GSA Refuses to Identify Models in Fed's 17,205 Detroit Purchase

Robert Farago
by Robert Farago

Good afternoon,

I am responding on behalf of my colleague Bob Lesino [PR for the General Services Administration] and at this time we can’t provide any other information than what was in the press release.

Thank you.

MaryAnne

Gee, I wonder if this has anything to do with the country of origin for these vehicles . . . TTAC will now file a Freedom of Information Act request. Press release after the jump.

WASHINGTON — The U.S. General Services Administration is one step closer to fulfilling its responsibilities outlined in President Obama’s economic recovery legislation. On June 1, 2009, the agency ordered 14,105 fuel efficient vehicles for the Federal fleet using $210 million of funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA).

This brings the total number of fuel efficient vehicles ordered by GSA using ARRA funds to 17,205 at a cost of $287 million. The breakdown includes:

2,933 Chrysler vehicles for $53 million;
7,924 Ford vehicles for $129 million; and
6,348 General Motors vehicles for $105 million.

“This order represents just one of the multiple ways we are helping our customers meet their economic recovery and green government initiatives,” said Acting Administrator Paul F. Prouty.

On April 9, 2009, GSA announced that by June 1, 2009, it would spend about $285 million in ARRA funds for commercially available fuel efficient vehicles. On April 14, 2009, GSA ordered 3,100 fuel efficient hybrid vehicles, worth $77 million. By September 30, 2009, GSA will order $15 million worth of advanced technology buses and electric vehicles for use in the Federal fleet.

“GSA is committed to spending Recovery dollars quickly and wisely,” said Commissioner James A. Williams of GSA’s Federal Acquisition Service. “Simultaneously, we are focused on acquiring vehicles that will provide long-term environmental benefits and savings by increasing the fuel efficiency of the Federal fleet.”

Each new fuel efficient vehicle replaces, on a one-for-one basis, operational motor vehicles in the federal inventory that met replacement standards. Each new vehicle will have a higher miles-per-gallon (MPG) rating than the one it replaces.


Robert Farago
Robert Farago

More by Robert Farago

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 13 comments
  • Holydonut Holydonut on Jun 11, 2009

    We might as well all submit to the GSA FOIA department... strength in numbers? http://www.gsa.gov/Portal/gsa/ep/contentView.do?contentType=GSA_OVERVIEW&contentId=11388&noc=T All FOIA requests for the GSA must be sent to the mailing address or, alternatively, to the email address shown below: General Services Administration FOIA Requester Service Center (ACMC) 1800 F Street, NW, Room 3116 Washington, DC 20405 (202) 501-2727 Fax EFOIA: gsa.foia@gsa.gov

  • CarPerson CarPerson on Jun 12, 2009

    Ask for a breakdown where the cars are going and you will get nowhere. They will go to the department heads for their commuter car instead of to the people in the field putting in 25K miles a year. Another government pork perk.

  • Jalop1991 take longer than expected.Uh-huh. Gotcha. Next step: acknowledging that the fantasies of 2020 were indeed fantasies, and "longer than expected" is 2024 code word for "not gonna happen at all".But we can't actually say that, right? It's like COVID. You remember that, don't you? That thing that was going to kill the entire planet unless you all were good little boys and girls and strapped yourself into your living room and never left, just like the government told you to do. That thing you're now completely ignoring, and will now deny publicly that you ever agreed with the government about.Take your "EV-only as of 2025" cards from 2020 and put them in the same file with your COVID shot cards.
  • Jalop1991 Every state. - Alex Roy
  • CanadaCraig My 2006 300C SRT8 weighs 4,100 lbs. The all-new 2024 Dodge Charge EV weighs 5,800 lbs. Would it not be fair to assume that in an accident the vehicles these new Chargers hit will suffer more damage? And perhaps kill more people?
  • Akila Hello Everyone, I found your blog very informative. If you want to know more about [url=
  • Michael Gallagher I agree to a certain extent but I go back to the car SUV transition. People began to buy SUVs because they were supposedly safer because of their larger size when pitted against a regular car. As more SUVs crowded the road that safety advantage began to dwindle as it became more likely to hit an equally sized SUV. Now there is no safety advantage at all.
Next