ANSI_EVSP_Roadmap_May_2013.pdf

VSP
STANDARDIZATION ROADMAP
FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLES
VERSION 2.0
MAY 2013
Prepared by the
Electric Vehicles Standards Panel
of the
American National Standards Institute

[this page intentionally left blank]

ANSI EVSP Standardization Roadmap for Electric Vehicles, Version 2.0 Page 3 of 170
Table of Contents
Table of Contents .................................................................................................................. 3
Acknowledgments................................................................................................................. 7
Summary of Major Changes From Version 1.0...................................................................... 11
Executive Summary............................................................................................................. 19
1. Introduction .................................................................................................................. 25
1.1 Situational Assessment for Electric Vehicles.......................................................................25
1.2 Roadmap Goals for EVs and Charging Infrastructure...........................................................27
1.3 Roadmap Boundaries ........................................................................................................28
1.4 Roadmap Audience ...........................................................................................................29
1.5 Roadmap Structure ...........................................................................................................29
1.6 Definitions ........................................................................................................................31
2. Background ................................................................................................................... 33
2.1 How the Roadmap was Developed and Promoted..............................................................33
2.2 Entities Operating in the EV Standards Space.....................................................................34
2.2.1 U.S.-based SDOs..............................................................................................................................35
2.2.2 Non U.S.-based SDOs ......................................................................................................................36
2.2.3 U.S. Federal Government Agencies.................................................................................................37
2.2.4 World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations (WP.29)..................................................38
2.2.5 Other Cross-Sector Initiatives .........................................................................................................39
3. Identification of Issues................................................................................................... 43
3.1 Vehicle Domain.................................................................................................................43
3.1.1 Energy Storage Systems..................................................................................................................44
3.1.1.1 Power Rating Methods ...................................................................................................44
3.1.1.2 Battery Safety..................................................................................................................44
3.1.1.3 Battery Testing – Performance and Durability................................................................44
3.1.1.4 Battery Storage, Packaging, Transport and Handling .....................................................45
3.1.1.5 Battery Recycling.............................................................................................................45
3.1.1.6 Battery Secondary Uses ..................................................................................................46
3.1.1.7 Crash Tests / Safety.........................................................................................................46
3.1.2 Vehicle Components .......................................................................................................................47
3.1.2.1 Internal High Voltage Cables, On-Board Wiring, Component Ratings and
Charging Accessories.......................................................................................................47
3.1.2.2 Vehicle Diagnostics – Emissions......................................................................................47

3.1.2.3 Audible Warning Systems ...............................................................................................47
3.1.3 Vehicle User Interface.....................................................................................................................47
3.1.3.1 Graphical Symbols...........................................................................................................48
3.1.3.2 Telematics – Driver Distraction.......................................................................................48
3.1.3.3 Fuel Efficiency, Emissions, and Labeling .........................................................................48
3.2 Infrastructure Domain.......................................................................................................48
3.2.1 Charging Systems............................................................................................................................49
3.2.1.1 Wireless Charging ...........................................................................................................49
3.2.1.2 Battery Swapping............................................................................................................50
3.2.1.3 Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE) ......................................................................50
3.2.1.4 Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC).............................................................................52
3.2.1.5 Vehicle as Supply.............................................................................................................52
3.2.1.6 Use of Alternative Power Sources...................................................................................53
3.2.2 Infrastructure Communications......................................................................................................53
3.2.2.1 Communications Architecture for EV Charging ..............................................................54
3.2.2.2 Communications Requirements for Various EV Charging Scenarios...............................57
3.2.2.3 Communication and Measurement of EV Energy Consumption ....................................58
3.2.2.4 Cyber Security and Data Privacy .....................................................................................59
3.2.2.5 Telematics Smart Grid Communications.........................................................................59
3.2.3 Infrastructure Installation ...............................................................................................................59
3.2.3.1 Site Assessment / Power Capacity Assessment ..............................................................60
3.2.3.2 EV Charging – Signage and Parking.................................................................................60
3.2.3.3 Charging Station Permitting............................................................................................60
3.2.3.4 Environmental and Use Conditions.................................................................................61
3.2.3.5 Ventilation – Multiple Charging Vehicles........................................................................61
3.2.3.6 Guarding of EVSE.............................................................................................................61
3.2.3.7 Accessibility for Persons with Disabilities to EVSE ..........................................................61
3.2.3.8 Cable Management.........................................................................................................62
3.2.3.9 EVSE Maintenance ..........................................................................................................62
3.2.3.10 Workplace Safety............................................................................................................62
3.3 Support Services Domain...................................................................................................62
3.3.1 Education and Training ...................................................................................................................64
3.3.1.1 Electric Vehicle Emergency Shut Off – High Voltage Batteries, Power Cables,
Disconnect Devices; Fire Suppression, Fire Fighting Tactics and Personal
Protective Equipment .....................................................................................................65
3.3.1.2 Labeling of EVSE and Load Management Disconnects for Emergency Situations ..........65
3.3.1.3 OEM Emergency Response Guides .................................................................................65
3.3.1.4 Electrical Energy Stranded in an Inoperable RESS; Battery Assessment and Safe
Discharge Following an Emergency Event ......................................................................66
3.3.1.5 Disaster Planning / Emergency Evacuations Involving Electric Vehicles.........................66
3.3.1.6 Workforce Training .........................................................................................................67

4. Gap Analysis of Standards, Codes, Regulations, Conformance Programs and
Harmonization Efforts ......................................................................................................... 69
4.1 Vehicle Domain.................................................................................................................69
4.1.1 Energy Storage Systems..................................................................................................................70
4.1.1.1 Power Rating Methods ...................................................................................................70
4.1.1.2 Battery Safety..................................................................................................................70
4.1.1.3 Battery Testing – Performance and Durability................................................................74
4.1.1.4 Battery Storage, Packaging, Transport and Handling .....................................................75
4.1.1.5 Battery Recycling.............................................................................................................78
4.1.1.6 Battery Secondary Uses ..................................................................................................79
4.1.1.7 Crash Tests / Safety.........................................................................................................79
4.1.2 Vehicle Components .......................................................................................................................81
4.1.2.1 Internal High Voltage Cables, On-Board Wiring, Component Ratings and
Charging Accessories.......................................................................................................81
4.1.2.2 Vehicle Diagnostics – Emissions......................................................................................83
4.1.2.3 Audible Warning Systems ...............................................................................................84
4.1.3 Vehicle User Interface.....................................................................................................................85
4.1.3.1 Graphical Symbols...........................................................................................................85
4.1.3.2 Telematics – Driver Distraction.......................................................................................86
4.1.3.3 Fuel Efficiency, Emissions and Labeling ..........................................................................87
4.2 Infrastructure Domain.......................................................................................................88
4.2.1 Charging Systems............................................................................................................................88
4.2.1.1 Wireless Charging ...........................................................................................................88
4.2.1.2 Battery Swapping............................................................................................................89
4.2.1.3 Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE) ......................................................................90
4.2.1.4 Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC)...........................................................................101
4.2.1.5 Vehicle as Supply...........................................................................................................102
4.2.1.6 Use of Alternative Power Sources.................................................................................104
4.2.2 Infrastructure Communications....................................................................................................105
4.2.2.1 Communications Architecture for EV Charging ............................................................105
4.2.2.2 Communications Requirements for Various EV Charging Scenarios.............................108
4.2.2.3 Communication and Measurement of EV Energy Consumption ..................................111
4.2.2.4 Cyber Security and Data Privacy ...................................................................................115
4.2.2.5 Telematics Smart Grid Communications.......................................................................115
4.2.3 Infrastructure Installation .............................................................................................................116
4.2.3.1 Site Assessment / Power Capacity Assessment ............................................................116
4.2.3.2 EV Charging – Signage and Parking...............................................................................118
4.2.3.3 Charging Station Permitting..........................................................................................119
4.2.3.4 Environmental and Use Conditions...............................................................................121
4.2.3.5 Ventilation – Multiple Charging Vehicles......................................................................122
4.2.3.6 Guarding of EVSE...........................................................................................................123

4.2.3.7 Accessibility for Persons with Disabilities to EVSE ........................................................123
4.2.3.8 Cable Management.......................................................................................................124
4.2.3.9 EVSE Maintenance ........................................................................................................125
4.2.3.10 Workplace Safety..........................................................................................................125
4.3 Support Services Domain.................................................................................................126
4.3.1 Education and Training .................................................................................................................126
4.3.1.1 Electric Vehicle Emergency Shut Off – High Voltage Batteries, Power Cables,
Disconnect Devices; Fire Suppression, Fire Fighting Tactics and Personal
Protective Equipment ...................................................................................................126
4.3.1.2 Labeling of EVSE and Load Management Disconnects for Emergency Situations ........127
4.3.1.3 OEM Emergency Response Guides ...............................................................................128
4.3.1.4 Electrical Energy Stranded in an Inoperable RESS; Battery Assessment and Safe
Discharge Following an Emergency Event ....................................................................128
4.3.1.5 Disaster Planning / Emergency Evacuations Involving Electric Vehicles.......................129
4.3.1.6 Workforce Training .......................................................................................................130
5. Summary of Gap Analysis............................................................................................. 135
6. On the Horizon ............................................................................................................ 149
Appendix A. EV Charging Actors and Communications ....................................................... 151
A.1 Introduction....................................................................................................................151
A.2 Role of Communications in EV Charging Infrastructure.....................................................151
A.3 EV Charging Aspect of the Smart Grid ..............................................................................152
A.4 Functional View of EV Charging Infrastructure Communications.......................................154
A.5 Communications Architecture for EV Charging .................................................................157
A.6 Actors.............................................................................................................................160
A.7 Sample Types of Communications Between Actors...........................................................161
Appendix B. Glossary of Acronyms and Abbreviations........................................................ 165

Acknowledgments
In addition to the individuals acknowledged in version 1.0 of this roadmap, thanks are extended to those
who commented on the roadmap or helped to promote it, and to the following professionals for their
contributions, financial and/or in-kind support toward the development of this version 2.0 update. The
update is based on a consensus of the active participants and does not necessarily reflect the views of
the individuals or organizations listed. The employment status and affiliations of individual participants
are subject to change.
AEYCH LLC Hank McGlynn (SAE)
Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers Giedrius Ambrozaitis
American National Standards Institute Joe Bhatia, Susanah Doucet, Bei Gu, Rachel
Howenstine, Gary Kushnier, Jim McCabe,*** Leslie
McDermott, Liz Neiman, Elise Owen, Jessica Roop,
Fran Schrotter
Amperex Technology Ltd. Bob Galyen (SAE)*, Joern Tinnemeyer (SAE)
Poul Andersen Consulting Poul Andersen
Argonne National Laboratory Theodore Bohn (DOE), Hina Chaudhry
Association of Global Automakers John Cabaniss, Julia Rege
ATIS Steve Barclay, Thomas Payne, Paul Savitz
Audi AG Martin Conrads
Autoliv Americas, ATC Doug Stein (SAE)
Automotive Manufacturing Technical Education
Collaborative
Sam Collier
Better Place Liran Katzir, Frank Kitzantides,* Hugh McDermott,
Ziva Patir
The Bishop Group Paul Bishop (IEEE)
CenterPoint Energy Greg Angst
Chrysler Rich Scholer (SAE)
Corning James E. Matthews, III**
Coulomb Technologies, Inc. Shantanu Kothavale,* Richard Lowenthal
CSA America Shawn Paulsen, Cliff Rondeau
Delphi David Lambert (Global Automakers), Laurie Moore
Duke Energy Michael D. Rowand, Mike Waters
Eaton Matt Guth, Kevin Lippert
EDF Energy R&D UK Centre Panagiotis Papadopoulos
Edison Electric Institute Steven Rosenstock
EFACEC Antonio Guimaraes
EIS Alliance Chris Kotting
Electric Power Research Institute Mark Duvall, John Halliwell
Elite Electronic Engineering Inc. Craig Fanning
Energetics Fred Wagner (DOE)
EnerNex Dr. Aaron Snyder
Ericsson Stephen Hayes (ATIS)
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Jessica Cockrell, Ray Palmer

FirstEnergy Technologies Timothy Croushore
Ford John Bilezikjan (SAE)
General Electric Phil Piqueira, Heather Pugliese, Patrick Salas
General Motors George Bellino (SAE), Slav Berezin (SAE), Gery Kissel
(SAE), David Reeck
Gridmerge Robert Cragie
Don Heirman Consultants Don Heirman
Hendry and Associates Anne Hendry
Honda Tommy Chang (Global Automakers)
Hubbell John Goodsell, Dennis Oddsen
IEEE Paul Bishop, Michael Kipness, Tim Kostyk, Russ
Lefevre
International Association of Electrical
Inspectors
David Clements
International Code Council Bruce E. Johnson, David Karmol, Kim Paarlberg,
Kermit Robinson
Intertek Rich Byczek*
ITT Interconnect Solutions Lee Wolfel
Dale Kardos & Assoc. Inc. Dale Kardos* (Global Automakers)
LastMile TT Vishant Shah
Leviton Ken Brown (NEMA)
Magna E-Car Zilai Zhao
Mitsubishi Electric Research Labs Zafer Sahinoglu
Mitsubishi Motors Corporation Bowu Reed
Mitsubishi Research Institute Yuichiro Shimura
Motorcycle Industry Council Pamela Arnette, Mel Stahl
National Electrical Contractors Association Michael Johnston
National Electrical Manufacturers Association Ryan Franks, Harry Massey, Andrei Moldoveanu,
Paul Molitor*
National Fire Protection Association Kathleen Almand, Ryan Depew, Christian Dubay,
Mark Earley,* Ken Willette*
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Phil Gorney
National Institute of Standards & Technology Tanya Brewer, Marc Buttler, Dr. Allen Hefner, Dr.
Jeffrey Mazer, Mary H. Saunders
National Renewable Energy Laboratory Mike Simpson (DOE)
Gregory C. Nieminski, LLC Greg Nieminski (EPRI)
Nissan USA Joe Thompson (Global Automakers)
Open Secure Energy Control Systems Stan Klein
P3 North America Arthur Holland (SAE)
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Krishnan Gowri (DOE), Rick Pratt (DOE)
Panasonic Mike Stelts
PRBA – The Rechargeable Battery Association George Kerchner
Public Utilities Commission of Texas Julie Black
Qualcomm Mark Klerer
Rocky Mountain Institute Ben Holland
RSR Technologies, Inc. Dr. Tim Ellis, Dr. Jacob Hohn

SAE International Peter Byk,* Patricia Ebejer, Jack Pokrzywa, Gary
Pollak,* Gary Schkade, Keith Wilson*
San Diego Gas & Electric JC Martin
Schneider Electric Steve Hsu, Alan Manche,* James T. Pauley**
SEW-Eurodrive Tim Schumann
Siemens Chun Fan, Rick Kluth, John Young
Sony Electronics, Inc. Dr. Paul J. Hearty
Southern California Edison Richard Hodson, Joshua McDonald,* Jose Salazar
ST Microelectronics James Allen (HomePlug Powerline Alliance, IEEE)
TDI Power John Santini
Telecommunications Industry Association Cheryl Blum, Herb Congdon
ThinkSmartGrid Mike Coop
TKstds Management Tom Kurihara (IEEE)
Tseng InfoServ, LLC Mitch Tseng
TUV SUD Canada Erik Spek (VdTÜV)
Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. Joseph Bablo,* Sonya Bird, Kenneth Boyce, Kent
Donohue, Laurie Florence,* Maurice Johnson, John
Thompson
U.S. Department of Energy Linda Bluestein, Keith Hardy, Lee Slezak
VdTÜV Volker Blandow, Sebastian Oertel
Xanthus Consulting International Frances Cleveland
*Asterisk following a name denotes Working Group Co-Chair.
**Double asterisk following a name denotes ANSI EVSP Co-Chair.
***Triple asterisk following a name denotes ANSI staff lead.
Parentheses signify participation on behalf of an organization.

Summary of Major Changes From Version 1.0
High-Level Structural and Content Changes
The general structure of the roadmap version 1.0 has been retained. In addition to the inclusion of this
summary of major changes from version 1.0, other changes in structure and content are as follows:
- A new section 1.6 has been added to highlight definitions used in the document, specifically
electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE).
- Section 2.1 was renamed How the Roadmap was Developed and Promoted to include summary
text about domestic and international coordination efforts.
- A new section 2.2.4 was added on the World Forum for the Harmonization of Vehicle
Regulations (WP.29).
- Other Cross-Sector Initiatives was renumbered section 2.2.5. This section now includes an
expanded description of the work of the Smart Grid Interoperability Panel Vehicle to Grid
Domain Experts Working Group (SGIP V2G DEWG) and its roadmap, plus information about
regional and state initiatives.
- Sections 3.2.2 and 4.2.2 on Infrastructure Communications have been divided into parallel
subsections covering Communications Architecture for EV Charging; Communications
Requirements for Various EV Charging Scenarios; Communication and Measurement of EV
Energy Consumption; Cyber Security and Data Privacy; and, Telematics Smart Grid
Communications. It is clarified that standardization generally relating to smart device
communications, the connected vehicle, and intelligent transportation systems is out of scope;
rather, the focus is communications standardization that is essential or unique to the PEV
charging infrastructure (e.g., communications between an EV, EVSE and Energy Service
Provider).
- Subsections 3.2.3.2 and 4.2.3.2 have been renamed EV Charging – Signage and Parking. The text
includes discussions of public signage for EV charging and EV parking space allocation.
- Subsections 3.3.1.1 and 4.3.1.1 have been renamed Electric Vehicle Emergency Shut Off – High
Voltage Batteries, Power Cables, Disconnect Devices; Fire Suppression, Fire Fighting Tactics and
Personal Protective Equipment. The aspect regarding fire suppression, fire fighting tactics and
personal protective clothing is new.
- Subsections 3.3.1.2 and 4.3.1.2 have been renamed Labeling of EVSE and Load Management
Disconnects for Emergency Situations.
- Subsections 3.3.1.4 and 4.3.1.4 have been renamed Electrical Energy Stranded in an Inoperable
RESS; Battery Assessment and Safe Discharge Following an Emergency Event. The discussion of
stranded energy is new.

- New subsections 3.3.1.5 and 4.3.1.5 have been added on Disaster Planning / Emergency
Evacuations Involving Electric Vehicles. Battery recharge in emergencies is addressed here.
- Workforce Training has been renumbered subsections 3.3.1.6 and 4.3.1.6.
- Section 4 gap statements now include an indication whether or not a gap is grid related and a
descriptor of the status of progress since the release of version 1.0 of the roadmap. Thus, the
status of progress is described as: Closed (completed) or, using a traffic light analogy, as Green
(moving forward), Yellow (delayed in progressing), Red (at a standstill), Not Started or Unknown.
New gaps for version 2.0 are identified as such. Any significant changes from version 1.0 are
summarized in an update statement.
- Section 5 has been renamed Summary of Gap Analysis and provides a table summarizing the
findings of the gap analysis in section 4 described above. On the far right of the table, a column
has been added on the Status of Progress since the release of version 1.0 of the roadmap. A key
at the top of the table defines the descriptors used to assess the status of progress.
- Section 6 has been renamed On the Horizon and briefly describes technology opportunities and
next steps.
- Appendix A has been substantially updated to provide a primer on EV communications.
Summary of Gap Analysis Changes
In roadmap version 2.0, a total of 58 issues are reviewed (versus 52 in version 1.0). Of these:
- 14 are issues where no gap was identified (versus 16 in version 1.0), meaning where it was felt
that existing standards and/or regulations adequately address the issue:
o 13 of these are carried over from version 1.0;
o 1 is a new issue, that being “Disaster Planning / Emergency Evacuations Involving
Electric Vehicles.”
- 44 gaps or partial gaps are identified (versus 36 in version 1.0); a “gap” is where no standard or
conformance program currently exists to address a safety, performance, or interoperability
issue). Of these:
- 30 of the gaps are near-term priorities (versus 22 in version 1.0) which means they should
be addressed in 0-2 years;
o 7 new gaps that are near-term priorities are introduced in version 2.0; the status of
progress on all of them is green:
 A new near-term gap on “Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC)” (4.2.1.4)
has been added with the recommendation to complete work on IEC 61851-

21, Parts 1 and 2, and SAE J2954 to address EMC issues related to electric
vehicle charging.
 A new near-term gap on “Standardization of EV Sub-meters” (4.2.2.3) has
been added with the recommendation to develop standards or guidelines
related to the functionality and measurement characteristics of the new
types of sub-meters that are coming out for EVs, including embedded sub-
meters in the EVSE or EV. NEMA and the NIST U.S. National Working Group
on Measuring Systems for Electric Vehicle Fueling and Submetering
(USNWG EVF&S) are listed as potential developers.
 A new near-term gap on “Coordination of EV Sub-metering activities”
(4.2.2.3) has been added with the recommendation that organizations
developing standards, guidelines or use cases related to EV sub-metering
should coordinate their activities in order to avoid duplication of effort,
assure alignment, and maximize efficiency. Specifically, these are identified
as NEMA, the USNWG EVF&S, and the SGIP V2G DEWG.
 A new near-term gap on “Cyber Security and Data Privacy” (4.2.2.4) has
been added that there is a need for guidelines and standards to address
cyber security and data privacy concerns associated with PEVs and smart
grid communications. The recommendation is to complete work to develop
SAE J2931/7, and to revise ISO/IEC 15118-1 and NISTR 7628, volume 2.
 A new near-term gap on “Telematics Smart Grid Communications” (4.2.2.5)
has been added that there is a need to develop use cases related to non-
utility aggregation control and vehicle information in order to assess the
existing functionalities, and to determine any missing requirements within
the context of existing standards, Energy Service Provider (ESP) business
requirements, and telematics networks to support smart grid load
management. The recommendation is to complete work on SAE J2836/5TM
.
 A new near-term gap on “Electrical energy stranded in an Inoperable RESS”
(4.3.1.4) provides that standards to enable common method assessment of
rechargeable energy storage systems (RESS) condition and stability, and
removal of the energy stranded from an inoperable RESS, are needed to
increase the safety margin to persons who may become exposed to the
device in an inoperable state for various reasons and conditions during the
RESS life cycle. The recommendation is for NHTSA and the Argonne National
Laboratory to carry out a research project that they have begun to
independently identify a solution set to the issue of electrical energy
stranded in a damaged or inoperable RESS, and that work should be
completed on SAE J3009 to address a similar scope.

