EV Charging After the One Big Beauiful Bill

This evVG Vision Report examines expiring federal tax credits, EV policy recalibration and high infrastructure costs that challenge adoption.

Recalibrating the Road Ahead: EV Charging After the One Big Beautiful Bill evVG VISION REPORT NO. 4 SEPTEMBER 2025

evVG MEMBERS

Kaysey England City of Phoenix Aviation Department

Gabe Klein U.S. Joint Office of Energy & Transportation (former)

Srijata Chattopadhyay Shell Recharge

Garrett Fitzgerald Smart Electric Power Alliance

Tom Healey Nouria Energy Corporation

John Kwon CATL

Deb Peck Kelleher Alliance for Clean Energy NY

Jessica Stoll Lowery Project Manager / Climate Mayors

Chris Normandeau FirstService Energy

Kimberly Okafor Trillium - A Love’s Company

Darren Palmer Ford Motor Company

Francisco Pineda The New School

FACILITATOR/ SPEAKER

FACILITATOR

Laura Renger CalETC

Janine Robar State of Michigan

Sophia Schuster Michigan EIBC

Jay Smith Charge Ahead Partnership

Bonnie Trowbridge Drive Clean Colorado

Fred Yonghabi Sr. Con Edison

VISION GROUP NETWORK CO-FOUNDERS

Mike Austin Executive Editor, Road and Track Magazine

Nathan Niese Managing Director & Partner, Boston Consulting Group

Myra Kressner Kressner Strategy Group

Eva Strasburger StrasGlobal/Compliance Safe

Roy Strasburger StrasGlobal/Compliance Safe

The main topics in this evVG Vision Report:

We are Electric Vehicles Vision Group (evVG), a group of invited stakeholders from across the EV industry who have volunteered our time to help our fellow retailers, solution and product providers, and public and private sector professionals. The only reason we gather is to discuss, debate and share our experiences and ideas. Each of us is offering our personal opinions. We are not looking for “group think.” We make our conversations available to everyone in the industry through evVG Vision Reports. These reports will help you better understand current challenges, solutions, and opportunities while giving you access to different opinions and perspectives. Electric Vehicles Vision Group is part of the Vision Group Network, whose mission is to gather the best minds in the industry, put them in a virtual room, and let the ideas and opinions develop. This evVG Vision Report is comprised of multiple parts: evVG Views is a summary of the conversation with additional resources. The full meeting transcript and the presentation recording and slides are online and searchable by topics. We include the full transcript so that you can be in the room with us, rather than only having access to selected quotes and paraphrasing.

Impact of the 2025 Federal Budget Reconciliation on Energy and Climate

Big Picture: Policy and Funding Implications

• Will Policy Changes Impact Commercial EV Adoption? • Funding Challenges for Charging Infrastructure and

Manufacturing • Tariff Impacts

Success or Failure: Nationwide Charging Network Rollout

• State Versus Federal Programs and Variations • NEVI Program Implementation and Expectations

Consumer Adoption and Habits

www.vgnsharing.com

evVG

VIEWS AN ELECTRIC VEHICLES VISION GROUP DISCUSSION

The August 2025 Electric Vehicles Vision Group (evVG) virtual meeting featured an overview of new and deleted U.S. energy policies and funding, followed by a discussion speculating infrastructure advancement and consumer behaviors considering these changes and the political climate.

www.vgnsharing.com

Niese opened his presentation on OB3 (One Big Beautiful Bill) by framing it as a “recalibration” of U.S. energy and climate policy toward a short-term horizon, reminiscent of pre-IRA conditions. The budget reconciliation bill, President Trump’s 2025 domestic policy centerpiece which was signed into law in July 2025, sits within a broader context of executive orders and regulatory moves affecting the EPA, tax credits, and emissions rules. He noted that this shift comes alongside an administration focused on “energy dominance” narrowly defined around fossil fuels, rather than the full spectrum of energy needs. Niese outlined three principal areas of change that resulted from passage of OB3 and in Trump executive orders. First were accelerated expirations of IRA tax credits for EVs, solar, and wind, alongside new foreign entity restrictions, particularly impacting renewable energy projects. Second was the rescission of unobligated funds from programs like the Department of Energy’s Loan Program Office, which had supported EV battery supply chains. Third were

