Fort Johnson reclaims nearly $1 million utility rebate, unlocks millions more in future energy savings – army.mil

Report on Utility Cost Optimization and Sustainable Development Goal Alignment at Fort Johnson

Executive Summary

A strategic utility rate intervention at Fort Johnson, Louisiana, has resulted in the recovery of $973,948.72 in overpayments and is projected to generate over $2.3 million in annual savings. This initiative, achieved through a multi-agency collaboration, demonstrates a profound commitment to fiscal responsibility and directly supports several United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The successful rate renegotiation aligns with principles of affordable energy, sustainable communities, responsible consumption, and effective institutional partnerships.

Background and Identification of Inefficiency

For over a decade, Fort Johnson was incorrectly billed for electricity under a “Small General Service Rate Schedule,” a classification intended for small businesses rather than a large federal installation. This misclassification led to significant financial overpayments, representing an inefficient use of public funds and a deviation from the principles of SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production). A prior audit had identified the issue, but corrective action was not possible until the utility provider, Entergy Louisiana, filed a rate case with the Louisiana Public Service Commission (LPSC) in 2023, its first in ten years.

Strategic Intervention and Partnership (SDG 17)

The filing of the rate case provided a critical opportunity for intervention. The success of this initiative is a direct result of a cross-functional collaboration, serving as a model for SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals). The key partners included:

• U.S. Army Engineering and Support Center, Huntsville: The Commercial Utility Program (CUP) initiated the utility bill audit and provided project management.
• U.S. Army Legal Services Agency (USALSA-ELD): The Environmental Law Division provided the legal expertise to file the rate intervention and argue the case before the LPSC.
• Fort Johnson Energy Management: The on-site Energy Manager, Jeffrey Rodgers, provided installation-level support.
• Resource Efficiency Manager (REM) Program: Scott Pogue, an on-site REM, acted as a crucial liaison, gathering and supplying the detailed technical data necessary to justify the rate change.

Financial Outcomes and Economic Sustainability

The intervention yielded substantial and permanent financial benefits, strengthening the economic sustainability of the installation, which functions as a community, thereby supporting SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities). The quantifiable outcomes include:

1. A one-time rebate of $973,948.72 for three months of overbilling.
2. Projected annual savings of approximately $1.9 million from the transition to a Large General Service Rate Schedule.
3. Additional annual savings of $420,000 through reductions in Additional Facilities Charges over the next 35 years.
4. A total net present value savings estimated at $11.5 million from the rate case success.

These savings reinforce the financial health of the institution, a key tenet of SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions), by ensuring public funds are utilized effectively.

Alignment with Core Sustainable Development Goals

This project is a clear demonstration of the U.S. Army’s alignment with global sustainability objectives. The primary contributions are:

• SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy): By ensuring the installation is billed at an equitable and appropriate rate, the initiative secures affordable energy, a foundational component of sustainable energy management.
• SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities): The significant cost savings enhance the long-term financial viability and operational resilience of the Fort Johnson installation.
• SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production): The action directly addresses and corrects the inefficient consumption of financial resources, ensuring taxpayer dollars are managed responsibly.
• SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals): The success was entirely dependent on the seamless collaboration between legal, technical, and on-site management teams, proving the efficacy of partnerships in achieving complex sustainability and efficiency goals.

Conclusion

The successful utility rate intervention at Fort Johnson represents a landmark achievement in fiscal stewardship and operational efficiency. It highlights how targeted, collaborative action within large institutions can produce significant, lasting economic benefits. More importantly, this case serves as a powerful example of how institutional practices can be aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals, creating value for the organization, the taxpayer, and the broader objective of a sustainable future.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 7: Affordable and Clean Energy – The article focuses on making energy more affordable for a large institution by correcting billing rates and improving management, which aligns with the goal of ensuring access to affordable energy.
• SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production – The initiative described is a clear example of promoting resource efficiency. By identifying and eliminating financial waste in utility consumption, the Army is practicing more responsible and sustainable management of its resources.
• SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals – The success of the project is explicitly attributed to the effective collaboration between multiple internal Army departments and programs, showcasing a strong partnership to achieve a common goal.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. SDG 7: Affordable and Clean Energy

   • Target 7.3: By 2030, double the global rate of improvement in energy efficiency. The article details a significant improvement in financial efficiency related to energy use. The actions of the Resource Efficiency Manager (REM) and the switch to a more appropriate rate plan are direct efforts to improve the efficiency of energy consumption and management, leading to massive cost savings.

2. SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production

   • Target 12.2: By 2030, achieve the sustainable management and efficient use of natural resources. The entire article is about the efficient use of resources, specifically electricity and the financial resources used to pay for it. The utility bill audit, rate correction, and the role of the Energy Manager and REM are all measures to ensure “sustainable management and efficient use” of these resources, preventing millions of dollars in waste.

3. SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals

   • Target 17.17: Encourage and promote effective public, public-private and civil society partnerships. The article is a case study in effective public-public partnership. It explicitly states that the success was due to “the collaboration between two programs at the U.S. Army Engineering and Support Center,” and was a “demonstration of how cross-functional Army teams from different Commands and Programs can work together seamlessly.” This involved legal experts, utility rate experts, energy managers, and on-site efficiency managers.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

1. Indicators for SDG 7 (Target 7.3) and SDG 12 (Target 12.2)

   • Monetary Savings from Energy Efficiency: The article provides precise financial figures that serve as direct indicators of improved efficiency.
     • An estimated $1.9 million per year in savings from switching to the Large General Service Rate Schedule.
     • An additional $420,000 annually in savings from reductions in Additional Facilities Charges.
     • A total of $11.5 million in savings resulting from the rate case.
   • Correction of Past Inefficiencies: The one-time rebate is a quantifiable measure of the inefficiency that was corrected.
     • A rebate of $973,948.72 for three months of overbilling.
   • Change in Rate Classification: The switch from a “Small General Service Rate Schedule” to a “Large General Service Rate Schedule” is a qualitative indicator of implementing a more efficient and appropriate resource management structure.

2. Indicators for SDG 17 (Target 17.17)

   • Successful Outcome of Collaboration: The achievement of the multi-million dollar savings and rebate is a primary indicator of the partnership’s effectiveness. The article calls it “one of CUP’s most successful utility rate interventions to date.”
   • Documentation of Partnership Structure: The article identifies the specific entities involved in the cross-functional team, serving as a qualitative indicator of the partnership’s composition. This includes the Commercial Utility Program (CUP), Army Legal Services Agency’s Environmental Law Division (USALSA-ELD), Fort Johnson’s Energy Manager, and the Resource Efficiency Manager (REM).

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: army.mil