 A new near-term gap on “Workforce Training – Charging Station Permitting”
(4.3.1.5) has been added to develop and promote a “Code Official Toolkit”
related to EVSE permitting.
o 4 of the gaps that were near-term priorities identified in version 1.0 are now closed
or will be shortly:
 The partial gap on “Power quality” (4.2.1.3) will be closed with the
publication of SAE J2894/2.
 The partial gap on “EVSE charging levels” (4.2.1.3) with respect to DC
charging levels is now closed with the publication of the new version of
SAE J1772™.
 The partial gap on “Off-board charging station and portable EV cord set
safety within North America” (4.2.1.3) is closed with the publication of the
new tri-national standard based on UL 2594.
 The partial gap on “EV coupler safety within North America” (4.2.1.3) is
closed with the publication of the new tri-national standard based on UL
2251.
o 19 of the gaps that are near-term priorities are still open from version 1.0. The
status of progress can be described as follows: 14 are green, 2 are yellow, none are
red, 2 are not started, and 1 the status is unknown. Significant developments
include:
 The gap on “Charging of roaming EVs between EVSPs” (4.2.2.2) notes that
NEMA’s EVSE section organized a working group to develop a standard that
supports roaming that allows charging services from a provider other than
the home EVSP. The standard will include inter-operator interfaces to
address the various stages of a charging session (e.g.,
authentication/authorization, charging data records, billing record
exchange.) The NEMA working group also is looking to develop a radio-
frequency identification (RFID) credential protocol specification so that all
EVSEs that implement the specification will be able to read RFID cards that
conform to the specification. IEC also has initiated work on IEC 62831 Ed.
1.0, User identification in Electric Vehicle Service Equipment using a
smartcard, which describes the physical and protocol layers of an RFID card
used in charging spots.
 The gap on “Access control at charging stations” (4.2.2.2) indicates that
NEMA’s EVSE section set up a working group to look at this issue. It decided

that offline access control lists were a low priority and deferred action on
offline access control to a later phase of work.
o 11 of the near-term priorities from version 1.0 were substantially revised:
 The recommendation on “Delayed battery overheating events” (4.1.1.2) was
revised to say that this issue should be addressed in future rulemaking
and/or revisions of SAE J2929 based on the results of the DOT/NHTSA-
funded SAE Cooperative Research Project. NHTSA has been added as a
potential developer.
 The UN Subcommittee of Experts on the Transport of Dangerous Goods was
added as a potential developer to the gap on “Packaging and transport of
waste batteries” (4.1.1.4) as there is a proposal before it.
 Regarding “Graphical symbols” (4.1.3.1), the text has been updated to note
NHTSA sponsored research on functional safety and failure modes. The
roadmap version 1.0 gap statement and recommendation have been re-
focused on communication of information to the driver. NHTSA has been
added as a potential developer and the priority level has been changed from
near-term to long-term. Regarding the roadmap version 1.0 gap statement
and recommendation relating to graphical symbols for “parts under the
hood,” this aspect is addressed in section 4.3.1.1 on EV emergency shut off.
 The gap on “Wireless charging” (4.2.1.1) was modified to account for IEEE
and IEC/TC 69 work, with both added as potential developers.
 The text and recommendation relating to “Battery swapping – safety”
(4.2.1.2) have been updated to note the new project IEC 62840 in IEC/TC 69.
 The text on “EV coupler interoperability with EVSE globally” (4.2.1.3) has
been updated to note the publication of the SAE J1772TM
AC/DC
combination coupler and that the forthcoming IEC 62196-3 will describe the
SAE J1772™ coupler and several other different DC coupler configurations
used elsewhere. The gap statement notes the publication of SAE J1772TM
.
The recommendation notes the need to incorporate SAE J1772TM
into IEC
62196-3 and the need to build out the charging infrastructure to
accommodate variations in coupler configurations for particular markets as
necessary, in particular with respect to DC charging. CHAdeMO, and “vehicle
and charging station manufacturers,” have been added alongside SAE and
IEC as “potential developers.”
 The text, gap statement, recommendation and list of potential developers
on “Vehicle as supply” (4.2.1.5) have been substantially reworked to focus

specifically on the need for harmonization of the DER communications
model between SAE J2836/3TM
, IEC/TR 61850-90-8, and SEP 2.0. Potential
changes to other standards to address integration of inverter-based DER
devices with the grid, or architecture and safety aspects of reverse power
flow, are contemplated in the text but not included as a gap.
 The roadmap version 1.0 text, gap statement, recommendation and
potential developers on “Communication of standardized EV sub-metering
data” (4.2.2.3) have been revised to be specific about communication of EV
sub-metering data between third parties and service providers and to
complete work on the Green Button Sub-metering Profile of ESPI.
 The partial gap on “Electric Vehicle Emergency Shut Off” (4.3.1.1) largely has
been addressed with the publication of SAE J2990. The text, gap statement
and recommendation have been substantially modified to more broadly
capture the scope of safety concerns facing emergency responders including
the possibility that additional standardization work may be needed with
respect to fire suppression, fire fighting tactics and personal protective
equipment.
 The text, gap statement and recommendation on “Labeling of EVSE and load
management disconnects” (4.3.1.2) have been clarified to address labeling
for emergency situations. UL and NEMA have been added as potential
developers.
 The gap on “Battery assessment and safe discharge following an emergency
event” (4.3.1.4) has been modified to include an assessment of battery
stability. Emergency responders are no longer identified as the specific user
of battery discharge procedures since second responders (tow operators,
roadside assistance) and OEM representatives also may need such training.
The development of such procedures is now described as contingent upon
research underway by NHTSA / Argonne National Laboratory on stranded
energy. Argonne and NFPA have been added as potential developers. Text
regarding safe battery recharge in emergencies has been removed and a
new roadmap section on Disaster Planning / Emergency Evacuations
Involving Electric Vehicles has been added to separately address that
concern.
- 13 of the gaps are mid-term priorities (versus 12 in version 1.0) which should be addressed
in 2-5 years;
o 1 new mid-term gap on “Workforce Training – Colleges and Universities” (4.3.1.5)
has been added to develop higher education programs focused on electric vehicle

charging infrastructure development from the standpoint of land use, community
planning and architecture.
o Of the 12 mid-term priorities from version 1.0 that are still open, the status of
progress can be described as follows: 4 are green, 2 are yellow, 1 is red, 4 are not
started, and 1 is unknown. Significant developments include:
 Because of resource issues, work on the power rating method standards
(4.1.1.1) SAE J2907 and J2908 has been canceled and will be re-opened
under a new J number at a future date yet to be determined.
 The gap on “Locating and reserving a public charging station” (4.2.2.2) notes
that NEMA’s EVSE section organized a working group to develop a standard
that permits EV drivers to universally locate a public charging spot. It
decided that reserving a public charging spot was a low priority and
deferred action on reservations to a later phase of work.
 In relation to the gap on “Accessibility for persons with disabilities to EVSE”
(4.2.3.7), additional text has been added to the roadmap describing the
two-step process for addressing accessible EV parking and charging in
relevant standards and codes including the ICC A117.1, IBC®, IgCCTM
, and
IZC®. Non-accessible EV parking and charging also is addressed in the
roadmap text.
o 2 of the mid-term priorities from version 1.0 have been substantially revised:
 The gap on “Loss of control/dual mode failure in the battery” was reworked
as “Functional safety in the charging system” (4.1.1.2). The gap statement
and recommendation have been updated to note NHTSA-funded research,
that the issue may be with the charging system rather than the battery, and
that NHTSA rulemaking may result. NHTSA has been added as a potential
developer and the priority level has been changed from mid-term to near-
term.
 The text and potential developers for “Guarding of EVSE” (4.2.3.6) have
been updated. NFPA has work on premises security and, so, has been added
as a potential developer. It does not appear that NHTSA has jurisdiction in
this area and neither it nor the American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials (AASHTO) have developed guidelines or standards
for guarding of EVSE. No other agencies or organizations have been
identified at this time that are working on this issue.
- 1 of the gaps is a long-term priority (versus 2 in version 1.0) and should be addressed in 5+
years.

o As noted earlier, the gap on “Graphical Symbols” (4.1.3.1) is still open from version
1.0. The status is not started.
o 2 of the long-term priorities from version 1.0 have been substantially revised:
 The text and recommendation on “Battery recycling” (4.1.1.5) have been
updated to note relevant work by SAE. The priority level has been changed
from long-term to near-term.
 The text on “Battery secondary uses” (4.1.1.6) has been updated to note
some of the considerations in the work thus far by the SAE committee. The
priority level of the gap has been changed from long-term to mid-term.
Additional Significant Text Changes
- Text regarding the work of the Electric Vehicle Safety Informal Working Group (EVS-IWG) of
WP.29 has been added to Subsection 4.1.1.2 on Battery Safety.
- The work of the SAE EV Crash Test Safety Procedures Task Force has been noted in
Subsection 4.1.1.7 on Crash Tests / Safety.
- Text regarding the North American harmonization effort based on UL 2231, Parts 1 and 2,
has been added to Subsection 4.2.1.3 under EV Supply Equipment and Charging Systems.
- Additional information about the IEC 61851 series of standards, including on light electric
vehicles, and the IEC 62196 series, has been added to Subsection 4.2.1.3 on Electric Vehicle
Supply Equipment (EVSE).
- New Subsection 4.2.2.1 on Communications Architecture for EV Charging includes more
information on the relationship between the SAE communications standards and the
corresponding ISO/IEC 15118 series.
- New Subsection 4.2.2.2 on Communications Requirements for Various EV Charging
Scenarios includes text about European work related to communication between EVSEs and
charging network operating systems including the Open Charge Point Protocol (OCPP), eMI3
and Green eMotion, as well as inter-operator interoperability, including the Open Clearing
House Protocol (OCHP) and Hubject joint venture.
- New Subsection 4.2.2.3 on Communication and Measurement of EV Energy Consumption
includes expanded text on sub-metering, third party sub-metering use cases, and
standardization activities including communications formats between a third party data
management agent and a billing agent and on functional and measurement characteristics
of third party sub-meters.
- Additional text regarding challenges associated with the EVSE installation permitting process
is included in Subsection 4.2.3.3.

Executive Summary
Electric vehicles (“EVs,” a/k/a electric drive vehicles) offer the potential to significantly reduce the
United States’ (U.S.) use of imported oil, create a multitude of well-paying jobs through the
establishment of a broad, domestic EV industry, and reduce on-road vehicular emissions. In order to
achieve this potential, and broadly penetrate the consumer market, EVs must be undeniably safe,
become more cost competitive, and otherwise satisfy user expectations and needs.
While there are many types of EVs, including those powered by fuel cells and other technologies, this
roadmap’s primary focus is on light duty, on-road plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs) that are recharged via a
connection to the electrical grid, as well as the supporting charging infrastructure needed to power
them. PEVs include battery-powered all electric vehicles (AEVs), sometimes referred to as battery
electric vehicles (BEVs), and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs). Some plug-in models are also
extended range electric vehicles (EREVs) that function as an AEV, plus have a feature to extend vehicle
range beyond the battery (e.g., via a gasoline generator and other possibilities). Conventional hybrid EVs
(HEVs) which are recharged by an internal combustion engine are yet another type of EV and, while not
the focus of this roadmap, are noted where there are relevant safety and other considerations.
Given the current range limitations of plug-in EVs on battery power alone, a critical need is the
establishment of a supporting charging infrastructure to enable vehicle recharging at home, at work,
and in public locations. This infrastructure must be reliable and broadly interoperable regardless of the
type of PEV or charging system utilized.
Equally important is the establishment of a comprehensive and robust support services sector that
includes training of emergency first responders, vehicle technicians, electrical installers and inspectors,
as well as education of authorities having jurisdiction, building owners, and consumers.
Never has there been a more auspicious time for EVs than the present. Nonetheless, while the times
appear especially promising, EVs do face significant challenges to widespread adoption. In order for EVs
to be broadly successful, the following challenges must be successfully addressed:
Safety: While inherently neither more nor less safe than conventional internal combustion engine
vehicles, EVs do have unique safety complexities and risks which must be understood and accounted for
as part of the vehicle life cycle.
Affordability: Cost is a critical issue which must be continually addressed in order for EVs to become
widely accepted and broadly penetrate the consumer market.
Interoperability: The ability to recharge anywhere in a secure fashion will greatly enhance EV driver
flexibility and user convenience.
Performance: The ability to extend the driving range of EVs on a single battery charge without the need
for range extension is largely due to energy storage capabilities (batteries) and a function of technology
development.

Environmental Impact: The demand from both regulators and consumers for “greener” vehicles
(i.e., more fuel-efficient, less reliant on fossil fuels) must be met.
Standards, code provisions, and regulations, as well as conformance and training programs, cross over
all these areas and are a critical enabler of the large-scale introduction of EVs and the permanent
establishment of a broad, domestic EV and infrastructure industry and support services environment.
Roadmap Goals, Boundaries and Audience: In order to assess the standards and conformance programs
needed to facilitate the safe, mass deployment of EVs and charging infrastructure in the United States,
the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) convened the Electric Vehicles Standards Panel (ANSI
EVSP or “the Panel”). The decision to form the Panel was made at a meeting of key stakeholders in
March 2011 which ANSI convened in response to suggestions that the U.S. standardization community
needed a more coordinated approach to keep pace with electric vehicle initiatives moving forward in
other parts of the world. This effort draws upon participants from the automotive, utilities, and
electrotechnical sectors as well as from standards developing organizations (SDOs or “developers”) and
government agencies.
In April 2012, the ANSI EVSP released the Standardization Roadmap for Electric Vehicles – Version 1.0
(“roadmap”). The goals of this update to the roadmap remain the same, namely to:
1. Facilitate the development of a comprehensive, robust, and streamlined standards and
conformance landscape; and
2. Maximize the coordination and harmonization of the standards and conformance
environment domestically and with international partners.
Accordingly, the focus of this roadmap is to comprehensively identify, inventory, and assess existing
standards, relevant codes and regulations, and related conformance and training programs, ascertain
gaps and recommended solutions. This includes identification of prioritized timeframes for when
standardization should occur and SDOs that may be able to lead the work.
It is important to emphasize that the focus of this roadmap is not merely to identify gaps and then to
suggest development of new standards or conformance programs to fill them. Rather, it is also to
identify opportunities where gaps potentially can be filled by revising or harmonizing existing standards
and conformance programs.
Several high level boundaries have been established in the development of this roadmap. The focus is
on PEVs, charging systems, and associated support services. Standards and conformance activities are
emphasized that have direct applicability to the U.S. market for PEVs and charging infrastructure.
Additionally, this roadmap has been developed with an eye toward international activities and
harmonization, and a strong emphasis is placed upon establishing priorities for near-term
standardization needs (0-2 years), while also assessing mid-term (2-5 years), and long-term (5+ years)
requirements.

This roadmap is targeted toward a broad audience including SDOs; U.S. federal, state, and municipal
governments; and the automotive, electrotechnical, and utilities industries, among others.
Entities Operating in the EV Space: The U.S. standards system acknowledges that there are multiple
paths to achieving globally relevant standards. Many SDOs and consortia operate on an international
scale and what matters is that the standards are developed according to the principles of the World
Trade Organization’s Technical Barriers to Trade Agreement. Coordination and harmonization among
international standardizing bodies is an aspirational goal that will help to foster innovation and grow
global markets for EVs. Suffice it to say that the deployment of EVs in the United States will be shaped
by the standards activities of a number of SDOs, both U.S.-based and non-U.S. based, as well as codes,
regulations, conformance and training programs, and related activities of many stakeholders, including
U.S. federal government agencies, inter-governmental bodies, and other cross-sector initiatives.
Roadmap Structure: The broad electric vehicle and infrastructure system is very complex and dynamic,
undergoing continual evolution and adaption, with many parties involved. In order to develop this
roadmap, it was necessary to frame activities under three broad domains: vehicles, infrastructure, and
support services. Within those three domains, seven broad topical areas of relevance to standards and
conformance programs for electric vehicles were identified: energy storage systems, vehicle
components, and vehicle user interface within the vehicle domain; charging systems, communications
and installation within the infrastructure domain; and education and training within the support services
domain.
While some distinct issues within the topical areas are solely applicable to one specific domain, in
general they are highly interrelated and interdependent. In many, if not most cases, important issues
related to standards and conformance programs cross over at least two of the domains simultaneously,
if not all three. Understanding the interrelationships and interfaces between the domains, topical areas,
and issues is essential.
Section 2 of the roadmap provides additional background regarding how this roadmap was developed
and promoted, and some of the key players that are shaping the standardization landscape for PEVs and
charging infrastructure.
Section 3 of the roadmap provides the context and explanation for why specific issues were considered
important and subsequently assessed as part of this roadmap. Sections 3 and 4 parallel one another in
structure to facilitate ease of use, cross comparisons, and consideration of issues across domains and
topical areas.
Section 4 is the gap analysis of standards, codes, regulations, conformance programs, and
harmonization efforts. This evaluation looks at existing and needed standards and conformance
programs that are relevant to the rollout of electric vehicles and charging infrastructure in the United
States. Where gaps are identified, recommendations for remediation are noted. Based on an
assessment of the acuteness of risk, a priority for addressing each gap is noted, along with an indication
of the potential developer(s) who could undertake the work. Gap statements also include an indication

whether or not a gap is grid related and a descriptor of the status of progress since the roadmap version
1.0 was released.
Section 5 provides a table summarizing the findings of the gap analysis in section 4.
Section 6 briefly describes what is on the horizon in terms of technology opportunities and next steps.
Additionally, this roadmap is supplemented by the ANSI EVSP Roadmap Standards Compendium
(“compendium”), a searchable spreadsheet which inventories standards that are directly or peripherally
related to each issue, while also identifying related issues to which the standards potentially apply. Like
the roadmap itself, the compendium has been updated since its original publication in April 2012.
Summary of Gaps and Recommendations: Presently, this roadmap has identified a total of 44 gaps or
partial gaps and corresponding recommendations across the three domains and seven topical areas.
Thirty of these gaps / recommendations have been identified as near-term priorities, thirteen as mid-
term priorities, and one as a long-term priority.
Specifically, with regard to near-term safety and other priorities, the following gaps/partial gaps have
been identified: functional safety in the charging system; delayed battery overheating events; safe
storage of lithium-ion batteries; packaging and transport of waste batteries; battery recycling; audible
warning systems; wireless charging; battery swapping (both safety and interoperability); power quality;
EVSE charging levels; off-board charging station and portable EV cord set safety within North America;
EV coupler safety within North America; EV coupler interoperability with EVSE globally; conformance
programs for EV coupler interoperability within the U.S. market; electromagnetic compatibility (EMC);
vehicle as supply / reverse power flow; use of alternative power sources; charging of roaming EVs
between EVSPs; access control at charging stations; communication of standardized EV sub-metering
data; standardization of EV sub-meters; coordination of EV sub-metering activities; cyber security and
data privacy; telematics smart grid communications; electric vehicle emergency shut off – high voltage
batteries, power cables, disconnect devices; fire suppression, fire fighting tactics and personal protective
equipment; labeling of EVSE and load management disconnects for emergency situations; electrical
energy stranded in an inoperable RESS; battery assessment and safe discharge following an emergency
event; and, workforce training – charging station permitting.
In this context, a gap refers to a significant issue – whether it be related to safety, performance,
interoperability, etc. – that has been identified and that should be addressed in a standard, code,
regulation, or conformance program but for which currently none is published or known to exist that
adequately addresses the issue. Gaps can be filled through the creation of entirely new standards, code
provisions, regulations, or conformance programs, or through revisions to existing ones. In some cases
work may already be in progress to fill the gap.
A partial gap refers to a situation where a significant issue has been identified that is partially addressed
by an existing standard, code, regulation, or conformance program. No gap means there is no significant
issue that has been identified at this time or that is not already adequately covered by an existing
standard, code, regulation, or conformance program.

