Skip to main content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Inaugural Meeting for the EV Working Group (Text Version)

This is a text version of Inaugural Meeting for the EV Working Group, presented on Sept. 26, 2023.

RACHAEL NEALER: Fantastic. Well, welcome, everyone, to the first group kick off of the EV working group. We're going to go ahead and get started on the agenda here while we have the Executive Director of the Joint Office joining. I am Rachael Nealer. I'm the Deputy Director of the Joint Office and the designated federal official for the EV working group, and would like to welcome you all to the meeting today.
So hopefully, you have all received the meeting information. We sent the slides in advance but just to go over what we're doing in the agenda today. We're going to call to order the first EV working group meeting here today. We're going to do an introduction of members. So, each one of the members will have about two minutes to introduce themselves and talk about why they're interested in the EV working group.
We'll then go over the role of the working group as it is laid out in the legislation, the bipartisan infrastructure law, which stood up the EV working group. And then we'll go through an exercise of setting and getting input on the EV working group priorities. Lastly, we will close out with public comment, which will be run by our facilitator Rachael Sack. And then we'll do the final close out and adjourn the meeting.
All right.

So, I will pause there and give it over to Gabe Klein for our opening remarks.

GABE KLEIN: Thanks, Rachael. Can you guys hear me OK?

RACHAEL NEALER: Yep, loud and clear.


SPEAKER 2: Loud and clear.

GABE KLEIN: Sorry I was a couple minutes late. I was having technical difficulties here in my office, but it's great to be here. First thing I want to do actually is thank Rachael and the team, who've worked tirelessly on this over the last year. It's been a long road just because we have multiple agencies obviously. The Joint Office spans DOE and DOT purposely. And I am just so excited. And, also, I want to thank all of you for taking your time and for being here and for being patient as we got this organized, got it together, and are finally kicking it off.

So, I'm excited and really honored to be kicking off the inaugural meeting of the Electric Vehicle Working Group. This group brings together and comprises 25 expert stakeholders from federal government, local government organizations, manufacturers of vehicles, components, batteries, public utilities, state energy planners, and labor officials. Together, you all will be making recommendations to the Secretaries of Energy and the Secretary of Transportation, and really all of us who serve them as well.

With the speed of the electric vehicle adoption that we're seeing—and I just actually came from the Deploy 23 Conference put on by Jigar Shah and the LPO office. And we're talking about how rapidly everything is expanding. We've seen a tripling of the sales of EVs over the last three years. We're putting $7 and a half billion into the EV charging system, which we think will bring another $24 billion in private sector investment for EV charging.

We, also—the Joint Office—by the way, are supporting EPA's school bus program, which is $5 billion, and then the FTA loan transit program, which is $5.6 billion. There is a tremendous amount happening at incredible speed and we need leaders who can help us to address these unique challenges and opportunities that are in front of us.

We really want to align efforts across government and across industry, and we firmly believe that we are here to enable a lot of innovation. And a lot of that's going to happen within the private sector. So, we want to align these efforts across government and industry to ensure that we build an electrified transportation future that is really for all Americans, not just for early adopters, not just for wealthier people, but for everybody, whether they drive electric or ride electric.

So, in today's meeting, you're going to be hearing more from Dr. Rachael Nealer. She's our Deputy Director of the Joint Office of Energy and Transportation, but she's also the designated federal officer for this working group, or the DFO as we say. We're all about acronyms here in the federal government. So, Dr. Nealer will take us through some initial thoughts on potential priorities for the EV working group.

But then we're not going to talk at you. We're here to hear from you on where you think the group should initially focus. And that's the purpose of a FACA and the EV working group, is to get your thoughts, not only on the future, but on what our work plan should be for the EV working group. And that's a lot of what we'll talk about today. So, we look forward to hearing from all of you. Again, thank you for your patience. Thank you for bringing your expertise to the table, and we're excited to work with you. Thanks.

RACHAEL NEALER: Great. Thank you so much, Gabe. Without further ado, I think we will just go ahead and jump into the introductions of members. Just as a reminder, I'm Rachael Nealer, the Deputy Director of the Joint Office and the designated federal official, as Gabe said, of the EV working group. I've been at the Department of Energy for a number of years, studying electrification, and look forward to working with each and every one of you in this journey that we have together. I will pass it over to our facilitator today, Rachael Sack.

RACHAEL SACK: Thanks, Rachael. Hopefully, this won't get too confusing with two Rachaels today. But hello, everyone. Welcome, again, to today's kickoff meeting for the electric vehicle working group. My name is Rachael Sack, and I'm with the US DOT Volpe Center. I'll be serving as your facilitator today.
Before we begin, I'd just like to take a few minutes to review some of the ground rules and housekeeping items on your slide today. For our working group members who are joining us, please remain on mute when you're not speaking. Feel free to raise your hand when you would like to speak, and please turn on your video if it's not on already when you are speaking. For our public attendees listening today, you are muted, but you can chat with the host if needed for technical issues.

Also, those who have pre-registered to speak, during the public comment period, you will be given that opportunity and you'll be able to unmute at that time. And then as a reminder, the slides from today's meeting plus the meeting notes and recording will be posted to the EV working group page on sometime in the next few weeks.

OK. At this time, we are going to lead into introductions. We're going to ask our working group members to spend just about two minutes introducing yourself. I'll call on you in alphabetical order. And if you could provide your name, title, and organization, and then what you hope to bring to the EV working group. That would be great. So, let's start off here. OK, Rakesh Aneja, can you please introduce yourself?

RAKESH ANEJA: I'd be happy to. Hello, everyone. I'm really honored to be here. My name is Rakesh Aneja, and I'm the Vice President and Head of E-mobility at Daimler Truck North America. As part of this role, I have leadership responsibility to drive Daimler Truck's decarbonization and sustainability efforts in North America. And I've been part of the commercial vehicle industry for 25 plus years. And I've had the opportunity to learn from a diverse set of professional and educational experiences, spanning multiple countries: US, Germany, and India.

As we all know, trucks are the backbone of our economy and society. They transport almost 9 trillion ton miles per year globally. And I often joke that in a world without trucks, we'd be sitting here naked and hungry. And 7% of all anthropogenic CO2 emissions worldwide are produced by commercial vehicles. And that's the opportunity—the tremendous opportunity that excites me and my colleagues in the trucking and commercial vehicle industry—the chance to make a difference there.

Certainly, from a Daimler Truck perspective, we are committed to the Paris Climate Agreement. It is our ambition to offer exclusively new vehicles that are CO2 neutral in our core markets by the year 2039. Many of our customers and peers share similar goals. And as we all recognize, a number of challenges do remain to make this vision and goal a reality. And that's why I'm incredibly honored and enthusiastic to serve as a committee member here of the US government's EVWG. I look forward to representing the perspectives of the commercial vehicle OEMs, collaborating with this group and the Joint Office to help shape the future of mobility and transportation in the United States. Thank you.

RACHAEL SACK: Thank you very much. Next, Deputy Assistant Secretary Michael Berube.

MICHAEL BERUBE: Hello, everyone. It is great to see many faces that I know and to meet those of you that I haven't met before. I'm the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Sustainable Transportation Fuels at the US Department of Energy. So, what that means is I lead all of our work here at DOE on transportation decarbonization and transportation related issues, certainly covering electric vehicles and battery technology, but also hydrogen and fuel cells and bioenergy.

And starting just about a year and a half ago, with my DOT colleagues, I co-lead the Joint Office that Gabe is heading up. I want to thank all of you, as Gabe said, for taking your time to serve on this working group. Each of you are here for both your own knowledge but also representing your space and your industry.

Collectively, our goal, along with other federal partners here, is really for this group to be able to provide to the Secretaries of Transportation and Energy, and to us that work for them, really the unvarnished insight from all of you of what will it take to achieve vehicle electrification across all of the segments covered here. What are we—the way I would suggest we all think of it, there is no one that's going to get this done that's probably not somewhere on the phone here representing some way or shape or that will help influence it.

So, it's, in some ways—it is up to us. What are the challenges? What are the specific tasks that we've got to do? What plans need to be put in place? And thinking about very much as a we are all in this together approach, government, NGOs, private sector groups all together. So collectively, how do we all work together to make those goals happen? So, look forward to hearing from all of you, not just today, but over the coming months and quarters. We'll all be spending quite a bit of time together. Look forward to us being able to meet in person next time. Thank you.

RACHAEL SACK: Thank you very much. John Bozzella.

JOHN BOZELLA: Thank you very much, Rachael. And thanks to Gabe and Rachael, and Michael. Good to see all of you and good to be here together finally. I'm really looking forward to this. This is critically important, not only to the country, but really to the auto industry.

I'm John Bozzella. I'm the President and CEO of Alliance for Automotive Innovation. We represent the auto ecosystem broadly, the manufacturers that design and develop and build and sell and service virtually all the vehicles in the new vehicle market today, as well as tier 1 suppliers and tech companies, new entrants to the space, battery producers and others. And, so, it's the ecosystem broadly, the automotive ecosystem broadly, the industry as it is today, as well as the industry as it's becoming.
If you look at electrification, this is where the industry is going. The electrification of personal mobility is, in fact, the future. And if you look at just the numbers, $1.2 trillion globally will be spent by this industry by the end of the decade. $115 billion of that in the United States alone. There are 102 separate electrified vehicles in the marketplace in the US today. And by electrified, I mean battery electric, plug-in hybrid, or hydrogen fuel cell. That's enormous progress from where we've been just a few years ago.

And I think that number is going to be about 130 or so just in the next two years. And, so, we are absolutely on the path toward an electrified future. But to get where we need to go at the pace we want to go, we're going to have to do nothing short of transforming the entire automotive industrial base and the entire automotive market here in the United States to get there. And it's going to take the collective vision and hard work of all of you, as well as all of us.

Because to create the necessary conditions for those transformations, the industrial transformation and the market transformation, it's going to go well beyond one company or one sector of the economy. And that's why I am so absolutely, not only excited to be with all of you, but, frankly, here with a sense of urgency to make sure that we are partners with you and that we are doing what we need to do to get there.

Just allow me a quick invitation, if you don't mind. For those of you who are here in Washington, D.C., I literally just ran back into my office from Hains Point where right now as we speak in the great outdoors is an auto tech showcase that demonstrates the latest automotive technology, the latest battery electric, plug-in hybrids, hydrogen fuel cells, as well as advanced safety technology that is driving that transformation.

So, you can all come down and not only—after we talk about it today—we can drive these technologies together and shape the future together. So sorry if that was over two minutes. But Gabe, Rachael, thank you so much for the invitation and I am ready to roll up my sleeves.

RACHAEL SACK: Thank you very much. Is Charles Brown with us? And Danielle Sass Byrnett? OK. Laura Chace, can you please introduce yourself?

LAURA CHACE: Hi, everyone. I'm Laura Chace. I'm the President and CEO of ITS America. And thank you for having me here. And hello to Gabe and Michael, and Rachael, and Rachael, and everyone else on the call. ITS America—we represent the broad technology in transportation industry. So, we represent public sector organizations and private sector companies who are developing and deploying advanced transportation technologies in support of safer, greener, smarter mobility for all.

And, so, what I'm hoping to bring to the conversation and to the working group is a perspective on how we can incorporate intentionally advanced technologies, and ITS technology in particular, into this transition. Because in a transportation landscape that is increasingly multi-modal, that it increasingly requires interoperability for users and for the owners of transportation systems, we need to be intentionally figuring out how we can deploy those technologies in a way that is going to support the outcomes that we all want and how those technologies can be an enabler to accelerating this transition to electrification across all modes. And so that is why I'm looking forward to the conversation and to the work of this working group. And thank you so much.

RACHAEL SACK: Thank you. Mark Dowd.

MARK DOWD: Hi. My name is Mark Dowd. I'm here part of the sustainability team at the Council on Environmental Quality. My focus is zero emission fleets. Looking forward to having a conversation with you all, do some problem-solving, and supporting the Joint Office. Thanks.

RACHAEL SACK: Thank you. Dean Bushey.

DEAN BUSHEY: Good afternoon. Thank you to everybody. Thank you to Mr. Klein, Mr. Berube, and Dr. Nealer, and the distinguished members. I'm the SVP of Sustainability for Travel Centers of America. We have over 290 large travel plazas across the nation. And now as a BP brand, we have 8,000 retail sites serving three million customers a day. We're committed to sustainability. We're going to be net zero by 2050. And we've committed $1 billion of private investment into EV charging network by the year 2030. So, we are all in.

