|
|---|
|
Request for Information on the J3400 Connector and Potential Options for Performance-Based Charging Standards Publication: Federal Register Agency: Federal Highway Administration Byline: Shailen P. Bhatt Date: 6 March 2024 Subjects: American Government  , Electric Vehicles, Roads & Highways
Topic: SAE International |
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 45 (Wednesday, March 6, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16081-16084]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-04750]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
[Docket No. FHWA-2023-0054]
Request for Information on the J3400 Connector and Potential
Options for Performance-Based Charging Standards
AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice; request for information (RFI).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FHWA issued regulations establishing minimum standards and
requirements for certain electric vehicle (EV) chargers. Subsequent to
the publication of this final rule, the Society of Automotive Engineers
(SAE) published a Technical Information Report for a new connector
standard, known as J3400, which multiple automakers have announced an
intention to adopt in the coming years. To ensure the effective
implementation of programs that are subject to the minimum standards
and requirements and to inform a potential update to the minimum
standards, FHWA, in coordination with the Joint Office of Energy and
Transportation, is seeking additional information in five areas: on the
expectations surrounding market availability for J3400 within EVs and
EV chargers; on the technical compatibility of J3400 with existing
regulations and safety considerations; on considerations regarding
challenges and benefits of the implementation of J3400 at charging
stations; on market demands for the continued availability of Combined
Charging System (CCS) and J1772 connectors; and potential options for
performance-based standards that can reduce the need for future
regulatory updates or changes as technology evolves.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 5, 2024. Late-filed
comments will be considered to the extent practicable.
ADDRESSES: To ensure that you do not duplicate your docket submissions,
please submit comments by only one of the following means:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to www.regulations.gov and
follow the online instructions for submitting comments;
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: West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m. E.T., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The
telephone number is (202) 366-9329;
Instructions: You must include the agency name and docket
number at the beginning of your comments. Except as described below
under the heading ``Confidential Business Information,'' all
submissions received, including any personal information provided, will
be posted without change or alteration to www.regulations.gov. For more
information, you may review the U.S. Department of Transportation's
complete Privacy Act Statement published in the Federal Register on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions about this notice,
please contact Ms. Suraiya Motsinger, FHWA Office of Natural
Environment, (202) 366-4287, or via email at suraiya.motsinger@dot.gov.
For legal questions, please contact Ms. Dawn Horan, FHWA Office of the
Chief Counsel, (202) 366-9615, or via email at Dawn.M.Horan@dot.gov.
Office hours for FHWA are from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., E.T., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
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 also may 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.
Confidential Business Information
Confidential Business Information (CBI) is commercial or financial
[[Page 16082]]
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 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. The FHWA will protect
confidential information complying with these requirements to the
extent required under applicable law. Information collected in this RFI
may also be shared with the Joint Office of Energy and Transportation
and Department of Energy (DOE) consistent with Congressional direction
that the minimum standards and requirements for EV chargers be
developed in coordination with DOE. The Joint Office of Energy and
Transportation will protect any such shared information in accordance
with applicable DOE standards. 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: Ms. Suraiya Motsinger, FHWA, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, HICP-20, Washington, DC 20590 via mail, or
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.
