|
|---|
|
Notice of Request for Information (RFI) on Medium- and Heavy-Duty Electric Charging Technologies and Infrastructure Needs Publication: Federal Register Agency: Federal Highway Administration Byline: Shailen P. Bhatt Date: 12 September 2024 Subjects: American Government  , Electric Vehicles, Roads & Highways
|
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 177 (Thursday, September 12, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 74356-74359]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-20423]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
[Docket No. FHWA-2024-0028]
Notice of Request for Information (RFI) on Medium- and Heavy-Duty
Electric Charging Technologies and Infrastructure Needs
AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice; request for information (RFI).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FHWA, along with the Joint Office of Energy and
Transportation (Joint Office), invites public comment on this request
for information (RFI) regarding the Medium- and Heavy-Duty Electric
Charging Technologies and Infrastructure Needs. This RFI seeks input in
four areas to support medium and heavy-duty (MHD) battery electric
vehicles (EV) (DOT vehicle classes 4 through 8) including: unique EV
charger and station needs; vehicle charging patterns; MHD EV charger
technology and standardization; and workforce, supply chain, and
manufacturing to support charging of MHD battery EVs. The goal is to
inform appropriate future Federal Government activities to support the
development and deployment of EV chargers to support the anticipated
needs of MHD EV original equipment manufacturers, fleet operators,
drivers, charging station operators, and electric utilities. Comments
should also address how to balance advances in technology with the need
to expeditiously build out the national EV charging infrastructure,
including support for MHD segments.
DATES: Responses to the RFI must be received by November 12, 2024.
Late-filed comments will be considered to the extent practicable.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are encouraged to submit comments using
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov, under docket
number FHWA-2024-0028. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Alternatively, interested persons may submit comments, identified by
docket number FHWA-2024-0028, by any of the following methods:
Postal Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590.
Hand Delivery/Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, between 9:00 a.m. and
5:00 p.m. E.T., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The
telephone number is (202) 366-9329.
Docket: The docket for this activity, which includes Federal
Register notices, comments, and other supporting documents/materials,
is available for review at www.regulations.gov. All documents in the
docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov index. However, not all
documents listed in the index may be publicly available, such as
information that is exempt from public disclosure.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Questions about this notice may be
addressed to Suraiya Motsinger, FHWA Office of Natural Environment, via
email at dot.gov">Suraiya.motsinger@dot.gov or telephone (202) 366-4287 or Sarah
Hipel, Joint Office of Energy and Transportation, via email at
sarah.hipel@ee.doe.gov or telephone (240) 994-0050.
For legal questions, please contact Dawn Horan, FHWA Office of
Chief Counsel, via email at dot.gov">Dawn.M.Horan@dot.gov or telephone (202)
366-9615 or Matthew Schneider, U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Office
of the General Counsel, via email at matthew.schneider@hq.doe.gov or
telephone at (240) 597-6265.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Electronic Access and Filing
A copy of this notice, all comments received on this notice, and
all background material may be viewed online at www.regulations.gov
using the docket number listed above. Electronic retrieval assistance
and guidelines are also available at www.regulations.gov. An electronic
copy of this document may also be downloaded from the Office of the
Federal Register's website at: www.FederalRegister.gov and the U.S.
Government Publishing Office's website at: www.GovInfo.gov.
Background
Vehicle manufacturers and operators are deploying MHD EVs at an
increasing rate with a recent report citing the availability of over
160 models and over 17,500 zero emission trucks in operation--a nearly
10-fold increase from just 3 years ago.\1\ This trend in MHD EV
adoption is driven by a combination of factors, including declining
battery costs, improvements in vehicle performance and range, and
growing recognition of the economic and environmental benefits
associated with electrification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://calstart.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/ZIO-ZET-2024_010924_Final.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The regulatory landscape governing MHD EVs (DOT vehicle classes 4
through 8) is evolving rapidly as well, driven in part by imperatives
to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and criteria pollutants. Examples of
such regulations include performance-based emission standards by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency \2\ and the Advanced Clean Trucks
rule through the California Air Resources Board,\3\ which other States
may elect to adopt consistent with Section 177 of the Clean Air Act (42
U.S.C. 7507).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engines/final-rule-greenhouse-gas-emissions-standards-heavy-duty.
