Bill Overview
Title: Strategic EV Management Act of 2022
Description: This bill directs the General Services Administration (GSA) to coordinate with the heads of federal agencies to develop a comprehensive strategic plan for federal electric vehicle fleet battery management and to report to and brief Congress regarding the plan and its implementation across agencies. The GSA may periodically update the strategic plan based on new information relating to electric vehicle batteries that becomes available. The Government Accountability Office must report to Congress on how the costs and benefits of operating and maintaining electric vehicles in the federal fleet compare to the costs and benefits of operating and maintaining internal combustion engine vehicles.
Sponsors: Sen. Peters, Gary C. [D-MI]
Target Audience
Population: federal workforce managing or utilizing government vehicle fleets
Estimated Size: 9000
- The primary individuals affected will be federal employees who manage or utilize government vehicle fleets.
- Secondary effects could influence suppliers of batteries and electric vehicles, as demand might shift based on federal fleet management strategies.
- Other stakeholders might include advocates for environmental policies, who may see this as a positive step toward reducing carbon footprints in government operations.
Reasoning
- The primary impact group for the Strategic EV Management Act of 2022 comprises federal employees who manage or utilize government vehicle fleets. These individuals will directly experience the policy’s effects, as it alters fleet management practices and could potentially influence operational effectiveness and job satisfaction.
- Suppliers of batteries and electric cars might see indirect effects due to changes in demand from government agencies. This could affect their business operations and economic perspectives.
- Environmental advocates may view this policy positively, as EV integration aligns with broader sustainability goals. Their well-being might improve, knowing that federal policies are shifting toward greener technologies.
- Considering the policy’s budget and target population, direct impacts will be moderate to low due to the limited scale of immediate personnel directly involved. Broader impacts may be felt via the examples set by the federal government’s commitment to sustainable fleet management.
Simulated Interviews
Fleet Manager (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could streamline the process of fleet management, especially given the push for comprehensive strategic planning.
- I’m hopeful it will make managing the EV fleet more straightforward, enhancing our effectiveness.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Battery Supplier Executive (Detroit, MI)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy might increase demand for better battery management solutions, which could benefit our company.
- However, it might also mean stricter compliance requirements; I’m cautious but optimistic.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Retired Federal Employee (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While I'm retired, seeing efforts to improve how government fleets manage EVs is encouraging.
- I believe this may positively impact the environment and set a good example for private sectors.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Environmental Policy Advocate (Denver, CO)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy represents a significant step forward in federal EV policy.
- I'm hopeful this will encourage broader adoption of sustainable practices across the federal operations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Electric Vehicle Technician (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm optimistic that the Strategic EV Management Act will create more jobs in EV maintenance and management.
- This could increase job stability and growth in my field.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Federal Logistics Coordinator (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think the policy will provide much-needed guidance for handling fleet transitions.
- The strategic plan could resolve a lot of existing logistical hurdles.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Public Policy Analyst (New York, NY)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy is likely to provide useful data for evaluating the cost-effectiveness of EVs versus traditional vehicles.
- This information can inform future policy decisions, making my role more data-driven and valuable.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Federal Fleet Driver (Seattle, WA)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Managing battery range and charging times remains a challenge.
- If this new policy smooths out these issues, it’d relieve a lot of daily stress.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Supply Chain Manager (Boston, MA)
Age: 31 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could improve how we manage supplier contracts related to EV components, potentially making my job easier.
- I'm cautiously optimistic about the strategic improvements.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Automotive Engineer (Houston, TX)
Age: 53 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm interested in the technical guidelines the new strategic plan might offer.
- These could impact how we design and engineer future vehicle solutions for federal fleets.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $8000000 (Low: $6000000, High: $10000000)
Year 2: $5000000 (Low: $4000000, High: $7000000)
Year 3: $3000000 (Low: $2000000, High: $4000000)
Year 5: $3000000 (Low: $2000000, High: $4000000)
Year 10: $1000000 (Low: $500000, High: $1500000)
Year 100: $500000 (Low: $100000, High: $1000000)
Key Considerations
- Administrative coordination across various federal agencies must be efficiently managed to keep costs down.
- Potential resistance or delay from agencies could affect the timeline and effectiveness of the strategic plan implementation.
- Environmental benefits via reduced carbon footprint may create intangible social benefits beyond direct financial measures.
- Integration with technological advancements in electric vehicles and batteries is vital to reap the full benefits of the strategic management plan.