Background
On February 28, 2023, FHWA published a final rule \1\ establishing
minimum standards and requirements for projects funded under the
National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) Formula Program and
projects for the construction of publicly accessible electric vehicle
(EV) chargers that are funded with funds made available under Title 23,
United States Code, including any EV charging infrastructure project
funded with Federal funds that is treated as a project on a Federal-aid
highway. As outlined in statute, the purpose of the NEVI Formula
Program is to ``provide funding to States to strategically deploy EV
charging infrastructure and to establish an interconnected network to
facilitate data collection, access, and reliability.'' This purpose is
satisfied by creating a convenient, affordable, reliable, and equitable
network of chargers throughout the country. Prior to the establishment
of this rule, there were no national standards for the installation,
operation, or maintenance of EV charging stations, and wide disparities
exist among EV charging stations. The final rule enables States or
other designated recipients to implement federally funded charging
station projects in a standardized fashion in order to build a
convenient, accessible, reliable, and equitable charging network across
the country that can be utilized by all EVs regardless of vehicle
brand. Such standards provide reliable expectations for travel in an EV
across and throughout the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ On November 15, 2021, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law
(BIL) was enacted as the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
(IIJA), Public Law 117-58. To ensure standardization for a
nationwide network of EV chargers, the BIL mandated the creation of
a set of minimum standards and requirements for electric vehicle
chargers which were finalized under 23 CFR 680 by FHWA on February
28, 2023, at 88 FR 12724.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As part of this rule, FHWA regulates the connector type used on EV
chargers through 23 CFR 680.106(c) which states, ``All charging
connectors must meet applicable industry standards. Each Direct Current
Fast Charger (DCFC) charging port must be capable of charging any
Combined Charging System (CCS)-compliant vehicle and each DCFC charging
port must have at least one permanently attached CCS Type 1 connector.
In addition, permanently attached CHAdeMO (www.chademo.com) connectors
can be provided using only FY2022 NEVI Funds. Each Alternating Current
(AC) Level 2 charging port must have a permanently attached J1772
connector and must charge any J1772-compliant vehicle.'' The final rule
allows permanently attached non-proprietary connectors to be provided
on each charging port so long as each DCFC charging port has at least
one permanently attached CCS Type 1 connector and is capable of
charging a CCS-compliant vehicle.
Subsequent to the publication of 23 CFR part 680, the Society of
Automotive Engineers (SAE) published a Technical Information Report
(TIR) \2\ in December 2023 which provided information on the J3400 EV
charging connector standard (also known as the North American Charging
Standard Electric Vehicle Coupler). J3400 utilizes the same connector
and pins for AC and DC charging; the publication of a new connector
standard has implications for both vehicles and chargers. To date,
J3400 has only been utilized in a proprietary implementation by one
auto manufacturer and its charging network. However, several additional
auto manufacturers have announced an intention to adopt J3400 with full
vehicular integration beginning in 2025, and through adapters as early
as 2024. Multiple charging equipment manufacturers have also publicly
committed to adopting the J3400 connector on chargers. The FHWA, in
coordination with the Joint Office of Energy and Transportation, seeks
information to better understand how the introduction and adoption of
J3400 will impact the EV charging industry, automakers, and EV charging
consumers and to inform potential updates to the minimum standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ https://www.sae.org/news/2023/12/sae-j3400-tir-released.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To ensure FHWA has the most comprehensive and current information
available, FHWA is specifically seeking detailed comments on the
expectations surrounding market availability for J3400 within EVs and
EV chargers, on the technical compatibility of J3400 with existing
regulations, on considerations regarding challenges and benefits of the
implementation of J3400 at charging stations, on market demands for the
continued availability of CCS and J1772 connectors, and on potential
options for performance-based standards that can reduce the need for
future regulatory updates or changes as technology evolves. The FHWA is
also interested in obtaining more information on the impact of the
publication of the J3400 TIR in order to assess how the minimum
standards and requirements for EV charging can address the evolving
needs of EV charging consumers and industry.
The FHWA additionally requests information on what performance-
based standards would best facilitate competition and innovation in EV
markets, consistent with the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs ``Guidance on Accounting for
[[Page 16083]]
Competition Effects When Developing and Analyzing Regulatory Actions.''
