Three US Lawmakers Call On USPS To Freeze Oshkosh Vehicle Contract

As a follow-up to a previous topic regarding new USPS vehicles:

https://www.autonews.com/technology...ero-headline

Where were those wackos during the review process for awarding the contract? There is already a requirement to have part of the fleet electric (no percentage of total found) and for vehicles to be able to be retrofitted to electric as the tech improves.

This just delays the whole replacement process further, where USPS already has had to replace completely dead Grummans with non-electric mini-vans. A familiar sight around here is a Grumman postal vehicle on a flatbed tow truck.

I am not sure how a term of "whackos" applies but given the value it is not unexpected that some would challenge the decision. If the decision went another way, another group would challenge.

The Government wrote the performance/technical requirements of the Contract and the bidders did exactly what they were asked in order to not be thrown out as non-responsive. Now "somebody" comes along to question everything? So typical and one reason why Federal contractors build in extra monies or are aggressive Change Order pursuers.

One reason why all electric was not pursued in the Government RFP was that there was no budget for the estimated additional 6 billion dollars needed to fulfill that requirement not to mention all of the infrastructure upgrades necessary to accommodate charging the vehicles. Hey, its only money and they are printing it at a record clip.

I really do not understand the point of EVs (electric vehicles) although I admit I like the looks and performance of some of the hot ones.

Being eco-friendly is much more than just what comes out of the tailpipe but many folks seem to ignore this fact. The manufacturing of EVs can produce more CO2 than internal combustion vehicles due to the batteries. For example PoleStar recently acknowledged that its PoleStar 2 has a 26-ton carbon footprint from the factory which is higher than its sister company's Volvo gasoline powered HC40 SUV manufacturing footprint. And then you also have the planned obsolescence of EVs (batteries being as costly to replace as the value of the car) and the impact of the battery disposal. And of course during its lifetime you have to charge your EV and are consuming the carbon footprint that comes with that. Meanwhile China, with their environmental history, has already locked up vast amounts of the lithium battery industry.
Don

To wrap things up:

https://www.motortrend.com/news/new...ervice-usps/

That article (biases notwithstanding) makes me wonder who's getting paid under the table...

Yup.

I tried to find a nonbiased source, but it is impossible now. Motor Trend. Go figure.

Money and politics affect most decisions. Just as the USPS plays games with the delivery statistics, I expect them to also manipulate data hat supports whatever decision they want to make just as gas and EV proponents do. Organizations and people seek data that supports their views.

Given the fuel economy, it surely is not going to reduce that aspect of their ongoing operating expense.

Agree that the Postal Office department as a LONG history of being a political football.

But while a lot of people like to yap about DeJoy, he has helped negotiated the bi-partisan Postal Service Reform Act (passed 342-92 of the US House of Representatives). This Bill eliminates the USPS having to prepay retiree health care costs, save 50 billion dollars, and also eliminates the 57 billion dollars of on-paper debt from previous prepaying. In other words, will make the USPS solvent for the first time in recent memory (divisive folks will probably not recognize this). It moves USPS employees into Medicare (like the rest of us). These vehicles, with their air conditioning and safety attributes, may have been a bone thrown to the Postal Union and that value should be considered.
Don

The answer is always to throw more money at it. The delivery times, at least for my area, continue to deteriorate. I understand the Herculean effort to dig out of a financial poop storm that Congress created over the decades but none of it is customer centric whatsoever. In fact, it is all about saving the postal service rather than improving the postal service service. Would EV's make a difference in getting my mail to me on time? Not at all. Neither do air conditioned fossil fuel burning vehicles.

As letter mail volume continues to decline and package volume increases the USPS is an also-ran. A solid 90% plus of my packages come FedEx and UPS and are almost always on time although lately the final delivery execution can get ugly, with a continuous flow of new and inept drivers, due to issues finding qualified employees.

I am pretty sure that 'customer centric' is an antonym of 'monopoly'.
Don

Yes

I do think when another longer arc history of the USPS is written years hence, the 2022 Postal Service Reform Act will be recognized a major turning point and accomplishment under Mr. DeJoy's aegis. That is, assuming it passes the Senate when it comes up there. Schumer says it looks to pass and I believe Biden is prepped to sign it.

I say this as one social liberal/divisive/fiscal conservative.

The vehicle procurement is a snafu and I look forward one day to a thorough dissection of the timeline and influence brought to bear on this -- likely will require very deep dives into the archives of email among procurement officers and spec writers and some others.
That these vehicles will have an average mpg of 14 appalls me on multiple grounds.

Going all electric would have seemed to be a no-brainer given that these are low speed vehicles. They should have a tremendous range. Ford is supplying the engines and transmissions and already has the electric F150 platform components in their supply chain.

In general I would agree, Rogdcam.
Densely populated areas in close proximity to the post office it would seem to be quite sensible to go all-electric.
True - there need to be charging stations installed at those post offices, but that should not be a terrible obstacle and the cost will be spread over years....

Somewhat more rural areas, where range and access to charging are issues mentioned as reasons to not convert the fleet to electric -- one would think they could've gone hybrid for a percentage of the fleet that served those customers.

I think it's a failure of vision, but it also appears to involve some failures in their cost analysis projections.

Edited to add: It's easy to be a Monday morning quarterback, but I hope for the USPS sake and that of the US gov't and tax/rate -payer that this can be re-examined before a final award.