[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 
[email protected] 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 [email protected] 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