On the very day that the federal government announced it would buy 101 Chevrolet Volts, President Obama released a new Presidential Memorandum requiring fleet purchases “achieve maximum fuel efficiency.” Regardless of cost, apparently, as the Volt costs over $40,000 and is the size of a $17,000 Chevrolet Cruze. Moreover, the new policy does not appear to reflect the Government Accountability Office’s recent lambasting of government’s use of E85 “flex fuel” vehicles to fulfill previous alt-fuel mandates. Hit the jump for Obama’s full memo
Presidential Memorandum–Federal Fleet Performance
The Federal Government operates the largest fleet of light duty vehicles in America. We owe a responsibility to American citizens to lead by example and contribute to meeting our national goals of reducing oil imports by one-third by 2025 and putting one million advanced vehicles on the road by 2015.
Living up to that responsibility means the Federal fleet should operate only as many vehicles as needed to work efficiently, leveraging Federal purchasing dollars to build manufacturing capacity for more alternative fueled vehicles, and reducing petroleum consumption through efficiency and alternative fuels.
In Executive Order 13514 of October 5, 2009, Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance, my Administration set a goal of reducing petroleum use in the Federal fleet. In order to provide guidance to executive departments and agencies (agencies) to help achieve my Administration’s Federal fleet performance goals, and to ensure that agencies are in compliance with Executive Order 13514, I hereby direct the following:
Section 1. Vehicle Technologies. (a) By December 31, 2015, all new light duty vehicles leased or purchased by agencies must be alternative fueled vehicles, such as hybrid or electric, compressed natural gas, or biofuel. Moreover, agency alternative fueled vehicles must, as soon as practicable, be located in proximity to fueling stations with available alternative fuels, and be operated on the alternative fuel for which the vehicle is designed. Where practicable, agencies should encourage development of commercial infrastructure for alternative fuel or provide flex fuel and alternative fuel pumps and charging stations at Federal fueling sites.
(b) Pursuant to motor vehicle management regulations, set forth at 41 C.F.R. 102-34.50, executive fleets are required to achieve maximum fuel efficiency; be limited in motor vehicle body size, engine size, and optional equipment to what is essential to meet agency mission; and be midsize or smaller sedans, except where larger sedans are essential to the agency mission. Within 180 days of the date of this memorandum, any executive fleet vehicles that are larger than a midsize sedan or do not comply with alternative fueled vehicle requirements must be disclosed on agency websites.
(c) The Department of Energy shall assist the United States Postal Service (USPS) in evaluating the best alternative fuel technologies for the USPS fleet.
Sec. 2. Optimum Fleet Size. Within 90 days of the date of this memorandum, the General Services Administration (GSA) shall develop and distribute to agencies a Vehicle Allocation Methodology (VAM) for determining the optimum inventory with emphasis placed on eliminating unnecessary or non-essential vehicles from an agency’s fleet inventory and ensuring lifecycle cost-effectiveness of maintaining such inventory. In addition, the VAM shall address composition for agencies’ light duty fleets based on their missions. In doing so, the GSA shall consider existing Federal VAMs as appropriate. The VAM shall assist agencies in selecting vehicle options based on lifecycle cost analysis, including projected fuel costs, warranty, operations, mileage, maintenance, and disposal.
Sec. 3. Fleet Management. (a) Within 180 days of the GSA’s dissemination of the VAM referenced in section 2 of this memorandum, agencies shall determine their optimal fleet inventory using the VAM, and shall post their optimal fleet inventory targets on agency websites. At the same time, agencies shall submit to the Administrator of General Services (Administrator) fleet management plans to achieve these targets no later than December 31, 2015.
(b) Within 30 days of receiving agency fleet management plans, the Administrator shall submit a summary of the plans to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget and to the Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality.
(c) Within 90 days of receiving agency fleet management plans, the Administrator shall provide each agency and military service with recommendations for the acquisition of alternative fueled vehicles to implement fleet optimization plans, including shared fleet-on-demand services where applicable.
(d) Agencies shall incorporate new fleet management plans into their Annual Strategic Sustainability Performance Plans prepared in furtherance of Executive Order 13514, beginning with their June 2012 plan submission.
Sec. 4. Applicability. (a) With respect to law enforcement and emergency vehicles, the GSA shall, within 180 days of the date of this memorandum, and in coordination with the Departments of Defense, Homeland Security, Justice, and the Treasury, and other appropriate agencies, issue guidance to agencies on the applicability and implementation of alternative fueled vehicle requirements.
(b) Consistent with the guidance developed in section 4(a) of this memorandum, the head of an agency may exempt vehicles used for law enforcement, protective, emergency response, or military tactical operations of that agency from the provisions of this memorandum.