\3\ https://afdc.energy.gov/laws/12473.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 74357]]
Fleet operators, cognizant of the long-term sustainability and cost
advantages offered by electric propulsion, are increasingly embracing
EVs as viable alternatives to conventional diesel-powered vehicles. The
momentum toward electrification is further propelled by corporate
sustainability goals, regulatory compliance pressures, and the
emergence of innovative business models that prioritize operational
efficiency and environmental stewardship.
Increased adoption by fleets, the need to address the climate
crisis, and the compelling total cost of EV ownership create a well-
timed backdrop for federal investments in the Bipartisan Infrastructure
Law \4\ and the Inflation Reduction Act.\5\ These investments will
support the buildout of the electrical generation, distribution, and
charging network needed to provide clean, affordable, and reliable
energy to a sector that accounts for 23 percent of transportation
emissions despite accounting for only five percent of vehicles on the
road.\6\ These investments will help meet U.S. federal goals of 100
percent new zero-emission truck and bus sales by 2040, with an interim
goal of 30 percent new zero-emission vehicle sales by 2030.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3684.
\5\ https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/5376.
\6\ https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/fast-facts-transportation-greenhouse-gas-emissions.
\7\ https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2023-01/the-us-national-blueprint-for-transportation-decarbonization.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stakeholders across the public and private sectors are mobilizing
efforts to accelerate the expansion of charging infrastructure
networks, enhance interoperability standards, and facilitate strategic
investments in key infrastructure corridors. For example, the Joint
Office of Energy and Transportation, in collaboration with the U.S.
Department of Energy, Department of Transportation, and the
Environmental Protection Agency, released in March of 2024 an all-of
government National Zero-Emission Freight Corridor Strategy.\8\ The
Strategy provides a phased approach to prioritizing planning,
investment and deployment of MHD vehicle charging and hydrogen
refueling infrastructure within freight hubs and along corridors to
realize a complete zero-emission freight network by 2040. The privately
led Powering America's Commercial Transportation Coalition \9\ (PACT)
brings together vehicle and infrastructure manufacturers, fleets,
utilities and other key stakeholders to collaborate on solutions to
accelerate the pace of transportation electrification for MHD EVs. By
proactively addressing the need for robust charging infrastructure,
stakeholders can catalyze the transition to a cleaner, more sustainable
transportation ecosystem, while positioning the industry for long-term
success in an increasingly electrified future.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ https://driveelectric.gov/files/zef-corridor-strategy.pdf.
\9\ https://www.pactcoalition.org/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The charging requirements for MHD EVs vary widely, reflecting the
diverse operational profiles and energy demands within this sector.\10\
This spectrum ranges from vehicles engaged in on-demand operations with
structured schedules, such as urban delivery trucks and transit buses,
to inter-city and regional transit vehicles, like coaches and tractor
trailers that cover longer distances between urban centers. In
addition, fleet operators can often use vehicles to meet multiple use
cases and duty cycles (e.g., municipal sanitation trucks that double as
snowplows in the winter months). Shorter haul vehicles can often use
centralized charging depots with the opportunity for lower power
charging. At the other end of the spectrum, long-haul and over-the-road
applications, exemplified by heavy-duty trucks engaged in Interstate
freight transportation, may require ultra-fast charging capabilities to
allow trucks to quickly get back on the road. These vehicles operate
continuously for extended periods, necessitating strategically located
charging stations along major transportation corridors to facilitate
rapid turnaround times or provide parking facilities with charging.
Developing a charging infrastructure ecosystem entails addressing this
spectrum of use cases comprehensively, ensuring that solutions are
scalable, adaptable, and aligned with the evolving needs of the
transportation industry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy22osti/81656.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Purpose
This RFI seeks input in four areas to support charging of MHD EVs:
(1) unique EV charger and station needs; (2) vehicle charging patterns;
(3) MHD EV charger technology and standardization; and (4) workforce,
supply chain, and manufacturing. The information received from this RFI
will inform government activities to support the development and
deployment of EV chargers to meet the anticipated needs of MHD EV
original equipment manufacturers, fleet operators, drivers, charging
station operators, and electric utilities. This RFI also seeks to
understand MHD EV charging as a whole, rather than through
transportation and electricity-specific lenses. Increasing
understanding and awareness across all relevant sectors is key to
ensuring that electric MHD vehicle fleet operators and charging
networks:
Support a modern electric grid and create widespread
benefits for fleet operators, communities, and all ratepayers; and
Are served by energy regulatory environments and public
policies that reflect the wide variety of vocational needs, use cases,
and duty cycles for electric medium and heavy-duty buses and trucks.