The evVG virtual meeting, held on August 6, 2025, was facilitated by Mike Austin , executive editor of Road and Track Magazine , and Nathan Niese , managing director & partner at Boston Consulting Group. Niese kicked off the meeting with his presentation, “Impact of the 2025 Federal Budget Recon - ciliation on Energy and Climate.” Throughout the meeting, members actively engaged in discussion based on their unique perspectives. Impact of the 2025 Federal Budget Reconciliation on Energy and Climate “ What we really have here is a recalibration that takes us to the pre-IRA policy dynamics, which really means you can have not much more than a 2- to 3-year time horizon to invest in the United States, given how much policy continues to shift from one Congressional session to the next. Nathan Niese , Managing Director and Partner, Boston Consulting Group

www.vgnsharing.com

help domestic supply chains. When combined with emission restriction removals both at the state and federal levels, EV adoption and demand isn’t “completely over...but the highs that we might’ve been able to expect will take some reca- libration.” Layered on top are tariff changes that have shifted the economics of energy generation and storage. “Any renewables adoption now has a higher cost,” Niese explained. Yet, supply constraints mean fossil fuel build-out is limited and many utilities are still prioritizing long- term renewable and battery storage strate- gies. Battery storage markets, especially for LFP-based (Lithium Iron Phosphate) systems, are adjusting as domestic production ramps up to offset costly imports from China.

broader shifts in oil, gas, and coal policy. While NEVI (National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure) and IIJA (Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act) funding for EV charging remained untouched, many renewable projects now face urgent time- lines to qualify for incentives, with others likely deprioritized. Transportation programs bore the heaviest blow. The 30D clean vehicle credit, 25E used clean vehicle credit, and 45W commercial clean vehicle credit, will all end in September of 2025, prompting a likely “rush of potential sales” before phase-out. Niese warned that after such incen- tives expire, markets often take 12–18 months to rebound, as seen abroad. He also noted that some manufacturing incentives, like 45X for battery production, were extended, though with added foreign entity restrictions, which should

The following are the Internal Revenue Service codes for the purchase of an electric vehicle and Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle (FCV) for the federal tax credits which are referenced throughout this section and in the online transcript. 30D – Up to $7,500 for a new, qualified plug-in EV or FCV 25E – Up to $4,000 for a previously owned, qualified plug-in EV or FCV 45W – Up to $7,500 for commercial EVs and FCVs of up to 14,000 pounds, and $40,000 for EVs and FCVs over 14,000 pounds 45X – The Advanced Manufacturing Production Credit (AMPTC) to encourage domestic production of clean energy components and critical minerals. Visit the IRS website to learn more about these credits and qualifications.

www.vgnsharing.com

Big Picture: Policy and Funding Implications

Will Policy Changes Impact Commercial EV Adoption? During the presentation, a discussion on consumer and infrastructure incentives found that policy changes, cost realities, and shifting market sentiment were concerning, beginning with the removal of two major incentives: the commercial vehicle federal credit (45W) and various government fleet targets. Niese noted the vanishing target for government fleets. State-level measures such as California’s Clean Fleet Act have also been rolled back or challenged. Without these pillars, adoption drivers for commercial fleets have weakened. Darren Palmer , vice president of electric vehicle programs at Ford Motor Company, underscored that “there’s effectively no positive credit to get there and then no requirement to do that.” He added that the impact is compounded by the unexpected expense of charging infrastructure for commercial vehicles, with some customers discovering costs as high as $15,000 to install Level 2 chargers. These higher costs force fleets to reassess the total cost of ownership, often concluding that the payback period is too long without

commercial and retail decision-making, noting that “it makes complete sense” that incentives were never the sole reason to invest in charging. For retailers, as with fleets, other factors often outweigh the presence or absence of credits. Turning to the truck stop and heavy-duty segment, Kimberly Okafor , general manager of zero emissions for Trillium and Love’s Travel Stops, said the passenger vehicle EV charging credit was “really nice to have” but not a deciding factor in their investments. With expira- tion looming, the priority is to install as many chargers as possible before the deadline. However, on the heavy-duty side, total cost of ownership was already a major barrier compared with diesel or CNG/RNG, and the removal of incentives has further dampened interest. “We didn’t have very many fleets knocking on our door...now we’re seeing even less,” she said. Niese reflected that the EV sector is in a period of recalibration. “The euphoria of a couple of years ago” has subsided he said, and it will take time to untangle which slowdowns stem from policy changes versus those from a natural market reset.