(c) This memorandum shall apply to the activities, personnel, resources, and facilities of each agency that are located within the United States. The head of an agency may apply this memorandum to activities, personnel, resources, and facilities
of the agency that are not located within the United States, to the extent the head of the agency determines that doing so is in the interest of the United States.
Sec. 5. Definitions. (a) “Alternative fueled vehicle” means an alternative fuel vehicle as defined by Executive Order 13514 and an alternative fueled vehicle as defined by 42 U.S.C. 13211(3), including a “new qualified fuel cell motor vehicle” as defined in 26 U.S.C. 30B(b)(3) and a “new qualified hybrid motor vehicle” as defined in 26 U.S.C. 30B(d)(3).
(b) “Agency” means an agency as defined in Executive Order 13514.
(c) “United States” means the fifty States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, the United States Virgin Islands, and the Northern Mariana Islands, and associated territorial waters and airspace.
Sec. 6. General Provisions. (a) This memorandum shall be implemented consistent with applicable law, including international trade obligations, and subject to the availability of appropriations.
(b) Nothing in this memorandum shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
(1) authority granted by law to a department, agency, or the head thereof; or
(2) functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(c) This memorandum is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
BARACK OBAMA
So does this mean most of our Senators cannot order for their company car all those $100k + Range Rovers, Escalades, S class Benzes, etc.?
Of course not. This memorandum is for the little people.
In seriousness.. who knows. Probably an argument will be made that the Senator NEEDS that Escalade to use as a mobile office.
I think that this is a good thing. Not the buying of the Volts, but that the gov’t should be buying smaller vehicles because they don’t need full size vehicles for everything. You would think that this would be common sense, but it is the gov’t that we are dealing with.
Cost is no object when it’s other people’s money.
This from a guy who drove a 300C (dubs? of course!) as a private citizen.
He drove a Ford Escape Hybrid before taking office. But you are correct that he drove a 300C, and prior to that a Jeep Grand Cherokee.
As long as he paid for it through his own salary, what does this have to do with government fleet purchases? No one is saying that government employees can’t buy and drive whatever they want with their own money.
@nullo
It depends: did he expense his fuel?
(Note to the humourless: I don’t care what they drive; it’s such small fry that it’s immaterial regardless of your bent)
His personal car became an issue during the campaign because he made a critical remark about Detroit producing too many gas guzzlers, and, lo and behold, that turned out to be what he drove.
The companies made gas guzzlers because – DUH! – people like him were buying them. He made it an issue in the first place. The Hybrid Escape was a hasty change to save face.
Maybe it’s just me, but I’d sorta hoped that our days of “leveraging Federal purchasing dollars to build manufacturing capacity for more alternative fueled vehicles” were over, after the Chrysler & GM bailouts. Apparently the Feds are staying in the car business, after all, with more direct investment vs. the customary 1001 regulations, rebates, tax credits, and such?
I would prefer to force all of them to drive bicycles to slow down legislation process so they cause less damage to this country. Or may be just shut it down (in August) so no fuel is consumed at all.
Looks like our current structure of lobbyists and rules do that just fine as is, though bikes would be a lot cheaper for the tax payer. Sadly it’s not exactly causing ‘less damage’ to the nation.
The US government could lead by example by buying 4 cylinder Fusions and Malibus for rock bottom prices and making informed decisions that result in reduced costs to the tax payers.
“… buying 4 cylinder fusions and Malibus . . .”
Maybe they can use their buying power to get Ford to set up a Fusion line in the Flat Rock plant so they (and we) can buy US-assembled Fusions.
Do they even need mid size cars? Most often they will be single occupant and can’t an Aveo (who cares if its actually made in Korea b/c it does have a Chevy badge on it so that should make most ignorant patriots happy) marked down to less than $10k suffice?
Buy ‘civil servants’ something they’re going to resent, like Aveos, and they will destroy our cars in weeks. That won’t save us any money. Fusions are supposed to be sound cars, so they should have low upkeep and be worth something when they’re eventually wholesaled. It is kneejerk short sighted idiocy as practiced by Obama that leads to huge expensive failures.
Knee-jerk sounds more like WMD or “Mission Accomplished” or TARP more than what little has been done in the last 3 years.
As for Government transportation needs, resale and reliability should be main considerations. If that was so, most of our Civil Servants would be driving Honda Civics.
Resale is a non-starter as most if not all goes to the middle-men when vehicles are removed from the books. Ease-of-maintenance including simplicity and component availability beats long-term reliability 95% of the time.
If that was so, most of our Civil Servants would be driving Honda Civics.
