Domenici Calls For Repeal of Energy Provision That Could Weaken National Security
Senator Also Seeks to Boost Renewable Energy at Military Bases
April 29, 2008
10:47 AM
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Pete Domenici, ranking member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, today asked the leaders of the Senate Armed Services committee to repeal a section of recently-enacted energy legislation which will make it more difficult and expensive for the U.S. military to obtain fuel. The Senator also asked the committee to allow the federal government to negotiate longer-term contracts to deliver renewable energy to government facilities, such as military bases.
In a letter addressed to Armed Services Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and Ranking Member John McCain (R-Ariz.), Domenici called for a repeal of Section 526 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 in the FY2009 Defense Authorization bill, which the committee has begun working on. The provision, which has been the subject of much speculation and controversy, could potentially be interpreted to prevent the U.S. military (and other federal agencies) from obtaining fuel from certain sources, including some that the military currently rely on for low-cost fuel.
Domenici also asked the committee to consider extending federal contracting authority for renewable energy. The current limitation of 10 years has made it difficult for government facilities to obtain clean energy sources like wind and solar power, since longer term contracts are necessary for the economic viability of renewables.
Finally, Domenici called on the committee to keep defense facilities under state electricity laws. State utilities have already invested in the infrastructure and power sources necessary to serve military bases, a special exemption for DoD facilities, which is under consideration, and could lead to higher prices for consumers who will suddenly be forced to bear the brunt of costs.
The text of the letter appears below:
As the Armed Services Committee begins work on the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009, I ask that you consider my views on the following energy-related provisions: (1) procurement of alternative fuels; (2) long-term renewable energy contracts for federal agencies; and (3) state electricity laws.
First, I urge you to include language to repeal Section 526 of the “Energy Independence and Security Act” (EISA) of 2007, which prevents federal agencies from purchasing “alternative or synthetic” fuels that have higher lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions than conventional petroleum. This provision is part of an effort to prevent the Air Force from procuring coal-to-liquid fuels, but by prohibiting the development of some of our nation’s most promising resources – not only coal-to liquids, but also oil shale and tar sands – it will increase America’s reliance on foreign oil. As we continue to face record oil and gasoline prices, Section 526 can be seen for what it is: a counterproductive measure that threatens our national security, our energy security, and the strength of our economy.
Next, I encourage you to extend federal agencies’ contracting authority for renewable energy. Current law limits such contracts to a period of ten years, even though longer-term contracts would protect agencies from price volatility while simultaneously encouraging greater investment in renewable sources of energy. Congress sought to remove this barrier last year. In H.R. 6, the “Renewable Fuels, Consumer Protection, and Energy Efficiency Act of 2007,” the Energy Committee authorized the extension of this contracting authority for up to 50 years. The House-passed Energy bill contained a similar provision, allowing for a period of 30 years. However, the contract extension was not included in the final energy package, EISA, that became law. In my opinion, this contracting authority should be extended for all federal agencies, especially the largest energy consumer within the federal government, the Department of Defense, to at least a 20-year period.
I also ask that you uphold state electricity laws and oppose attempts to create a military exemption from retail regulation. As you know, the Department of Defense has long been considered a retail electric customer for which local utilities have an obligation to serve. A military exemption could result in stranded costs for those utilities and significant cost-shifting onto homeowners and small businesses already strained by increased energy prices.
As always, I appreciate your hard work on behalf of the men and women of our armed services, and I look forward to working with you as we move to enact the FY 09 National Defense Authorization Act.
--30--