Next Steps: While this roadmap represents a specific snapshot in time, it maintains a distinctively
outward looking, over the horizon posture that will continue to facilitate discussions with domestic,
regional and international partners regarding coordination and harmonization of standardization
activities and adaption to technological and policy changes.
Depending upon the needs of stakeholders, and available resources, periodic updates on significant
electric vehicle standardization activities and progress to address the gaps identified in this roadmap will
be made. Issues that are new or that require further discussion also may be explored. The aim behind
any such efforts will be to continue to help guide, coordinate, and enhance the standards landscape as
needed to support the widespread introduction of PEVs and charging infrastructure.

1. Introduction
Electric vehicles (“EVs,” a/k/a electric drive vehicles) offer the potential to significantly reduce the
United States’ (U.S.) use of imported oil, create a multitude of well-paying jobs through the
establishment of a broad, domestic EV industry, and reduce on-road vehicular emissions. In order to
achieve this potential, and broadly penetrate the consumer market, EVs must be undeniably safe,
become more cost competitive, and otherwise satisfy user expectations and needs.
While there are many types of EVs, including those powered by fuel cells and other technologies, this
roadmap’s primary focus is on light duty, on-road plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs) that are recharged via a
connection to the electrical grid, as well as the supporting charging infrastructure needed to power
them. PEVs include battery-powered all electric vehicles (AEVs), sometimes referred to as battery
electric vehicles (BEVs), and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs). Some plug-in models are also
extended range electric vehicles (EREVs) that function as an AEV, plus have a feature to extend vehicle
range beyond the battery (e.g., via a gasoline generator and other possibilities). Conventional hybrid EVs
(HEVs) which are recharged by an internal combustion engine are yet another type of EV and, while not
the focus of this roadmap, are noted where there are relevant safety and other considerations.
Given the current range limitations of plug-in EVs on battery power alone, a critical need is the
establishment of a supporting charging infrastructure to enable vehicle recharging at home, at work,
and in public locations. This infrastructure must be reliable and broadly interoperable regardless of the
type of EV or charging system utilized.
Equally important is the establishment of a comprehensive and robust support services sector that
includes training of emergency first responders, vehicle technicians, electrical installers and inspectors,
as well as education of authorities having jurisdiction, building owners, and consumers.
Standards, code provisions, and regulations, as well as conformance and training programs, cross over
all these areas and are a critical enabler of the large-scale introduction of EVs and the permanent
establishment of a broad, domestic EV and infrastructure industry and support services environment.
1.1 Situational Assessment for Electric Vehicles
Several factors are driving the keen interest in EVs. Certainly, U.S. government concerns over energy
security and dependency on imported petroleum from increasingly unstable foreign markets is a
primary driver. The potential of EVs to offer a solution to this problem, to contribute to the reduction of
greenhouse gas emissions, and to promote economic growth and jobs creation in the new technologies,
has spurred substantial government investment in electric vehicle research and infrastructure. In his
2011 State of the Union address, U.S. President Barack Obama announced the goal of putting one
million electric vehicles on U.S. highways by 2015. There is also increasing demand for low-emission,
fuel-efficient and affordable vehicles from consumers who want to demonstrate their commitment to
the environment.

Never has there been a more auspicious time for EVs than the present. In recent years, there have been
major advances in energy storage technologies (most especially lithium-ion based technologies) that
have led to significant improvements in energy- and power density along with reduced costs. There have
also been steady achievements with regard to hybrid power train developments, power electronics, and
electric machines. Corporate average fuel economy (CAFÉ) requirements for 2016 and beyond provide
an additional impetus behind EVs. And never before has there been such a broad interest and
commitment by the automobile industry to the success of EVs.
Nonetheless, while the times appear especially promising, EVs do face significant challenges to
widespread adoption. In order for EVs to be broadly successful, the following challenges must be
successfully addressed: safety, affordability, interoperability, performance, and environmental impact.
These also can be viewed as core values that will directly impact consumer acceptance of EVs.
Standards, codes, regulations, and related conformance and training programs, are essential
components that will aid in successfully addressing these concerns.
Safety: While inherently neither more nor less safe than conventional internal combustion engine
vehicles, EVs do have unique safety complexities and risks which must be understood and accounted for
as part of the vehicle life cycle. Given the high voltages and currents in EVs, battery and cable safety is
especially important. This is true not only in accident situations for occupants and rescue personnel, but
during charging, vehicle/battery repair, replacement, and recycling. Standards play an invaluable role in
ensuring the safety of EV systems (and risks to technology manufacturers) especially if standards lead or
at a minimum keep pace with and foreshadow technology evolution. Forward-leaning safety standards,
codes, and regulations, complemented by conformance programs and training, are in fact essential to
avoiding accidents and public safety risks that potentially could adversely affect the widespread viability
of EVs.
Affordability: Cost is a critical issue which must be continually addressed in order for EVs to become
widely accepted and broadly penetrate the consumer market. EVs are more expensive than
conventional vehicles, largely driven by battery capital and replacement costs which are related to
economies of scale, manufacturing technology, and raw materials. Likewise, the cost of infrastructure
technology and installation needs to be reduced to bring the overall EV system life cycle cost in line with
that of conventional vehicles.
While standards, codes, and regulations do not directly impact the cost of EV systems, they do so
indirectly. For example, comprehensive, clear, and forwardly insightful standards and codes reduce risk
and uncertainty for technology developers and investors, serving as an insurance policy of sorts. A well
designed and fully developed standard and code environment encourages competition through
facilitation of new market entrants and increased private sector investment. Standards for recharging
will also lower costs for manufacturers and consumers.
Interoperability: The ability to recharge anywhere in a secure fashion will greatly enhance EV driver
flexibility and user convenience. Well established interoperability standards and communications
systems which facilitate the ability to remotely locate, price compare, and reserve charging sites along

travel routes will be invaluable, especially in the early years of EV deployment given the relative scarcity
of charging infrastructure. Billing under different charging scenarios must be seamless and efficient.
It will be important for standards to be designed to facilitate upgrade paths and flexible compatibility
with quickly evolving communications and smart grid technologies. A bit further out possibly, but also
important, are standards to facilitate vehicle energy to home and grid applications. Significantly greater
interoperability will lead to manufacturing efficiencies for both the vehicle and built infrastructure
leading to greater affordability and reduced financial risk.
Performance: The ability to extend the driving range of PEVs on a single battery charge without the
need for range extension is largely due to energy storage capabilities (batteries) and a function of
technology development. As standards, codes, and regulations help to reduce overall risk, it is likely that
more technology firms will enter the market and investment will increase, thereby leading to a
quickened pace of technology advancement. Standards for fast charging will help to define this market,
accelerate development of more cost effective fast charging systems, enhance user convenience, and
extend EV driving range. These factors will enhance business and consumer confidence in, and electric
driving performance of, PEVs, making them increasingly attractive as a practical and reliable alternative
to conventional vehicles.
Environmental Impact: The demand from both regulators and consumers for “greener” vehicles (i.e.,
more fuel-efficient, less reliant on fossil fuels) must be met. This will continue to drive technological
developments and standardization efforts within the auto industry. This includes batteries with
enhanced storage capacity as well as investigation of renewables as alternative power sources. The
ability to safely and efficiently recharge EVs in residential, commercial and public settings without
adverse grid impacts is essential, and also the subject of standardization activity and technological
advancements.
1.2 Roadmap Goals for EVs and Charging Infrastructure
In order to assess the standards and conformance programs needed to facilitate the safe, mass
deployment of EVs and charging infrastructure in the United States, the American National Standards
Institute (ANSI)1
convened the Electric Vehicles Standards Panel (ANSI EVSP or “the Panel”). In April
1
ANSI is a non-profit organization that coordinates the U.S. private sector standards and conformance system – a
system that relies upon close collaboration and partnership between the public and private sectors. ANSI
represents thousands of member companies, organizations, and individuals who rely upon standards and
conformance to increase efficiency, create market acceptance, improve competitiveness, and foster international
commerce. For more than ninety years, ANSI and its members have worked to demonstrate the strength of private
sector-led and public sector-supported, market-driven, standards-based solutions that are characterized by
consensus, openness, and balance. ANSI is the U.S. member of the International Organization for Standardization
(ISO) and, via the U.S. National Committee, the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC).

2012, the ANSI EVSP released the Standardization Roadmap for Electric Vehicles – Version 1.0
(“roadmap”).2
The goals of this update to the roadmap remain the same, namely to:
1. Facilitate the development of a comprehensive, robust, and streamlined standards and
conformance landscape; and
2. Maximize the coordination and harmonization of the standards and conformance environment
domestically and with international partners.
Accordingly, the focus of this roadmap is to comprehensively identify, inventory, and assess existing
standards, relevant codes and regulations, and related conformance and training programs, ascertain
gaps and recommend solutions. This includes identification of prioritized timeframes and potential
standards developing organizations (SDOs or “developers”) that may be able to lead the work. This
roadmap also aspires to discuss coordination of SDOs and oversight bodies (domestic and international),
as well as provide a framework to monitor the evolving technical and policy landscape for EVs and
infrastructure with regard to standards and conformance programs.
It is important to emphasize that the focus of this roadmap is not merely to identify gaps and then to
suggest development of new standards or conformance programs to fill them. Rather, it is also to
identify opportunities where gaps potentially can be filled by revising or harmonizing existing standards
and conformance programs.
1.3 Roadmap Boundaries
In order to manage scope, emphasize priorities, and adhere to a compressed timetable, several high
level boundaries have been established in the development of this roadmap:
- The emphasis is on standards and conformance programs that are specific to on-road plug-in
EVs (PEVs) consisting of battery-powered all electric vehicles (AEVs) and plug-in hybrid EVs
(PHEVs), charging infrastructure, and associated support services, as opposed to other types of
EVs or more general road vehicle and electrical infrastructure standardization activity.
- Standards and conformance programs that address the key challenges and core consumer
values of safety, affordability, interoperability, performance, and environmental impact are
targeted.
- Standards and conformance activities that have direct applicability to the U.S. market for PEVs
and charging infrastructure are the primary focus.
2
http://publicaa.ansi.org/sites/apdl/evsp/ANSI_EVSP_Roadmap_April_2012.pdf

- This roadmap has been developed with an eye toward international activities and
harmonization, especially with regard to Canada and the European Union (EU). Harmonization
refers to efforts to align or make equivalent the requirements in standards and conformance
programs.
- As a result of the acute need for standards and conformance programs to keep pace with the
rapidly evolving EV environment, a strong emphasis is placed upon establishing priorities for
near-term standardization needs (0-2 years), while also assessing mid-term (2-5 years) and long-
term (5+ years) requirements.
1.4 Roadmap Audience
This roadmap is targeted toward a broad audience including standards development organizations
(SDOs); U.S. federal, state, and municipal governments; and the automotive, electrotechnical, and
utilities industries, among others.
This roadmap may assist SDOs in identifying priority areas, establishing boundaries, and identifying
opportunities for collaboration, consolidation, and harmonization. In addition, as specific gaps are
identified for the overall EV standards landscape, it will be easier for SDOs to prioritize their activities
over the near-term, mid-term, and long-term timeframes.
This roadmap will assist federal and state government entities in establishing a coherent and
coordinated U.S. EV policy, and participating in or tracking the progress of associated technical activities.
It will also assist harmonization efforts with regional and international entities on needed standards and
conformance programs.
This roadmap will serve municipal governments and other like entities in understanding the issues and
complexities surrounding EVs, infrastructure, and supporting services, and where to find resolution
when looking to establish EV deployment strategies in local communities.
This roadmap will help industry to target standards participation efforts, and aid in the development of
EV technologies and related conformance programs. It will also enable industry to identify commercial
opportunities, to gain insights to support business strategies and technology sequencing, and to reduce
safety and economic risks.
1.5 Roadmap Structure
The broad electric vehicle and infrastructure system is very complex and dynamic, undergoing continual
evolution and adaptation, with many parties involved. In order to develop this roadmap, it was
necessary to frame activities under three broad domains: Vehicles, Infrastructure, and Support Services.
Within those three domains, seven broad topical areas of relevance to standards and conformance
programs for electric vehicles were identified: Energy Storage Systems, Vehicle Components, and
Vehicle User Interface within the Vehicle Domain; Charging Systems, Communications and Installation

within the Infrastructure Domain; and Education and Training within the Support Services Domain.
Figure 1 illustrates this.
Figure 1: Domains and Topical Areas for the
Standardization Roadmap for Electric Vehicles
While some distinct issues within the topical areas are solely applicable to one specific domain, in
general they are highly interrelated and interdependent. In many, if not most cases, important issues
related to standards and conformance programs cross over at least two of the domains simultaneously,
if not all three. Understanding the interrelationships and interfaces between the domains, topical areas,
and issues is essential.
Section 2 of the roadmap provides additional background regarding how this roadmap was developed
and promoted, and some of the key players that are shaping the standardization landscape for PEVs and
charging infrastructure.
Section 3 of the roadmap provides the context and explanation for why specific issues were considered
important and subsequently assessed as part of this roadmap. Sections 3 and 4 parallel one another in
structure to facilitate ease of use, cross comparisons, and consideration of issues across domains and
topical areas.
Section 4 is the gap analysis of standards, codes, regulations, conformance programs, and
harmonization efforts. This evaluation looks at existing and needed standards and conformance

programs that are relevant to the rollout of electric vehicles and charging infrastructure in the United
States. Where gaps are identified, recommendations for remediation are noted. Based on an
assessment of the acuteness of risk, a priority for addressing each gap is noted, along with an indication
of a potential developer(s) who could undertake the work.
In this roadmap update, section 4 gap statements now include an indication whether or not a gap is grid
related and a descriptor of the status of progress since the release of version 1.0 of the roadmap. Thus,
the status of progress is described as: Closed (completed) or, using a traffic light analogy, as Green
(moving forward), Yellow (delayed in progressing), Red (at a standstill), Not Started or Unknown. New
gaps for version 2.0 are identified as such. Any significant changes from version 1.0 are summarized in
an update statement.
Section 5, the Summary of Gap Analysis, provides a table summarizing the findings of the gap analysis in
section 4 described above. On the far right of the table, a column has been added on the Status of
Progress since the release of version 1.0 of the roadmap. A key at the top of the table defines the
descriptors used to assess the status of progress.
Section 6 briefly describes what is on the horizon in terms of technology opportunities and next steps.
This roadmap is supplemented by the ANSI EVSP Roadmap Standards Compendium, a searchable
spreadsheet which inventories standards that are directly or peripherally related to each issue, while
also identifying related issues to which the standards potentially apply.3
Like the roadmap itself, the
compendium has been updated since its initial publication in April 2012.
1.6 Definitions
For purposes of defining the scope of this roadmap, the ANSI EVSP agreed to apply the definition of
electric vehicle found in the 2011 and 2014 versions of NFPA 70®, the National Electrical Code® (NEC®),
given below, with the primary focus being on-road vehicles containing a battery that is recharged via the
electrical grid, and related infrastructure.
Electric Vehicle. An automotive-type vehicle for on-road use, such as passenger automobiles,
buses, trucks, vans, neighborhood electric vehicles, electric motorcycles, and the like, primarily
powered by an electric motor that draws current from a rechargeable storage battery, fuel cell,
photovoltaic array, or other source of electric current. Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV) are
considered electric vehicles. For the purpose of this article, off-road, self-propelled electric
vehicles, such as industrial trucks, hoists, lifts, transports, golf carts, airline ground support
equipment, tractors, boats, and the like, are not included.
3
The ANSI EVSP Roadmap Standards Compendium can be found at www.ansi.org/evsp.

In addition to what is not included in the NFPA 70® definition, the Panel further agreed to not include
aircraft, or vehicles on fixed guideways (e.g., rails, monorails) such as trains or trolleys. While not
relevant to the infrastructure discussion applicable to PEVs and PHEVs, the panel agreed to consider in
part hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) that are recharged by internal combustion engines to the extent that
they pose safety concerns, e.g., for emergency responders.
As used throughout this roadmap, the term electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) encompasses both
of the following definitions that will be found in article 625 of the NEC® 2014 version:
Electric Vehicle Charging System. A system of components that provide a dc output that is
supplied to the vehicle for the purpose of recharging electric vehicle storage batteries; and
Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment System. A system of components that provide an ac output
that is supplied to the vehicle for the purpose of providing input power to an on-board charger.

2. Background
2.1 How the Roadmap was Developed and Promoted
The ANSI EVSP was convened to conduct the standardization needs assessment for EVs, with a view to
assuring that the technologies and infrastructure are effective, safe, and ready to accommodate a major
shift in our national automotive landscape. Drawing participants from the automotive, utilities, and
electrotechnical sectors as well as from standards developing organizations (SDOs) and government
agencies, the Panel is a continuation of a series of standards coordinating activities where ANSI has
brought together stakeholders from the private and public sectors to work in partnership to address
national and global priorities. As ANSI itself does not develop standards, the Panel is strictly a
coordinating body intended to inventory and assess but not duplicate current work. The actual
development of standards for EVs and related infrastructure is carried about by various SDOs.
The decision to form the Panel was made at a meeting of key stakeholders in March 2011 which ANSI
convened in response to suggestions that the U.S. standardization community needed a more
coordinated approach to keep pace with electric vehicle initiatives moving forward in other parts of the
world. The need for improved coordination was reinforced at an April 2011 ANSI Workshop on
Standards and Codes for Electric Drive Vehicles, convened on behalf of the U.S. Department of Energy
and the Idaho National Laboratory (see workshop report and proceedings at www.ansi.org/edv).
Formally launched in May 2011, the ANSI EVSP set out to produce a strategic roadmap of the standards
and conformance programs needed to facilitate the safe, mass deployment of electric vehicles and
charging infrastructure in the United States. From the outset, the Panel was also envisioned as a
resource to better enable the United States to speak with a coherent and coordinated voice in policy
and technical discussions with regional and international audiences on needed standards and
conformance programs related to electric vehicles.
Seven working groups were organized to conduct the standardization needs assessment. The working
groups mirrored the topical areas within this roadmap: Energy Storage Systems, Vehicle Components
and Vehicle User Interface within the Vehicle Domain; Charging Systems, Communications and
Installation within the Infrastructure Domain; and Education and Training within the Support Services
Domain.
Following an initial plenary meeting held in June 2011, the working groups met virtually over the course
of several months to identify existing and needed standards and conformance programs, as well as gaps
and harmonization issues. Individual working group members subsequently drafted sections of the
roadmap based on the discussions. These were reviewed by the working groups individually and later
collectively at the Panel’s second plenary meeting held in November 2011 and in subsequent conference
calls. The roadmap development process was characterized by open participation and consensus-based
decision-making.