incentives. Palmer commented that infrastructure costs may be more damaging than policy rollbacks because even willing adopters are reconsidering. From the perspective of the government sector, Jessica Stoll Lowery , transportation policy advisor at Atlas Public Policy, explained that many government entities relied on the 45W commercial vehicle credit. Without it, “it’s definitely putting a wrench in their financing strategy” and delaying timelines. She said some fleets are still waiting on payments from months-old filings, which has made “it really complicated” and has turned some away from the funding mechanism, if not from EVs entirely. Still, interest remains high, with the shift affecting speed more than commitment. Niese added that some infrastructure investors never factored credits into their initial business cases, meaning deals could still work without them. Lowery agreed, recalling that some government clients were skeptical of the credit’s existence in the first place, using it only as a “nice bonus” for purchasing additional EVs. On the retail side, Jay Smith , executive director at the Charge Ahead Partnership, drew parallels between

www.vgnsharing.com

Funding Challenges for Charging Infrastructure and Manufacturing Incentive funding, equipment choices, and the shifting economics of EV adoption was cited as Tom Healey , VP facilities at Nouria Energy Corporation, explained that grant availability directly shaped investment decisions. With past incentives, it was easier to choose higher-ca- pacity equipment, such as a 320-kilowatt charger, over a smaller 100-kilowatt unit. Now, without comparable funding, the company is “reevaluating” those choices.

storage solutions or battery-to-battery charging poles. All these applications continue to benefit from 45X as a “carrot” designed to reduce battery deployment costs. However, Niese noted that the credit now comes with restrictions tied to “foreign entity of concern” provi - sions. This means manufacturers with certain foreign ownership or licensing, particularly linked to countries like China, are ineligible. Alongside tariffs and executive orders, these measures are reshaping sourcing priorities. “There’s U.S.-based solutions, particularly the ones that are 45X-based, that have been hit and penalized less hard on the stick side and therefore are able to rise to the top,” he said, adding that domestic producers now have a competitive edge despite historically higher costs. Tariff Impacts Tariffs, battery sourcing, and global policy comparisons dominated the exchange on whether tariffs were influ - encing EV infrastructure investment more than the loss of federal incentives. Palmer called the tariff impact on vehicles “huge,” pointing to China’s ability to produce low-cost LFP batteries that make smaller EVs affordable and “good enough” for mainstream adoption. In the U.S., producing batteries at that price point remains difficult, but retaining and leveraging 45X incentives could enable domestic production of high-volume,

only minimal purchases. He relays that customers say, “When the installation of the charger in my depot is costing me too much, I don’t make the TCO anymore. Therefore, I will reduce to a trickle how many more I’m going to buy.” Niese agreed, saying BCG’s analysis had already detected a “meaningful” decline in demand before the latest policy changes, particularly in heavy commercial segments. Light commercial vehicles, such as Ford’s E-Transit, had been more resilient, but are now facing a “double-whammy” from both economic and policy pressures. Palmer added that early adoption had been driven in part by legislative requirements for fleet composition, which pushed operators to start buying well before deadlines. With those rules eased or removed, they’re changing their planned purchases. Roy Strasburger , CEO of StrasGlobal, president of Compliance Safe and Vision Group Network co-founder, asked for clarification on the specific incentives provided under the 45X program for battery development. Niese explained that 45X offers $35 per kilowatt-hour in credits for domestically produced battery cells, plus an additional $10 per kilowatt-hour for battery modules. These components can be used in electric vehicles or stationary storage systems (BESS), and even integrated into EV charging units, either in large, containerized

“ From the perspective of an EV charging station installer, the incentive money does impact our decision making on what type of equipment we’ll put in.