The work that this group is doing is great. I want to bring the voice of the customer because that's who I serve. We serve both passenger side and the medium duty, heavy duty side. So, if you look at the passenger side, whether it's a family going on vacation over Thanksgiving, what do they want in an EV network? Well, they want safety. They want reliability. They want to make sure there are amenities. They want to make sure they're located along the highways or in the rural areas. They want to make sure that the experience they have at that location serves them. So that's the customer that we focus.

And then when you look at the medium duty, heavy duty side, as you go into truck decarbonization—really it's the same thing. Our professional drivers want a safe place to go that's familiar. They want to be able to go inside. They want to have high speed, ultra-fast charging so they can get back out on the road. Well, all of those require cooperation amongst all of us, the public-private partnership, to make sure that that power is available.

Is the grid going to support medium duty, heavy duty charging? Do we need micro grids or local power? How do we cooperate with the utilities? And how do we as the government and the private industry regulate, incentivize, and mandate requirements that sets the standards so that we can achieve those goals for the customer? Again, for us, it's all about driving what the customer needs, driving sustainability, driving low carbon future, but also keeping the customer in mind. So, I'm super excited to be part of the group and I'm looking forward to the communications.

RACHAEL SACK: Thank you very much. Nadia El Mallakh.

NADIA EL MALLAKH: Good morning or afternoon. Really excited to be here and honored to be a part of this great working group. I am the Vice President of Strategic Partnerships and Clean Transportation at Xcel Energy. We are a vertically integrated utility operating in eight states. We have kind of a nice slice of the United States if you think from the Dakotas all the way down to the panhandle of Texas is where we operate.

And really looking forward to partnering with all of you. A lot of the comments already resonate. We at Xcel Energy and the overall utility industry have been on a journey as we are increasingly incorporating more renewables and carbon-free resources into the grid. And, so, we're very passionate about it, particularly because of all the benefits it delivers to customers. So for example, in Xcel, it's about $1 per gallon equivalent to plug in at night off peak. That's just one of the benefits.

Of course, the carbon emission reductions are massive and we all know that emissions from the transportation sector are number one in this country. And that's why we're all here to help combat that challenge. And so, with that, I would just say looking forward to partnering with all of you. We do have a lot of expertise with the grid and energy and really want to make sure that we're focusing on how we're partnering across the ecosystems to leverage the utilities regardless of whether they're a municipal utility, a co-op, or an investor-owned utility to partner to bring this transition to fruition. Thank you.

RACHAEL SACK: Thank you. Mayor John Giles.

JOHN GILES: Thank you. I'm John Giles, Mayor of Mesa, Arizona. And I'm on this committee to help represent local governments across the country. One of the amazing things about local governments is that we do so many things. In fact, as I reviewed the priority list prior to today's meeting, I can say the local governments are concerned with and care about and have a hand in nearly every aspect of what this committee will be looking into and advocating for. We want to see more EVs on the road to help mitigate the effects of climate change, to improve air quality, and to hit the goals that many cities, like mine, have for our climate action plans.

We are also champions of economic and workforce development, areas that I think stand to gain enormously from the EV revolution. And if you think about it, we are also pretty significant fleet owners. I mean, think about school buses, police cars, garbage trucks, fire trucks.

And we're also frankly utility providers. My city has an electric company. So, we are deeply—and in addition to those things—we're deeply concerned about equity and equal access to this new vehicle technology for our citizens and the people that we serve. So, I look forward to sharing perspectives from local government and learning best practices from my fellow workgroup members on all of the topics that we're going to be discussing.

I would like to also, though, however, highlight a couple of additional areas that I see local governments wanting to weigh in on but I didn't see specifically called out in the priority list. That would be namely public safety and regulatory responsibilities. Mesa and all cities and towns are in the public safety business. We need to allay concerns and protect our residents while also implementing policies that will guide safe implementation of this amazing, new technology.

On the regulatory side, if you think about it, before anything that we are talking about is going to happen, it's going to come down to land planning and zoning and getting permits. I mean, nothing happens without those things happening. I want to help local government be prepared to step up and be able to provide those functions and to bring the experience of our preparation in those areas back to this group and share those with you and be benefited by your feedback on those things.

And finally, I come to this role as an EV enthusiast myself. And so, I look forward to helping local governments be a part of the EV transformation and to offering any assistance I can to this working group and the federal government so that we can work together to make this transformation a huge success. Thank you.

RACHAEL SACK: Thank you. Kevin Gotinsky.

KEVIN GOTINSKY: Hello, everyone. Thank you for having me. It's an honor to be a part of the EV working group. I'm a UAW member. I'm the Director of EV Strategies. I'm a top assistant to UAW president Shawn Fain. Actually, in the moment right now, our president—UAW president is walking hand in hand with our President Biden on the picket lines here in Michigan. So, it's an honor obviously to have him join us in the ongoing strikes that are taking place right now.

Our main focus right now is the transition of going from ICE obviously to EV. Obviously, it's happening in a rapid pace, which is great. We support it 100%. One of our key focuses, though, is making sure throughout this transition that our auto industry workers are not left behind.

There is—with the evolving into different obviously technologies, battery cell manufacturing and things of that nature—making sure it's just transitioned for all of our employees, making sure as a lot of the government subsidies are out there—making sure that they are good paying jobs to build communities as it was designed to do. Well, we obviously create zero emissions. So that's our focus. And again, just working with all you guys and moving forward through this process, I'm excited to do so and I appreciate you guys having me. Thank you.

RACHAEL SACK: Thank you. Denise Gray.

DENISE GRAY: Good—hello to everyone. My name is Denise Gray, and I'm an industry advisor currently working as an advisor to LG Energy Solution, a battery cell and module and pack design, R&D, and production company.

I hope to bring to this industry or this workgroup my background, which is about 30 years at General Motors working on advanced technology as we deploy it here in the United States and around the world, but also the experience I have working globally, working in Europe, as well as in China—as those industries and those governments pulled together as one force to bring the technology to the citizens of those countries. And so, I'm excited that here in the United States we're working together to bring this technology and I hope that I can be of support to the entire work group.

RACHAEL SACK: Thank you very much. Dr. David Haugen.

DAVID HAUGEN: Hello, everyone. I'm David Haugen, and I'm here in Ann Arbor, Michigan, where I am the Laboratory Director of EPA's National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Lab. I'm one of the division directors in EPA's Office of Transportation and Air Quality. And that's the part of EPA that sets both the criteria health-based standards on the tailpipes of almost every mode of transportation used in the country, from cars and SUVs and small pickups, large trucks, buses, agricultural equipment, aviation, marine, and rail, as well as greenhouse gas pollution standards from many of the vehicles I just described.

We also regulate and monitor compliance with commercial transportation fuels, renewable fuel standard, and the distribution of funds for the IRA Clean School Bus program. So, with all of that, electrification underpins the proposals that we have out right now for light duty and medium duty vehicle multi-pollutant rule and the heavy duty phase III greenhouse gas proposal.

Both of these rulemakings rely very substantially on electrification from the light, medium, and heavy duty fleets over the course of the next several years and beyond. And we in the EPA Office are anticipating and relying on the transformational change of electrification so that our fleet can go to electric power or zero carbon fleet. And this workgroup is extremely important to us, and I look forward to contributing to the work. Thank you.

RACHAEL SACK: Thank you. Henrik Holland.

HENRIK HOLLAND: All right, good morning, good afternoon, everybody. My name is Henrik Holland. It's a real honor to be on this committee. Thank you for having me. I'm the Senior Vice President and Global Head of Mobility at Prologis. For those of you who do not know Prologis that well, we are a pure play industrial real estate company active in 19 countries, the largest real estate company of its kind in the US with a little under 4,000 facilities.

About 3% of global GDP goes through our buildings. When I say buildings, I predominantly mean warehouses. And with such a large portfolio of logistics facilities, you can imagine that we have a lot of the trucks that will be converting from the internal combustion engine to electric visiting our facilities.
And in order to support our customers with that transition, as well as to meet our own net zero commitment by 2040, we have set up a new division under myself that supports our customers with the infrastructure that they need to charge at our facilities and beyond. So, as we're building the infrastructure for EVs today and in the future, and we focus almost exclusively on medium to heavy duty vehicles, we're currently executing on some of the first and largest—and I say with humility—I think some of the most innovative projects in the country to make this happen.

And what I really would love to do as part of my membership of this committee is to bring that experience and the industry voice as it comes to the challenges as well as the opportunities to bring this infrastructure to life to the table to develop pathways, practical pathways to accelerate this transition towards a net zero future of logistics. Thank you.

RACHAEL SACK: Thank you. Joung Lee.

JOUNG LEE: Hi. It's really great to see everyone. And my name is Joung Lee, and I serve as Deputy Director and Chief Policy Officer at AASHTO, the Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, and really appreciate the chance to provide the perspectives of the nation's state departments of transportation.

What I think AASHTO brings to this working group is the voice of what's really happening on the front lines of both NEVI and charging and fueling infrastructure program implementation effort in the state DOT world. And we really do look forward to discussing the successes and challenges related to strategically procuring and installing EV chargers to ensure maintenance and reliability of the system and to coordinate with really the top-notch expertise represented in this room.

We do believe flexibility in how we translate the underpinning law is crucial to successful and timely deployment. And I would say for the last year and a half, AASHTO, the National Association of State Energy officials, and the Joint Office signed a memorandum of understanding to provide that framework for collaboration between key state and federal government agencies. And a lot of that effort has been really spent on coordinating between state DOTs that are in control a lot of the funding in the law and then with the state energy offices that have a lot of experience in EV infrastructure deployment from the Volkswagen settlement funds in the past.

And we've created and deployed the online EV states clearinghouse. We've had a ton of both in-person and virtual engagements for state practitioners culminating in that really highly successful national EV conference this past July. So, we really do want to thank our really—our close partners and friends at NASEO and the Joint Office for that work together with the state DOTs in helping to get this program off the ground and running smoothly. So, really great honor to participate in the working group and look forward to the discussions to come.

RACHAEL SACK: Thank you very much. Is Barack Myers here? OK. We'll move on to Kelsey Owens.

KELSEY OWENS: Good afternoon, everyone. I'm Kelsey Owens. I'm a Senior EV Policy advisor in the Office of the Secretary in the Department of Transportation. And I help to manage the electric transportation portfolio here at DOT and assist all of our leadership with the development of policy on all things electrification from aviation to rail to maritime. We really have electrification work occurring across our entire department.

So, as part of my work, I support our collaboration with all of the DOT's operating administrations with other federal agencies, like our partners at the Joint Office and at the Department of Energy, and with all of our stakeholders like you to implement electric transportation programs here at DOT.

I also serve as the Environmental Justice Lead for the department and therefore support our department's commitment to ensuring that EVs and EV charging are available to all. I look forward to collaborating with all of you on the development of strategies to accelerate and streamline transportation electrification. We really deeply appreciate the partnerships that we've already built with our stakeholders and the success that these relationships have brought about thus far, but we know that we need to move faster if we want to take advantage of this truly once in a lifetime opportunity to transform our transportation network.

So, it's an absolute honor to join all of you here today. For those I've had the pleasure of meeting before, it's absolutely wonderful to see you again. And for those I've not had the pleasure of meeting yet, I look forward to working with you in the future. Thank you.

RACHAEL SACK: Thank you. Is Crystal Philcox with us today? OK, let's move on to Cassie Powers.

CASSIE POWERS: Good afternoon all. My name is Cassie Powers. I'm Chief of Staff here at NASEO, the National Association of State Energy Officials. We represent the governor designated energy offices in each of the states and territories, and our members have long led a lot of EV infrastructure programs in their state and have also been responsible for the development of EV roadmaps on integrating clean transportation measures into the state's comprehensive energy plans and other climate and energy related planning initiatives, and often act as the glue in the states between various transportation electrification and other stakeholders to ensure that there is smooth program policy development in the state and roll out of transportation electrification programs.