Though hydrogen refueling can provide a zero-emission fuel option
for commercial MHD vehicles, this RFI only seeks information on
electric charging considerations for MHD EVs.
Disclaimer and Important Notes
This RFI is not a Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) or Funding
Opportunity Announcement (FOA). Any information obtained as a result of
this RFI is intended to be used by the Government on a non-attribution
basis for planning and strategy development and may be shared with
other Government agencies; this RFI does not constitute a formal
solicitation for proposals or abstracts. Your response to this notice
will be treated as information only. FHWA and the Joint Office will
both review and consider all responses in formulating program
strategies for the identified materials of interest that are the
subject of this request. Neither FHWA nor the Joint Office will provide
reimbursement for costs incurred in responding to this RFI. Respondents
are advised that FHWA and the Joint Office are under no obligation to
acknowledge receipt of the information received or provide feedback to
respondents with respect to any information submitted under this RFI.
Responses to this RFI do not bind FHWA or the Joint Office to any
further actions related to this topic.
Confidential Business Information
Confidential Business Information (CBI) is commercial or financial
information that is both customarily and actually treated as private by
its owner. Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552),
CBI is exempt from public disclosure. If your comments responsive to
this notice contain commercial or financial information that is
customarily treated as private, that you actually treat as private, and
that is relevant or
[[Page 74358]]
responsive to this notice, it is important that you clearly designate
the submitted comments as CBI.
You may ask FHWA to give confidential treatment to information you
give to the Agency by taking the following steps: (1) Mark each page of
the original document submission containing CBI as ``Confidential'';
(2) send FHWA, along with the original document, a second copy of the
original document with the CBI deleted; and (3) explain why the
information you are submitting is CBI. FHWA will make its own
determination about the confidential status of the information and
treat it according to its determination. FHWA will protect confidential
information complying with these requirements to the extent required
under applicable law. If DOT receives a FOIA request for the
information that the applicant has marked in accordance with this
notice, DOT will follow the procedures described in its FOIA
regulations at 49 CFR 7.29. Only information that is marked in
accordance with this notice and ultimately determined to be exempt from
disclosure under FOIA and 49 CFR 7.29 will not be released to a
requester or placed in the public docket of this notice. Submissions
containing CBI should be sent to: Suraiya Motsinger, FHWA, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, HICP-20, Washington, DC 20590 via mail, or
dot.gov">Suraiya.motsinger@dot.gov via email. Any comment submissions that FHWA
receives that are not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in
the public docket for this matter.
Confidential information collected in this RFI will also be shared
with the Joint Office consistent with Congressional direction that the
minimum standards and requirements for EV chargers be developed in
coordination between DOT and DOE. The Joint Office will protect any
such shared information in accordance with applicable DOE standards, as
DOE serves as host for the Joint Office.
Evaluation and Administration by Federal and Non-Federal Personnel
Federal employees are subject to the non-disclosure requirements of
a criminal statute, the Trade Secrets Act, 18 U.S.C. 1905. The
Government may seek the advice of qualified non-Federal personnel. The
Government may also use non-Federal personnel to conduct routine,
nondiscretionary administrative activities. The respondents, by
submitting their response, consent to FHWA and the Joint Office
providing their response to non-Federal parties. Non-Federal parties
given access to responses must be subject to an appropriate obligation
of confidentiality prior to being given the access. Submissions may be
reviewed by support contractors and private consultants.
Request for Information Categories and Questions
The following list of questions are of particular interest to FHWA
and the Joint Office. Commenters are not required to answer every
question and commenters should not view the list as a constraint on
sharing additional information relevant to MHD EV charging technologies
and infrastructure needs.
