The Energy Policy Act of 1992 and Executive Order 13149: Proposed compliance strategies and process improvements for federal agencies

Under the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (EPAct), 75 percent of Light Duty Vehicle (less than 8,500 pounds) acquisitions by federal agencies must be Alternative Fuel Vehicles (AFVs). EPAct's intent was to reduce United States reliance on foreign oil, and it was hoped that federal agencies would assume a leadership role in adopting AFVs and the use of alternative fuel in those AFVs. EPAct requirements apply to centrally-fueled federal fleets consisting of 20 or more Light Duty Vehicles (LDVs) operating primarily in a large urban area. Executive Order 13149 issued in 2000 requires federal agencies to reduce petroleum consumption by 20 percent relative to a 1999 baseline, use alternative fuels (those not derived from petroleum) the majority of the time in their AFVs, and increase fuel economy of their conventional Light Duty Vehicles by 3 miles per gallon by 2005.; Most federal agencies met the EPAct 75 percent LDV acquisition requirement in 2004, however, most all agencies are not on track to achieve the 20 percent petroleum reduction and the 50 percent alternative fuel use requirements. In many cases, federal agencies are acquiring AFVs (that are typically more expensive than conventional vehicles), and then fueling those vehicles with conventional gasoline. Besides being a waste of taxpayer dollars, this approach does not meet the intent of EPAct, which was to reduce the dependence on foreign petroleum. It was surmised that federal agencies lack an objective, quantitative methodology for AFV acquisitions and Executive Order 13149 compliance, and that a system of tiered optimization models could improve the process.; Federal fleet managers were asked to participate in a survey that would be used to identify various criteria that are important to them when developing an AFV acquisition strategy. Several optimization models were then constructed, focusing on the criteria identified by fleet managers and delineated in their agency's annual EPAct compliance reports. The U.S. Navy was used as a test case for models that were designed to (1) meet EPAct requirements at a minimum cost, (2) maximize EPAct compliance subject to a given budget, and (3) maximize alternative fuel use. Model iterations that allowed for the construction of alternative refueling stations, required acquired AFVs to actually use alternative fuel, and/or subjected the Navy to military-specific requirements were also created and used. In addition, a few excursions were undertaken to capture costs of selected externalities like pollution and energy security as well.; An analysis of federal agency annual EPAct compliance reports and strategies, as well as the results of the tiered set of optimization models, indicates that there are efficiencies that federal agencies could take advantage of when developing compliance strategies for EPAct and Executive Order 13149. These efficiencies would enable agencies to comply with EPAct requirements and improve Executive Order 13149 compliance at little to no increase in their current budget.