Version 1.0 of this roadmap was released in April 2012. Beginning in July 2012, the working groups
reconvened via monthly conference calls to discuss implementation of the roadmap’s
recommendations, updates on the status of work, and progress to close the identified gaps. The Vehicle
Domain working groups met jointly as the Vehicle Systems working group and also considered some of
the relevant issues in the Support Services Domain, as did the Installation working group.
Since the release of version 1.0, ANSI has widely promoted the roadmap to various audiences.
Domestically, this has included DOE, NHTSA, EPRI, and the SGIP, among others. Internationally, the
roadmap has been shared with the IEC Strategic Group #6 on Electrotechnology for Mobility. In July
2012, ANSI and the China Association of Standardization organized a technical workshop on EV
standardization in Beijing. In August 2012, the roadmap was presented at the U.S.-China EV and battery
technology workshop in Boston. In November 2012, ANSI and the European standards organizations CEN
and CENELEC held a transatlantic eMobility standardization roundtable in Brussels, transatlantic
cooperation having attracted high level government attention via the Transatlantic Economic Council
(TEC) and its eMobility work plan. Cooperation on eMobility standardization also has been the subject of
a bilateral dialogue between ANSI and the German standards body DIN. All of these efforts have
facilitated greater understanding of standards priorities and fostered a healthy dialogue on cooperation,
harmonization and alignment of standards and regulations.
2.2 Entities Operating in the EV Standards Space
The deployment of electric vehicles is both a national issue and a global challenge. While in some cases
national requirements will define the specific approach to an issue, in many areas international norms
will provide the necessary direction. The U.S. standards system acknowledges that there are multiple
paths to achieving globally relevant standards. Many SDOs and consortia operate on an international
scale and what matters is that the standards are developed according to the principles of the World
Trade Organization’s Technical Barriers to Trade Agreement, which are also consistent with ANSI’s
Essential Requirements: Due process requirements for American National Standards. The process must
be consensus-based, open, with balanced participation – and include all the other elements that are the
hallmarks of the U.S. standards system. Coordination and harmonization among international
standardizing bodies is an aspirational goal that will help to foster innovation and grow global markets
for EVs.
Suffice it to say that the deployment of EVs in the United States will be shaped by the standards
activities of a number of SDOs, both U.S.-based and non-U.S. based, as well as codes, regulations,
conformance and training programs, and related activities of many stakeholders, including U.S. federal
government agencies, inter-governmental bodies, and other cross-sector initiatives. Listed below are
some of the principal SDOs, government agencies, organizations, and initiatives that are influencing the
roll-out of EVs in the United States.

2.2.1 U.S.-based SDOs
SAE International: SAE standards development activity covers a wide range of EV issues. These include
the charge coupler standard SAE J1772™, described in IEC 62196-2, which was revised in 2012 to include
both alternating current (AC) and direct current (DC) charge capability, and which will be described in
the forthcoming IEC 62196-3. SAE also has published a power quality specification SAE J2894. SAE is also
working on documents related to vehicle to grid and vehicle to off-board charger communications (the
J2836™ and J2847 series of documents and J2931 and J2953), and is working closely to harmonize these
standards with its IEC and ISO/IEC counterparts. SAE also is working on J2954, a wireless charging
standard and, again, is working with IEC on harmonization. Other EV issues addressed by SAE standards
include battery design, packaging, labeling, safety, transport, handling, recycling, and secondary uses;
energy transfer systems, terminology, etc. SAE International administers the U.S. mirror committee
(a/k/a U.S. technical advisory group or TAG) for ISO/TC 22/SC 21 on electrically propelled road vehicles.
See http://ev.sae.org/.
Underwriters Laboratories Inc.: UL standards for EVs address safety-related concerns for batteries (UL
2271 and UL 2580); electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) (UL 2594); personnel protection systems
(UL 2231-1 and UL 2231-2); EV charging system equipment (UL 2202); plugs, receptacles and connectors
(UL 2251); on-board cables (UL 2733); connectors for use with on-board EV charging systems (UL 2734);
electric utility (smart) meters (UL 2735), etc. UL has published requirements for electric vehicle power
supplies (UL 2747) and is developing requirements for electric vehicle wireless charging equipment (UL
2750). UL administers the U.S. mirror committee (U.S. TAG) for IEC/TC 69 on electric road vehicles and
electric industrial trucks. UL also administers the U.S. mirror committee (e-TAG) for IEC SMB SG6,
Electrotechnology for Mobility. See http://www.ul.com/electricvehicle/.
National Fire Protection Association: NFPA’s standards development activities include NFPA 70®, the
National Electrical Code® (NEC®), which is adopted throughout the U.S. and is adopted as part of, or
incorporated into, all U.S. model building codes and residential construction codes. It provides a uniform
standard for residential, commercial, and industrial electrical installations for EV charging equipment in
North America. NFPA is also very active in conducting EV safety training for emergency first responders
under a grant from the U.S. Department of Energy and in partnership with several vehicle
manufacturers. NFPA and SAE have co-hosted an annual U.S. national EV safety standards summit since
2010 (see reports at http://www.evsafetytraining.org/Resources/Research.aspx).
IEEE: IEEE publishes the IEEE 1547 series of Standards for Interconnecting Distributed Resources with
Electric Power Systems and the IEEE P2030.1 Draft Guide for Electric-Sourced Transportation
Infrastructure. IEEE also publishes and develops Power Line Communication (PLC) standards: 1901-2010
Wireless Medium Access Control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications for High Rate Wireless
Personal Area Networks (WPANs), and IEEE P1901.2, Draft Standard for Low Frequency (less than
500kHz) Narrow Band Power Line Communications for Smart Grid Applications. See
http://electricvehicle.ieee.org/.

International Code Council: ICC publishes the International Building Code® (IBC®) and International
Residential Code® for One- and Two-Family Dwellings (IRC®), the model codes used as the commercial
and residential codes in all 50 states, and the International Fire Code (IFC®) used by 43 states as the fire
code. As such, any new or revised standard or codes with specific provisions relating to EVs or EVSE,
such as the National Electrical Code®, will need to be integrated into or referenced by the I-Codes®.
Training will need to be provided to code officials and fire inspectors if such requirements are to gain
wide acceptance and use at the state and local levels of government, where building requirements are
adopted and enforced.
National Electrical Contractors Association: NECA has developed NECA 413 for the electrical contracting
industry. This standard describes the procedures for installing and maintaining EVSE for AC Levels 1 and
2 and DC fast charging.
National Electrical Manufacturers Association: NEMA’s EVSE systems section is working to promote the
EVSE infrastructure around the world. NEMA has worked with UL and the Canadian Standards
Association (CSA) and counterparts in Mexico to harmonize EVSE safety requirements in North America.
NEMA’s EVSE systems section also has established two working groups to address communications gaps
and issues identified in version 1.0 of this roadmap. NEMA organized a working group to develop a
standard that permits EV drivers to universally locate a public charging spot and to support roaming that
allows charging services from a provider other than the EV user’s home charging provider. NEMA also
has set up a second working group to address gaps related to EVSE embedded metering and
communication. See http://evseready.org/.
Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions: ATIS is exploring two use cases: charging an EV
from someone else’s private home and charging from a public charging portal, with respect to both
connected vehicle and smart grid standardization. ATIS will investigate the role that telecom operators
can provide in these use cases with respect to cellular and fixed wide area communications, service layer
capabilities such as security, quality of service (QoS), priority, device provisioning, management, and
charging. This investigation will include the identification of any gaps in information and
communications technology (ICT) standardization needed to satisfy these use cases.
2.2.2 Non U.S.-based SDOs
International Electrotechnical Commission: There are a number of IEC technical committees (TC) and
subcommittees (SC) dealing with EVs including IEC/TC 69, which has produced the IEC 61851 standards
on Electric vehicle conductive charging, and IEC/23H, which is responsible for the IEC 62196 standards
on Plugs, socket‐outlets, vehicle connectors and vehicle inlets ‐ Conductive charging of electric vehicles.
In January 2011, IEC and e8, a global organization of the world’s leading electricity companies (now
known as the Global Sustainable Electricity Partnership), brought together major stakeholders for a
roundtable to determine priorities for the development of EV-related standards that will enable global
interoperability and connectivity. See http://www.iec.ch/newslog/2011/nr0411.htm. In October 2011,
the IEC Standardization Management Board (SMB) formed Strategic Group 6, Electrotechnology For
Mobility, to provide the SMB and IEC TCs with a strategic vision and assistance to address

standardization needs on systems and products to be used for interfacing plug-in electric vehicles with
electricity supply infrastructure.
International Organization for Standardization: ISO has entered into a memorandum of understanding
with IEC to improve cooperation on standards for electric vehicles and automotive electronics. The
agreement creates a framework of cooperation between ISO/TC 22, road vehicles, with a number of IEC
TCs/SCs. The agreement covers on-board equipment and performance of road vehicles, and the
interface between externally chargeable vehicles and electricity supply infrastructure. Annex A of this
agreement lists ISO and IEC (TCs and SCs) standardization activities in the field of electrotechnology for
road vehicles. Annex B of this agreement lists current modes of cooperation. See
http://www.iso.org/iso/mou_ev.pdf.
CEN CENELEC: The European Standards Organizations (ESOs) CEN, the European Committee for
Standardization, and CENELEC, the European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardization, formed a
Focus Group that produced in June 2011 a Report on European Electro Mobility Standardization for
Road Vehicles and Associated Infrastructure in response to the European Commission/European Free
Trade Association (EFTA) mandate M/468 concerning the charging of electric vehicles. A second edition
of the Report was published in October 2011 with minor amendments, following Technical Board
discussion. See www.cen.eu/go/eMobility. The mandate was focused on ensuring electric vehicle
charging interoperability and connectivity in all EU member states, as well as addressing smart charging,
and safety and electromagnetic compatibility of EV chargers. A CEN CENELEC eMobility Co-ordination
Group (eM-CG) has been established to ensure that the recommendations contained in the report are
implemented. Cooperation between the eM-CG and the ANSI EVSP is being pursued. ANSI, CEN and
CENELEC convened a transatlantic eMobility standardization roundtable in November 2012 and have
discussed cooperation on EVs at ANSI-ESO meetings.
2.2.3 U.S. Federal Government Agencies
U.S. Department of Energy: DOE is supporting the development of this standardization roadmap and
the growth of the EV market on a number of fronts.
Announced by President Barack Obama in March 2012, DOE’s EV Everywhere Grand Challenge4
seeks to
assist U.S. companies in making PEVs as affordable and convenient for American consumers as gasoline-
powered vehicles within the next 10 years. The DOE has held a number of workshops and released a
Blueprint document which describes PEV technology, deployment barriers, and steps needed to realize
the goal of the initiative.
DOE’s Workplace Charging Challenge is an initiative intended to expand access to workplace charging
across the country, making PEVs more convenient.
4
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/electric_vehicles/index.html

DOE continues to invest in research to develop advanced technologies to improve vehicle performance
and increase fuel economy. Areas of investigation include: advanced lightweight and propulsion
materials, advanced battery development, power electronics, advanced heating, ventilation and air
conditioning systems, and fuels and lubricants.
DOE’s Transportation Electrification Demonstration Projects are a nationwide effort to mine data to
assist in the widespread deployment of EV charging stations. The projects include the deployment of
13,000 electric vehicles, the installation of more than 20,000 charging stations, and funding of programs
for first responders on how to handle accidents involving EVs. Data collected in the projects include
vehicle and charger performance, charging patterns and public charger use, the impact of various rate
structures on charging habits, and the impact of vehicle charging on the electric grid. Experiential
information is also being collected with regard to operational impacts and deployment issues such as
the soft value of EV charging for retail establishments, and permitting challenges for commercial
applications.
DOE participates, alongside U.S. automakers, national laboratories and utilities, in the U.S. DRIVE Grid
Interaction Tech Team which is working to identify and support the reduction of barriers to the large
scale introduction of grid connected vehicles. DOE also has programs for advanced vehicle testing and
has issued a number of grant-funded projects to promote education of the workforce in relation to EVs.
U.S. General Services Administration: In May 2011, GSA launched the federal government’s first Electric
Vehicle Pilot Program to further the president’s goals of reducing the country’s dependence on oil
imports by one-third by 2025 and putting 1 million advanced technology vehicles on the road. The pilot
is a targeted investment to incorporate electric vehicles and charging infrastructure into the federal
government’s vehicle and building portfolios over time. GSA is continuing to expand the pilot program in
2013 with the purchase of additional vehicles.
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration: An agency of the U.S. Department of Transportation
(DOT), NHTSA maintains the U.S. Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) and Regulations to
which manufacturers of motor vehicle and equipment items must conform and certify compliance. In
addition to having to comply with crashworthiness, crash avoidance and other standards also applicable
to conventional vehicles, EVs sold in the U.S. must additionally comply with FMVSS 305 which addresses
electrolyte spillage, intrusion of propulsion battery system components into the occupant compartment,
and electrical shock. In January 2013, NHTSA proposed a new safety standard that will require EVs to be
equipped with audible alerts so that blind and other pedestrians can detect a nearby EV when being
operated at low speed. Research projects are also underway on crash avoidance and performance.
2.2.4 World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations (WP.29)
As the name implies, WP.29 provides a forum for the development of Global Technical Regulations
(GTR) for vehicles which can be adopted by governments around the world. The Secretariat is provided
by the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE). NHTSA is the U.S. representative to
WP.29.

The Electric Vehicle Safety Informal Working Group (EVS-IWG) and the Electric Vehicles and the
Environment Informal Working Group (EVE-IWG) were established in November 2011 following a joint
proposal by the U.S., Japan, and the EU to establish two working groups to address safety and
environmental issues associated with electric vehicles (EVs). Both WGs are chaired by the U.S.
The EVS-IWG is working to develop one or more GTRs on common requirements to address safety issues
associated with EVs, their components and batteries.
The EVE-IWG is presently focusing on acting as a forum for exchanging information related to the
impacts of EVs on the environment. It is our understanding that the EVE-IWG also intends to publish a
Reference Guide for EV environmental regulation, currently in development, by mid-2014.
The WP.29 Working Party on Noise (GRB) has established an informal working group, the Quiet Road
Transport Vehicles (QRTV) Working Group, to carry out activities that are considered essential to
determine the viability of “quiet vehicle” audible acoustic signaling techniques and the potential need
for their global harmonization. The U.S. proposed that a GTR be developed in June 2011.
2.2.5 Other Cross-Sector Initiatives
Smart Grid Interoperability Panel: The SGIP, formed in November 2009, engages stakeholders from the
entire smart grid community in a participatory public process to identify applicable standards, gaps in
currently available standards, and priorities for new standardization activities for the evolving smart
grid. SGIP was established to support the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in
fulfilling its responsibilities under the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. In January 2013,
the SGIP transitioned to a self-financed, legal entity that retains partnership with the government (SGIP
2.0).
Vehicle to Grid Domain Expert Working Group (V2G DEWG)
Within the SGIP there are working groups of experts within a particular domain. As electric vehicle to
grid interaction has been determined to be a critical issue, a Vehicle to Grid Domain Expert Working
Group (V2G DEWG) was created in 2009 to analyze vehicle to grid interoperability. The V2G DEWG
provides a strategic view of interoperability needs and standards gaps related to the interaction and
communications between the electric vehicle, the charging system, the power grid, and the user. The
V2G DEWG has eight subgroups: Roadmap, Cyber Security, Privacy, EV as Source, Roaming, Regulatory
Issues, Sub-metering and Advanced Use Cases. Work is coordinated with other SGIP DEWGs on
Cybersecurity, Business & Policy, Distributed Renewables, Generation, and Storage.
When the V2G DEWG identifies critical roadblocks or gaps in any of these areas, an SGIP Priority Action
Plan (PAP) is formed. These tactical PAPs facilitate and coordinate stakeholders and SDOs in overcoming
standards related challenges. The first SGIP V2G-related PAP was PAP 11 focused on common
information for EVs. This PAP was closed out in 2011 with the successful approval by the SGIP of three
SAE documents: J2836™, J2847, and J1772TM
. These have been entered into the SGIP catalog of

standards, a library of standards, best practices, and guides for development and deployment of an
interoperable smart grid.
The SGIP can redirect issues identified by the V2G DEWG that are out of scope of the SGIP to the ANSI
EVSP and share with the ANSI EVSP information on electric vehicle infrastructure standardization needs
and gaps. The ANSI EVSP in turn can identify standardization needs and gaps that can inform the work of
the V2G DEWG and facilitate the development of SGIP PAPs. In October 2012, the V2G DEWG and the
ANSI EVSP Communications WG held a joint meeting to review the organization of, and gaps identified
in, the communications section of the ANSI EVSP roadmap (version 1.0), and to discuss future work.
Staged Evolution of PEV Industry
The V2G DEWG’s Roadmap subgroup has put together its own comprehensive framework to help
strategize the development and timely adoption of new technologies, protocols, standards and business
practices needed to support the vision of a robust PEV industry. The V2G DEWG’s roadmap describes a
staged evolution of the PEV industry as illustrated in Figure 2 below.5
It is recognized that some Stage
contents might conflict with regional and/or regulatory policy decisions or implementation timelines
and thus individual goals or activities might occur earlier or later than elsewhere. Generally, it is
suggested that Stage 1 is currently nearing completion (EOY 2012) and Stage 2 is just beginning.
Stage 1: PEV Introduction and Planning
Goals: PEV Impact Assessment, and Interoperability Development Completion
Key Process Areas: PEV charging equipment standardization (e.g., Communication, Interoperability). PEV end-to-
end acquisition process (e.g., Program Enrollment, Installation). Pilot Tariff and Services Impact Analysis.
Distribution transformer load analysis and failure prediction.
Stage 2: Testing and Piloting of Integrated Architectures
Goals: Physical and Communications Interoperability. Widespread Adoption of PEV Programs for Demand/Supply
Balance and Customer Control.
Key Process Areas: Accurate measurement of PEV power consumption (e.g., sub-metering). Service provider/utility
back office integration. Management of charging rates.
Stage 3: Interoperability and Deployment
Goals: PEVs securely utilized as power source; integrated with renewables.
Key Process Areas: PEV/Grid Physical interoperability. Advanced use cases for power flow and communication
(e.g., bi-directional).
Stage 4: Advanced Functionality
Goals: PEV as a fully integrated DER. Optimized system level efficiencies. System is secure, scalable and
sustainable.
Key Process Areas: End-to-end integrated communication systems. Decentralized control and pricing systems.
Figure 2: Staged Evolution of PEV Industry
5
For the V2G DEWG’s complete Roadmap in spreadsheet form, see: http://collaborate.nist.gov/twiki-
sggrid/pub/SmartGrid/V2GRoadmap/SGIP_PEV_Roadmap_Framework_1.0.xlsx

In Figure 2, the Stage titles express broad statements about the overarching timeline activities they
represent. The Goals are meant to define gating factors so that the next stage can begin. The Key
Process Areas give an overview of what must be focused on to meet the Goals. Each of the Key Process
Areas includes additional specific activities or objectives (see Roadmap link) that ensure the completion
of the Key Process Areas and thus the Goals. These are organized under three headings: System
Functionalities (Integrated Communications, Distributed Energy Resources, Measurement, Advanced
Control Methods, Consumer Interfaces), System Qualities (Safety/Reliability, Security, Privacy) and
Market Structures (Role of Third Parties, Billing, and Regulatory and Business Practices).
TransAtlantic Business Dialogue: The TABD has supported the development of an EV agenda as an
advisor to the Transatlantic Economic Council (TEC). In March 2011, TABD members Audi and Ford
drafted an eMobility work plan for the TEC. The European Automobile Manufacturers Association
(ACEA), the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers and others provided input and the plan was endorsed
by the TABD. In May 2011, the plan was submitted to the TEC Co-Chairs within the White House and the
European Commission. It was further refined in preparation for the November 2011 TEC meeting. The
October 2011 ANSI – ESO Conference on Transatlantic Standardization Partnerships included a session
on eMobility/electric vehicles, organized in partnership with the TABD. At that event, EU Trade
Commissioner Karel De Gucht called on participants to organize a transatlantic eMobility standardization
roundtable. ANSI, CEN and CENELEC convened such a roundtable in Brussels in November 2012. In
December 2012, the TABD merged with the European-American Business Council to form the
Transatlantic Business Council (TBC) with TABD operating as a distinct program within the new
organization.
National Electric Transportation Infrastructure Working Council: Sponsored by the Electric Power
Research Institute (EPRI), the IWC is a group of individuals whose organizations have a vested interest in
the emergence and growth of the EV and PHEV industries, as well as the electrification of truck stops,
ports, and other transportation and logistic systems. IWC members include representatives from electric
utilities, vehicle manufacturing industries, component manufacturers, government agencies, related
industry associations, and standards organizations. IWC committees meet several times a year.
Electric Drive Transportation Association: EDTA is an industry association dedicated to advancing
electric drive as a foundation for sustainable transportation. Since 1989, EDTA has led efforts to provide
federal support for electric drive research, demonstration and manufacturing, and to provide significant
incentives for the purchase of electric vehicles and chargers, and the promotion of EV infrastructure
development in the U.S.
Regional and State Initiatives: There are multi-stakeholder and government supported efforts
underway at the regional, state and municipal level to facilitate the rollout of EVs. Some examples
include the following:
Northeast Electric Vehicle Network
The Transportation and Climate Initiative (TCI) of the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic states, which is
facilitated by Georgetown University’s Climate Center, launched the Northeast Electric Vehicle Network

in October 2011 to support the rollout of EVs in that region. TCI, together with the New York State
Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) and sixteen of the Northeast region’s Clean
Cities Coalitions, received a grant from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to lay the groundwork for
the Northeast Electric Vehicle Network. Under the DOE grant, the project partners have engaged
stakeholders and conducted a literature review of market barriers to EV deployment in the Northeast.
They have also created several guidance documents for the TCI region including, among others, siting
and design guidelines for electric vehicle supply equipment, a report on EV-ready codes for the built
environment, and a guide to planning and policy tools for creating EV-ready towns and cities. See
www.northeastevs.org.
California Plug-in Electric Vehicle Collaborative
The California Plug-In Electric Vehicle (PEV) Collaborative is a multi-stakeholder public-private
partnership working to enable the plug-in electric vehicle market in California. The Collaborative
includes elected and appointed officials, automakers, utilities, infrastructure providers, environmental
organizations, research institutions and others. The Collaborative has developed a strategic plan Taking
Charge for California’s PEV market through 2020 and formed a number of working groups to implement
the plan’s recommendations. The Collaborative has held workshops for local government officials to
support regional planning and local market development. It has also launched a number of reports,
communication guides, and a resource center to support these efforts. See www.pevcollaborative.org.