Category 1: Unique EV Charger and Station Needs
1. Market Evaluation: Please provide any information or plans that
you have regarding the adoption of MHD EVs now and anticipated growth
over time (by 2030 and 2040) by vehicle type (please refer to FHWA's
vehicle classification definitions).\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Chapter 2. Introduction to Vehicle Classification--
Verification, Refinement, and Applicability of Long-Term Pavement
Performance Vehicle Classification Rules, November 2014--FHWA-HRT-
13-091 (dot.gov).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Station Development Considerations: What factors should be
considered for the siting, location and development of a MHD EV
charging station? What features and site design elements need to be
considered for a station designed to support MHD EVs deployed in the
next five years considering both depot and en-route charging
applications? How should grid interconnectivity/capacity be considered
in the site design for MHD EV stations? Should certain site design
elements be standardized (e.g., number of ports, physical dimensions/
spacing between charging ports, pull-through charging bays, co-location
with other fuels) or is flexibility needed to accommodate different MHD
EV charging scenarios and site constraints?
3. Public vs. Private Charging Requirements: What is the
anticipated make up of publicly available charging sites vs. charging
sites with exclusive or limited access? How are public and private
charging sites likely to differ? What are the potential constraints
between private and public charging with regards to charger
availability?
4. Safety Considerations: What are the safety considerations for
charging MHD EVs at a public station vs. a private station, including
personal safety and safe operations? What specific safety
considerations are important to consider for high-power (e.g., megawatt
level) charging?
5. Community Engagement: What are best practices for engaging
communities for the deployment of charging infrastructure for MHD EVs?
What community needs should be accounted for when siting a location for
a MHD EV charging station?
6. Distance Requirements between Stations: What would be an
appropriate maximum distance between MHD EV public charging stations
along an Interstate highway? From an Interstate highway? What are the
typical mileage ranges of MHD EVs? Why and how might this consideration
change over time?
7. MHD EV Charging Times: What is the expectation of charging and/
or dwell times for MHD EVs and how does that vary by use case or other
factors?
8. Overnight Parking/Charging Needs: What is the anticipated need
for overnight or long-duration parking for MHD EVs over the next 3 to 5
years and/or longer-term? Should these spaces be dedicated for electric
MHD vehicles that are actively charging? Should these spaces also be
made available for electric MHD trucks that are not actively charging
or non-electric MHD vehicles?
9. Delivering Power to a Site: What actions are currently being
taken by electric utilities or can electric utilities take to ensure
that necessary power is available in MHD EV charging locations? What
actions are currently being taken by MHD fleet owners/operators or can
MHD fleet owners/operators take to ensure that necessary power is
available in MHD EV charging locations?
10. Demand Response and Managed Charging: What demand response or
managed charging strategies are needed and/or have been employed
successfully for MHD charging locations?
11. Role of Onsite Energy Storage and Generation: What role is on-
site energy storage and generation playing or could play in supporting
MHD EV charging needs? What actions are needed to enable the
utilization of cost-effective energy storage and generation?
12. Grid Interaction: What scenarios or use cases would be ideal
for exporting power from charging sites back to the grid? What actions
are needed to enable cost-effective exportable power?
13. Turning Radius: What are the turning radii that should be
considered to service most MHD EVs at a site?
14. Driver Amenities: Where applicable, what driver amenities (such
as on-site restrooms, dining, or shopping) or fleet services (such as
vehicle inspections) can or should be considered for a station designed
to support MHD EVs deployed in the next
[[Page 74359]]
5 years that will charge: (i) at public en-route chargers; (ii) at
freight destinations; and (iii) in publicly accessible private or
quasi-public depots? Do needs for on- or conveniently located off-site
amenities at stations designed for MHD EVs differ from those designed
for light-duty EVs?
15. Fleet Lessons Learned: For fleets experienced in operating and
charging MHD EVs, what are some important lessons learned that should
be incorporated in the buildout of national infrastructure to support
charging activities?
16. Equity: What equity-related challenges or benefits could be
associated with MHD EV charging? What strategies could increase those
benefits or mitigate those challenges? Are there considerations
important to independent owner operators and small fleets?
Category 2: Vehicle Charging Patterns
17. Minimum Power Requirements: Is there a preferred minimum power
level (including any specific voltage or current requirements), both
per charging port and per charging station, to adequately serve MHD EV
needs in public locations now? In 5 years? In 10 years? Is there a
minimum number of MHD charging ports at a charging station that would
make it useful as an MHD charging site? Are there alternative
performance-based requirements that should be considered for the
provision of a minimum number of MHD charging ports or total power
available?