\3\ The term ``performance-based standards'' in this context refers to
standards that specify a level of service and types of vehicles a
charger must support without specifying specific connectors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/RegulatoryCompetitionGuidance.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Request for Comments and Information
To ensure the effective implementation of programs that are subject
to the minimum standards and requirements, FHWA requests information
from the public, auto manufacturers, charger manufacturers, and others
involved with or impacted by EV charging regarding the impact of the
publication of the J3400 TIR. The FHWA is seeking additional
information in five areas: (1) on the expectations surrounding market
availability for J3400 within EVs and EV chargers, (2) on the technical
compatibility of J3400 with existing regulations and safety
considerations, (3) on considerations regarding challenges and benefits
of the implementation of J3400 at charging stations, (4) on market
demands for the continued availability of CCS and J1772 connectors, and
(5) on options for performance-based standards.
1. Market Availability
a. What is the expected commercial availability and timeframe of
J3400 EVSE products such as connector and cable assemblies, EV
chargers, and adapters? Please be as specific (to month/year,
anticipated volumes) as possible.
b. What safety standards will J3400 EVSE products need to be
certified to and when will that certification occur? Are there any
concerns with obtaining appropriate electrical and mechanical safety
certifications for the J3400 connector?
c. What is the commercial availability and timeframe of vehicles
with (i) J3400 inlets, and (ii) 800V system architecture? Please be as
specific (to month/year, anticipated volumes) as possible.
d. Will future 800V vehicles be backwards compatible with 400V
charging stations? If yes, for how long?
e. What, if any, opportunities do you see to commercial
availability and use of J3400 connectors and chargers?
f. What, if any, barriers do you see to commercial availability and
use of J3400 connectors and chargers?
g. Is there existing domestic manufacturing capacity to meet
anticipated demand for J3400 connectors and chargers? If not, when do
you expect this capacity to be available? How many companies have
capability to ramp up production of J3400 ports, connectors, and/or
adapters?
h. How might the ownership and exercise of intellectual property
rights impact the development of J3400 EVSE products?
2. Technical Compatibility With 23 CFR Part 680
a. Do you foresee any challenges with J3400 specifically meeting
the power delivery requirements in 23 CFR 680.106(d)? Please elaborate
on these challenges with specific examples, data, etc.
b. Do you foresee any challenges with J3400 specifically meeting
the interoperability requirements in 23 CFR 680.108? Are there any
challenges with J3400 meeting other aspects of interoperability,
including compatibility, safety, and performance of connectors/inlets/
adapters, communications or security protocols, or support of vehicles
designed to charge using CCS/J1772 connectors? Please elaborate on
these challenges with specific examples, data, etc.
c. Do you foresee any other challenges with J3400 meeting other
existing requirements in 23 CFR part 680? Please elaborate on these
challenges with specific examples, data, etc.
d. Have any issues been identified or foreseen using a combined
connector that accommodates both CCS Type 1 and J3400 connectors with
one cable (as an example, combined connector designs such as Tesla's
Magic Dock)? Is there a difference in performance or durability between
the use of a combined cable with multiple connectors and the use of two
separate cables (each with their own connector)? Please comment
specifically about power level and reliability.
3. Implementation Challenges and Benefits at Charging Stations
a. Is there a need to include J3400 connectors on all federally-
funded chargers? Is there a difference between the use of J3400
connectors for DCFC or AC Level 2 charging?
b. Is it practical to retrofit an existing DCFC with a J3400 or
other connector either in addition or as a replacement to an existing
connector? What is the cost of installation to retrofit an existing
charger with a J3400 or other connector in addition or as a replacement
to an existing connector? Would retrofitted or added J3400 connectors
on DCFC ports suffer from performance loss relative to natively
installed CCS connectors? Are there other challenges with retrofitting
an existing charger? If so, please describe challenges.
c. What is the cost of a DCFC with a CCS Type 1 connector? What is
the anticipated cost of a DCFC with a J3400 connector? What is the
anticipated cost of a charger that provides both CCS Type 1 and J3400
at each port? Are there differences in maintenance considerations
between these different types of DCFCs?
d. What is the cost of an AC Level 2 charger with a J1772
connector? What is the anticipated cost of an AC Level 2 charger with a
J3400 connector? What is the anticipated cost of a charger that
provides both J1772 and J3400? Are there differences in maintenance
considerations between these different types of AC Level 2 chargers?
e. What, if any, equity-related challenges or benefits may result
from use of J3400 connectors? What are the benefits or challenges for
persons with disabilities between using J3400 and CCS/J1772 connectors?