Tom Healey , VP Facilities, Nouria Energy Corporation

Palmer said installation costs have become a deci- sive barrier. Even when vehicles are well-matched to customer use cases and performing as intended, high infrastructure costs have eroded total cost of owner- ship (TCO) to the point where some fleets now plan

www.vgnsharing.com

low-cost models in the next three years. However, Palmer warned the path is “a minefield” of shifting regulations and sourcing rules, with success hinging on companies’ ability to meet evolving requirements. Gabe Klein , former executive director of the U.S. Joint Office of Energy and Transportation, said investor responses are “sort of all over the place.” “ We’re just in a state of uncertainty, and I think that is making it so you either take that long view and you say, “we’re going to count the government out as much as you can and we’re just going to move forward with our long-term plans.” Or you are putting things on hold, including investment, new factories.

“ It’s like when we moved from DVDs to streaming, there was a gap because broadband was slow, and you could say EV charging networks are the same sort of thing. But we didn’t go back to DVDs. We’re not going back to DVDs. It’s not happening.

Gabe Klein , Former Executive Director, U.S. Joint Office of Energy and Transportation

designed to work together, but recent policy rever- sals weakened that strategy. Palmer highlighted how other countries have leaned more on “sticks” than “carrots” to drive EV adoption. China’s costly licensing requirements for gas vehicles, Norway’s heavy taxes on gasoline cars, and similar measures in Europe created strong consumer incentives to go electric. Klein added that such policies reshape market behavior, while U.S. uncertainty pushes consumers and businesses away as the rest of the world advances. Both agreed that the movement from gas powered vehi- cles will change to electric someday, just maybe at a slower rate.

Long-term investors see the current adminis- tration’s changes as temporary and are moving forward, while others have paused or canceled major projects. The greater challenge, Klein argued, is uncertainty and some are exploring public-private partnerships to reduce reliance on grants. Klein noted that while EV adoption will continue, the U.S. risks falling behind China without cohe - sive industrial policy. “We’re not going to be Cuba where everybody’s driving a 1985 Chevy, we’re moving forward,” he declared. He emphasized that the CHIPS Act, Inflation Reduction Act, and Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act had been

Gabe Klein , Former Executive Director, U.S. Joint Office of Energy and Transportation

www.vgnsharing.com

Success or Failure: Nationwide Charging Network Rollout

Washington state provided a counterpoint to Texas’ progress. Klein described conversations with Washington’s transportation leaders who explained that NEVI funding represented only a small fraction of their much larger, $1.2 billion EV charging program. Rather than rushing to deploy chargers with federal dollars, Washington integrated NEVI funds into its broader plans, delaying visible results but aligning with their long-term strategy. He underscored that NEVI was designed to supplement, not replace, the private sector, particularly in rural areas where commercial investment was unlikely without state intervention. General misunderstanding of NEVI’s scope, Klein argued, contributed to public impatience. The program’s 1,100-station target was modest compared to the anticipated 1.28 million chargers needed nationwide by 2030 and many expected rapid nationwide deployments in its early years. Despite challenges with supply chains, infrastruc- ture, and politics, progress was measurable. By the time Klein left his post, 400 stations had been built, with 40,000 ports in motion toward the goal of 500,000 public and private chargers by the end of the decade.

State versus Federal Programs and Variations Shifting federal priorities could open the door for more state-led action on EV incentives, also. Smith suggested that 2026 may prove pivotal, with legisla- tures in states like California potentially introducing or expanding purchase tax credits to offset federal rollbacks. Such moves, Klein cautioned, would come as state budgets are already feeling the strain from clawbacks of federal dollars. Klein also raised the possibility of a broader fiscal and political rift over who controls funding, what he called a poten- tial “interesting cataclysm” in the next two years. While the discussion acknowledged these tensions, Chris Normandeau , director at FirstService Energy, urged caution in framing the issue purely along partisan lines. Using Texas as an example, he pointed out that the state leads the nation in renewable energy production and ranks just behind California in EV adoption, defying the assumption that clean energy growth is solely a