We certainly hope to bring our members' expertise and views to this dialogue and share insights from the energy office's long history of designing and implementing EV infrastructure programs and helping to design and implement state EV policy. And in particular, to elevate some of the planning and implementation needs associated with transportation electrification deployment and the associated infrastructure investment and, in particular, ensure that the electric system needs and grid integration concerns are addressed to bring that perspective.

As Joung has said, we've enjoyed a wonderful partnership with AASHTO as well as the Joint Office this last year and a half or so to support the states as they are rolling out the NEVI program and are now partnering with others to successfully deploy charging infrastructure through the charging and fueling infrastructure grants and are preparing for a tranche of other resources and initiatives coming from the feds. And so we certainly look forward to continuing that partnership. And so, thank you to all for having us here.

RACHAEL SACK: Thank you. Mike Roeth.

MIKE ROETH: Hello, everybody. My name Mike Roeth. I lead the North American Council for Freight Efficiency and also are represented on this council representing RMI as well. So, I'm here with the trucking industry, so I bought a trucking hat or a trucker hat. And so, I'm really excited to join you all. We're the group that brings Run on Less to the marketplace. And we're right now in the 16th day right now of Run on Less—Electric DEPOT. So, we're highlighting 10 electric truck depots that are operating 291 trucks right now.

So, me personally, I had—I'm entering the fourth third of my career, I call it. I spent 12 years at Cummins, 12 years at Navistar International Trucks, and now 12 years running NACFE. And so, I really am excited about our opportunity around zero emission trucks, battery electric trucks in particular. And if you go on to, you can see a lot of our thoughts about—and you see me far too much, but the team and I and all the players.

Rakesh and Henrik have both been part of Run on Less. And we interviewed them at some of these depots—those two guys at some of these depots just this summer. So, have a look at it. A couple more days. And it really is showing—and what I want to bring to the market is, or to this committee, is the real pragmatic real-world things around electric trucks in class III to class 8. So, everything from vans to heavy tractors.

And there are unique benefits and challenges of electric vehicles in the heavy duty commercial vehicle space. And it's just really thrilling. And I would just say, one, I'm convinced that electric trucks will be the biggest driver, attraction, and retention technology in 50 years. I really do. I think this is going to really help us get drivers to bring those—well, those clothes and food. So, Rakesh, we're not naked and hungry. So, I'll close with that. Thank you all. I'm looking forward to it.

RACHAEL SACK: Thank you very much. Victoria Stephen.

VICTORIA STEPHEN: Hi. Good afternoon, everyone. My name is Victoria Stephen. It's my pleasure and privilege to be here with you today and to be joining this very impressive team of individuals and impressive range of expertise that's out here. I am the Director of the Next Generation Delivery Vehicle Program at the US Postal Service under our Fleet Management and Electrification Strategy organization. That's a mouthful.

Our team has responsibility, not only for vehicle development, requirements development, but for acquisition, for deployment, for program management and execution, and the same for the EV charging infrastructure. So, we are actively advancing the electrification of our delivery fleet in particular right now. As you're aware, it's one of our nation's largest federal fleets. We're in the process of purchasing over 66,000 battery electric vehicles and actively in the process of installing EV infrastructure at a scores of sites right now as we speak.

So, these—as we prepare to transition our fleet to a more environmentally capable, supportive fleet, we're really excited. We're early in the process. This space is evolving in front of all of us. I mean, every week it seems there's something new. So, we're trying very hard to position ourselves to continue to evolve and learn as the technology and capabilities expand and grow. We really—given the size of our fleet, we have over 200,000 routes that are serviced using a vehicle.

So, this is just the tip of the iceberg. We have a lot further to go to continue replacing this fleet and we want to make sure that as things evolve in the space that we're taking advantage of and learning from, and optimizing, given all these new capabilities. So, we're gaining a lot of this early experience from the scale of our large scale implementation, fleet implementation. We're doing this work in alignment with our Delivering for America strategic plan.

So, there are many pieces that we're bringing together. This is part of our overall organizational strategy to position us for the decades and hopefully centuries ahead. So I'm very much looking forward to working with each of you, learning from you, sharing our experiences, and really finding a way that we can capitalize on and really help build this electric future, this great future together. So thank you for having me today.

RACHAEL SACK: Thank you. Doug Greenhaus.

DOUGLAS GREENHAUS: Thank you, Rachael. My name is Doug Greenhaus. Until last month, I was Vice President of Environmental, Health, and Safety at the National Automobile Dealers Association. I had the privilege of retiring last month but I am still a consultant to NADA for purposes, among other things, of this illustrative committee. I'm very much looking forward to working with all of you to see if we can come up with some very fruitful and innovative recommendations for our government partners on how we can most effectively roll out electric vehicles as we're doing now but even on a more accelerated basis moving forward.

Now, what is NADA? The National Automobile Dealers Association represents over 90% of those dealers across the country that have a franchise to sell new motor vehicles. They range from class I all the way to class 8. The folks like Rakesh and John's people that make the vehicles, we sell them to customers, both individuals, family households, fleet customers, you name it. We are the ones that sell over 90% of the new motor vehicles to the customer base out there.

We also sell an equal number of used motor vehicles. So, issues involved with used electric vehicles are also near and dear to our hearts. It's fair to say that we are concerned about some of the barriers to adoption that we're seeing with some prospective purchasers, but we think those barriers can and will be overcome if we all work together in the right direction.

For example, we're working very closely with federal, state, and local governments on incentives to help overcome some of those barriers, especially as they relate to the affordability of electric vehicles and, for example, working with the Department of Treasury on the EV tax credits that were enacted into law last year, but also at the state and local level where it's very important that we get the incentives right so that prospective purchasers will be more welcoming of these vehicles.

Education will play a big role. I think we can all work together on better educating the motoring public and prospective purchasers about EVs. We all work with them on a daily basis. I drive one. We're very familiar with being the experts that we are. But believe it or not, many folks out there only know a little bit about some of these new technology vehicles. So, education will be key.

We all know about the charging and infrastructure issues. Our dealers, which have invested tens of billions of dollars in infrastructure training equipment tools for these new technology vehicles, are having issues in some places with integration with the grid. Those issues have to be addressed. So, we also know about the public charging concerns.

RACHAEL SACK: Thank you, Doug. Thank you, Doug. I will—before we introduce our last working group member, many of the issues that you and others have mentioned, there'll be opportunity today as part of our survey and discussion to highlight many of those. So last, but not least, our last working group member is Kofi Wakhisi.

KOFI WAKHISI: Hey, greetings, everybody. My name is Kofi. I work at the Atlanta Regional Commission, which is the Metropolitan planning organization for the Atlanta urbanized area. I focus on pretty much all of the modal planning activities. So that goes—that includes bicycle, pedestrian, freight, public transit, including electrification of all those systems. In addition to that, working with our transportation system management and operations professionals in the region to help improve traffic flow and congestion and travel time reliability.

Also, I'm a member of AMPO, the Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations technical committee, where I sit on that committee and hear lots of stories, anecdotes, and questions about what is the role of a regional organization in pursuing electrification of the transportation system? And not only what is the role, what are some of the blind spots and some of the considerations that we need to focus on because of the nature of a regional organization usually is to be able to—

We're not faced with the task of implementing and actually physically transitioning our system and transforming to electrification but trying to help provide guidance to local governments and other planning partners, transit operators, et cetera, trying to help give them some foresight and/or hopefully a roadmap to help them better situate their electrification installations. So, I'm very excited, very honored to be here, and looking forward to the discussion.

RACHAEL SACK: Thank you. Thank you, everyone, for taking the time to introduce yourselves. I think it will be very helpful as we have our discussion later in today's meeting and in future meetings, of course. At this time, I'm going to turn it back over to Rachael Nealer so we can begin to discuss the role of this working group. Rachael.

RACHAEL NEALER: Thank you so much, Rachael. It feels a little funny saying that, but you guys have a Rachael sandwich here leading the meeting. So, I'm feeling really energized, everyone. And before we jump into the slides, I just want to say this is such a unique opportunity. And we've been working really hard on this membership package. So, it's just really great to see that membership package come to life, see the people, see the perspectives, bring them all together. It's just—it's really exciting to be a part of this. So thank you again for your time.

We are going to jump into a little bit of a overview of what the legislation authorizes to do in this EV working group, and then we'll jump into the priorities. We will end with the survey that we sent you questions for in advance. We weren't able to take those questions in advance or get the answers in advance, but we will do that during our break. And then behind the scenes, we will kind of consolidate some of those answers and then present them back to the team, to the group here after the break. So that's the plan for the next little bit of time.

But to begin with, we are going to go over a little bit of the legislative role of the EV working group. All right. You guys can see my slides OK, right? Great. All right. So, the EV working group was established in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and operates in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act. Pulling out from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, this unique opportunity, it really highlights the importance and the authority to really pull off this whole of stakeholder approach.

So, I'm in the Joint Office of Energy and Transportation. We embody the whole of government approach. But in order for us to really be successful in this transformation into electrification, we really need this whole of stakeholder approach. So, it's really important for us to close the feedback loop with industry from a lot of different organizations representation from a lot of different perspectives to really make sure that we are working together and headed in the right direction with that transformation.

The mission and objectives in very simplified terms are laid out here from the legislation, but you can always go back to the legislation to look at it in more detail. But really, the goal of this group is to provide recommendations to the Secretaries of Energy and Transportation and, therefore, their agencies on the development, adoption, and integration of light, medium, and heavy duty electric vehicles into the nation's transportation and energy systems.

And we're really looking to coordinate and consult with any existing federal interagency working groups on fleet conversion or other similar matters relating to EVs as well. You can tell– and I'll mention this again in reviewing the membership– we have a little bit of a unique circumstance with this EV working group in that there actually are federal members of the EV working group, which is usually not the case because you're making recommendations to the federal government.

But in this case, in order for us to really make sure that we are tied well to our colleagues and other agencies working on electrification as well, we do have members from a variety of agencies in this group. And that's, again, to really highlight the importance of all working together in this whole of stakeholder approach. Inevitably, this EV working group reports to the Secretaries of Energy and Transportation any products we have, such as the reports that I'll talk about in the next slide will go to the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, the Senate Appropriations Committee, and the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, and the House Appropriations Committee.

So, those are really the two DOT and DOE majority of committees kind of authorizing and funding the work of the agencies. And so, this is just a reflection of the fact that the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the Hill wrote into the language this EV working group and so they really want to hear from the EV working group what work is being conducted. We've had a lot of interest, both from the Hill and from specific members of the Hill. So, I imagine that we will continue to give updates over time on how the EV working group is working together.

Any questions? All right, I will move on to the products of the EV working group. So, in the legislation, it specifically asks for three reports. And the three reports kind of bubble up into these categories. We don't have to do all of these. These are just the scope that is authorized for this EV working group. Obviously, we want to align it with our priorities of what we think the EV working group is suitable to address and any barriers to electrification that we think are really critical.

So, the reports scope is laid out as the description of barriers and opportunities to scaling up electric vehicle adoption throughout the US, usability, reliability, and consumer adoption. Under that, I believe there is a whole laundry list that we'll talk a little bit more about in detail when we're setting the priorities as well.

It also talks about examples of successful public-private partnership models and demonstration projects that encourage electric vehicle adoption. Analysis of current efforts to overcome the barriers. And again, that subparagraph A has a laundry list that we'll talk about in more detail.

An analysis of the estimated cost and benefits of any recommendations of the working group, and then any other topics that is determined by all of us here. So, this is very broad for what we can include in the report. So, I think it gives us a lot of flexibility but kind of lays the foundation for what we'll talk about next in terms of priorities.

And so just one last time, you've heard from many of the members now, which is really exciting. But this EV working group is 25 members. We've got six from federal stakeholders, including Department of Energy, Department of Transportation, Environmental Protection Agency, Council on Environmental Quality, and the General Services Administration, and the USPS. And then we have 19 non-federal stakeholders that represent specific industries and state and local agencies.

And it was really great to hear some of the different perspectives that people are bringing to the table. We're really trying to balance backgrounds, experiences, and viewpoints so that we have a really great representative group to identify barriers and how to overcome them with this EV working group. And we wanted to also make sure that we were geographically diverse in representation as well. So that was taken into account when we were selecting members. The perspectives of rural, urban, and suburban areas are specifically called out in the legislation.