3. Identification of Issues
Section 3 introduces the issues that are subsequently assessed in the standardization gap analysis in
section 4 of the roadmap. The interrelationship of issues, combined with the dynamic nature of electric
vehicle and infrastructure technology and the evolving policy environment, poses some unique
challenges to the development of a comprehensive, coordinated, and streamlined Standardization
Roadmap for Electric Vehicles.
3.1 Vehicle Domain
For purposes of this roadmap, the Vehicle Domain generally encompasses the technologies, equipment,
components, and issues that fall within the strict confines of the electric vehicle itself up to and
including the vehicle inlet portion of the charge coupler. The following sections under the Vehicle
Domain, 3.1.1 Energy Storage Systems, 3.1.2 Vehicle Components, and 3.1.3 Vehicle User Interface,
discuss the relevant issues that fall under these topical areas and why they are important with regard to
standardization, harmonization, and conformance activities. The interrelationship of issues within the
Vehicle Domain is illustrated in Figure 3.
Figure 3: Interrelationship of Issues within the Vehicle Domain

Terminology
On a general note from the outset, it is important for consistent vocabulary to be used for electric
vehicle terminology to assist in the development of standards for electric vehicles, as this will provide a
consistent understanding of important concepts.
3.1.1 Energy Storage Systems
The topical area of Energy Storage Systems primarily relates to battery energy storage and related
subsystems but may also include other energy storage systems, including fuel cells and mechanical
energy storage. The most common types of batteries being developed for electric transportation are
lithium-ion-based. Topics addressed in this section include: power rating methods; battery safety;
battery testing – performance and durability; battery storage, packaging, transport and handling;
battery recycling; battery secondary uses; and crash tests/safety.
3.1.1.1 Power Rating Methods
Power rating methods are important for hybrid electric vehicles and battery-powered all electric
vehicles in order to define test methods and conditions for rating the performance of electric propulsion
motors as used in these vehicles, as well as thermal and battery capabilities and limitations.
3.1.1.2 Battery Safety
For electric vehicles to meet their full potential in the marketplace, the public needs to see them as at
least as safe as the vehicles they replace. Effective safety standards provide a means to ensure that
electric vehicles are safe for occupants, other motorists, children, service technicians, and first
responders. Safety standards mainly consist of tests, intended to duplicate real-world events.
Compliance to an EV battery safety standard demonstrates that the EV battery meets a minimum safety
criteria established by that standard. Safety standards not only protect the public – they also help
protect manufacturers from legal challenges that may arise. Vehicle manufacturers desire global
harmonization of safety standards that are effective without imposing unnecessary costs or limits to
innovation.
3.1.1.3 Battery Testing – Performance and Durability
Battery performance and durability testing incorporates a means to evaluate both the performance and
durability of cells, modules and full battery packs, as well as the battery management system. Test
standards related to battery abuse, product safety, or transportation/handling are addressed in other
sections of the Energy Storage Systems topical area of this roadmap.

3.1.1.4 Battery Storage, Packaging, Transport and Handling
Battery Storage
EV Batteries (including HEV and PHEV) will require storage throughout many stages of their life cycle,
namely – prior to market distribution by manufacturers, in import/export locations, logistic centers, in
battery swapping (switching) stations including warehousing, in repair workshops as well as garages
following accidents, at recovered vehicle storage lots, at auto salvage yards, and at the end-of-life in
recycling facilities. Traceability and life cycle management are important. Differentiation between new
and waste batteries (damaged, aged, sent for repair, end-of-life) batteries is also significant. The risk of a
stored battery must be evaluated based on several parameters, including, but not limited to, state of
charge (SOC), mechanical wholeness, and age of the battery.
Battery storage issues of concern include: high temperature controls (particularly significant for battery
swapping stations during charging), humidity control including adequate air circulation and ventilation
to prevent explosive gas atmospheres (especially significant for damaged batteries), hydrogen/oxygen
detection, storage of damaged batteries away from other batteries and combustible materials, and fire
prevention and extinguishing systems.
Battery Packaging, Transport and Handling
Three significant use cases exist with respect to battery packaging, transport and handling:
- Battery packaging and design for the transportation between the battery manufacturer and the
vehicle manufacturer;
- Battery packaging and design for battery transportation to workshops or battery swapping
stations; and
- Battery packaging for the transportation of used and damaged batteries.
Transport by ground, air and sea of EV batteries (including those for HEVs and PHEVs) presents a unique
risk to their supply chain handlers, as their weight and volume are significantly higher than common
consumer batteries. This risk grows further when handling aged and damaged batteries. For example,
there may be needed packaging for a damaged or deformed battery to account for possible leakage of
materials.
3.1.1.5 Battery Recycling
Battery end-of-life, either through damage beyond repair or full exhaustion following use, requires
special consideration from the environmental, geo-political and economical points of view. As electric
vehicle battery manufacturing relies on natural minerals mining, and improper disposal may potentially
result in soil, groundwater and air pollution, the need for technology allowing for efficient battery
recycling is fast growing. Lead-acid batteries, by comparison, have reached nearly 100% recycling rates
worldwide.

Lithium-based batteries are expected to be the main chemistry for the foreseeable future, and are
projected to take up nearly 40% of the consumable world lithium by 2020. Positive value for recycling
these batteries is likely to be through the nickel and cobalt components, as the lithium itself is a small
fraction of the battery, and rather inexpensive. Additional challenges stem from the fact that many
battery chemistries exist with different lithium combinations and pack geometries, which makes it hard
to develop industrial-scale precise recycling processes with high recovery rates and efficiency.
Additionally, not all battery chemistries may have a value (e.g., iron phosphate).
3.1.1.6 Battery Secondary Uses
A secondary life for both fixed and removable electric vehicle batteries may include re-use for other
vehicular applications and grid and low-power applications. This can include fulfilling different grid
functionalities including storing energy and helping to stabilize grids utilizing renewable energy.
Some possible battery second life applications include:
- Re-use or repackaging of modules or packs with testing for compatibility in vehicle applications;
- Re-use for lower power applications especially DC and home to grid and vehicle to grid, etc.;
- Re-use in industrial situations utilizing DC energy for manufacturing with low voltage use and
storage;
- Re-use with alternative power in small farm or school type uses, and as battery backup and
stable power source;
- Re-use with alternative power in medium factory or building uses, and as battery backup and
stable power source;
- Re-use for grid support, line balancing and backup stabilization.
The nascent second life market for EV batteries has the potential to lower the cost of electro-mobility
and enhance environmental protection through materials retention, re-use, and extended battery pack
life, leading to value chain enhancements.
3.1.1.7 Crash Tests / Safety
To be sold in the U.S., electric vehicles must comply with all applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standards (FMVSS). These include crash avoidance standards, crashworthiness standards, post-crash
safety standards and others. The FMVSS are enforced by NHTSA, which routinely conducts compliance
testing to ensure that the vehicles certified for sale in the U.S. comply with all of the applicable
requirements. Vehicles that are noncompliant or vehicles that possess a safety defect are subject to
NHTSA’s recall and remedy provisions of the Motor Vehicle Safety Act.

3.1.2 Vehicle Components
Key on-board vehicle areas addressed within this roadmap include: safety issues associated with internal
high voltage cables and on-board wiring, component ratings, and charging accessories; vehicle
diagnostics – emissions; and audible warning systems.
3.1.2.1 Internal High Voltage Cables, On-Board Wiring, Component Ratings and Charging
Accessories
The advent of the electric vehicle poses unique opportunities and challenges from a safety perspective.
In terms of vehicle component standards, the high voltage cables entail the primary conductive media
internal to the vehicle. This area does not include the cabling systems commonly used in 12V and 24V
systems that form the basic wiring systems in conventional vehicles. Instead, this topic focuses on the
systems and subsystems associated with the primary drive mechanisms for the vehicle. For hybrid
electric vehicles, this includes the cabling associated with any electricity transferred from the internal
combustion engine to the storage device, as well as regenerative braking technology and the charging
station. For plug-in electric vehicles, this is only the braking and charging connections to the drive train.
Both AC and DC technologies are considered. Concerns over the internal, high voltage cables relate to
both the safety of the operator and the integrity and efficiency of the propulsion and storage systems
for the EV.
3.1.2.2 Vehicle Diagnostics – Emissions
An issue for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles and hybrid electric vehicles (but not for battery-powered all
electric vehicles), is vehicle diagnostics with respect to the detection of system faults within the vehicle’s
emissions control system.
3.1.2.3 Audible Warning Systems
Organizations of, and for, persons who are blind or have low vision have expressed concerns that
electric vehicles and some hybrid electric vehicles may not be audibly detectable by the blind. Safety
standards related to sound emission/audible warning systems can serve to address this concern.
3.1.3 Vehicle User Interface
A reliable, safe customer experience is critical to electric vehicles gaining acceptance in the marketplace.
One step toward improving this experience is using communication tools that are readily identifiable
and understood by the vehicle owner and those that service or otherwise interact with the vehicle.
Topics addressed in this section include: graphical symbols; telematics – driver distraction; and fuel
efficiency, emissions, and labeling.

3.1.3.1 Graphical Symbols
Due to the global nature of the industry, the use of universal graphical symbols that are easily
understood regardless of the language of the driver will assist in effective communication of such
important information as the battery fuel gauge, state of charge, and health.
3.1.3.2 Telematics – Driver Distraction
Telematics is the combination of telecommunication and programmable computerized services to assist
drivers with navigation, emergency assistance, convenience features such as remote door locks, climate
conditioning, access to internet/cloud services, on-board diagnostics, service reminders, and other
infotainment services. This section discusses driver interaction with such information and
communications systems, and more specifically the potential for driver distraction from the task of
driving.
3.1.3.3 Fuel Efficiency, Emissions, and Labeling
Fuel economy and vehicle emissions are among several factors that consumers will evaluate in deciding
whether or not to purchase an electric vehicle. It is therefore important that vehicle labels provide clear
and accurate information. As more electric vehicles appear on the market, it will become increasingly
important for consumers to be able to compare among different manufacturers and models. Consumers
will also want to compare and contrast features and value across the different types of available EVs
(AEVs, PHEVs, HEVs) in the same way that they have traditionally evaluated vehicles powered by internal
combustion engines.
3.2 Infrastructure Domain
For purposes of this roadmap, the Infrastructure Domain generally encompasses the technologies,
equipment, components, and issues that fall within the confines of the charging infrastructure up to and
including the connector portion of the charge coupler. The following sections under the Infrastructure
Domain, 3.2.1 Charging Systems, 3.2.2 Infrastructure Communications, and 3.2.3 Infrastructure
Installation, discuss the relevant issues that fall under these topical areas and why they are important
with regard to standardization, harmonization, and conformance activities. The interrelationship of
issues within the Infrastructure Domain is illustrated in Figure 4.

Figure 4: Interrelationship of Issues within the Infrastructure Domain
3.2.1 Charging Systems
In order to promote the development, acceptance and deployment of EVs, and to discourage the
imposition of market barriers, it is imperative that plugs, chargers and EVs be interoperable. EV owners
must be able to easily recharge their vehicle at their home or office and when traveling long distances
within their own state and across state lines. Harmonized standards that assure the interoperability of
EVs with the charging infrastructure will do much to help grow the market for EVs, and thus will be in
the best interest of EV and EVSE manufacturers, as well as EV users.
Topics addressed in this section include: wireless charging; battery swapping; electric vehicle supply
equipment; electromagnetic compatibility; vehicle as supply; and use of alternative power sources.
3.2.1.1 Wireless Charging
Wireless charging is a type of charging where energy is transferred to the vehicle in a contactless
manner rather than via a physical, conductive electrical connection. Stationary or static wireless
charging is where an EV is parked in a garage or charging location and is recharged without being
physically plugged in. Dynamic wireless charging takes this one step further and allows a vehicle to be

recharged while in motion. Wireless charging is a rapidly developing technology that will lend itself
naturally in the promotion and deployment of EVs. Although at this time the standards for wireless
charging are not complete, there is a significant interest in this technology. It is important to have
harmonized standards to ensure a safe, interoperable charging experience.
3.2.1.2 Battery Swapping
The limited range of current plug-in electric vehicles is a major obstacle when it comes to consumer
adoption and the migration from traditional internal combustion engine-powered transportation
solutions to a clean battery-powered solution. The current estimated range of battery-powered all
electric vehicles is around 80-120 miles with a battery weight of around 550-600 pounds. In a plug-in
hybrid electric vehicle, range can be extended via a gas-powered generator. In general, the current
range of PEVs on battery power alone is satisfactory for most daily commuter driving, but it does not
provide the ability to drive long distances, hence the need for range extension. Accordingly, there is a
need for a supporting infrastructure of charging networks covering homes, offices, parking, shopping
and industrial areas, and highways where PEVs can plug-in to recharge.
An alternative approach to addressing the range extension issue is via a network of battery swapping
(switching) stations (BSS). A BSS is an electro-mechanical installation of robotics, electrical and
mechanical drives used for the switching of batteries for electric vehicles and that may include battery
charging devices and telecommunication ports. This technology exists today and has been used in niche
segments for many years, enabling the replacement of a depleted battery with a fully charged one in
less than 5 minutes. The fully automated process removes the battery from the vehicle and moves it to a
battery rack, so the battery can be charged in optimal conditions. A fully charged battery is then taken
from the battery rack and inserted into the vehicle. Battery swapping stations could be located along all
key highways or major roads, thus enabling electric vehicles to drive for extended ranges. Battery
swapping stations are currently being mass deployed in Israel, Denmark, and China.
Battery swapping technology would require removable batteries with common interfaces that connect
with the battery outside the vehicle. EV batteries are currently very heavy, which requires that they be
carefully handled. Therefore, removable batteries will require a common mechanical interface to lock
and remove the battery from the vehicle by actuation of "twist-like" devices by external actuators which
are part of a switching station. Other issues pertinent to common battery packs and modules include
electrical interface, cooling integration, data transfer integration, and dimensions.
3.2.1.3 Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE)
Power Quality
Plug-in electric vehicles require both the electric grid and the vehicle charger to be reliable, as the power
quality of one depends on the power quality of the other. Coordinating the electric utility grid
characteristics and acceptable levels of power quality for vehicles and vehicle chargers allows
manufacturers and utilities to ensure that PEV users achieve a reliable charging experience.

EVSE Charging Levels/Modes
One of the most critical components to electric vehicle adoption is the ease and efficiency by which the
vehicle can be recharged, and the availability of charging facilities. The most available means of charging
an electric vehicle is to use a standard grounded electrical receptacle in accordance with NEC® Article
625 requirements. This is most practical at home where receptacle outlets are readily available and
downtime for the vehicle potentially allows the longest charging period throughout the day. Charging at
higher AC voltages, or using DC voltages, can provide a faster charge. These AC voltage levels are
available in homes, as well as municipalities, workplaces, and retail locations. DC chargers and high
power AC supply equipment can provide high power charging, reducing the time it takes to charge a
vehicle.
EV Supply Equipment and Charging Systems
As defined in Article 625 of the National Electrical Code®, electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE)
includes off-board charging stations, or portable EV cord sets (also referred to as charge cables) that
supply AC power to a vehicle’s on-board charger, whereas EV charging system equipment includes off-
board chargers that supply DC power to a vehicle in order to charge the on-board storage battery
directly. Vehicles may be designed for use with both types of infrastructure equipment. On-board
systems and controls are required to maintain the proper charge path such that AC voltages are not
applied to the battery and the like.
Infrastructure equipment is provided with a system of protection that is used to monitor ground
connections or isolation of the charging circuit from the user. These systems monitor the infrastructure
device as well as the vehicle through the conductive connection. The protection systems provide a
portion of the control for the charging function and shut down the infrastructure equipment in the
event of a loss of the protective elements associated with that system of protection (ground or
isolation).
EV Couplers
A critical user component required for recharging plug-in electric vehicles is the EV coupler, which
consists of a vehicle connector and a vehicle inlet. This vehicle connector and vehicle inlet combination
(coupler) provides a conductive path for power from the charging infrastructure equipment to the
vehicle, and assists the infrastructure equipment with safety checks, communication, and other aspects
associated with safe recharging of the vehicle.
Ideally, electric vehicle operators should be able to use any available charging station to recharge their
vehicle. This interoperability is governed by the electric vehicle charging systems including the vehicle
couplers. For these reasons, standardized EV couplers are vitally important in facilitating public adoption
of EVs, especially when multiple vehicle models are involved.
The EV coupler is also instrumental in protecting people from the risk of electric shock. This includes the
vehicle owner, as well as other people in the area that may contact the electric vehicle or the EV

coupler. The EV coupler also protects the vehicle, by guarding against mismatching of the vehicle
connector and vehicle inlet and providing for the correct communication and pilot controls via an
expected charge protocol. Safety standards provide the minimum requirements necessary to protect the
vehicle owner, general public, infrastructure, garage, and charging site, while the vehicle is charging.
With standardized couplers, an EV driver would be familiar with one type of EV connector and would not
have to worry about matching a connector to their particular vehicle make and model. Standardization
would also reduce attempts to modify equipment, or provide adapters to convert equipment, which
could adversely affect the safety of the charging system. Harmonized standards (national, regional,
international) would be beneficial, so that all EV couplers and electric vehicles would function in the
same manner and provide similar protection.
3.2.1.4 Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC)
The concept of EMC is to protect both the communications channels and the electrical circuits used in
charging and operating the vehicle. The focus is to limit or control electromagnetic emissions by both
the vehicle and charging station devices to keep them within tolerable limits for other nearby devices.
EMC standards help maintain the integrity of the EV system as a potential emitter and “good citizen” of
the electric grid, as well as protecting the vehicle and charging station from other emitters on the grid.
This is necessary to maintain the safety and interoperability of the devices within the charging
environment.
3.2.1.5 Vehicle as Supply
The topic of vehicle as supply describes the vehicle serving as a power source for other than vehicle
applications. Reverse power flow (RPF) is when the EV transfers power to off-board equipment as
further described below.
Pure reverse flow is very useful for powering loads at a remote site; this capability is called Vehicle to
Load (V2L). An EV can also use pure reverse power flow for providing a “jump start” to another EV; this
capability is called Vehicle to Vehicle (V2V). And pure reverse flow from an EV can be used to provide
emergency backup power for a home following a loss of grid power; this is called Vehicle to Home (V2H).
Because these are all off-grid applications, the on-board or external inverter must regulate both the
voltage and the frequency and it is the connected loads that determine how much energy flows from
the vehicle battery.
When a vehicle provides reverse power flow into a live electric grid this is called Vehicle to Grid (V2G). A
small, modular storage device connected to the grid is considered to be a distributed energy resource
(DER). The grid-connected EV that is capable of reverse power flow is a DER device. The real value of an
EV to the grid is its ability to serve as a DER device and provide precisely controlled bi-directional power
flow – not just reverse flow. The bi-directional converter can be located on-board the vehicle or
externally in the EVSE. When the grid-tied bi-directional converter is providing power to the grid it must
operate as a current source, synchronized to the grid voltage and frequency. The grid-tied bi-directional
converter can be commanded to deliver a precise forward or reverse power flow. If there is a power