In Canada, many do. It helps that they’re made here. :)
The problem with that is that it is only the V6 versions that are FFVs so the 4cyls can’t be purchased because there is a suitable alt fuel vehicle alternative.
I’d like to believe you’re being ironic.
I’m thinking of Steve Martin in the Smart car in the Pink Panther. “Oh, no, it’s the feds, walk faster!”
How about we get rid of most of the take-home cars for federal employees? Very few of them are justified based on employees having to go out nights and weekends on business. Federal agencies practice “use it or lose it” to make sure they don’t lose any vehicles or other unnecessary equipment. And I suppose Obama will give up his 10 ton limo?
Since on average government employees make a lot less than a similar position in the private sector, I don’t have a problem with certain perks like take home vehicles or the generous health insurance/pension plans. Something has to be offered to make the positions attractive enough to entice the most capable candidates.
As far as the presidential limo goes, I think being the number one target for a bunch of ne’er do wells throughout the world justifies something with robust anti-ballistic capability.
That is the best piece of sarcasm I’ve read in ages! LOL!!
I think you’re exaggerating quite a bit, the federal employees I know that do a lot of field work all use their own provate cars at home. Who the hell wants to drive the crappy fleet cars?!
There are very few take-home cars in the federal fleet. Regs are so strict that if for some reason I could not return a GOV to my agency for some reason I would have to park it at my local post office or something, any place but my driveway.
What’s crazy is how they calculate the number of cars they need. Rather than just pay me mileage (which comes out of a different budget) when I occasionally need to use my POV, they want to assign me a car. A waste of an expensive asset.
The gov spends 8 million dollars a minute, this little charade won’t even raise a pimple in the bill.
I’ll bet the government could drive a heckuva deal on Calibers right now.
In the late 70’s when I worked at the Military Personnel Records Center in the St. Louis area, we had a wonderful fleet of AMC Hornets in our motorpool!
No doubt its the choice between funding pensions and Insane Panther Love. While your at it Mr. President, try parking Air Force 1 once in a while and using a stealth generic Gulfstream. The Secret Service Circus when you come to esp. Chicago is a bit silly.
Coming from experience going to the US Gov’t fleet auctions over the years, up through 1990-91 or so with my Dad, I saw A LOT of compacts of the day like Chevy Novas, Ford Fairmonts, Chevy Citations, Chrysler K cars, Ford Tempos and of course there WERE larger cars but by the 1980’s, they were Celebrities and the like and that’s the run of the mill fleet cars too as they sold surplus trucks used for various departments where necessary and some Chevy Blazers (full size) as well as Ford Broncos, some with their rear seats missing, full sized vans and I believe mini vans too.
My Dad bought several of these cars over the years, beginning with larger mid sized vehicles such as the ’66 or 67 Plymouth Fury that within a few months had a collapsed cylinder, this being 1972 or so and it was traded with friend for I think a ’70 or 71 Plymouth Fury III 4 door and later had a ’71 Ford Custom then a 1975 Plymouth Gran Fury that I think he got from the state as a former unmarked police cruiser as it has the 360 V8 in it.
But since 1979, he’s bought compacts beginning with a ’74 Chevy Nova with the 250 inline 6 and automatic and not much else then a 78 Ford Fairmont with the addition of carpeting and an AM radio but otherwise a base inline 6/auto 4 door, then an 83 Chevy Citation, same thing, but with AC this time and full wheel covers instead of dog dish caps and lastly, a basic 87 Plymouth Reliant sans AC for my middle sister and by then, it 1990 or so and the cars were ceasing to be the great values they once were as they became better equipped and thus more expensive and desirable.
But to reduce corporate fleet mileage is ALWAYS a good thing IMO and ensuring that the various departments keep to smaller sized cars as much as possible that also get good mileage and can utilize various types of fuels is always a good idea, especially if done right, which this might be since it looks like they are they are reasonable here in the initial stage of this dictum in any case.
That must have been a great way to grow up. I’d love to have one of those big fleet Mopars.
Yeah, it was actually, a fun way to spend a Saturday I don’t know for sure if the 71-72 Fury was from a Gov’t auction, but it probably was as I think these good friends had to install an AM radio and it was a piece of garbage. :-)
That said, I grew up on Mopars so have a rather soft spot for them, especially the old 225 slant sixes that resided in my parent’s 64 Dodge 330 station wagon they bought new in Florida with AC no less.
Both the Nova and Fairmont eventually became mine years later, the Nova was a decent car when I had it, 1983-85 the Fairmont from Dec 1987 to spring 1992 when I replaced it with a 1983 Honda Civic and I’ve never looked back. :-)