So, with that, I will see if there's any questions on the legislation itself. Again, I think it just provides us the foundation to have a really successful EV working group, a lot of broad interests, a lot of broad topics that we can really dive into. We'll talk a little bit about, not only what those topics might be, but also how we might be able to tackle them.

So, one of the ideas that we had initially on the EV working group is potentially subcommittees that would align with either reports or topical areas that we find very critical to the transformation to electrification. So, we'll talk about that a little bit in the priority section and how we really attack the various priorities that we're going to set with this group. Any questions? John.

JOHN BOZELLA: Yes. I'm sorry, just—so you—in some of the materials you sent out, you have sort of timing for the reports. Are there statutory timing requirements other than a general sense of urgency that we all have?

RACHAEL NEALER: There are, John. Thanks for bringing that up. So, the first report is due 18 months after the establishment of the EV working group. Because it took us a while—well, we prioritized establishing the EV working group and then the member package took us quite a while as you guys know.

And so, we actually have that first report due in the January time frame. So, I do have a bit of a proposal of how we might be able to thread the needle on meeting that deadline but also doing something that's meaningful in the first couple months of the EV working group. And then the other two reports, it's basically two years after each report is delivered. So, we have a lot more time for the second and third report.

One thing that we've also been talking about that I'd like to set the stage for here is that we don't have to pick a single topic for any one of these reports. It might be a compilation of topics or under a larger umbrella that the EV working group wants to provide recommendations on. So, I don't think we need to think of it in terms of one to one.

And then I also want to say that there is the possibility that maybe the EV working group really wants to advise on something that we just don't have the time—to your point, John—the urgency. We don't have the time to really put well-documented in a report. And so that, to me, is a way that we might be able to utilize the subcommittees and identify ways that we might be able to get more urgent recommendations or suggestions to the government that don't necessarily fall in line with the reporting structure.


RACHAEL NEALER: Yep. Any other questions? All right. Well, let's then go ahead and jump into the priorities. So, I don't know if you guys feel the same way in your organizations, but we are much more effective in our meetings oftentimes with proposals and for people to give responses to and feedback to proposals. So, we've really developed this set of priorities, the proposed priorities just as a way to get a conversation started.
And so I just wanted to, at a very high level, talk about what it means to make the EV working group effective because I don't think all of the topics that we might feel very passionate about—and I heard a lot of really great comments in the introductions. It's very evident that everyone's passionate about this mission. So that's really exciting.

But I think we're looking for the sweet spot in the middle here, which is some alignment of the topics that are critical, probably also multi-stakeholder, maybe require a private-public partnership that will need some actionable coordination across those stakeholders. Obviously, that benefits the public because the government is the end of the recommendations. And so, we want to make sure that it benefits the public. Also has a clear audience and is obviously impactful.

So, there are a lot of issues that are in that topic area that we could tackle as an EV working group, but I think we also want to think about the timing aspect of it. And so, the timing aspect probably means that we're talking about issues that are not too long-term. So, something that is actionable within the duration of this EV working group, something that we can really take action on now, but is not too urgent.

So, especially what I'm thinking about in the too urgent is the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law stood up this EV working group but it also has a lot of investments that are going out the door. And we want to make sure that we are aligned in the recommendations such that when the EV working group delivers them, that they're actually actionable by the government and they're not necessarily focused around investments that are already going in the ground and that the government is going to have a hard time actually enacting.

And then I think the other items are that we want them to be well-documented. But again, it might take us a couple of years to document that, so I think we want to take that into consideration. And we really want to think about how this capitalizes on the investments, both private and public. So, one thing that's really important about this, as well as in the Joint Office, is that we need to all work together. We've seen particularly on something like EV charging or battery manufacturing, like there's a lot of coordinated efforts happening both in the investments in the private sector, but also in the public sector.

Any additional thoughts or questions that folks want to add to this kind of framing, how we hit the sweet spot between topics and timing for the EV working group priorities? OK, great. I will continue.
So, to your point, John, your question earlier, the first report is due in January. I actually think it's an opportunity for us to put kind of an executive level roadmap of these EV working group priorities down on paper, share that publicly with folks that allows this transparency and coordination that's going to be needed, not only within the EV working group members, but also throughout the industry.

So, I think that I imagine it could be a relatively short document. But once we do agree on priorities, what does that roadmap look like? How are we going to tackle these priorities? What subcommittees do we think are going to be lined up? That might also help when we're talking about the subcommittees for bringing in other subject matter experts that could help on the subcommittees.

So, as I imagine, the subcommittees, they could be topical and report out as needed, but it does allow us to bring in experts to inform this EV working group. So we don't have—if we wanted to have a subcommittee that was focused on a specific area, we could bring in multiple experts to get their different perspectives on a specific issue.

So, I think report number one would be what does our plan for all of this look like? And then report number two and number three are really what we want to align to our priorities. I imagine that those priorities are supported by our subcommittees because we don't want to have subcommittees that are just kind of extraneous.

We want to make sure that they're really focused on something and informing the EV working group work. I think it could be select topics—and we'll talk about some of those topics. And those two reports are due every two years. So, if we have the first one due in January of 2024, the second and third report would be due in 2026 and 2028, probably around the same time frame, January.

Do folks have any questions about the reporting, the subcommittees?

MIKE ROETH: Rachael, this is Mike. Have you thought about the subdo you think the subcommittees would match the priorities or something else?

RACHAEL NEALER: Yes, I think so. So, we really want the priorities to be supported by the subcommittees. I would just say that we don't necessarily have to have a subcommittee that has a report out, for example. Or maybe it's a report out but it's not a report out that's in satisfaction of the legal language. So, we have a little bit of flexibility in how we deploy the subcommittees in order to–
Bottom line is I just want us to be really effective. And if there's a topic that we want to talk about, that we want to investigate some more, let's talk about a subcommittee supporting that priority and then we can talk also about what products come out of that subcommittee. Is it a report? Is it a presentation? Is it just them reporting back to the EV working group on their findings? Let's talk about how we make those things actionable. Great. John.

JOHN BOZELLA: Oh, sorry about that. Yeah, thank you. So, this is—I love the idea of subcommittees. I think that's important. But I want to come back to the first report and the idea of a high level roadmap on what our priorities are. I mean, it does raise the question about how we define the future. And so, I'm just—we have a whole series of goals and ambitions and sort of different sectors represented on this committee, for example.

So, is success defined by a specific definition of electrification, by—is it—does it—is it consistent with the agency decarbonization and transportation goals? Like what are we—what are we solving for? Like I understand what our broad ambition is, but like is there some specific definition, some specific outcome that we're targeting the addressing of opportunities and barriers to?

MICHAEL BERUBE: Rachael, I can jump in here if you want—maybe give one perspective. To some degree, it's a FACA so it's what this group wants, to advise the secretaries. Clearly baked into the law—and I'll tell you just what I'm hearing from the secretaries is we are going to be getting to very high levels of electrification in very quick time frame. And the purpose, I think, of this group is not as much to debate exactly what percent is and what year, but when I heard from everyone in the early comments is we see the directory and we see it's going fast. What are the things we need to do to make that happen and make it happen as fast as possible?
The end goal, as you mentioned, John, the transportation decarbonization blueprint lays out getting to net zero by 2050. That requires that we get all vehicles to net zero well before that. So, I think for this group it's not a matter necessarily of having to choose that, but I think we have to all recognize we're here because we're looking at numbers that are transforming very large, if not all of the fleet there. And again, it's going pretty rapidly.

So, I think that would be my suggestion, that we look at this very rapid trajectory, not worry as much about the exact year. And I know that that could become a problem, but also avoid just getting too enmeshed in specific regulatory or other—obviously, there's rule-making out there, things like that that are active right now.

JOHN BOZELLA: Yeah. Just first of all, thank you. And I'll shut up after this. But 100%, that's helpful. And I wasn't getting at is there a particular regulatory outcome as much as I was getting at the scope of this is so massive that when we're talking about the barriers, I think we have to recognize how aggressive we're going to have to be when we look at deploying charging infrastructure.

For example, when we think about developing supply chains here in the United States and we think about the industrial transformation that Kevin referenced earlier, for example, from ICE to EVs from a manufacturing perspective and from a workforce perspective. So, I think it's important that we recognize that we're going to have to be very open and honest because the ambitions are as large as they are.

RACHAEL NEALER: Great. Thanks, John. Rakesh.

RAKESH ANEJA: Hi. Thanks, Rachael. I wanted to ask if there is a perspective already from you or from the team in terms of how many priorities and topics we want to take on and how many subcommittees we take on. And to me, it really comes down to effectiveness. I appreciated the conversation earlier when you shared what should constitute a priority and we would want to find the right balance and the number of topics we take on within the time frame to be really effective.

RACHAEL NEALER: Yeah, thanks so much, Rakesh. Again, I think that's kind of up to the EV working group. So, my suggestion would be let's see how much our priorities, our individual priorities are overlapping right now and then address in the coming weeks to months as we're developing this roadmap potentially what those priorities are.

I imagine like we certainly do not want the number of priorities on the proposed priority topic list. 10—11 priorities is probably too much for this committee to bite off, especially because a lot of them are really meaty topics. So, I think we have to get to a place where we probably have a handful, probably reduce that proposed priority topic list in half, I would say, to probably about five-ish. We can decide if there's maybe some reports, like if the reports align with some of these topics and maybe we can have a couple of topics to each report.
I think we need to have at least– we're required to have three reports. So I would say that's probably the minimum then, two, is if we have two or three priorities that we put into these reports, that would satisfy the legislative language. So I would say less than 10 but more than two or three.

And I would also say to the point, Rakesh, of the subcommittees, again, we don't want to propose subcommittees just for the sake of having subcommittees. And in fact, there is a cost to the subcommittees because each subcommittee needs to be led by a primary member of the EV working group. So, we also need to figure out how that overlays like how much people—how much time people have to commit to leading a subcommittee potentially in their topic area if there's interest to do so by the EV working group.

RAKESH ANEJA: Thanks, Rachael.

RACHAEL NEALER: Yeah. Laura and then Mark.

LAURA CHACE: Hi. Yes. I was going to ask if there's been consideration for the subgroups and the reports to be worked on concurrently as opposed to sequentially because I'm very mindful, as I think many on this call are, of the timing of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and ensuring that we're tackling these issues urgently and in a time frame that is going to align, to some degree, with the timeline of the law so that we'll have some reports, some recommendations while that funding is still in progress and as Congress and others are debating the next iteration of funding.

As John mentioned, this is obviously a long-term massive issue that we're facing. And I think there are some sectors that might require more support in the shorter term. And I haven't seen a lot of discussion about transit fleets, about hydrogen. And I think those—I think some things may benefit from being worked on in a concurrent fashion. So, I just wanted to put that out there for consideration.

RACHAEL NEALER: Thanks, Laura. Yeah, I totally agree. I think these subcommittees—they don't need to necessarily be placed sequentially. I think the only constraint we have is the reporting. So if we want to do a report, let's go ahead and get it in maybe report two or three further in the future. Let's get a subcommittee started for them now. Like let's start working on that. We don't want to necessarily make any of these reports our own fire drill for ourselves. But I think there also might, to your point, there could be some dependencies across these subcommittees that we want to be very mindful of when we're standing them up.

I see Mark and Michael. I will say that I'd like to move on to the priorities so that when we get to the break and you guys have all the full information on—excuse me, on the survey. But Mark and Michael, if you have final comments on what we've stated so far.

MARK DOWD: I'll be brief. I agree with Laura that there is an urgency and there should be an urgency to what we do. I don't—I worry that we're going to try to solve for all things and we don't have—that would be a mistake. And to John's point about what are we trying—like the future state is really what we should be thinking about and the technology and the transition and its impact on our communities in terms of trying to prioritize what we're working on. So that would be my two cents, is focus on those impacts, communities, and how do we solve for that future state?

RACHAEL NEALER: Great. Thanks, Mark. Michael.

MICHAEL BERUBE: Just, I guess, a comment on the subcommittees if you think about it. The—I heard a few different thoughts. The vision here was through the life of this committee, we have a limited number of members here. We are allowed to create subcommittees that can bring in a broader group of records and quite honestly spread the workload.

And they can be—these would be committees that, in theory, our thought was could be there to educate and help provide rather than just one representative speaking to one entire area. Take work with critical utilities and EVs. There's probably a lot of voices there. Have a group of folks here that can do that. Ultimately, what they do has to come back to the full committee for recommendations.