failure, the inverter must automatically turn off. This is for the safety of workers that may be repairing
downed lines.
The term V2G has become associated with the concept of an aggregator coordinating the power flow of
many EVs to provide frequency regulation for the grid. This is only one of many ways that an EV can
serve the bulk grid and the distribution system as a DER. An EV with DER capability can be used solely
within a home by a home energy management system to manage the power demand of the home on
the external grid. This is not a V2H application because the home loads are still connected to a live grid.
However, a grid-tied inverter system can be configured to automatically disconnect the home from the
grid and switch from V2G to V2H operating mode following a grid power failure. This is routinely done
today with grid-tied solar PV inverter systems.
An EV could route power from an on-board inverter to a vehicle-mounted panel with NEMA receptacles.
This would be very convenient for directly connecting tools or appliances to the panel for V2L or using a
cord set for V2V. The EV could also be connected to the home through a transfer switch in the same
manner as any other portable genset to provide V2H capability. The EV to EVSE connection would be
used for V2G.
An external inverter would use the EV to EVSE connection and extract DC power from the vehicle
battery to generate the AC power. A premises-mounted EVSE could be used for V2G and V2H modes
with automatic switching. A portable unit could be used for V2L and V2V applications.
3.2.1.6 Use of Alternative Power Sources
EVs support and complement the increased possibility of an infrastructure with distributed generation
of power, and direct connection of power sources to the EV for charging purposes. This includes
efficiency benefits of DC generation and DC use, without losses associated with conversion to and from
AC, for example use of photovoltaic (PV) for direct DC charging of electric vehicles. It also allows the EV
battery to serve as a storage device for alternative energy systems, for example solar power generated
during the day or wind power generated at night, which can be reclaimed later as needed.
3.2.2 Infrastructure Communications
The charging of EVs creates both risks and opportunities for service providers and consumers. At a
minimum, consumers want access to a ubiquitous charging infrastructure that enables them to charge
their EVs safely and quickly at the cheapest possible rate. Energy Service Providers want to be able to
push charging to off-peak hours to protect grid assets.
Additionally, value-added services such as demand response/load control, pricing, locating and reserving
charging stations, reverse energy flow, and charge management can provide further benefits to
consumers and the grid. To advance a truly smart grid that can accommodate EVs, it is necessary that
communication among the various entities involved be enabled to maximize the services offered and
the benefits that EVs can deliver. Put another way, the vehicles, charging network providers and utilities

must be able to interact with one another seamlessly. While standards are a critical part of this, business
models are also needed to support the infrastructure for these interactions.
Topics discussed in this section include: communications architecture for EV charging; communications
requirements for various EV charging scenarios; communication and measurement of EV energy
consumption; cyber security and data privacy; and telematics smart grid communications.
Standardization work that relates generally to smart device communications, the connected vehicle, and
intelligent transportation systems is beyond the scope of this roadmap. Rather, this communications
section is focused on standards that are essential or unique to the PEV charging infrastructure, such as
those governing communications among an EV, EVSE and an Energy Service Provider.
Appendix A contains a more detailed, high level description of the need for communications in different
sections of the EV charging infrastructure, and the various stakeholders or actors involved in PEV
charging that need to communicate with each other.
3.2.2.1 Communications Architecture for EV Charging
The actors and communication methods involved in EV charging may vary, depending on criteria such as
the location of charging; the EV-related infrastructure (communications-capable or not); the type of
charging (AC/DC/wireless); the charging provider (utility, corporation, municipality, EV Services Provider,
etc.); and the requirements for authentication, authorization, accounting, and billing of the charging
session.
An actor is an entity that serves as one end point of communications. For example, when an EV
communicates with an EVSE, the two actors are the EV and the EVSE. The primary actors involved in EV-
related communication are expected to be the: (1) EV, (2) EV driver / operator, (3) EVSE, (4) Energy
Service Provider (ESP), (5) Energy Management System (EMS), (6) End Use Measurement Device
(EUMD), and (7) EV Services Provider (EVSP).
Figure 5 shows a sample communications-oriented architecture containing the primary actors, including
three different locations where charging may occur.
EV charging infrastructure is a subset of the electric grid or smart grid. For simplicity, the generation,
transport and distribution parts of the grid can be bundled up and referred to as the utility or Energy
Service Provider.
Broadly speaking, EV charging infrastructure downstream from the utility may be subdivided into home
(residential) charging, public charging and commercial charging.
In all these scenarios, the utility, the EV, and in most cases the EVSE are the constants.
Home Charging
For home charging, the utility may communicate directly with the smart meter(s) installed at the home.
These meters send consumption data to the utility, and the costs can be calculated according to the
tariff schedules. This scenario only requires communication between the smart meter (operated by the

utility) and the utility. This could happen over the Advanced Measuring Infrastructure (AMI) network
deployed by the utility.
In a more advanced scenario, the EV may use the Original Equipment Manufacturer’s (OEM) telematics
network to download demand response information and tariff rates, and schedule charging accordingly.
In cases where a jurisdiction (such as a public utilities commission) has mandated that sub-metering be
opened up to third party agents, a sub-meter that resides in the EVSE, EV, or outside of them needs to
communicate its metering data to the third party, and the third party needs to then forward that data
(as-is or in an aggregated format) to the utility.
Home charging communication may happen over a Home Area Network, or it may use the customer's
internet connection, or it may use its own cellular data connection.
Commercial Charging
In scenarios where EVSEs are restricted to authorized access only EVs or EV drivers, then communication
is required for authentication purposes, e.g., using an RFID card, credit card, QR code, smartphone
application, etc.
The commercial charging scenario includes entities such as corporations, supermarkets, universities,
hospitals, etc. A commercial entity may offer different levels of service to different customers. For
instance, a supermarket may provide benefits to customers who charge at their EVSEs. Hospitals and
corporations may restrict EV charging to their employees only, in certain spaces. In other cases, charging
may be allowed for everyone.
The commercial charging scenario could also include multi-dwelling units (MDUs) such as apartment
complexes. If a small number of EVSEs are shared amongst all the EV driving residents of an MDU, then
the MDU operator may want to restrict access to those residents who sign up for a charging plan.
Public Charging
As EVs proliferate, there may be a large number of EV owners who do not have the luxury of charging at
home because they have to park their EVs on the street or they have to travel long distances.
Public charging may require the AAA (Authentication, Authorization and Accounting) function to be able
to bill the appropriate consumer, i.e., the consumer must be unambiguously identified such that the
proper service can be provided, and the service (electricity delivered to the EV) must be metered
accurately and securely, so that the consumer can be billed for their EV charging.
Also, since EVSEs are not ubiquitous, there needs to be a means for a driver to locate them, view
information (such as pricing and availability), and possibly reserve their use.

Communications High Level Architecture
Typically, there is an entity that manages the energy flow within each location and acts as an interface
between the Energy Service Provider and the various charging locations.
Figure 5: Sample Communications-Oriented Architecture for
Commercial, Home, and Public Charging

In a home, an Energy Management System (EMS) could act as an analog of a building EMS and control
all the energy loads in the home, including EVs. While the external communication with the Energy
Service Provider uses an Energy Services Interface (ESI), communication between the EMS and the
internal charging infrastructure takes place via a Home Area Network (HAN). Optionally, an EV Services
Provider may manage the EV portion of the load, leaving the EMS to handle the remaining loads such as
air-conditioning.
In the case of a commercial/industrial building, an EMS may be the entity managing the energy flow. It
communicates with the ESP via a standard ESI, and with the building's charging infrastructure via some
internal communications mechanism (e.g., BACnet).
For public charging stations, an EV Services Provider manages a network of EVSEs and provides charging
availability to EV drivers. The EVSP communicates with the ESP using a standard protocol such as
OpenADR 2.0 or ESPI, and may act as an aggregator, providing a single communication point with the
ESP for all the EVSEs in its purview. Creating and/or harmonizing standards specific to public charging
communication is desirable in order to provide services such as finding and reserving charging stations.
3.2.2.2 Communications Requirements for Various EV Charging Scenarios
There are various communication requirements for charging of EVs under different use cases (home,
commercial, public) and metering options, each with different levels of complexities.
Basic charging at home does not require communications. However, additional benefits become
available if smart charging capabilities exist, such as if sub-metering, charge management and/or
demand response are implemented. Further communication complexities come into play if the EV is to
be used as a supply source providing reverse power flow to the home or grid.
Commercial / industry applications (e.g., fleets) often involve multiple vehicle charging scenarios with
load balancing and sequencing in order to meet business application requirements and minimize costs.
Accurate, real time coupling of state of charge (SOC) assessment, business application requirements,
and service provider demand response load control is essential.
Public charging communication requirements include the need to quickly and easily locate, price
compare, and reserve charging stations on the fly. Additional complexities are also introduced due to
the need to authenticate, authorize, and bill the user, especially when crossing over different service
territories.
The following briefly describes a number of the requirements for information/communication exchange,
not all of which are germane to each use case.
Locating and Reserving Charging Stations: EV drivers charging outside their home need to easily find and
optionally reserve an available, compatible charging station. In-vehicle dashboard systems, portable
navigation devices, smartphones, and personal computers need to communicate with entities that can
provide these services.

Charging Related Information Retrieval: EV drivers need to retrieve information about the current SOC
of their EV and an estimate of how long charging may take. Based on this information, the driver can
make an informed decision about where to charge, relieving range anxiety. This information is available
in the EV and needs to be communicated to the driver via standard mechanisms.
Pre-Charging Information Exchange: In order for charging to take place, an EV must be physically
associated with an EVSE. At that point, charging parameters such as direction of energy flow, start and
end time of charging, price, and EV/driver authentication information need to be communicated
between the EV, EVSE, and grid.
During a Charging Session: For billing purposes, it is critical to accurately measure the energy being
provided to the EV and communicate this to the EVSP/ESP, optimally in real time. Charge management
including battery SOC is important. Energy Service Providers may need to act in real time during peak
demand situations by providing incentives to EVs to reduce the amount of energy consumed (demand
response load control).
Notifications: The EV driver may optionally opt-in to receive notifications when charging is completed or
ends due to a fault. Such information needs to be communicated from the EV/EVSE to the driver.
Post-Charging: At the end of a charging session, the EV driver/owner must be billed. This may involve
communications with a credit card processor, communication between an EVSP and an ESP, or
communication between two EVSPs (e.g., when roaming).
In order to successfully communicate the information required in the above scenarios, multiple actors,
protocols, and communication media may be involved. Each primary actor may be capable of
communicating via multiple methods. For example, an EV may be able to communicate with an EVSE
using power line communication (PLC) over the physical link between them. The EV may also be able to
communicate with an EV telematics provider using telematics communication over wireless cellular
radio (2G/3G/4G).
Due to the number of actors involved and services being offered, as well as the plethora of
communications technologies in service, it is critical to standardize these communications as much as
possible to provide ease of entry into the market while also allowing widespread and consistent
charging capabilities to drivers without adversely impacting the grid. Communications interoperability is
a critical component of a smart grid.
3.2.2.3 Communication and Measurement of EV Energy Consumption
Though not required for charging purposes, the measurement of EV energy consumption is deemed
necessary to provide customers certain value added services related to EV and HAN energy usage
information and control. Along with demand response (DR) programs, discrete measurement of an EV
allows for time of use (TOU) tariffs to encourage charging during off-peak times, thereby lowering
customer costs and addressing issues related to the integration of renewables.

Regulatory issues and business cases will determine how metering of EVs is implemented. This would
include whether End Use Measurement Devices (EUMDs) need to be revenue grade in order to be used
for customer billing; who is allowed to own the EUMDs; who bills the customer; and how they
communicate. EUMDs can be separate meters (and therefore most likely to utilize existing metering
communication such as utility Advanced Measurement Interface (AMI) systems), probably necessitating
a second panel and service account. EUMDs could also be sub-meters, installed on a branch circuit of
the premises meter and necessitating a subtractive billing process to apply special rates. Sub-meters
could be located anywhere from the branch circuit to within the EVSE or EV itself.
3.2.2.4 Cyber Security and Data Privacy
Cyber security and data privacy issues associated with the introduction of PEVs and smart grid
communications have been the focus of attention of two of the SGIP V2G DEWG subgroups, whose work
has informed further work by SAE and the IEEE. A list of such issues can be found in the IEEE-USA
position statement Breaking Our Dependence On Oil By Transforming Transportation, available at
http://www.ieeeusa.org/policy/positions/Transportation0512.pdf.
3.2.2.5 Telematics Smart Grid Communications
Automakers are reviewing existing smart grid integration and communications architectures and
requirements to determine whether the utilization of existing vehicle telematics protocols and
structures are desired for PEV load management, ancillary services, and other utility, independent
system operators (ISOs) / regional transmission organizations (RTOs) services. Original equipment
manufacturers (OEMs) perceive several inherent industry benefits for implementing an integrated
telematics communications architecture such as: the ability to accelerate OEM implementation of
PEV/utility communications; provide common OEM services to all utilities; enable significant savings in
OEM vehicle development/production costs; allow versatility for integration with various utility smart
grid architectures; and provide for global applicability.
Telematics is the process for long-distance transmission of computer-based information and can provide
the capability to directly facilitate PEV smart grid load management communications with utilities, other
Energy Service Providers (ESPs), ISOs/RTOs, aggregators, and Electric Vehicle Services Providers (EVSPs).
Telematics has the versatility to further interact with Home Area Networks (HAN) and facility Energy
Management Systems (EMS) either through a gateway, the customer internet, or the PEV. OEMs and
other stakeholders are in the process of evaluating requirements to support possible interaction
between utilities and OEMs for PEV load management through telematics.
3.2.3 Infrastructure Installation
Installing electric vehicle infrastructure can be a unique challenge for communities. Appropriate codes
and standards to guide infrastructure installation will enable safe and effective deployment. Several key
areas described in this section must be addressed to streamline and more effectively deploy EV
infrastructure including: site assessment / power capacity assessment; EV charging – signage and
parking; charging station permitting; environmental and use conditions; ventilation – multiple charging

vehicles; guarding of EVSE; accessibility for persons with disabilities to EVSE; cable management; EVSE
maintenance; and workplace safety.
3.2.3.1 Site Assessment / Power Capacity Assessment
Electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) for vehicle charging places an additional demand on the
electrical system where the capacity to supply the load must be verified and provided. A site assessment
is typically performed by an electrical contractor to verify capacity and ensure the existing service or
system will not be overloaded.
3.2.3.2 EV Charging – Signage and Parking
Consistent and abundant public signage regarding the availability of electric vehicle charging facilities
will enable current EV drivers to easily recharge their vehicles. The prevalence of such signage may also
serve as an incentive that will help to attract new buyers to the EV market.
In order to accommodate increased numbers of electric vehicles in urban settings, considerations are
needed with regard to facilities’ charging and parking provisions. As parking requirements are
sometimes established by standards, codes, and/or regulations for various building types, insights for
EVs may be gleaned therein and potentially incorporated as part of revised versions. Traditionally
determined locally, enforcement of parking space use is more complex, involving considerations of
whether parking is for electric vehicles generally or only for charging and, if so, for what duration.
3.2.3.3 Charging Station Permitting
To enable the widespread acceptance of electric vehicles, it is important that charging station
installations be safe and meet electrical and building code requirements. These requirements help
assure that personal injuries, fires, and other hazards are avoided through proper installations and are
managed through existing building plan approval and inspection processes. The existing safety system
relies on product safety standards and certification, installation and building codes and standards, and
permits and inspections – all three of which are essential to the safe functioning of the system.
Residential Installation: Permitting and inspection of a residential charging station is likely the only time
a jurisdiction has the opportunity to determine that the charging system is correctly installed to ensure
life safety for residents and to minimize fire or other risks to the property. Before approving a residential
installation, jurisdictions may require information on the system being installed, the method of
installation and any standards or product requirements relating to installation. Information on the
licensing or qualifications of the installer may also be required. There may be differences in permitting
requirements for single- and multi-family dwellings depending upon the jurisdiction.
Commercial/Public Installation: The permitting and inspection of a commercial or public charging station
has greater potential to impact a larger population than a residential installation, but the jurisdiction will
likely have greater opportunity to monitor the system through common annual building inspections
conducted to assure compliance with the local fire code. As with residential installations, jurisdictions
may require product, installation, and installer information to ensure safety.

3.2.3.4 Environmental and Use Conditions
Electric vehicle infrastructure equipment may be used in a wide variety of conditions. Environmental
factors that may affect the safety, durability, performance or life of the electric vehicle infrastructure
equipment include ambient temperature, precipitation, humidity, corrosive agents, and altitude.
Temperature range, including consideration of extremes of hot and cold exposure, may affect the ability
of the product to function in the expected manner. Ability to prevent ingress of precipitation or other
contaminants such as dust may degrade the insulation or performance of equipment. Where applicable,
the equipment’s ability to withstand the effects of icing and/or de-icing may be important. High
humidity conditions may also affect equipment insulation or performance.
Infrastructure equipment also may be exposed to potentially corrosive agents such as salts whether
through installation in proximity to bodies of salt water or through exposure to anti-icing salts applied to
roads.
Hazardous or classified locations are terms used to identify installations where fire or explosion hazards
may exist because of the presence of flammable or combustible gases or vapors, or other potential
sources of fire and/or explosion hazards. As it relates to electric vehicles, these may be relevant both
with respect to the existing presence of such hazards from outside sources (for example, at a fuel
station), and for the generation of such hazards through the electric vehicle charging process, if
applicable, based upon the battery technology that is employed.
3.2.3.5 Ventilation – Multiple Charging Vehicles
Ventilation concerns must be addressed if charging stations are installed in enclosed areas such as
parking garages located in or under commercial buildings or multi-family residential dwellings. Public
officials and building operators will be concerned both with the possibility of off-gassing and heat
generation during charging operations, both of which may affect ventilation standards or codes. Vehicle
charging locations may be designated in, or only permitted for, ventilated areas of enclosed buildings.
3.2.3.6 Guarding of EVSE
The guarding of EVSE is an important issue encompassing physical and security protection for
equipment. Appropriate guarding of EVSE will enhance protection for users, facilitate safe charging
experiences, and lower risks in situations of vehicular collisions.
3.2.3.7 Accessibility for Persons with Disabilities to EVSE
Design and location considerations for EVSE must also take into account accessibility requirements in
design standards, building codes, as well as state and federal accessibility regulations including the
Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act.

3.2.3.8 Cable Management
Cord connected EVSE poses several challenges with regard to safety and theft especially within the
public arena. Safety aspects include possible tripping hazards and concerns about vehicle drive-aways
while still plugged in. Copper cables within EVSE offer tempting theft opportunities with resulting safety
implications.
3.2.3.9 EVSE Maintenance
While it is expected that most EVSE will require relatively little maintenance, it is considered best
practice to consistently follow a maintenance regimen to reduce safety risks and extend the service life
of EVSE. EVSE manufacturers typically provide recommended maintenance practices as part of service
manuals, and other information is available to provide guidance with regard to maintenance of EVSE
and electrical equipment in general.
3.2.3.10 Workplace Safety
Safety Programs and Safe Work Practices: Safety in electrical construction, installation, and maintenance
must be addressed proactively across a broad spectrum of workplace tasks and hazards. Safety in
construction requires establishing sound and effective safety principles and contractor safety programs.
Best practices for such programs include having in place a policy with goals, a plan, methods of
implementation, measurements, recordkeeping, and ongoing auditing and assessment. Safety requires
communication, coordination and cooperation between employees and the employer as it is a shared
responsibility. Ultimately, employers are responsible for developing and maintaining effective safety
programs and for ensuring that employees implement safe electrically-related work practices.
Shock, Arc-Flash, and Arc Blast Protection: Workplace safety for electrical workers requires compliance
with applicable electrical safety related work requirements. Work generally should always be performed
in an electrically safe work condition, and installation and maintenance should not be performed on
equipment or systems that are energized. Energized work must be justified and it must be proven that it
is not feasible to de-energize the system or that doing so would introduce additional or increased
hazards. In situations where justified energized work must be performed, appropriate personal
protective equipment (PPE) must be worn. Effective safety-related work practices and principles must
be integrated into the planning stages and installation of electrical work, as well as into initial planning
and design of EVSE installations.
3.3 Support Services Domain
For purposes of this roadmap, the Support Services Domain generally includes the supporting peripheral
activities, both under incident response and normal operating conditions, necessary to the well-being of
the broad electric vehicle and infrastructure environment. Standards, and education and training
programs for service personnel, are the primary focus with safety the paramount concern.