“blue state” priority. Klein agreed that Texas is an anomaly, illustrating how the politics of EV adop- tion and renewable energy are often more complex than the national narrative suggests. NEVI Program Implementation and Expectations Again, Texas emerged as a standout example in the national rollout of EV charging infrastructure, with Klein noting the state’s surprisingly efficient approach to permitting clean energy projects. Coming from his unique position in the federal government, Klein gave a peek into states’ uses and perspectives on federal programs. While many other traditionally conservative states showed little enthusiasm for programs like NEVI, Texas quietly advanced projects without much public fanfare. In contrast, places like Illinois, Washington, Oregon, and California have at times expressed frustration over not seeing propor- tional returns on federal funding.

www.vgnsharing.com

Since the July evVG meeting, the U.S. Department of Transportation updated the NEVI guidelines on August 11, 2025 to streamline the NEVI program implementation. Changes include: • Minimizing the content in state plans to statutory and regulatory requirements. • Simplifying the state plan approval process. • Aligning community engagement with regulatory requirements and reducing consultation requirements to advance projects. • Providing states with flexibility to determine the appropriate distance between stations along alternative fuel corridors to allow for reasonable travel. • Minimizing requirements for states to consider electric grid integration and renewable energy. • Accelerating project delivery by encouraging selection of charging locations where station owners are also the site host. • Eliminating requirements for states to address consumer protections, emergency evacuation plans, environmental siting, resilience, and terrain considerations. • Providing states with more flexibility to determine when their system is built out allowing NEVI funds to be used on public roads statewide. To learn more about the changes, read the U.S. Department of Transportation’s press release or visit the NEVI program website .

Funding disputes also shaped the landscape. Niese pointed out the irony of states like Washington expressing concerns about federal returns while slowing NEVI deployment through their own processes. Klein clarified that many of these disputes were resolved through lawsuits with 17 states suing and 14 succeeding in unlocking frozen funds, and a few, like Florida, simply opting out altogether. Okafor reflected on the complexity of tracking state-level decisions, noting that Texas’ rapid progress defied political expectations, while Wash- ington prioritized its own state funds over federal ones. Klein concluded that Texas had managed to reframe electrification in a way that secured support from influential state leaders, a feat not replicated in most other states.

www.vgnsharing.com

Consumer Adoption and Habits

While public perception often focuses on a shortage of charging infrastructure, most EV owners charge at home, reducing the relevance of range anxiety. Klein noted that the U.S. already has more than enough [home] chargers, yet utilization rates may dip in the near term, raising questions about the business viability for charging companies. He reiterated that the prevalence of Level 3 fast chargers has surpassed the expected need for Level 2 public chargers. Palmer reinforced that most EV owners charge at home or work and often keep a second vehicle for long trips. Many pair EV ownership with solar panels, creating a sense of energy self-sufficiency, and emerging technologies such as bidirectional charging are adding even more reasons for adoption. Palmer likened EV adoption to the iPhone’s slow but steady, word-of-mouth growth, suggesting that the current affordability and features represent a “mini golden age” for EVs. Klein agreed, calling vehicle-to-grid integration a game-changer, especially when combined with seamless “plug and charge” capabilities that reduce friction for drivers across charging networks. Still, Palmer expressed disappointment that more people fail to link climate concerns with EV adoption, especially given that many models are now cost-competitive or even cheaper than gas vehicles. Klein suggested the gap may stem from cultural differences, contrasting Palmer’s European “collectivist” perspective with America’s individualist mindset. Both agreed that backup power and energy independence could resonate deeply with U.S. consumers, tapping into the appeal of self-reliance.