There's not necessarily one subcommittee for one report. It's a group that's [INAUDIBLE] helped really brought in the work, brought in the effort of people that could be writing, putting things up. Ultimately, anything they create has to be voted on and agreed upon by this full committee. So that was the simple thought there.

I guess the other pieces that there are these required reports, these big reports that have to be submitted. There is also no reason that this group can provide advice to the secretaries at any point. Sorry. We see an urgent issue here. We want to communicate that as long as this committee overall agrees and votes on it and passes it up, that can be passed along.

So, don't take our sense of the urgency as it's not like—if there are urgent problems now to be heard or known, this is the best cross-sectional group of experts on vehicle electrification that exists in the country right now. I'm sure that we've got a great group and also a great cross-section across area affected area. So, we should—you should feel empowered to be. You are the advisory group advising the federal government on this critical issue.

RACHAEL NEALER: Yeah. And I might just add to Michael's, it adds—it allows us to spread the work a little bit but it also allows us to deepen the work a little bit too, to bring on specific subject matter experts that we really want to hear from in order to inform the recommendations to the EV working group and then, ultimately, the government. Kofi.

KOFI WAKHISI: No, thanks, Rachael. I was just thinking that one of the goals maybe to help scale this a little bit might be just kind of thinkingand you're going to get to it with prioritizing the topics, which is kind of identifying like a critical path. Problem is or the risk is the critical path may not be—it won't be a one size fits all based on the state or the urbanized area. So, then to me, it sounds like that critical—that template could be customized by eventually any local or state entity or transit operator.
And to me, the way to get to a critical path is to have a better understanding of all the different industries: planning, urban planning, engineering, utilities, energy planning. And I think that's a benefit of this group, is for us to all sort of have a crash course and reach a collective understanding of all the industries and professions that are involved so that we can have confidence in that critical path.

RACHAEL NEALER: All right. Thanks, Kofi. I might use your comment as a segue into the priorities here too. I mean, I think that's a really good point and I think it definitely emphasizes the importance of audience too. So who is our audience for this EV working group for the recommendations? I mean, first order is obviously the government, but how do we want it to be actionable? And are there other people that could also be a part of that action, to your point, Kofi, on the local—the more localized governments, for example, or transit agencies.

So, I'm just going to run through here two slides. There's going to be a lot of information on them, but they're essentially slicing and dicing the legislative language in two different ways. First is the potential topics from the legislation. This actually takes more of the laundry list of the priorities laid out in the legislation, kind of buckets it into some higher-level goals. So, this might be a way that we could organize ourselves.

It could also look more like we want to pick one topic from consumer focus and one topic from EV adoption, and one topic from technology solutions. So, this was just kind of a way for us to, at least on our side as we were preparing, to organize some of the information. And really, it feels like the legislation is calling out some major areas around EV adoption and removing barriers to EV adoption. That could be through technology solutions, but we also might need to investigate technology solutions more in depth around emerging technology solutions.

There's also supply chain issues. And then there's a consumer focus aspect that I think is really important to this EV working group. And then finally, there's the policy solution. So, this kind of takes a lot of the legislative language and tries to organize it. So, I'd just like you to take that into consideration when we are doing the survey in just a couple of minutes. Henrik, did you have a question about that here?

HENRIK HOLLAND: Yeah. So, I looked at this and I really liked the way that this kind of breaks our world down into discrete categories. What stood out to me as I was looking at this and then the priority list on the next page is that you can—there's different ways to slice and dice this. So, you can take a kind of industry vertical focus. So, with that, I mean consumer kind of more light-duty kind of consumer passenger vehicle car use and then you can look at logistics, medium-, heavy-duty as two industry verticals. And I think you kind of have the light duty under that consumer focus.

And then there's the kind of horizontal themes that run across that, like supply chain technology and policy. So, just looking at this, just the thought I had is that what I think is missing a little bit—and this has been kind of a theme I think over the past few years, that there's a lot of focus on the consumer adoption of EV, a little bit less so on medium and heavy duty for all kinds of reasons. And that's all fine. But there's a huge amount of, I think, impact to be had in the medium and heavy-duty side. That is captured in the sub-bullets.

What I was kind of thinking looking at this is that it might be helpful to—just the thought and a suggestion—to take EV adoption and maybe wrap that EV adoption bit under a consumer focus, like a light duty industry vertical, and then instead create a logistics or medium and heavy duty vertical with aspects of EV adoption. Because it seems that EV adoption, the way it is here, is very heavily focused on the consumer side.

But there's, of course, also EV adoption components in medium and heavy duty. I think if you have those two industry verticals within those kind of three vertical themes, you have a pretty logical way of how our system works. That's just what came to mind when I saw this. So just for consideration.

RACHAEL NEALER: Yeah, absolutely. So, I might want to just quick pause with Rakesh—and thank you for your comments, Henrik. Pause with Rakesh and Dean. So, I think we're already jumping into the priorities discussion, which is awesome. I think that's the real meat of this meeting and we want to get there.

But I actually think that if we're able to take the survey prior to that discussion, it might help us focus the discussion a little bit instead of—the point of the survey was to try to take 25 individual opinions and get them a little bit more focused. So, unless Rakesh—you have any clarifying questions or thoughts, I might ask you to hold your comments to the priority discussion that we'll talk about shortly.

RAKESH ANEJA: Yeah, in five seconds, I just wanted to echo what Henrik said. That's exactly my perspective as well. I think medium and heavy needs a dedicated focus. And I would strongly recommend making that its own sort of group or subcommittee topic and then dealing with the relevant topics in this group under the medium and heavy umbrella. So, just wanted to echo Henrik's perspective there.

RACHAEL NEALER: Awesome. I think that I'll use your comments, Rakesh, to segue into the next slide with some of the proposed priority topics. I do think that falls in the second bullet of unique needs of freight electrification. So, it might be something that we consider here as one of our priority topics.
And just to round out some of the items that stood out to us in the legislation was the grid integration and coordination with utilities, equitable and accessible EV adoption, consumer awareness around EV adoption and, in particular, the used vehicle market, consumer experience around charging reliability and security, open and real-time data needs. So, what is really needed, especially on the consumer end? And, also, what data do we need in order to make sure that we have a reliable EV charging network.
Supply chain issues around batteries, transformers, Buy America, critical minerals and recycling. We also have charging infrastructure. That could include home, workplace, community, and corridor charging. Unique needs of fleets, including transportation network companies, rental cars, et cetera, some cost and affordability issues that we're still working on in the EV space, and then workforce development. So, these were the proposed priority topics that we just wanted to get some feedback on initially.
And so, we've developed a survey that we'll take as I kind of conclude these remarks. These survey questions really are your priorities represented in that list. If no, what's missing? I think that's a really critical question to answer. If we have anything that's missing, we really want to make sure that we are identifying it early so that we can take it into full consideration as we drill down on what the priorities of this EV working group are going to be.

And then to start that process of, what are the top priorities for folks in the EV working group? How do we start figuring out which ones really rise to the top for the largest group of people within the committee? So, what is your top priority, and then what is your second priority?

And then, because we have this differentiation between the subcommittees and the reports, not only on timing, but what they might be able to provide in terms of support or depth for the subcommittees, would love to also understand what your initial thoughts are on subcommittees and what we'd like to see the reports focus on.

So, with that, we will post into the chat here the link for you all to take the survey. And we will also take a break. So, take the survey, do what you need to do: get water, get food, whatever you need to do during the break, and we will resume at—what is the time here? At 2:50. So, we have a 20-minute break for folks. And then we will reconvene.

If you could take the survey on the earlier side of that break, that would help us because we're going to try to synthesize a little bit so that we're not doing all of this shooting from the hip and we're able to pull things together and have a really informed discussion in the next hour. Laura, did you have a question?

LAURA CHACE: Yeah, could you put up the list of priorities because somehow I never received the packet. Yeah, so we can see the priorities. Thank you.

RACHAEL NEALER: They're also in the survey, Laura. So, you'll see them there too. Awesome. Thank you all so much. We will see you at 2:50.

RACHAEL SACK: Hello, everyone. Thank you to our members for completing the survey. Just as a reminder, for the public joining us today, this survey was just for our working group members, but we will be discussing the results. So, you will see shortly how everything turned out in order to help us with our discussion as we frame the priorities of this working group.

So, for the next 40 minutes or so, we are going to work through—Rachael and myself—with all of you as the working group members, to look at the results from the survey. We're going to take the questions in groups. We're going to first focus on the priorities and how you rated them as your top priorities, other items you may have included.

Then we'll focus on the reports, which Rachael described earlier, and then the subcommittees, which Rachael also described, so that we can start to see a relationship across all of these items while also keeping in mind what is part of the mission of this EV working group and what may be on the periphery. So, we'll be talking through all of that.

We're going to share our screen to start to give a preview of some of these results. And then we welcome our working group members to come back on video. Again, unmute when you're ready to share something. And certainly, please raise your hand like we did prior to the break. OK. I think we will get started here by looking at the results of our first two questions. So, just give us a moment.

SARA EMMONS: Rachael Nealer, can you please turn off your screen share?

RACHAEL SACK: I feel like we should have a drum roll here. So, the first question was regarding the priorities that were previously listed on the screen, were those representative of what you see as the priorities for the working group? We have mixed opinion here. So, this is where we're going to spend the next few minutes to really see what other items were suggested by the working group members so we can see if they, A, fit into an existing bucket already or if there are other things that we need to be considering.

So, when we look at what was missing, let's start to scan what some of those results may look like. So, I know we can only fit so many on the page at this time. So, we'll just do a quick run through and then we'll start to talk about the relationships. So, the first was challenges regarding medium and heavy duty. Public safety was listed. The targeting of federal resources to maximize reduction in barrier. Cybersecurity was noted along with hydrogen fuel cell technology support, transit electrification, and multi-modal focus.
And then the next set of comments talks about a multifamily housing needs. I will try to skim this myself. And then also public fleet perspectives here. The next comment is really about goals and accountability, which probably thread through everything that we'll be talking about today and in the future reports, as well as a focus on Metropolitan regions, or MPOs. And then the dedicated focus on solving the electrification challenges. And this is for class 6 through 8 vehicles.

And I think that takes us through our list here. So, some are much more detailed than others. But we really want to start diving a little deeper into some of these just to help us inform our next set of questions, which we'll get to the reports and subcommittees. Rachael, let me just ask you. Is there anything that you'd like to highlight that stands out to you with some of these comments?

RACHAEL NEALER: Thanks, Rachael. I think there's a couple. I think you covered on the goals and accountability. I would want to see that reflected in all of our work. What are the goals? What is the audience? How are we working together on these topics?

I think there is some also comments on integration with other decarbonization technologies. So, we might focus more on the EV side, but how does hydrogen play a part here as well? I think, especially when you take into consideration medium and heavy duty. And then I see a little bit of like maybe an urban focus, so the MPOs, the multi-modal, the transit might all be focused around an urban topic that would be interesting to have a little bit more discussion around.

And then cybersecurity. I just want to point out that cybersecurity medium and heavy duty, just to clarify on our priorities list, we did have those represented. Although, maybe it wasn't as clear as it could have been. The medium and heavy duty is kind of in the unique needs of freight electrification. So, it sounds like we've got a lot of interest around that even for the later questions.

And then the cybersecurity was really in the consumer experience around charging reliability and security, but maybe we do need to be a little bit more explicit about cybersecurity, for example.

RACHAEL SACK: So, I'm going to suggest that we think about some of these things, especially those who added to this section of the responses. If we—and before we jump, Rachael can confirm—I'm thinking if we think about this in the context of the topics for the reports and subcommittees, we can discuss which of these may thread into some existing themes or have a relationship to even if it's not directly a part of it.

So, that might help us figure out where we can branch off of some of these priorities. So, for those of you who had some of these other comments that we see on the screen, keep that in mind as we look for some relationships. Rachael, does that sound good to you or would you like to dive a little deeper into any of these right now?

RACHAEL NEALER: I think that sounds good.

