ZEV charging on public lands

Full Title:
DRIVE Across America Act of 2026

Summary#

This bill would set up the "Cleaner TRAILS Initiative" to help put zero-emission vehicle (ZEV) charging and fueling stations on National Park Service and Forest Service lands and on nearby lands tied to those sites. It directs the agencies to make an interagency strategy, buy some ZEVs for agency fleets, prioritize ZEV shuttle services, allow user fees, and report to Congress each year. The bill also changes some federal electric-vehicle grant and planning rules to encourage charging near airports, tourist destinations, and federal recreation lands.

  • Establishes an interagency initiative to plan, install, operate, and map ZEV fueling infrastructure on “covered land” (national parks, national forests, affiliated sites, and nearby land within 25 miles with an agreement).
  • Requires a public, updated strategy and coordination with the Joint Office of Energy and Transportation and GSA.
  • Authorizes appropriations of $100 million per year to the National Park Service and $100 million per year to the Forest Service for each fiscal year 2027–2031 (authorization, not actual appropriation).
  • Limits how program funds may be used (for example, up to 20% for vehicle purchases, up to 30% for infrastructure in urbanized areas, up to 4% for admin).
  • Amends highway grant rules to set aside 10% of certain funds for projects that serve airports, long‑haul travel, tourism, and sites near federal lands; expands an EV working group into a broader commission with travel and recreation representation.
  • Removes a specific pre-2025 deadline in a highways provision (changing a time‑limited phrase to a continuing one).

What it means for you#

  • Visitors to national parks and forests: You could see more public charging or hydrogen fueling at parks, nearby parking areas, and affiliated sites. The bill requires maps and public website listings of new stations.
  • People with electric cars, campers, boats or other ZEV recreational vehicles: You may have more options to charge or refuel when visiting federal recreation lands or sites within 25 miles that sign an agreement with the agencies.
  • Agency employees and fleets: Forest Service and National Park Service employees may be allowed to use agency charging infrastructure for commuting. Agencies are also directed to increase ZEVs in their fleets and shuttles, subject to availability and infrastructure.
  • Shuttle and transit service providers, concessionaires, and contractors: Agencies must give priority consideration to providers that operate shuttles using ZEVs when awarding new agreements to provide shuttle or transportation services on or to covered land.
  • Local governments and Tribal governments: Land they own within 25 miles of park or forest sites can be included as “covered land” if the appropriate agency head enters an agreement, making them potential hosts for charging infrastructure.
  • Electric utilities and energy providers: The bill asks agencies to plan for grid upgrades, storage, and smart charging. Project siting will consider impacts on utility capacity and required buildout.
  • Travel and tourism industry and airports: Federal planning and grant rules would steer some EV infrastructure funding and planning toward airports, tourist destinations, and services like rental cars and rideshares.

Expenses#

Estimated public cost: The bill authorizes up to $100 million per year to the National Park Service and $100 million per year to the Forest Service for fiscal years 2027–2031. If fully appropriated each year, that would be up to $200 million per year and up to $1 billion total over five years.

  • These figures are authorizations. Actual spending requires future appropriations by Congress.
  • The bill limits uses of those funds: no more than 20% for federal vehicle purchases, no more than 30% for projects in urbanized areas, and no more than 4% for administrative costs.
  • The bill allows agencies to collect user fees for publicly accessible charging/fueling and to use those fees for operations and maintenance.
  • The bill does not include a fiscal note here. No further cost-estimates (such as estimated grid upgrade costs, state or local costs, or private costs) are provided in the text.

Proponents' View#

  • The bill appears intended to increase access to charging and fueling for zero-emission vehicles at and near federal recreation lands, which could make it easier to visit parks and forests with electric vehicles.
  • It could help agencies and their contractors transition to cleaner fleets and shuttle services by planning for infrastructure and by purchasing ZEVs.
  • The bill would coordinate multiple federal offices (Joint Office of Energy and Transportation, GSA, DOE labs) to streamline planning and technical support.
  • Adding mapping and public information aims to make it easier for visitors to find charging stations.
  • The changes to highway grant programs and the Joint Office emphasize travel, tourism, and airports, which could help build charging corridors to popular destinations.

Opponents' View#

  • One concern is cost and funding certainty: the bill authorizes substantial sums but requires Congress to appropriate the money; the text does not guarantee funding levels or show a fiscal offset.
  • The bill does not set firm timelines or specific targets for when infrastructure must be built at particular sites, so it may be unclear how fast visitors will see new chargers.
  • It is unclear how agreements with private landowners or concessionaires will allocate long‑term responsibilities for installation, ownership, maintenance, and public access.
  • Grid and utility upgrade needs could be large at some remote sites; the bill asks agencies to plan for upgrades but does not identify how those costs would be paid or allocated among federal, state, local, private, or utility actors.
  • Allowing up to 30% of funds to be used in urbanized areas could be viewed as diverting money from remote recreation sites, depending on priorities.
  • The amendment that removes the specific pre-2025 timing language in a highways provision could have administrative or legal effects that are not fully explained in the bill text.