Final Reflection The future of EV charging in the U.S. is entering a period of recalibration, where rapid growth will give way to more measured progress shaped by shifting policies, evolving economics, and market realities. While near-term adoption may slow as incentives expire and infrastructure costs rise, technological advances, domestic manufacturing gains, and state-level initiatives are poised to sustain momentum over time. The long-term trajectory still points toward electrification, but success will depend on aligning policy stability, cost competitiveness, and consumer confidence to bridge the gap between today’s challenges and tomorrow’s opportunities.

www.vgnsharing.com

Review LIGHTNING ROUND

Facilitator Mike Austin led the group discussion with a look back at how the EV charging landscape has shifted since the group’s April 2025 meeting. He noted that public fast charging is becoming far more common in his own experience. While there is more availability, performance can still vary, with some stations malfunc- tioning or delivering slower-than-expected speeds. Starting by looking at consumer education and charging perception, Darren Palmer pointed out that Tesla charging is compatible with most, if not all, company networks, giving customers alternatives if they encounter a broken charger. He credited Tesla’s long development timeline and multiple hardware iter- ations for their reliability, contrasting it with first-gen - eration CCS hardware that struggled in extreme temperatures. Palmer added that while reliability is improving across the board, the question of whether customers are getting the full advertised charging speed remains a knowledge gap. He said many drivers “have no idea that they’re getting 50 kilowatts” when they could be charging much faster.

incentives begin to disappear, though the U.S. market remains stable. Palmer suggested there was perhaps a short-term rush: “we saw greater sales than last year” and anticipate growth this month. He warned of uncertain pricing pressures afterward, as companies weigh losses against market share. Srijata Chattopadhyay described how Shell, as an integrated energy company and its independent charging networks, are under pressure “to be profit - able,” identifying the intertwining of macro pressures and political pressures. She reflected on the long arc of infrastructure development, noting that no single administration dramatically changes the overall trajectory, though the pace can vary. While acknowledging the feeling of being at a low point and admitting that Shell itself is undergoing changes, she expressed optimism that EV adoption and charging build-out will continue, even at a temporarily slower rate. To read the full discussion from the April 2025 evVG meeting, read “Vision Report Building Out the EV Charging Network.”

This led into a broader discussion of consumer miscon- ceptions and infrastructure planning. Austin observed that marketing messages often oversell charging speed, and that in reality, drivers don’t always need the highest peak rates to charge efficiently on the road. Tom Healey , operating over 300 Nouria convenience sites, shared that his network has experimented with chargers ranging from 50 to 320 kilowatts (19 charging sites in New England and 5 in their southeast region), but “the typical charge rate is much lower than that.” While high-output chargers are meant to future-proof investments, he questioned whether they are worth the cost now given today’s vehicle capabilities. Jay Smith asked how far ahead Nouria plans when install- ing chargers, and Healey confirmed a ten-year lifecy - cle target. Palmer weighed in that predicting needs even five years ahead is tricky, especially as smaller, more affordable EVs with modest batteries and slower charge rates are expected to grow in popularity. On the topic of market trends and the role of incen- tives. Austin mentioned cooling sales growth as EV

www.vgnsharing.com

NOTABLE AND QUOTABLE “ I feel like that was our one chance to even try to catch up to China. So we’re going to be buying a lot of Chinese goods. Let’s be honest. And maybe Chinese cars at some point. I hope not. I’d like to be buying a Ford. Gabe Klein , Former Executive Director, U.S. Joint Office of Energy and Transportation

“ What we’ve been struggling with is the actual rate of charging that the vehicles can take. So, we’ve got these more expensive, elaborate 320-kilowatt chargers, and we’re finding that the typical charge rate is much lower than that. Tom Healey , VP Facilities, Nouria Energy Corporation

“ With EV incentives going away and in terms of sales cooling off a little bit, at least in the U.S., seems to be holding steady as a decent part of the sales mix. It’s just not growing as quickly. Mike Austin , Executive Editor, Road and Track Magazine

“ I think what will be interesting is to see if in 2026, states start to make up for some of the rollbacks that you’ve seen at the federal level. Jay Smith , Executive Director, Charge Ahead Partnership

“ That said, though, I think overall we’re still seeing that all the fleets that we’re working with are still interested in EVs. It’s just hampering the timeline. It’s hampering the way that they were going to accelerate more quickly than now is feasible with budgeting and cycling through vehicles. Jessica Stoll Lowery , Transportation Policy Advisor, Atlas Public Policy