18. Uptime Reliability: Should uptime, as a performance-based
standard, account for all minimum performance shortfalls, e.g., power
sharing, voltage inadequacy, sites relying on supplemental energy
storage, incompatible connectors/need for adapters, payment system or
network outages, or other EV charger limitations that fail to deliver
specified minimum performance requirements? If uptime is insufficient
to measure all shortfalls, what parameters should be included to ensure
reliable and comprehensive service?
19. Charge Time Accessibility: What are the best methods for
supporting MHD EV fleets that primarily charge enroute or at
destination locations? What considerations should be given for first-
come, first-served and/or appointment-based scenarios for vehicle
charging at a station?
20. Charging Needs Across Vehicle Use Case: How does MHD EV
charging vary across different vehicle classes, use cases, and market
segments: at private or quasi-public depots, en-route (public)
locations, destinations, or a mix? What does that mix look like to form
a coherent national network?
Category 3: MHD EV Charger Technology and Standardization
21. Megawatt Charging Standard: What is the anticipated adoption
timeline for megawatt charging system (MCS), and other proprietary and
non-proprietary connectors, on charging infrastructure in various MHD
segments and is there a preferred connector standard? Is it preferable
to have multiple connector types at MHD public charging locations or a
single type?
22. MHD EV Controllers and Management System Considerations: How
are EV charge controllers and battery management systems different in
MHD EVs than in light-duty passenger EVs? How do charge controllers
differ in EV chargers designed for MHD EVs compared to chargers
designed for light-duty passenger EV applications?
23. Cybersecurity Considerations: How does cybersecurity factor
into the product or systems engineering process? Are there specific
cybersecurity standards, frameworks, or controls that are commonly used
in the industry? What cybersecurity considerations are important in the
near-term (12-36 months)? What cybersecurity concerns need to be
addressed for MHD EV charging in the longer-term?
24. Alternative Charging Technology Solutions: Are there additional
standards or technologies, such as inductive charging or bi-directional
charging, that should be considered? If so, please provide information
about these technologies, their benefits, and their anticipated
industry adoption timeframes.
25. Performance-Based Standards: Are there performance-based
alternatives (i.e., standards that specify a level of service and types
of vehicles a charger must support without specifying specific
connectors) to specifying charging standards and communications
standards by reference that would support a convenient, affordable,
reliable, and equitable MHD EV charging network while reducing the need
for future refinement to federal regulations?
26. Key Performance Indicators: Should performance-based standards
include requirements for achieving Key Performance Indicators most
important to MHD EV customers? If so, what should those Key Performance
Indicators be?
27. Market Impact of Standardization: How would standardization
affect the ability of firms to compete? \12\ Will proposed or
anticipated industry standards favor or disfavor any market
participants? Will proposed or anticipated industry standards impact
the ability of firms to enter the market? If so, how? How could the
process for developing technology standards for EV charging and related
technologies be more fair, open, and/or transparent?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Guidance
on Accounting for Competition Effects When Developing and Analyzing
Regulatory Actions (Oct. 2023), https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/RegulatoryCompetitionGuidance.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category 4: Workforce, Supply Chain, and Manufacturing
28. Workforce Needs for MHD EV Charging Infrastructure: What are
the workforce needs associated with manufacturing, installing, and/or
maintaining MHD EV chargers? What are the current gaps in workforce
development for MHD EV charging infrastructure deployment? Who are the
critical stakeholders and what is needed to promote workforce
development for MHD EV charging infrastructure? Do training programs
exist for workers on the installation of EV chargers with power levels
beyond those available today for light-duty vehicles? If yes, please
provide details of the program and the availability of a qualified
workforce.
29. High Power Charger Availability for MHD EVs: What is the
expected commercial availability (both timing and volume) of the MCS or
other proprietary connectors, cable assemblies, EV chargers, and
adaptors? What safety standards will these products be certified
against? Please provide any specifics on vehicle class, vocation,
expected charging port type, pricing, and timing.
30. Additional Information: Is there anything additionally that
should be considered related to MHD charging technologies and
infrastructure needs that is not covered in the above questions?
Issued in Washington, DC under authority delegated in 49 CFR
1.81 and 1.83.
Shailen P. Bhatt,
Administrator, Federal Highway Administration.
[FR Doc. 2024-20423 Filed 9-11-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-P