RACHAEL SACK: OK. So, these are going to be important. And all of these survey results are going to be helpful as we frame future meetings and next steps with reports and subcommittees. But let's look to the responses for question three now, if we can. And then we'll look at three and four together shortly.
This first question was, what is your top priority for the working group? And so, again, we recognize some of the comments that we just reviewed will not necessarily be represented here, but we'll talk about some of the other items. But you can see here the strong response with the first item of grid integration. And then our second highest was the charging infrastructure.

And then if we're looking at our top three, the next one is orange, and that is the freight electrification. And can we see what that other—the two others or several others. These are all of them. So, the unique needs of class 6 through 8 and medium heavy duty infrastructure, and the urban electrification.

RACHAEL NEALER: I think it's the urban electrification and the medium and heavy duty. So, hopefully, we'll count number 19 as maybe one for the electrification vote.

RACHAEL SACK: So, if we look here—and I'm just going to do a preview of number four because these are really—we're using number three and then number four to help inform what will become the priorities. If you remember, Rachael said before the break something more than two or three but under 10. And so, we're really just trying to see where the consensus lies with some of these.

So even for number two, for the second priority, the top one was charging infrastructure, which we saw in the previous question. And then the next one was supply chain issues. So does any—oh, can we just see what the others are here as well? Public safety and the unique need of fleets, I believe. Importance of engaging states in the discussion. So, I think, again, as we think about the stakeholders and the audience, some of the things that were mentioned before the break, these will be common threads in many of these topics and it'll be important to keep that in the discussion.

So, for those of you—well, I think we're going to open it up actually. Whether you had another that you added to the discussion or for what you commented here for three and four, when you see the ones that are outstanding in number in terms of what we kind of just visually can see as some of the most votes here, for those who first marked other, do you see relationships that you want to propose between something that we've reviewed and how it matches something like grid integration or the freight electrification, the medium heavy, or even the charging infrastructure? Nadia.

NADIA EL MALLAKH: From a grid perspective, I think—and this tags on some of the comments earlier about looking at light duty vehicles versus medium and heavy duty—I think that is a natural dividing line because there is some overlap. But when you get into the medium and particularly heavy duty, the grid integration needs can be very different. And so I do see that as a natural dividing line.

And I think we talk about some of the other areas that didn't quite make it: equitable EV adoption, cost affordability. I mean, all of those, I think, can sit, from my viewpoint, under grid integration and coordination. There's a lot of overlap there.

RACHAEL SACK: Thank you. And as we're talking, I know you haven't seen the results for the subcommittee questions yet, but it'll also be important to think what could branch off and may or may not be a report but could be a subcommittee. Rakesh.

RAKESH ANEJA: Yes, thank you. So, I appreciate this is our first conversation. So, a lot of things will get clarified with further discussion and getting to the details. I just wanted to make a couple of points really quickly. So, my overarching theme, as I mentioned earlier, is really specific needs on the medium and heavy side. And I wanted to make that explicit. That's really class 6 through 8 vehicles. A big impact opportunity there for obvious reasons that we discussed.

Then the other element is the stakeholder piece. And I appreciate you mentioned that. But for example, EPA has a proposed regulatory rule out there that focuses on vehicle product regulation. And the suggestion would be for our committee, if we are looking at freight electrification and if that's what we mean by medium and heavy duty class 6 through 8 vehicles, we also look at some sort of policy and regulatory framework on the infrastructure side. Because obviously, the vehicle product regulation is not going to be successful without the infrastructure piece. So, that potentially goes in the stakeholder direction under that overarching topic.

And another example on the stakeholder side would be how do we engage the states? And that comment came from me. Even today, for example, there's a lot that happens at the state level with the public utility jurisdiction when investments get made. We have over 3,000 utilities in the country with unique processes. And we often say, if you've spoken to one utility, means you've spoken to one utility. So, that could be another example on the stakeholder engagement side under the overarching umbrella of infrastructure for heavy duty vehicles or freight electrification.

RACHAEL SACK: Great. Thank you. The common goals of accountability and stakeholder coordination, even if different for different stakeholders, I think will certainly put in its own bucket as being the things that should be considered for many of these. John and then Mayor Giles.

JOHN BOZELLA: OK, thank you. So, first, I want to associate myself with Rakesh's comments. That's exactly what I meant when I said goals and accountability and metrics. I think your example of having an infrastructure metric or requirement that supports sort of a vehicle or a fleet requirement is exactly right. And so, 100% agree. And so, what I heard Rachael say is sort of goals accountability metrics kind of fold into all of these elements. So, I support that if that's the will of the group. If not, we have to come back and have that conversation again it seems to me.

With regard to the top three, I look at supply chain as fourth maybe when you sort of toggle back and forth. Supply chain like is absolutely foundational to the rest of this stuff. Like we can't build cars without a supply chain. We can't build trucks without a supply chain. So, like if we're going to be it's only three, you got to come back to supply chain. If we have four or five, supply chain's in there. So, like I'm fine.

But it's also supply chain also contributes directly to outcome issues like affordability and access because supply chain supports the availability of raw materials in a cost effective way, those kinds of things. So like I really—I think supply chain is really critical here. And it also gets to workforce.

RACHAEL SACK: Thank you.

RACHAEL NEALER: Could I just add to that, Rachael? John, I also think that's a really—when you take a look at the Venn diagram that I was trying to show of like multi-stakeholder, we need private-public partnerships, I do think supply chain—it's a pretty big topic, so we might have to figure out how– what components of it we actually want to dive deeply into. But it is one of those things that requires a lot of people to work together towards the same end to make work.

RACHAEL SACK: Thanks. Mayor Giles and then Dean.

JOHN GILES: Thank you. Well, my top priority was grid integration, but maybe it comes as no surprise to anyone that I'm the one that kept bringing up public safety kind based on some of my comments initially. But I think that that topic also was reflected in a lot of the other comments that I saw having to do with an emphasis on some of the unique challenges in the urban environment, the unique challenges presented with the lack of proper infrastructure in multifamily situations. I think as the price point of these vehicles come down, you're going to see more and more examples of extension cords coming out of apartment windows out to vehicles. And that's just not a sustainable, safe environment.

So, the—and also, for those—I think every stakeholder, we ought to be concerned about the perception issue going forward. And right now, I think one of the things that's top of mind for consumers is fires. And I think we know that the priority or the reality is that the incident of vehicle fires with electric vehicles is far less than it is with ICE vehicles. But again, that's an issue that is top of mind with a lot of consumers.

ICE vehicles are—fires are typically resolved in a matter of minutes and EV fires can sometimes linger for days. So, I think that's just a real issue that we need to address. Thank you.

RACHAEL SACK: Thank you. Just a quick question on that before we go to Dean and Victoria. Rachael, do you see some of those safety issues tying into any of these categories? Not to put you on the spot.

RACHAEL NEALER: I lost my mouth, sorry. No, I do think in particular consumer awareness and the consumer experience are all part of that. And especially, as Mayor Giles said, having codes go from someone's window to their curbside charging, that's—I don't think anyone wants that for themselves, nor do they want to come across it when they're walking down the sidewalk. There's a lot of aspects to that.

So, I do think that safety in a broad sense is an aspect of the consumer experience and something that we need to educate on to make sure that people are feeling comfortable in making that choice to go electric as well.

RACHAEL SACK: Thanks. Dean and Victoria.

DEAN BUSHEY: Yeah, thank you. What I really look at is—I was going to go immediately to medium duty, heavy duty and give 1/3 to the motion, which seems to be a recurring theme, but I want to hit safety real quick. I can't say—I can't emphasize and agree more with we need to be focused on safety.
It's not just the cars that are going to catch fire. It's when you place medium duty, heavy duty charging or passenger EV charging at a site, you really need to look at site design. Where are those chargers going to be located? Where are the passengers going to travel to get to the store inside? What's going to happen to the flow of traffic? It's a different animal when you're there for 20 to 30 minutes and you're potentially walking inside along different paths. So I think safety is a big one.

On the medium duty, heavy duty side, as a charging infrastructure provider, there are specific needs. And that's where I think the overlap between different providers, the state and federal governments, and the utilities need to work closely together. So, I would echo that thought also.

One thing that hasn't been brought up, and I'm not sure that we are going to address it in this group, is we need to make sure that companies who deploy the charging systems can make money. So, we need to have some type of expected charge rate that we could depend on so that we could go out and make money. Yes, it's great that NEVI is providing some type of CapEx up front. And that really is a great first step and I think the public-private partnership is working great there.

But moving forward when we're not positive of what the rate per kilowatt hour is going to be from the utilities, it's really hard for us to set a margin to charge the customer so that the customer can enjoy the benefits. Obviously, we want to pass along as much savings as we can to the customer, but I think that's a consideration also.

RACHAEL SACK: Thank you. Victoria.

VICTORIA STEPHEN: Yeah, thank you. I wanted to echo the—not just grid integration, but grid sufficiency. I know there's a lot of money that's going into to rehabbing and reinforcing and expanding the capabilities of our national electrical grid, but the visibility that we have. And in my case with the postal service, we operate literally everywhere. So, I'm well familiar with the fact that there's 3,000 utilities and 3,000 different answers to the same question.

And that's—for large scale implementations, that's a limit because we have to reach out to each individually in order to get an understanding of when there's sufficiency where. So, that's a real concern. I would love to see, not only grid integration, but better information about how we're hardening our national electric grid, what the timelines look like, who's doing what, where because that may even help us shape deployment sequencing. We can't wait three years to get sufficient power into a particular site. So, it'd be great to leverage some of this dialogue to get better broader visibility to that so that people can plan to it.
And then I just want to echo something that someone was talking about with emergency preparedness. We are planning to work with first responders in every one of our deployment locations to ensure that they know that we're putting out—we're going to have a presence with many numbers of electric vehicles with charging infrastructure that the local responders are trained and prepared for emergency response.

And I think that is a really important part of things as we look ahead. We don't want those things to happen. They will happen. And we want to make sure that the people that we call on to support emergency response are equipped and prepared and educated so that we all have better outcomes coming forward. Thank you.
RACHAEL SACK: Thank you. I will take Michael. And then Nadia, if you could just give me a minute to move on to the next questions, but then we can have you comment if it applies there just to keep our conversation moving. Thank you. Michael, last comment on this for now.

MICHAEL BERUBE: I just want to emphasize what Dean commented on and the cost and affordability in it. To me, it's not maybe its own individual topic, but in each of the items we deal with, the cost and affordability—supply chain is a lot about cost—the business models for people providing EV charging or for utilities, and for consumers. At the end of the day, a lot of this works on both the freight side and heavy trucks.

And light duty, because the electrification provides an opportunity for low-cost operation, it becomes of interest to consumers, becomes of interest and to accelerate adoption. If we lose that low cost because of how the charging is set up or the infrastructure or any of those other items, now you're facing a huge, huge headwind that is a lot harder to overcome on the move to electrification. So, I encourage us just to make that like in whatever our priorities are, make that as part of the thinking.

RACHAEL SACK: Great. So, let's take—all of the information that you've just discussed is feeding into the analysis that will be done after this meeting as well to help frame future meetings and help the group form its vision moving forward. So, let's just talk a little bit about the subcommittees because perhaps the relationships that you just described can morph into either elements of reports or separate or supplemental information.

So, I just wanted to take a minute and then Nadia I'll call on you as well. But the subcommittee results. So, these, again, you may have in your mind what the relationship looks like, which we would be happy to hear about. Overwhelmingly, the grid integration and coordination came in high for its own subcommittee as well as the unique needs of freight electrification. And then you can see similar to the reporting results, the charging infrastructure was high.

And then the last—sorry, I've got blocked. What is that blue on the far right? Oh, that's the other. OK. Well, maybe we could do a preview of the other and then we can call on Nadia and Laura to get this conversation started. OK. So, we'll go digging for some of those others. If someone did—I see BABA was listed.

If someone had another that they wanted to just mention verbally while we're searching, certainly feel free. The unique needs of fleets looks there. And I think some of these are similar to what we saw with the priorities as well. Before I call on Nadia and Laura for comments, were there other elements here people just want to flag? You can see the medium and heavy duty here.

MICHAEL BERUBE: Rachael, one—just as people are starting to make comments, one comment of a way for people to think about subgroups is you could have a subcommittee that's people on this committee. Hey, we need a subcommittee to go talk about this and bring it back. And then another type of subcommittee, we need to bring in some outside experts. So, there's someone here who will lead that and they'll bring in five or six other utility folks or eight utility folks to broaden the inputs, both of which are certainly valid.

