After several months of CloudWatch and Cost Explorer data, a citizen portal’s EC2/Fargate baseline CPU and spend look steady across business hours. Finance asks whether to adopt a commitment discount. Which action best adopts Savings Plans appropriately?

After months of CloudWatch and Cost Explorer data show a citizen portal's EC2/Fargate baseline CPU and spend steady across business hours, finance can adopt commitment discounts appropriately by purchasing Compute Savings Plans sized to that measured steady-state usage after reviewing Cost Explorer recommendations and utilization history. Evidence-based commitment protects the municipal appropriation without locking idle capacity. Buying the largest possible EC2 Instance Savings Plan for a single instance family in one AZ without reviewing utilization fails because oversized, overly specific commitments waste budget when families or regions shift. Switching the entire portal to Spot-only with no commitment because Savings Plans never apply to government workloads fails on two concepts: Savings Plans do apply to eligible government usage, and Spot-only removes the availability baseline a citizen portal typically needs. Disabling Cost Explorer recommendations so purchase decisions stay qualitative fails because it discards the quantitative guide AWS provides for commitment sizing. Exam caveat: SAP-C02 expects Savings Plans adoption grounded in utilization evidence, preferring flexible Compute Savings Plans for mixed EC2/Fargate baselines over blind max purchases. Operational check: export recommendation coverage and utilization, size to steady-state not peak spikes, purchase in stages, monitor utilization and coverage monthly, and document the civic finance approval trail for auditors.