines in combat.

“Although the conference agreement authorizes $26.6 billion less than the budget request, I am confident that it provides adequate support for the men and women of the armed forces and their families and provides them with the means to accomplish their missions Senator Carl Levin (D-MI), Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

The bill — the product of 11 months of hearings and meetings by House and Senate members and staff — was signed by all 26 members of the conference committee.

“The fact that all 26 members of the conference committee have signed on to this bill shows that there is bipartisan agreement that this legislation addresses and satisfies the Administration’s concerns related to the detainee provisions that were fully debated in Congress in recent weeks,” said Senator John McCain (R-AZ), ranking member of the committee. “I deeply appreciate the hard work and dedication of my friend Chairman Levin, whose leadership has been essential to continuing the tradition of deliberate review and oversight that the Defense Authorization Bill has provided our nation’s military for over fifty years without fail.”

Tim Clayton, an associate with Columbus, Ohio-based law firm Luper Neidenthal & Logan, said the bill’s measures indicate a cost and benefit analysis of standards like LEED, requiring the rating system to be put to the test to see if buildings perform as advertised.

“Far from abandoning the standard, the military is actually required to justify it,” he said. “Not only do I have no problem with that, but I think the government should take the concept to its logical conclusion and start demanding favorable cost/benefit for all manner of programs.”

Clayton, who is a LEED accredited professional and focuses on real estate law, commercial litigation and green building and construction law, noted that the prohibition of LEED is only against Gold or Platinum levels, and does not apply if there is no additional cost.

“Again, this sounds to me like a demand for a return on the green building investment, and there’s nothing inherently wrong with that,” Clayton said. “Might this demand for cost/benefit justification be applied equally to other facets of the government? We should be so lucky.”