RACHAEL SACK: Yeah, that's a good point. So, as we discuss this, let's keep that in mind and what you think is most helpful here. So, Nadia, Laura, and then John.

NADIA EL MALLAKH: I echo Michael, the comment on affordability. I mean, I think that trickles through everything, especially when you're thinking about how rates are structured. There's affordability of the vehicle. There's affordability of the infrastructure. There's affordability of the grid buildout, et cetera, rate structures. So, there's a lot there.

And I am excited to see the grid integration and coordination scoring what it is because I do think we've all mentioned the different ways that these come together, but that is going to be very critical. And I would say customers sharing data fleets, letting us know where they're going to be doing build out, those types of things, we haven't really talked about that that much, but that's critical.

My final comment is, although there are over 3,000 utilities, typically there's a lot of collaboration in the industry. And when you have an industry trend like, the clean energy transition, we can move quickly as an industry. So, we are not the number one source of emissions in the US anymore. And that is a transformational action that occurred with utilities learning and partnering with each other. So, I would just note that I think we can take some best practices and export them.

RACHAEL SACK: Thank you. Laura.

LAURA CHACE: Hi. Yes, I wanted to just add a comment on—and full transparency, I voted for it but open in real-time data needs actually think underpin every single category, every single priority here. And I actually think it needs to be nested in any of the priorities that are chosen because much like the comment made earlier about if we don't have a supply chain, we don't have electric vehicles, if we actually don't have data, open data, shared data, it's going to affect the effectiveness of charging infrastructure. It's going to affect the integration with the grid. It's going to affect equitable EV adoption. It's going to affect consumer acceptance and experience around charging stations. So, I think it really actually should nest within any of their priorities.

And then the second thing I just want to say, I'm not sure if anybody else is sort of struggling with this, but it's hard for me to make a good recommendation on what I want to see in the reports or maybe even what subcommittees I want to see if I'm not totally sure yet where the priorities are. So, I just wanted to see if we're going to have a chance to, when we finally say, OK, here are the priorities we're choosing, here are the subcommittees that we've identified what's missing, and then get to the reports.

Because I feel like it's a little bit backwards engineered if we try to say right now what we want in the reports but we haven't even necessarily gotten agreement on the priorities. So, I just wanted to bring that up and see if there's a way to have a chance to inform that after we've gotten agreement on the priorities.

RACHAEL NEALER: Yeah, I'll just take a second to answer your question directly, Laura. This is an ongoing process. So absolutely. This is our first way of trying to just identify some of the priorities, some of the potential subcommittees, report topics all at once, but we have a lot of homework to do to go back and kind of untangle, like what are the priorities, and what are the potential subcommittees that could support those priorities? What reports do we want to see come out of those?

So absolutely, we'll have plenty of opportunities to provide your feedback as working group members. We're certainly not going to—or you guys are the ones that have to approve this plan altogether. And so, we'll have many discussions. This is just how we started thinking about getting down to the mechanics because there are some differences between the subcommittees versus the reports. And so, we want to make sure that we're aligning the priorities to the right mechanism, for example.

What I also see coming out of this discussion that I think is—that you've pointed out and I think a number of people have pointed out at this point, it seems like we have—and I actually like how Henrik kind of laid out these different priorities and then vertical priorities and then maybe some horizontal priorities that cut across them. Sounds like we have some second order priorities, which are things like goals and accountability, equity and accessibility, affordability, data.

All of those things kind of need to be integrated to any topic, any priority that we decide that we want to investigate further. And so, we can take that back and kind of refresh what that looks like, is maybe what are the topical priorities and then a little bit more information around what do we want to investigate in depth in those priorities. And then I think it becomes a question of, do we need a subcommittee to support this or do we want this to turn out to be a report? And how do we balance all of that?

LAURA CHACE: Thank you. I appreciate that. And know that we—I appreciate you coming to us with proposals. Absolutely. Just wanted to share that feedback. Thanks.

RACHAEL NEALER: Yeah, thank you, Laura.

RACHAEL SACK: Thanks. While we listen to our final three comments before we may have to switch gears, if I could just ask the results of the report polling to be seen so you guys can take a look at that. I mean, clearly there are common trends across all of these. But as we've discussed, there's a lot of interrelationships across them. So, we'll do Joung, then Mayor Giles, and Cassie.

JOUNG LEE: Thank you. So, I think one of the things that I'd love to see the working group prioritize is the development of the workforce necessary to successfully deploy EV charging infrastructure. From the state DOT perspective, whether it's our own state employees or our private sector partners, even for your more conventional infrastructure delivery, serious shortages that we're facing in terms of the adequate workforce necessary to meet the sky-high expectations.

And especially on EV, there are so many moving pieces here, of which all of that can't really come together without the necessary workforce for the initial capital deployment. But also, for the ongoing operation, the 97% uptime, I mean that's a needed goal but also an ambitious goal. So that's something that I would certainly ask for the group to look into.

RACHAEL SACK: Thank you. Perhaps another thread across several topics. Mayor Giles.

JOHN GILES: Thank you. I just want to underline what Laura and Rachael said, having to do with the priorities. Some of these things that we've identified are absolute priorities, like the need for good data, but they aren't necessarily properly addressed in their own subcommittee. They should be, as they said, nested in everything that we do.

And the survey instrument I think was a little off. When we have other was one of the largest groups and I don't think it really picked up on what the suggestions were of the others. And not surprisingly, I'm going to say the word safety again as something that I think I've heard a few times and ought to be considered as a potential subcommittee.

RACHAEL SACK: And I'll add that I totally recognize we've not—just visually, we're not able to see the other comments easily and dissect them like you can with the graphs you see here. So, it will be part of that homework Rachael talked about to really look at those other items and see how to address them. What more do we need to ask all of you to help inform that? So much more work to look at these results.
Cassie, I see you have your hand raised.

CASSIE POWERS: Thanks. I am echoing what Joung identified the need for workforce development support. And I think in addition to the EV infrastructure and all the workforce that's going to be needed to roll that out to support workforce development initiatives and a trained workforce for the electric system and grid enhancement needs, one of the things we've been hearing out of some of the regional meetings that NASEO and AASHTO held earlier this year with the states and electric system partners is the significant backlog of transformers.

Some utilities are quoting 18 to 24 months as well as other components, all of which will be needed if there are major infrastructure banks that are going in. And so, this is likely something that will be a component of each of the committees or the priority areas. But the need for a trained workforce and recommendations there is strong.

RACHAEL SACK: Thank you. So, let's go back. Thank you for scrolling our other responses. I think it would be helpful to look at some of that gray bar of the charging infrastructure because that is fairly high here, especially on the reports after grid integration. Rachael, is there anything you want to mention on this?

RACHAEL NEALER: Yeah. So, I see charging infrastructure. That could mean a lot of things right now. We've got different types of charging infrastructure that's going in. The one thing that I would like to encourage the working group to think about is the investments in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, for example, are already on their way out the door.

And so, what I'm seeing here as a high need to talk about EV charging, I just want to untangle a little bit about what that means because I'll just be very transparent that it might be difficult to affect or impact the investments that are already going in the ground.

So, I just want to talk about what that EV charging bar means to each one of you because if it means taking a look at what charging infrastructure is needed beyond the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, I think that makes a lot of sense. But if we're talking about trying to provide recommendations on the programs that are already being deployed, I just have a little bit of concern around that because I just—
I want to make sure that the recommendations that the federal—or that the federal consensus group here is putting forward to the government are things that can be actionable. So, I think, just to that timing aspect, I think we just want to unpack that a little bit. And maybe we can do a little bit here, but then we might have to take that as a homework assignment as well.

RACHAEL SACK: OK. Let's spend about five minutes. So, if people can be as distinct as possible just to start this conversation, we'll start with Dean and then John.

DEAN BUSHEY: Yeah, thank you. I think that's a very interesting discussion about the timing of when we can affect charging infrastructure. Obviously, you've seen the news, and we've all seen the news, about charging infrastructure standards changing almost on a weekly basis. And even with the NEVI rollout, it changed from CCS to NACS standards, or a combined of the two, which we completely support.

Again, we're energy agnostic. We really want to provide what the customer needs. But those standards are changing. And I think we should understand that as those standards are changing, it's going to impact the future of standards. What does the customer need? What can we provide at this point to look into the future on what does 2026, '27, and '28, which I think is still going to be a ramp up, look like?

RACHAEL SACK: Thank you. John.

JOHN BOZELLA: OK. Yeah, thanks. Yeah. I'm not worried about trying to change the dynamic with regard to NEVI funding, where it's going, how it deploys. I think it's a critically important first step. And I do think it helps draw private money and those types of things.

I think we have a more fundamental problem, which is that's not going to be enough. And I don't think we have adequately gotten our arms around how quickly and how broadly and how fundamentally we're going to need it. And so, again, I'm starting to sound like a broken record on this, I want to know what our metric is. Like is it public charging spots per new vehicles sold or registration or whatever?

Like if you look at the ratios that we look at—and quick advertisement, we published something called Get Connected and we track this—we're going in the wrong direction. Like new vehicle—percent of new vehicle, light duty vehicles is growing much more quickly than charging infrastructure is. So, like something's wrong with this picture. And so, like we have to get our arms around that, number one.

Number two, I think we have to understand accessibility and we have to understand urban-rural. We have to understand a whole bunch of these things. Like this is fundamental. And I'm going to suggest to you that the market will be affected by the lack of infrastructure. It's the number one issue at dealerships. Where can I charge this thing? And so, like we have a massive set of issues to grapple with here.

RACHAEL SACK: Thank you. OK, Cassie. You are our final comment on this section for now. There'll be plenty of opportunity in future discussions to dive deeper into this as well, but Cassie.

CASSIE POWERS: Thanks. Yeah, a couple of comments. One, I guess I see the other, what is it, eight or nine options as supporting charging infrastructure rollout. So, it's almost that is an umbrella over a lot of these different areas. Beyond that, also to your point, Rachael, I think of the IIJA infusion into the market as a catalyst.

And so it'd be interesting to see what this group could do to make recommendations for how the public sector funds, which are generous but limited, might be leveraged with private sector funds and others to really meet some of the national network rollout goals. I know that there was the annual report that came out that identifies what level of investment might be needed if we could go a step further and really try to figure out what policy initiatives matched with private sector investment might be needed to achieve those goals. That would be important.

And then I also look at this as bleeding into freight electrification. I think that we kind of by default think about these terms in terms of passenger vehicles. But there are a lot of questions still about what level of both public and private sector investment is needed to support freight electrification. And so that may be just another way to segment the charging infrastructure priority.

RACHAEL NEALER: Awesome. Thank you guys for that clarification. I think that's really helpful. I just wanted to make sure that we weren't too narrowly focusing on the charging infrastructure that's going in the ground now, but sounds like we're being a little bit more expansive in making sure that ultimately through public and private investments, we're getting to a place where everyone can ride and drive electric and feel confident about it. Thank you.

RACHAEL SACK: All right. Thank you, everyone, for the discussion. I know it was brief and there's probably a lot more to uncover. But like Rachael mentioned, this is our preliminary way to gather information so we can propose some organization in moving forward. But we're really just the tip of the iceberg here so we can learn more and uncover some of those relationships, those threads, and figure out a plan forward. So, this is all to be continued.

But at this point, we are going to switch gears to our public comment portion of today's meeting. At this time, we're going to open the meeting to hear the public comments. And I'll call on those by name based on the order of those who pre-registered and marked yes for the potential for a comment.

For those of you that this applies to in the public, each of you will have two minutes to share your comment. I will be strict in adhering to those two minutes since we have limited time. When I call your name, please unmute yourself and turn your video on. And if we do not make it through all of our pre-registered commenters– if we do make it through and time allows, then we will open it up further by asking those to raise their hands.

But if we are unable to get through everyone who did pre-register, I just want to remind you that you can submit written statements to the working group's email address, which is or via email to Rachael Nealer as described in the Federal Register notice. And that information will be shared in the chat for our public today. Any statements that are received by October 3 will be included in the meeting notes that will be posted to the website.