Incident response
Incident response is the activity performed by service providers when the EV has been damaged or
disabled as result of an incident either on the road or at a garage/parked location where vehicle service
is not normally performed. Incident response may be prompted by a breakdown, involvement in an
accident, or the EV being at the scene of an incident, such as a fire, where a building or EV charging
equipment may be involved and there is a need to stabilize or remove the EV to avoid its further
involvement.
Standards and training can help ensure the safety of emergency responders as they stabilize EVs in the
field, provide medical service to and extract trapped passengers from them, extinguish fires, and
remove vehicles from the roadway. When EVs are plugged into chargers during incidents, standards and
training can also provide information regarding the safe disconnecting of chargers from power sources.
Normal operations
Normal operations include driving and charging of EVs, and servicing and maintenance activities
performed at service locations, including dealerships, service garages, fleet lots, and at vehicle owners’
residences.
Standards and training can help ensure the safety of service technicians and vehicle owners as they
operate or service EVs every day including performing charging functions, working on EV motive
systems, and changing out batteries.
The following issues under the topical area of Education and Training outline important considerations
within the Support Services Domain for EVs and supporting infrastructure: electric vehicle emergency
shut off – high voltage batteries, power cables, disconnect devices; fire suppression, fire fighting tactics
and personal protective equipment; labeling of EVSE and load management disconnects for emergency
situations; original equipment manufacturer (OEM) emergency response guides; electrical energy
stranded in an inoperable rechargeable energy storage system (RESS); battery assessment and safe
discharge following an emergency event; disaster planning / emergency evacuations involving electric
vehicles; and, workforce training. The interrelationship of issues within the Support Services Domain is
illustrated in Figure 6.

Figure 6: Interrelationship of Issues within the Support Services Domain
3.3.1 Education and Training
Education and training regarding the unique characteristics of EVs and their support equipment is
needed for the various trades including service technicians, tow operators, emergency responders
(including fire service, emergency medical services, and law enforcement), fire investigators, incident
investigators, and electrical inspectors and installers. Some education is required for vehicle owners
including fleet operators.
Emergency responders to incidents involving electric vehicles need to know how to safely stabilize
crashed vehicles; extract vehicle occupants; handle EV batteries; remove disabled vehicles from the
scene; and, handle incidents involving EVs that are being charged at public or private EVSEs.
Vehicle service technicians need to know how to identify power components in EVs (including batteries,
cables, and disconnects) and how to safely remove, install, store, and recycle EV batteries during non-
emergency operations.

Electricians and electrical inspectors need to know how to properly install EVSE and demonstrate to
building owners and homeowners how to operate EVSE and any associated load management
equipment.
Fleet operators and vehicle owners need to know how to charge their vehicles and how to properly
disable the EV power source to their vehicle once charging is completed.
3.3.1.1 Electric Vehicle Emergency Shut Off – High Voltage Batteries, Power Cables, Disconnect
Devices; Fire Suppression, Fire Fighting Tactics and Personal Protective Equipment
Emergency responders need to be able to quickly and easily identify high voltage EV batteries and
power cables, disable high voltage systems, and otherwise safely manage emergency events involving
electric vehicles. Clear safety markings and procedures on how to shut off power to an EV following an
incident would help to protect the safety of emergency responders, law enforcement, tow operators,
and vehicle occupants from electrical shock hazards during passenger extrication and post-crash vehicle
movement and servicing. Best practices for fire suppression, fire fighting tactics and personal protective
equipment are also necessary to ensure safety.
3.3.1.2 Labeling of EVSE and Load Management Disconnects for Emergency Situations
General safety labeling of EVSE is important to protect those operating the equipment. In addition,
during emergencies involving EVs that are connected to charging stations, either in public or private
locations, emergency responders need to understand how to shut down and disconnect the equipment.
Labeling, especially graphics, would aid in quickly identifying devices and disconnect locations.
When EVSEs are used in conjunction with load management equipment, locations and connections to
the load management equipment should be easily identifiable and have ready access. In these cases, the
EVSE may be energized through a load management device which may measure other loads on a service
or feeder to determine whether there is adequate capacity to supply power to an EVSE. Another
configuration may permit the sharing of a 240-volt branch circuit with another 240-volt appliance
instead of being directly connected to a dedicated branch circuit with its own disconnecting means such
as a circuit breaker or fuse. The load management device in this configuration would only permit EVSE
operation when other loads are not present on the branch circuit.
3.3.1.3 OEM Emergency Response Guides
Vehicle manufacturers produce emergency response guides (ERGs) which provide instructions and
schematic details of safety procedures for their vehicles. These show access points, disconnect locations,
and chassis dismemberment locations valuable to first responders and rescuers particularly when
extrication of a vehicle passenger is required.

3.3.1.4 Electrical Energy Stranded in an Inoperable RESS; Battery Assessment and Safe Discharge
Following an Emergency Event
A rechargeable energy storage system (RESS) is a completely functional electrical energy storage device
consisting of the battery pack(s) and the ancillary subsystems necessary for physical support, protection
and enclosure, thermal management, and control (including electronic control). The automotive
application of an RESS during normal operating conditions relies greatly on advanced electronic-
management systems to control the energy flow into the pack during charging and energy discharge
from the battery pack when needed for propulsion of the vehicle.
In most electrically propelled vehicles, during unintended or abnormal events (such as a vehicle crash),
vehicle safety systems, including high-voltage electrical contactor switches are designed to open the
high-voltage circuit, isolating the energy within the battery and placing the electrical propulsion system
in a non-operative mode. These systems provide safety from electrical shock as required for compliance
with FMVSS No. 305, as well as unintended propulsion. However, current RESS design principles
governing the contactor safety device prevent the remaining energy in the pack from being accessed or
removed. In certain cases, this energy will be contained in an undamaged battery without incident and,
after proper diagnostic evaluation by trained personnel, the battery may be returned to operation at the
discretion of the OEM.
In other circumstances, when the RESS, including the high voltage battery, has been damaged, there is
an increased risk to responders and others from stranded energy. A damaged RESS may result in loss of
the ability to maintain thermal stability within the high voltage battery. The safety risks increase in
relation to the level of energy as measured by the battery pack’s state of charge (SOC). This combination
of a damaged RESS and high SOC can result in elevated potential safety risks, in the form of electric
shock and exothermic release of the stranded energy (venting, fire, or explosion), to the people handling
the vehicle and the battery pack, such as emergency first and second responders, repair technicians, or
battery recyclers.
In addition, it is generally assumed that at the end of battery life, if by age or premature damage, every
battery will have to be discharged for safety reasons before secondary use or recycling.
3.3.1.5 Disaster Planning / Emergency Evacuations Involving Electric Vehicles
A longer term issue that has been raised is disaster planning and the need for guidelines or standards to
deal with emergency evacuation situations especially those involving large numbers of electric vehicles
on the road at the same time. If traffic congestion caused a number of electric vehicles to become
depleted of charge on major evacuation routes (e.g., bridges and tunnels), this could become a serious
issue.

3.3.1.6 Workforce Training
In addition to the training requirements described above, as the electric vehicle market grows and
creates jobs, there is an increasing need for widespread occupational training and education to support
the life cycle of EVs and associated infrastructure.

4. Gap Analysis of Standards, Codes, Regulations,
Conformance Programs and Harmonization Efforts
Section 4 presents the details of the gap analysis of standards, codes, regulations, and conformance
programs, be they existing or in development, with particular focus on those that are pertinent to the
rollout of electric vehicles in the United States. This assessment also includes a review of relevant
harmonization activities underway.
In this context, a gap refers to a significant issue – whether it be related to safety, performance,
interoperability, etc. – that has been identified and that should be addressed in a standard, code,
regulation or conformance program, but no standard, code, regulation or conformance program
currently is published or known to exist that adequately addresses the issue. Gaps can be filled through
the creation of entirely new standards, code provisions, regulations, or conformance programs, or
through revisions to existing ones. In some cases, work may already be in progress to fill a gap.
A partial gap refers to a situation where a significant issue has been identified that is partially addressed
by an existing standard, code, regulation or conformance program.
No gap means there is no significant issue that has been identified at this time or that is not already
adequately covered by an existing standard, code, regulation or conformance program.
Note: If no information is provided in the sections that follow on conformance programs or
harmonization efforts, it means that either the issue was not addressed or no gap was identified at this
time with respect to the issue.
Additional details regarding the identified standards, codes, regulations, and conformance programs
described in this section can be found in the ANSI EVSP Roadmap Standards Compendium.
4.1 Vehicle Domain
Terminology
There are published standards devoted to general technical terms as well as published standards specific
to electric vehicle terminology. The goal should be to encourage the use of consistent terminology
related to electric vehicles. Standards include:
- ISO 8713, Electric road vehicles – Vocabulary, published in 2012, establishes a vocabulary of
terms used in relation to electric road vehicles and focuses on terms specific to electric road
vehicles.
- SAE J1715, Hybrid Electric Vehicle (HEV) & Electric Vehicle (EV) Terminology, published in 2008,
is intended as a resource for those writing other electric vehicle documents, specifications,
standards, or recommended practices. SAE J1715 is in the process of being split into two parts

among the SAE Hybrid Committee and SAE Battery Committee. The new standard will be
designated parts 1 and 2.
Partial Gap: Terminology. There is a need for consistency with respect to electric vehicle terminology.
Recommendation: Complete work to revise SAE J1715. Priority: Mid-term. Potential Developer: SAE,
ISO. Grid Related: No. Status of Progress: Green. Update: SAE J1715 is still in revision and is targeted for
publication in the Spring of 2013.
4.1.1 Energy Storage Systems
4.1.1.1 Power Rating Methods
In version 1.0 of this roadmap, there was a statement that two standards are under development to
address power rating methods for electric vehicles:
- SAE J2907, Power rating method for automotive electric propulsion motor and power
electronics sub-system, which provides a test method and conditions for rating the performance
of electric propulsion motors as used in hybrid electric and battery electric vehicles.
- SAE J2908, Power rating method for hybrid-electric and battery electric vehicle propulsion,
which provides a test method and conditions for rating performance of complete hybrid-electric
and battery electric vehicle propulsion systems reflecting thermal and battery capabilities and
limitations.
Gap: Power rating methods. It was noted in roadmap version 1.0 that standards for electric vehicle
power rating methods are still in development.
Recommendation: Complete work to develop SAE J2907 and J2908. Priority: Mid-term. Potential
Developer: SAE. Grid Related: No. Status of Progress: Red. Update: With respect to the roadmap
version 1.0 gap, work on the power rating method standards SAE J2907 and J2908 has been canceled
because of resource issues. It will be re-opened under a new J number at a future date yet to be
determined.
4.1.1.2 Battery Safety
EV battery safety standards development has been identified as a priority by standards development
organizations including IEC, ISO, SAE and UL, the regulatory body NHTSA, and the inter-governmental
body WP.29 via its EVS-IWG. As a result, a number of electric vehicle battery and related safety
standards have been published or are currently under revision or development. A breakdown of this
effort by organization follows:

IEC
- IEC 62660-2, Secondary batteries for the propulsion of electric road vehicles – Part 2: Reliability
and abuse testing for lithium-ion cells, was published in 2010. Although not specifically
identified as a safety standard, it does include tests which address safety issues such as short
circuit and overcharge.
ISO
- ISO 6469-1, Electric road vehicles – Safety specifications – Part 1: On-board rechargeable energy
storage system (RESS), published in 2009, provides general safety criteria to protect persons
within and outside of the vehicle and applies to batteries and other RESS.
- ISO 6469-3, Electrically propelled road vehicles – Safety specification – Part 3: Protection of
persons against electric shock, published in 2011, addresses electrical safety of the RESS within
the overall vehicle.
- ISO 12405-1, Electrically propelled road vehicles – Test specification for lithium-ion traction
battery packs and systems – Part 1: High-power applications, was published in 2011. It is
primarily focused on performance. However, it does contain tests that pertain to lithium-ion
battery safety such as short circuit, overcharge, and over discharge tests.
battery packs and systems – Part 2: High-energy applications, was published in 2012. It is similar
to its Part 1 counterpart for high power applications and contains tests related to lithium-ion
battery safety.
battery packs and systems – Part 3: Safety. This standard, currently in development, will be the
ISO safety standard for lithium batteries for EV applications.
SAE
- SAE J1766, Recommended Practice for Electric and Hybrid Electric Vehicle Battery Systems Crash
Integrity Testing, was published in 2005 and is currently under revision. It specifically addresses
electric vehicle safety concerns resulting from a vehicle crash event.
- SAE J2464, Electric and Hybrid Electric Vehicle Rechargeable Energy Storage System (RESS)
Safety and Abuse Testing, revised in 2009, provides a series of tests with which to determine an
RESS response to a potential abuse condition.
- SAE J2929, Safety Standard for Electric and Hybrid Vehicle Propulsion Battery Systems Utilizing
Lithium-based Rechargeable Cells, defines a minimum set of acceptable safety criteria for a
lithium-based rechargeable battery system to be considered for use in a vehicle propulsion

application as an energy storage system connected to a high voltage power train. A revision to
the standard was published in February 2013.
UL
- UL 2580, Batteries for Use in Electric Vehicles, was published as an Outline of Investigation in
2009, and as ANSI/UL 2580 in October 2011. This standard evaluates the cells, cell modules and
battery pack's ability to safely withstand simulated abuse conditions. The standard is non-
chemistry specific and includes construction requirements and tests to address safety of the
electric energy storage assembly and modules which can consist of batteries and/or
electrochemical capacitors.
NHTSA
- NHTSA FMVSS 305, Electric Powered Vehicles: Electrolyte Spillage and Electrical Shock
Protection. Last revised in 2011, it is a set of requirements intended to reduce deaths and
injuries during a crash, which occur because of electrolyte spillage from propulsion batteries,
intrusion of propulsion battery system components into the occupant compartment, and
electrical shock.
EVS-IWG
As noted earlier, the EVS-IWG under WP.29 is working to develop a Global Technical Regulation (GTR)
that would address potential safety risks of EVs while in use and after a crash event, including electrical
shocks associated with the high voltage circuits of EVs and potential hazards associated with lithium-ion
batteries and/or other rechargeable energy storage systems (RESS) (in particular, containing flammable
electrolyte). The GTR would also set provisions and test protocols to ensure the vehicle system and/or
electrical components perform safely, are appropriately protected, and are electrically managed while
recharging from external electricity sources, whether at a residence or other charging location.
In 2012, the EVS-IWG met twice, once in April and later in October, in Washington, DC and Bonn,
Germany, respectively. The EVS-IWG terms of reference were approved at the 2nd
meeting in Bonn. At
the 2nd
meeting, the International Organization of Automobile Manufacturers (OICA) provided a detailed
presentation of its proposal for GTR consideration (much of which is based on adopting provisions
contained in UNECE R100, Uniform Provisions Concerning the Approval of Battery Electric Vehicles with
Regard to Specific Requirements for the Construction and Functional Safety). The OICA proposal focuses
on: 1) provisions for protection of electrical shock for in-use and post-crash, and 2) provisions to ensure
safety performance of RESS for in-use and post-crash. Further consideration of the OICA proposal will
continue in 2013.
With regard to the timelines for establishing the GTR, two options are being considered: 1) develop the
GTR in two phases, and 2) develop a complete and comprehensive GTR in a single phase. In Option 1,
Phase 1 would be based on the OICA proposal while Phase 2 would address RESS items that require
more research. Under Option 2, the EVS-IWG would attempt to address all issues in a single phase.

As proposed by OICA, the GTR would apply to all vehicles of Category 1-1 and 1-2, with a gross vehicle
mass (GVM) of 4,536 kilograms or less, equipped with electric power train containing high voltage bus,
excluding vehicles permanently connected to the grid. Per the OICA proposal, the following vehicles
would be excluded:
a) A vehicle with four wheels whose unladed mass is not more than 350 kg, not including the mass
of the batteries in case of electric vehicles, whose maximum design speed is not more than 45 km/h,
and whose engine cylinder capacity does not exceed 50 cm3
for spark (positive) ignition engines, or
whose maximum net power output does not exceed 4 kW in the case of other internal combustion
engines, or whose maximum continuous rated power does not exceed 4 kW in the case of electric
engines.
and
b) A vehicle with four wheels, other than that classified under a) above, whose unladed mass is not
more than 400 kg, not including the mass of batteries in the case of electric vehicles and whose
maximum continuous rated power does not exceed 15 kW.
The EVS-IWG held its third meeting in mid-April in Tokyo, Japan and a fourth meeting is tentatively
scheduled for October 2013 in Beijing, China.
* * *
Although there has been active work in the battery safety standards area, the committee identified two
gaps that need to be addressed.
Functional safety in the charging system
With funding from the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) and NHTSA, SAE International has
undertaken a Cooperative Research Project (CRP) to Develop Repeatable Safety Performance Test
Procedures for Rechargeable Energy Storage Systems (RESS), in partnership with five major automotive
original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) actively working on RESS. This research will include
investigation of failure modes and the results will be considered by NHTSA in connection with future
rulemaking (e.g., this could be a functional safety standard, FMVSS for battery system safety, or a
proposal for a GTR). SAE TEVVBC1 also plans to integrate the results of this research into future revisions
of SAE J2929. The CRP report is targeted for release in October 2013.

Gap: Functional safety in the charging system. Potential faults in the charging system, both on-board
and off-board, are the subject of NHTSA sponsored research and may need to be addressed in future
rulemaking and/or standardization.
Recommendation: Future NHTSA rulemaking and/or revisions to SAE J2929 should consider the results
of the DOT/NHTSA-funded SAE Cooperative Research Project with respect to fault events in the charging
system which could lead to overcharging. Priority: Near-term. Potential Developer: NHTSA, SAE. Grid
Related: No. Status of Progress: Green. Update: The roadmap version 1.0 gap statement and
recommendation have been updated to note NHTSA-funded research, that the issue may be with the
charging system rather than the battery, and that NHTSA rulemaking may result. NHTSA has been added
as a potential developer and the priority level has been changed from mid-term to near-term. Recent
updates to SAE J2929 do not address charging system failure; rather, they relate to electromagnetic
compatibility (EMC) to ensure the safety functions of the battery are not impacted.
Delayed battery overheating events
All of the current tested failure modes of battery systems can be classed as “real time” with regard to
outcome. If a European Council for Automotive R&D (EUCAR) hazard level of greater than 2 happens –
the EUCAR rating system is used in SAE J2464 – it is assumed that it happens within minutes or a few
hours at most. It is now known that some faults that can create EUCAR 2 or higher events may not
surface for days or even weeks. This possibility introduces a new hazard potential that could surface at
any time unless expediently dealt with in a safe manner. Some of these scenarios are easily recognized
and dealt with such as in vehicle accidents and with faulty chargers or battery management systems.
Scenarios that are less obvious or detectable are internal partial pack circulating currents that escalate
over time to dangerous thermal states. Stray currents occurring in sub sections of a pack that are
intermediate in value between zero and hard shorts can evolve and generate excessive temperatures.
Gap: Delayed battery overheating events. The issue of delayed battery overheating needs to be
addressed.
Recommendation: Address the issue of delayed battery overheating events in future rulemaking and/or
revisions of SAE J2929 based on the results of the DOT/NHTSA-funded SAE Cooperative Research
Project. Priority: Near-term. Potential Developer: NHTSA, SAE. Grid Related: No. Status of Progress:
Yellow. Update: The roadmap version 1.0 recommendation has been updated to note NHTSA-funded
research which may result in future rulemaking. NHTSA has been added as a potential developer.
Version 2 of SAE J2929 has been published. However, the topic of delayed battery overheating events is
not addressed in this revision; it is pending the results of the NHTSA sponsored research.
4.1.1.3 Battery Testing – Performance and Durability
The principal areas of interest relating to standards for battery performance and durability testing are as
follows:

Cell level performance testing: Specifically in the IEC realm, there are multiple standards for defining and
measuring common performance characteristics, with emphasis on the loading conditions expected in
electric vehicle or hybrid electric vehicle applications.
Pack level performance testing: Specifically, in the ISO 12405-1 and 12405-2 standards, attention is given
to the distinction between high energy and high power applications. These also attempt to define and
measure common performance characteristics based on EV or HEV applications.
There is a need to focus on harmonization of key battery performance parameters for electric vehicle
applications. For example: “12kWh capacity” alone does not provide sufficient information due to
varying methods of measuring and calculating battery capacities. This is particularly key at the cell level,
as the cells are the primary determination to battery charge/discharge currents and capacities.
Durability and environmental endurance requirements: Some work has been done to define life-cycle
testing parameters under simulated environmental conditions. However, for environmental test
conditions, reliance appears to be on existing generic automotive or electronics testing requirements,
which will require further modification for battery applications.
Environmental durability test requirements (e.g., temperature, humidity, vibration, etc.) could also be
better defined, as current practices are to adapt existing automotive electronics requirements to the
battery and battery management system on a case-by-case basis.
SAE is revising J1798, Recommended Practice for Performance Rating of Electric Vehicle Battery
Modules, published in 2008, which provides for common test and verification methods to determine
electric vehicle battery module performance.
In addition, UL has defined requirements and testing and certification services for batteries.
Gap: Battery performance parameters and durability testing. There is a need for further work on EV
battery performance parameters and environmental durability test requirements.
Recommendation: Complete work on SAE J1798 and if possible consider harmonization with ISO 12405-
2. Priority: Mid-term. Potential Developer: SAE, ISO. Grid Related: No. Status of Progress: Yellow.
Update: There is not a lot of progress to date on SAE J1798.
4.1.1.4 Battery Storage, Packaging, Transport and Handling
Battery Storage
The following standards, code provisions and regulations relate to safety aspects of battery storage:
- IEC 60068, Environmental testing. Part 1: General and guidance, provides guidance regarding
testing of equipment such as batteries under different environmental conditions, which it
expects to be exposed to during storage and operations.
- ICC publishes the International Fire Code® (IFC®).