What strategies could increase those benefits or mitigate the
challenges? If each charging station has a specified number of each
type of connector (J3400 and CCS Type 1/J1772), should accessible spots
be required to have both connectors?
f. What are workforce needs associated with retrofitting or
installing chargers to be J3400 compatible and maintaining those
chargers once installed? Will existing training and certification
programs need to be updated or amended to cover J3400 installation,
operations, and maintenance?
g. Are there any compatibility, reliability, or safety concerns
about charging vehicles that are designed to charge using CCS/J1772
connectors at new J3400 AC level 2 chargers or at J3400 DCFCs with an
adapter?
h. What are the challenges, if any, in ensuring that J3400 will
utilize ISO15118 cyber physical security protections such as TLS
authorization and authentication?
4. Market Demands for the Continued Availability of CCS, J1772, and
J3400 Connectors
a. Over time, what will be the expected continued demand for CCS/
J1772 connectors?
b. Over time, what will be the expected market adoption of J3400 in
new vehicle models? Please be specific in regard to the anticipated
percentage of J3400 and CCS/J1772 vehicles by model year.
c. Over time, what will be the expected demand for J3400
connectors?
[[Page 16084]]
Are new connector types (other than CCS, J1772, and J3400) likely to
enter the market?
d. What is the anticipated useful life of the CCS, J1772, and J3400
connectors and cables that are currently in use (or that will be
installed in the near future)?
e. What is the expected impact of the TIR to the market for vehicle
models that were manufactured to utilize CCS/J1772 connectors?
5. Performance-Based Standards 4
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ As noted above, the term ``performance-based standards'' in
this context refers to standards that specify a level of service and
types of vehicles a charger must support without specifying specific
connectors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
a. If there is a need to include J3400 connectors on chargers, what
are the advantages and disadvantages of the following design-based
approaches?
Approach 1: Include both J3400 and CCS Type 1/J1772 connectors on
each port.
Approach 2: Include a specified number of each type of connector
(J3400 and CCS Type 1/J1772) at each charging station.
Under Approach 2, what is the optimal ratio of J3400 connectors to
CCS/J1772 connectors? Why?
If there is not a need to include J3400 connectors on chargers,
what are the advantages and disadvantages of the following design-based
approaches to including J3400, CCS/J1772, or other connectors alongside
cables?
Approach 1: Provide at least one adapter for J3400 connectors at
each charging station.
Approach 2: Customers must provide their own adapters for use.
Are there alternative design-based approaches to accommodate J3400
and CCS/J1772 equipped vehicles?
b. Are there performance-based alternatives to specifying charging
standards and communication standards (such as J3400, J1772, or ISO
15118) by reference that would support a convenient, affordable,
reliable, and equitable EV charging network while reducing the need for
future refinement to federal regulations?
c. Which performance-based alternative (i.e., standards that
specify a level of service and types of vehicles a charger must support
without specifying specific connectors) would best facilitate
competition and innovation in EV markets? Which performance-based
alternatives have the potential to harm competition, create consumer
lock in, or otherwise erect or increase entry barriers?
d. Should performance-based standards include requirements for
achieving Key Performance Indicators most important to EV customers? If
so, what should those Key Performance Indicators be?
6. Other Considerations
a. Is there anything additionally that should be considered related
to EV charging connector standards and technologies that is not covered
in the above questions?
b. Are there any supply chain issues for EVs and EVSEs related to
support for 800V architectures?
Shailen P. Bhatt,
Administrator, Federal Highway Administration.
[FR Doc. 2024-04750 Filed 3-5-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-P