OK. At this time, I'm going to go through our pre-registration list. And again, please adhere to the two minutes. Glenn Cook, you are first on our list. If you are present, can you please unmute and turn your video on. Glenn Cook.

JULIE NIXON: Glen is not—

SARA EMMONS: Glenn and Sheryl, the first two on the registration list are not within the meeting, so you can move on to the third.

RACHAEL SACK: Thank you very much. Eric Gilliland.

ERIC GILLILAND: Hello, folks. Can you hear me at least?


ERIC GILLILAND: OK, great. Good afternoon. My name is Eric Gilliland. I'm the Vice President of Operations for re:Charge. I want to thank the EV working group for the opportunity to comment today. Re: Charge is a young company developing public charging stations for electric bikes and scooters, and we firmly believe that electric micromobility has the potential to significantly reduce the impact of the transportation sector on climate change.

However, due to current federal regulations, electric bikes and scooters are not considered electric vehicles or even zero emissions vehicles so are therefore not eligible for most federal programs that are funding transportation electrification. To be clear, the electrification of cars, trucks, and buses is critical to combating climate change, but the current high cost of many EVs and the challenges of charging in multi-unit buildings risk leaving lower income communities behind in the EV revolution.

Electric micromobility, such as e-bikes and scooters, both in shared mobility systems and as privately owned vehicles, can transform cities, promote physical activity, and confront issues of equity, all while addressing greenhouse gas emissions. However, we also hope this can be done safely, as Mayor Giles had emphasized.

EVs tend to be heavier and accelerate faster than comparable ICE vehicles. And so, we also encourage the working group to have safety concerns of the non-driving public in your minds as you conduct your important work. And we wish you all the best in this and stand ready to support you in any way we can. Thanks for your time.

RACHAEL SACK: Thank you for your comment. Next, I'd like to invite Brandt Hertenstein to unmute and turn your camera on. Brandt Hertenstein. OK. Next on our list is Justin Brightharp. Justin Brightharp.

JUSTIN BRIGHTHARP: Yes. Can you hear me?


JUSTIN BRIGHTHARP: Hi. Good afternoon, everyone. I'm Justin Brightharp with the Southeast Energy Efficiency Alliance. We are 501(c)(3) regional energy efficiency organization dedicated to energy efficiency principles in the Southeast. Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you all today.
I just wanted to highlight the– kind of aligned with what's been said today, wanted to highlight the importance of resilience in this conversation, not just from managing load on the grid, but also as it relates to natural disasters and preparation for that. As you talked about workforce today, that we think about not high school students as well and middle school students, not just two-year and four-year college programs. What does that kind of pipeline look like?

I know you mentioned the importance of actionable actions for the government. I would encourage the opportunity to look at the impact of the current federal programs and the two laws that are coming out and how to present that to the public.

And then one final part is the equity piece. As you think about equity kind of looking at policy initiatives, not just the equity of the personal vehicles, but equity about all types of electrification opportunities as well as policies. And so, for example, I saw you have the user fee on that list. Important to realize that user fees are a different collection method as opposed to the gas tax that general public is used to.
So, looking at alternatives and creating flexibility on how to research what's out there. And I would encourage some state outreach because some states are kind of looking at that right now. But wanted to thank you for the opportunity to present to you all and share my comments, and looking forward to supporting you all in this effort. Thank you.

RACHAEL SACK: Thank you very much. Next on our list is Colleen Quinn.

COLLEEN QUINN: Hi, everyone. Can you hear me?


COLLEEN QUINN: OK. Great to be with everyone today and very, very pleased that you all are organized and moving forward. This is a very important moment for the industry. And thanks to Rachael and everyone at the Joint Office and the DOE and the DOT that have worked really hard to bring this all together.

I'm here on behalf of the National EV Charging Initiative. Some of you, in fact, are members and have participated in our work. And I just wanted to endorse the work that you are doing and offer, in many ways, anything we can do to support. The other thing I wanted to mention is that we have launched this year, and will be working on this topic in 2024, something we're calling the Energize agenda or the Energize campaign.

And it aligns very well with at least your initial priorities that you all are talking about today because we are going to be focusing on state utility policy with a four-pillar agenda, which includes reducing upfront costs, which has been talked about today, targeting underserved markets and disadvantaged communities, increasing fuel cost savings, and speeding the energization of charging infrastructure. We are going to be passing– we are going to be promoting set of model bills. So we'll be in touch with all of you as we continue this work, but it aligns very importantly with the work that you're doing. Thank you.

RACHAEL SACK: Thank you. Trevor Dean.

TREVOR DEAN: Yeah. Hi, everyone. Can you hear me?


TREVOR DEAN: Apologies. I'm having some technical difficulties. I was just joining the Senator Cortez Masto from Nevada was one of the authors of this provision. So just wanted to thank all you guys for all of your hard work and commitment to this. I've been on and off throughout the afternoon and it sounds like we're getting exactly what we were hoping for, which is a lot of smart people trying to solve the challenges and provide on the opportunities that we're going to need to take advantage of here but making sure that we align as much of this, whether it's on a regulatory front, whether it's on a best place to put funding front, or the best advice to Congress and how we're going to make this transition. And it sounds like you guys are off to a good start, and I appreciate all your work.

RACHAEL SACK: Thank you. Next is Dan Murphy. Dan Murphy. OK. Next is Amy Day. Amy Day. OK. Next is Adrienne Summers.

ADRIENNE SUMMERS: Hello. I am listening because I represent the American Association of Community Colleges, which is called AACC. We are developing an EV hub, which includes partners Tesla and Panasonic. We are developing apprenticeship programs and partnership with community colleges to train with the workforce to meet the EV training needs. And I'm happy to connect. My email is, which I'll put in the chat for the moderators.

And our focus is charging stations, entry level manufacturing training, battery production, municipal needs, such as electric buses and light duty trucks. And then, of course, our focus is underserved and underrepresented populations for a diverse workforce. Thank you.

RACHAEL SACK: Thank you. Let me just go back and see if Dan Murphy or Amy Day are available to unmute. OK. Michael Kervin. Michael Kervin. OK. At this point, I would like to invite other members of the public to raise your hand if you would like to participate in our public comment portion of today's event. We'll give everyone a minute to please raise your hand for those interested in providing a comment.

OK, I believe Fernando Palma has his hand up. Can we unmute Fernando? Fernando, can you unmute yourself? Let's see if that has worked out. Fernando.

SARA EMMONS: Fernando dropped their hand.

RACHAEL SACK: OK. Vanessa Warheit.

VANESSA WARHEIT: That's right. Can you hear me?


VANESSA WARHEIT: Awesome. Thank you so much. My name is Vanessa Warheit. I'm the national lead for the Electric Vehicle Charging For All coalition. We're a nonprofit coalition representing the voices of organizations, elected officials, and residents committed to ensuring equitable access to light duty EV charging for everyone, regardless of the kind of housing they live in. We currently host the National EV Building Codes Working Group and we're very excited about this working group and appreciate the opportunity to speak with you.

We have two recommendations as you formulate your working plan. First, to ensure the needs of the American consumer of light duty EVs and EV charging are accounted for. I just lost my place. We strongly—there I am. We strongly encourage you to extend additional invitations to this working group to organizations representing consumers and particularly EV drivers and multifamily tenants' rights.

If there is one economic indicator the American consumer understands—and I believe that the gentleman from AAI referred to this earlier—it's the cost of gasoline. And to make this transition a success, we need to extend the savings that come with EVs equitably to everyone. If this administration is truly serious about equity, we need to ensure that the voice of the consumer is included from the beginning. As they say, if you don't have a seat at the table, you're likely to be on the menu.

Secondly, we encourage you to consider EV readiness building codes, and in particular equitable residential building codes for multifamily housing as a significant tool in building out our national light duty charging infrastructure. This is because when it comes to fueling, EVs are more like our cell phones than our gas cars. Over 80% of light duty EV charging happens at home. At home, drivers can take advantage of long dwell times to charge on lower power at a much more affordable price.

On the flip side, lack of home-based charging is one of the biggest barriers to EV adoption. This is particularly true for residents of multifamily housing who are more likely to be lower wealth and/or from communities of color. So we also strongly encourage you to factor the need for equitable home-based charging at residential utility rates into your planning. And I'll just leave you with one way—

RACHAEL SACK: Thank you. Thank you.


RACHAEL SACK: Thanks. All right. Next on our list is Shannon Dulaney.

SHANNON DULANEY: Hi, everyone. My name is Shannon Dulaney. I'm the Urban Development Director at itselectric. We are a curbside level two EV charging company headquartered in Brooklyn. We are purpose-built for the 40 million drivers across the US who park on the street and who don't have access to a garage or a driveway where they can charge their cars overnight. We rapidly install level two curbside chargers without needing to connect directly to the utility, and we share a portion of the revenue with the host property.

Because of the cost and time savings associated with our behind the meter approach, we don't need to ask for funding from our city partners or our host properties. So, we really think that this behind the meter approach that combines that with the curbside charging is a really important aspect of solving the charging crisis and providing that charging for people who live in multi-family homes or are renters or who just otherwise don't have access to those garages or driveways.

I was really happy to hear the conversation today and just the people who were talking about the need for continued look at the charging needs that we have. So I would just encourage that charging to be part of the working group going forward, especially as it relates to these urban populations who are not driving very far distances. So it would be a great population to switch to EVs. Don't have that range anxiety, but do have this access anxiety that we need to solve to get to 100% electric. Thanks so much.

RACHAEL SACK: Thank you. Our last public comment for today is Joe Nickerson.

JOE NICKERSON: Yeah. Hi, everyone. My name is Joe Nickerson. I'm the Director of Government Affairs for Beam Global. I'll keep my comments short. I think one thing for the subcommittees to consider would be energy storage and energy resiliency. At Beam, we believe that at least 25% of EV infrastructure should be off grid so that in the events of grid failures or natural disasters, EV drivers are still able to get the charges that they need.

So, I'll just leave it at that. And then I'll also say thank you to you guys for your great work and wish the EV working group the best of luck moving forward.

RACHAEL SACK: Thank you. This concludes the public comment portion of our meeting, so I'm going to hand it back over to Rachael Nealer.

RACHAEL NEALER: Thank you so much, Rachael. All right. We are going to talk about next steps and then wrap up before the top of the hour. So, I will share my screen again here on the next steps.
All right. So, this meeting was our first opportunity to share the proposed priority ideas for your feedback. So, thank you so much for thinking about this in advance, giving us your well thought out feedback. Really appreciate it. Now it's on us to go back and do a little bit of homework and kind of pull this together and something that we can share back with all of you.

By next meeting, we're hoping to determine some clear priorities for the EV working group with the survey results that you gave us, as well as the comments. We will also be posting this meeting to our website for anyone that wants to view it again, if you didn't get enough of it the first time around.
And then our next meeting we are hoping to do an in-person kickoff event. Everyone in-person in DC and really debut the priorities of the EV working group. We are hoping to have both the Secretary of Transportation and Secretary of Energy there. They are officially the chairs of this committee. And so we have worked around their schedule to try to get them both there in-person.

That date as of now is the 24th of October. As you can imagine, getting all of this turned around, including invitational travel, which will flag for each one of the members here, is going to be a tall order. So we have asked for additional availability in December so that we might have a little bit more time to process this. But for now, we have the tentative date of the 24th of October. We're going to try our best to turn it around, but it might get moved back to sometime in December. If it does get moved back to December, we'll let you know as soon as possible.

So, I just want to flag a couple actions for you guys, is to please put a hold on your calendar for Tuesday the 24th. We will probably have a multi-day event, but we haven't decided on whether that's going to be the 23rd and 24th or 24th and 25th. But at a minimum, I think holding the 24th would be helpful.
And then we will be reaching out from our colleagues at the Volpe Center, who are helping to organize this EV working group, are going to reach out to begin invitational travel. So, the EV working group will pay for the travel for you folks to come to DC for this meeting. So, we'll just need some information from each of you to get that kicked off.

Other than that, I will say thank you so much to everyone who contributed to this meeting. That's the members, that's everyone who sat in on the public side as well, and especially the folks who put in the effort to get this meeting organized and up and running. So, thank you to Sara Emmons, Julie Nixon, Rachael Sack, and our Enron colleagues who have run the webinar for us. So, thank you very much. Really appreciate your time and effort, and we very much look forward to continuing to work with you.