“ I think you said it perfectly. When I think about passenger vehicle EV charging and deploying our network, and what Section 30C meant to us as we were making investment decisions, we did consider it gravy. Kimberly Okafor , General Manager, Zero Emissions, Trillium and Love’s Travel Stops

“ And I think for me, having been in this industry for a long time, it’s obviously disappointing. And at the same time, I have optimism that there will be continued adoption and continued build out of infrastructure [but] temporarily at a slower pace. Srijata Chattopadhyay , VP Americas EV Charging, Shell Recharge

www.vgnsharing.com

Recalibrating the Road Ahead: EV Charging After the One Big Beautiful Bill evVG VISION REPORT NO. 4 SEPTEMBER 2025

TRANSCRIPT AND PRESENTATIONS

In The Room Transcript The full meeting transcript is online and can be searched by keyword so that you can be “in the room” with us, rather than only having access to selected quotes and paraphrasing

Meeting Presentations and Demonstration Videos

www.vgnsharing.com

VISION GROUP NETWORK CO-FOUNDERS Myra Kressner President, Kressner Strategy Group

Eva Strasburger President, StrasGlobal; CEO, Compliance Safe

Roy Strasburger CEO, StrasGlobal; President, Compliance Safe

Mike Austin evVG Facilitator and Executive Editor, Road and Track Magazine

Nathan Niese evVG Facilitator and Managing Director & Partner, Boston Consulting Group

MEMBERS

Jessica Stoll Lowery Project Manager / Climate Mayors

Srijata Chattopadhyay VP: Americas EV Charging, Shell Recharge

Gabe Klein Former Executive Director, U.S. Joint Office of Energy & Transportation

John Kwon General Counsel, CATL

Kaysey England Sustainability Program Manager, City of Phoenix Aviation Department

Garrett Fitzgerald Senior Director,

Tom Healey VP, Facilities, Nouria Energy Corporation

Transportation Electrification Smart Electric Power Alliance

Chris Normandeau Director, FirstService Energy

Kimberly Okafor General Manager of Zero Emission Solutions, Trillium - A Love’s Company

Darren Palmer Global VP Electric Vehicle Programs, Ford Motor Company

Deb Peck Kelleher Deputy Director, Alliance for Clean Energy NY

Francisco Pineda COO and EVP for Business and Operations, The New School

Laura Renger Executive Director, CalETC

Janine Robar Associate Director Mobility Innovation, State of Michigan

Sophia Schuster Policy Principal, Michigan EIBC

Jay Smith Executive Director, Charge Ahead Partnership

Bonnie Trowbridge Executive Director, Drive Clean Colorado

Fred Yonghabi Sr. Specialist, Con Edison

www.vgnsharing.com

The Electric Vehicle Vision Group (evVG) brings together stakeholders from across the EV industry. evVG participants represent all aspects of the EV eco system in order to bring the big picture into focus. evVG is designed for networking and thought-leadership discussion on strategic issues, practical implementation, and future trends that impact the development of the EV infrastructure. evVG operates under the Vision Group Network, which gathers the collective knowledge and ideas of its members to create a legacy of sharing within the retail community. For more information and to sign up for future Vision Reports, visit our website: vgnsharing.com/vision-report-library

A part of Vision Group Network

For more information about Vision Group Network email us:

Myra Kressner myra.kressner@vgnsharing.com

Eva Strasburger eva.strasburger@vgnsharing.com

Roy Strasburger roy.strasburger@vgnsharing.com

www.vgnsharing.com

VGN Vision Report Library

The VGN Vision Reports will not only provide you with insight into the issues that leading retailers are concerned about but will give you a vantage point to “listen” to their conversations. Learn about the specific solutions or programs that VGN members are utilizing – and the ones that didn’t work. VGN wants to provide real world solutions for real world issues.

vgnsharing.com/vision-report-library

www.vgnsharing.com

We Value Your Feedback VISION REPORTS SURVEY Please take a moment to share your thoughts with us on our Vision Reports.

SUBSCRIBE Subscribe to receive notifications for all new Vision Reports

FOLLOW Follow us on LinkedIn

Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 Page 12 Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 Page 16 Page 17 Page 18

vgnsharing.com