- Hussain has proposed mapping where defense production and grid constraints overlap
- He recommended a GSA acquisition framework that would integrate federal energy infrastructure work
- The White House declared a bulk power system emergency Aug. 26, citing defense production growth
Transmission constraints could prevent defense appropriations from becoming production capacity, and the government lacks an institutional framework to connect defense demand with utility infrastructure and the federal acquisition system, according to Sam Hussain, head of Capgemini‘s U.S. defense sector.
He made the argument in a Sept. 5 post on Substack. Hussain previously held roles at Peraton, CACI and MANTECH and spent seven years as a special adviser at the Department of War.
He wrote that generation alone does not resolve the constraint, noting that power produced on an installation still has to pass through substations, transmission infrastructure and the interconnection process before it can support a munitions plant or fabrication line.
What Are Defense Energy Corridors?
Hussain proposed identifying “defense energy corridors” — geographic areas where military installations, defense production, strategic manufacturing and projected electrical demand converge enough to warrant coordinated federal attention.
The analysis would map installations, depots, arsenals and shipyards alongside major defense manufacturers, lower-tier suppliers, semiconductor facilities and specialty metals producers. That demand picture would then be measured against generation capacity, transmission, substations, congestion, interconnection queues and infrastructure age.
The result would be what he called a defense industrial power map showing where production requirements intersect with energy constraints.
He argued the approach would let the government prioritize without charging unrelated civilian upgrades to the defense budget, since a project would qualify on mission-assurance or supply-chain grounds, while broader community benefits would function as an economic multiplier rather than the statutory rationale.
What Is the Proposed GSA Role?
Hussain also called for the General Services Administration to establish a governmentwide acquisition architecture he termed GRID, short for Government Resilience and Infrastructure Delivery.
He described it as a modular framework with capability areas covering generation, transmission and substations, storage and microgrids, digital grid and cybersecurity, engineering and interconnection, utility integration, and defense-industrial energy.
The framework would not replace the Army Corps of Engineers, override state utility commissions or convert impermissible uses of military appropriations into permissible ones, he wrote. A federal contractor cannot compete against an incumbent utility for modifications to assets the utility owns and operates.
Hussain pointed to GSA’s Assisted Acquisition Services as the institutional foundation, arguing the federal government needs an acquisition integrator rather than another energy bureaucracy.
What Federal Actions Does He Cite?
The Army opened a tranche of its Strategic Capital Initiative in June seeking privately financed commercial generation on installation land.
The White House declared a national emergency on Aug. 26 regarding bulk power system security, citing growth in advanced manufacturing, data centers, AI and defense production. That order directs the Department of Energy to recommend changes to federal acquisition policy so that national security risk factors are incorporated into energy infrastructure procurement.
The Department of War announced a $750 million investment on Aug. 24 to support a rare-earth offtake agreement within a $1.55 billion structure that also includes a $300 million Defense Logistics Agency purchase commitment and $500 million from a bank. Hussain cited the mechanism as a model for using federal demand to mobilize private capital.
Capgemini supports DOW, intelligence community and commercial clients through its U.S. defense sector.