- NFPA 1, Fire Code, Chapter 52 covers stationary battery installations, which would come into
play where batteries are used in a fixed energy storage facility.
- NFPA 13, Standard on Installation of Sprinkler Systems, addresses fire protection of storage
occupancies. This document’s technical committee is working on requirements for handling and
storing EV batteries based on the results of the National Fire Protection Research Foundation
report on lithium-ion batteries.
- NFPA 30A, Standard for Motor Fuel Dispensing Facilities and Repair Garages, covers fire
protection requirements for fueling and service stations including service garages. This
document’s technical committee is also looking at requirements for safe handling of EV
batteries at these locations.
- NFPA 70®, the National Electrical Code®, Article 480, Storage Batteries, 2011, covers the
installation of electrical conductors, equipment, and raceways; signaling and communications
conductors, equipment, and raceways; and optical fiber cables and raceways.
- SAE J2950, Recommended Practices (RP) for Transportation and Handling of Automotive-type
Rechargeable Energy Storage Systems (RESS). This standard addresses identification, handling,
and shipping of un-installed RESSs to/from specified locations (types) required for the
appropriate disposition of new and used items.
- OSHA 1910, storage batteries, where provisions shall be made for sufficient diffusion and
ventilation of gases from storage batteries to prevent the accumulation of explosive mixtures.
- IEC 62840, Electric Vehicle Battery Exchange Infrastructure Safety Requirements, is a new work
item within IEC/TC 69 that encompasses storage of lithium-ion batteries.
- NFPA’s Fire Protection Research Foundation has also started a research project looking at fire
suppression techniques related to burning of EV batteries.
Gap: Safe storage of lithium-ion batteries. At present, there are no published standards addressing the
safe storage of lithium-ion batteries specifically, whether at warehouses, repair garages, recovered
vehicle storage lots, auto salvage yards, or battery exchange locations.
Recommendation: A standard on safe storage practices for EV batteries must be developed, addressing
both new and waste batteries and the wide range of storage situations that may exist, including when
the batteries are separated from their host vehicle. Priority: Near-term. Potential Developer: SAE, NFPA,
ICC, IEC/TC 69. Grid Related: No. Status of Progress: Green. Update: The roadmap version 1.0 gap
statement has been modified to say there are no published standards addressing safe storage. IEC 62840
and the research project of the NFPA’s Fire Protection Research Foundation are noted in the text.

Battery Packaging, Transport and Handling
So far, only limited standards work has been done in this area including:
- SAE J1797, Recommended Practice for Packaging of Electric Vehicle Battery Modules, published
in 2008. This Recommended Practice provides for common battery designs through the
description of dimensions, termination, retention, venting system, and other features required
in an electric vehicle application.
- As noted above, there is also SAE J2950, Recommended Practices (RP) for Transportation and
Handling of Automotive-type Rechargeable Energy Storage Systems (RESS).
- ISO/IEC PAS 16898, Electrically propelled road vehicles – Dimensions and designation of
secondary lithium-ion cells, was published in 2012 and a revision is targeted for publication in
2013.
At the end of 2010, the United Nations (UN) specifically classified lithium-ion batteries as part of its
amendments to the model regulations on the transport of dangerous goods. Thus, transportation of
new batteries is now covered by the International Air Transport Association (IATA), International Civil
Aviation Organization (ICAO), International Maritime Organization (IMO), and local transportation
regulations in countries of import/export, based on the appropriate UN number:
- 3090, Lithium Metal Batteries (including lithium alloy batteries);
- 3091, Lithium Metal Batteries Contained In Equipment (including lithium alloy batteries) or
Lithium Metal Batteries Packed With Equipment (including lithium alloy batteries);
- 3480, Lithium-ion Batteries (including lithium-ion polymer batteries); and
- 3481, Lithium-ion Batteries Contained In Equipment (including lithium-ion polymer batteries) or
Lithium-ion Batteries Packed With Equipment (including lithium-ion polymer batteries).
UN recommendations (Manual of Tests and Criteria, section 38) also cover packaging limitations to
ensure proper containment against pressure and temperature changes, mechanical drops, etc.
The Portable Rechargeable Battery Association (PRBA) and the International Association for the
Promotion and Management of Portable Rechargeable Batteries (RECHARGE) submitted a joint proposal
on this issue to the UN Subcommittee of Experts (UN SCOE) on the Transport of Dangerous Goods. The
proposal was discussed at the Subcommittee’s June /July 2012 meeting, the result of which was that the
groups were invited to submit a new proposal.

Gap: Packaging and transport of waste batteries. Current standards and regulations do not adequately
cover transportation aspects of waste batteries (damaged, aged, sent for repair, end-of-life) in terms of
packaging, loading limitations, combination with other dangerous goods on same transport, etc.
Recommendation: There is a need for a harmonized approach toward communication, labeling,
packaging restrictions, and criteria for determining when a battery is waste. Priority: Near-term.
Potential Developer: UN SCOE on the Transport of Dangerous Goods, ISO/TC 22/SC21, SAE or UL. Grid
Related: No. Status of Progress: Green. Update: The UN SCOE was added as a potential developer as
there is a proposal before it.
Gap: Packaging and transport of batteries to workshops or battery swapping stations. Unloading a
battery in a battery swapping station is extremely challenging with the original packaging used for
dangerous goods transportation. There is a need for standards for intermediate packaging to cover
transport to battery swapping stations.
Recommendation: Intermediate packaging is required between the import location of the battery and
battery swapping stations and needs to be standardized around geometry, safety and matching to UN
packaging requirements. Priority: Mid-term. Potential Developer: ISO/TC 22/SC21, IEC/TC 69, SAE or UL.
Grid Related: No. Status of Progress: Not started.
4.1.1.5 Battery Recycling
The following documents are directed at all battery types including Lithium batteries:
- SAE J2974, Technical Information Report on Automotive Battery Recycling. In development and
targeted for publication by the end of 2013, this document provides a compilation of current
recycling definitions, technologies and flow sheets and their application to different battery
chemistries.
- SAE J2984, Identification of Transportation Battery Systems for Recycling Recommended
Practice. Published in June 2012 with a revision targeted for the Spring of 2013, this document
includes a chemistry identification system intended to support the proper and efficient recycling
of rechargeable battery systems used in transportation applications with a maximum voltage
greater than 12V (including SLI batteries).
In terms of regulations, lithium-ion battery recycling compliance requirements are limited to a few
states in the U.S., including California, Oregon and Florida. The lack of harmonization and clear battery
producer responsibility (in contrast to requirements in Europe for example) may potentially limit the
battery recycling schemes in the U.S. Nevertheless, federal grants are given as an incentive to develop
these recycling technologies and meet the demands of eMobility in the U.S.

Gap: Battery recycling. Standards are needed in relation to EV (li-ion) battery recycling.
Recommendation: Complete work on SAE J2974 and J2984. EV (li-ion) battery recycling standards are
desirable to address the calculation method toward recycling efficiency and recovery rates based on an
agreed unit (possibly weight) and/or life-cycle assessment tools, including energy recovery. Priority:
Near-term. Potential Developer: SAE, IEC. Grid Related: No. Status of Progress: Green. Update: The
roadmap version 1.0 text and recommendation have been updated to note relevant work by SAE. The
priority level has been changed from long-term to near-term.
4.1.1.6 Battery Secondary Uses
SAE TEVVBC15, Secondary Battery Use Committee, is tasked with developing standards to address
battery second life applications and has begun initial investigation of this topic. Most OEMs predict a 70-
80% capacity remaining in the lithium-ion battery after automotive initial purpose. Assuming the
replacement pack is returned to an authorized dealer or support facility, a simple test or state of health
record can assess the next steps. SAE J2950 can be used to safely ship batteries for storage or
repackaging for alternative uses. SAE J2936 can be used to correctly label the battery for handling.
Logistics will be required to facilitate different battery chemistries, various sizes and matching. Battery
management systems should be utilized as needed to maintain safety. Appropriate packaging methods
are also needed to avoid abuse.
Gap: Battery secondary uses. There is a need for standards to address battery second life applications
for grid storage and other uses.
Recommendation: Explore the development of standards for battery secondary uses, addressing such
issues as safety and performance testing for intended applications, grid connection/communication
interfaces, identification of parts/components that can be removed from the pack without destroying it,
etc. Priority: Mid-term. Potential Developer: SAE, UL. Grid Related: No. Status of Progress: Green.
Update: The text has been updated to note some of the considerations in the work thus far by the SAE
committee. The priority level has been changed from long-term to mid-term. UL has been added as a
potential developer.
4.1.1.7 Crash Tests / Safety
FMVSS 305
The only federal motor vehicle safety standard that is unique to electric vehicles is FMVSS 305, Electric
Powered Vehicles: Electrolyte Spillage and Electrical Shock Protection. In 2010, FMVSS 305 was updated
so as to align it more closely with the April 2005 version of SAE J1766, Recommended Practice for
Electric and Hybrid Electric Vehicle Battery Systems Crash Integrity Testing. In July 2011, the standard
was again amended in response to petitions for reconsideration filed subsequent to the publication of
the 2010 final rule. As amended, FMVSS 305 is intended to provide manufacturers greater flexibility,
requiring them to design electrically-powered vehicles so that, in the event of a crash, the electrical

energy storage, conversion, and traction systems are either electrically isolated from the vehicle’s
chassis or their voltage is below specified levels considered safe from electric shock hazards.
Since the physiological impacts of direct current (DC) are less than those of alternating current (AC), the
standard specifies lower electrical isolation requirements for certain DC components (100 ohms/volt)
than for AC components (500 ohms/volt). The recent rulemakings resulted in the introduction of new
definitions, changes to existing definitions, changes to the energy storage/conversion device retention
requirements, the introduction of a low voltage option for achieving electrical safety, and a requirement
for monitoring of the isolation resistance of DC high voltage sources that comply with the 100 ohms/volt
electrical isolation requirement. As amended, FMVSS 305 applies to passenger cars, multi-purpose
vehicles (MPVs), trucks and buses that have a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of 4,536 kg or less,
that use electrical components with working voltages more than 60 volts direct current (VDC) or 30 volts
alternating current (VAC), and whose speed attainable over a distance of 1.6 km on a paved level surface
is more than 40 km/h. This differs from the previously-existing standard that similarly applied to
passenger cars, MPVs, trucks and buses that have a GVWR of 4,536 kg or less but that was limited to
vehicles that use more than 48 nominal volts of electricity as propulsion power and whose speed
attainable in 1.6 km on a paved level surface is more than 40 km/h.
SAE EV Crash Test Safety Procedures Task Force
SAE has formed an EV Crash Test Safety Procedures Task Force under the Impact and Rollover Test
Procedures Standards Committee. The scope of the task force is to create and maintain information
reports and recommended practices that relate to laboratory and personnel safety when conducting
dynamic crash testing of EVs. Published work shall reflect the current industry “best practices” for
testing and provide a basis for industry harmonization of these methods, to the extent possible. There is
an understanding that these methods will change over time. Laboratory tasks being looked at include
vehicle receiving and inspection, vehicle preparation, crash tests, post-crash inspection, and post-crash
storage. The documents will address battery system failures due to electrical and mechanical abuse,
personal protective equipment, training, emergency procedures, thermal runaway risk, toxic emissions,
and other battery health assessments. The group hopes to publish an information report by the Spring
of 2013.
As noted earlier, NFPA’s Fire Protection Research Foundation has also started a research project looking
at similar questions related to burning of EV batteries and recommendations for suppression efforts.
SAE J2929 has added a section on rollover, but this will not cover all the issues that this task force is
exploring.
No gaps have been identified at this time with respect to this issue.

4.1.2 Vehicle Components
4.1.2.1 Internal High Voltage Cables, On-Board Wiring, Component Ratings and Charging
Accessories
EV-specific standards related to this topic include:
- IEC/TR 60783, Wiring and Connectors for Electric Road Vehicles, which applies to cabling and
connectors used in battery electric road vehicles. These recommendations are not applicable to
the low tension wiring (e.g. 12 V) for the auxiliary and signaling accessories, such as horn,
lighting, signaling lamps, wipers, etc., nor do they apply to connections between cells of the
traction battery. Rather, this document provides general rules for all external wiring and
connectors which are used for interconnecting the traction components and sub-systems. The
rules are applicable to the heavy current, the light current, and the signal harnesses. Currently,
this publication has the status of a technical report, hence the “TR” designation.
- SAE J2894/1, Power Quality Requirements for Plug In Electric Vehicle Chargers. The intent of this
published document is to develop a recommended practice for PEV chargers, whether on-board
or off-board the vehicle, that will enable equipment manufacturers, vehicle manufacturers,
electric utilities and others to make reasonable design decisions regarding power quality. The
three main purposes are: 1) To identify those parameters of a PEV battery charger that must be
controlled in order to preserve the quality of the AC service; 2) To identify those characteristics
of the AC service that may significantly impact the performance of the charger; and, 3) To
identify values for power quality, susceptibility and power control parameters which are based
on current U.S. and international standards. These values should be technically feasible and cost
effective to implement into PEV battery chargers.
- SAE J2894/2, Power Quality Requirements for Plug In Electric Vehicle Chargers - Test Methods.
This standard, targeted for publication in June 2013, describes the test methods for the
parameters/requirements in SAE J2894/1. It addresses automatic charger restarts after a
sustained power outage, as well as the ability to ride through momentary outages.
- UL 62, Flexible Cords and Cables, which covers electric vehicle cable constructed as described in,
and listed for use in accordance with, Article 400 of NFPA 70®, the National Electrical Code®. The
cable is used to supply power, signal, and control to electric vehicles during the charging
process. Electric vehicle cable consists of two or more insulated conductors, with or without
grounding conductors, with an overall jacket.
- UL 458A, Power Converters/Inverters for Electric Land Vehicles, which covers power converters
and power inverters intended for use in electric vehicles. This category covers fixed and
stationary power converters, and accessories having a nominal rating of 600 V or less, direct or
alternating current. This category also covers fixed, stationary and portable power inverters
having a DC input and a 120 or 240 V AC output. These converters/inverters are intended for use

within electric land vehicles where not directly exposed to outdoor conditions. This category
also covers converters/inverters that are additionally intended to charge batteries.
- UL 2202, Electric Vehicle Charging System Equipment, which covers charging system equipment,
either conductive or inductive, intended for use with electric vehicles. The equipment can be
located on- or off-board the vehicle.
- UL 2733, Surface Vehicle On-Board Cable, which covers single-conductor or single, coaxial cable
intended for the connection of components in an electric vehicle. The cable is rated 60, 75, 90 or
105°C (140, 167, 194 or 221°F), 300 or 600 V AC or DC, -30°C (-22°F), oil resistant, water
resistant, and suitable for exposure to battery acid.
- UL 2734, Connectors for Use in On-board Electric Vehicle Charging Systems, which covers
component connectors intended to interconnect both communication and power-circuit
conductors rated up to 30 A and up to 600 V AC or DC within an on-board electric vehicle
charging system.
General standards that may be applicable in the EV components environment include:
- IEC 61316, Industrial cable reels, which applies to cable reels with a rated operating voltage not
exceeding 690 V AC/DC and 500 Hz with a rated current not exceeding 63A, primarily intended
for industrial use, either indoors or outdoors, for use with accessories complying with IEC
60309-1.
- SAE J1654, High Voltage Primary Cable. This SAE Standard covers cable intended for use at a
nominal system voltage up to 600 VDC or 600 VAC. It is intended for use in surface vehicle
electrical systems.
- SAE J1673, High Voltage Automotive Wiring Assembly Design. This SAE Recommended Practice
covers the design and application of primary on-board wiring distribution system harnesses to
road vehicles. This document applies to any wiring systems which contains one or more circuits
operating between 50V DC or AC RMS and 600 V DC or AC RMS excluding automotive ignition
cable.
- SAE J1742, Connections for High Voltage On-Board Road Vehicle Electrical Wiring Harnesses -
Test Methods and General Performance Requirements. Procedures included within this
specification are intended to cover performance testing at all phases of development,
production, and field analysis of electrical terminals, connectors, and components that
constitute the electrical connection systems in high power road vehicle applications that
operate at either 20 V to 600 volts regardless of the current applied, or any current greater than
or equal to 80 A regardless of the voltage applied. These procedures are applicable only to
terminals used for in-line, header, and device connectors and for cable sizes up to 120 mm2
(4/0).

- UL 1004-1, Traction Motors, which covers motors intended as the prime mover and installed in
or on vehicles for highway use, such as passenger automobiles, buses, trucks, vans, bicycles,
motorcycles and the like. These motors have been investigated for construction and operation
at rated output. They have additionally been investigated for the severity and profile of shock
and vibration likely to be encountered by motors mounted in road vehicles.
- USCAR-37, High Voltage Connector Performance Supplement to SAE/USCAR-2. Procedures
included within this specification supplement are, when used in conjunction with SAE/USCAR 2,
intended to cover performance testing at all phases of development, production, and field
analysis of electrical terminals, connectors, and components that constitute the electrical
connection systems in high voltage (60~600V) road vehicle applications. These procedures are
applicable to terminals used for in-line, header, and device connector systems with and without
shorting bars.
In Europe and in other countries around the world, electric vehicles and on-board components are
subject to review through both European and UN regulations. These regulations include European
Regulations 2007/46/EC or 2002/24/EC and the UNECE Regulation R100. UNECE R100 is the UN
regulation which tests specific requirements for the construction, functional safety and hydrogen
emissions of battery-powered all electric vehicles. UNECE R100 is required by many countries before an
electric vehicle can be road registered, and is also required before European Community Whole Vehicle
Type Approval (ECWVTA) can be issued. Safety regulations and requirements within UNECE R100
include: vehicle constructional requirements (e.g., prevention of gas accumulation and correctly rated
circuit breakers); protection against electric shock through the assessment of covers and enclosures
associated with high voltage components; assessment of access to high voltage components according
to protection degrees, etc.
In the U.S., FMVSS 305, Electric Powered Vehicles: Electrolyte Spillage and Electrical Shock Protection, is
similar to R100 in Europe. In addition, all motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment are
covered by the Motor Vehicles Safety Act in the U.S., meaning they are covered by NHTSA’s recall and
remedy provisions in the event there exists a safety-related defect.
4.1.2.2 Vehicle Diagnostics – Emissions
In 1993, pursuant to the Clean Air Act, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published a final
rulemaking requiring manufacturers of light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks to install on-board
diagnostic (OBD) systems on such vehicles beginning with the 1994 model year. The regulations
promulgated in that final rule require manufacturers to install OBD systems which monitor emission
control components for any malfunction or deterioration causing exceedance of certain emission
thresholds, and which alert the vehicle operator to the need for repair. That rulemaking also requires
that, when a malfunction occurs, diagnostic information must be stored in the vehicle's computer to
assist the technician in diagnosis and repair.

Since the inception of the program, vehicle manufacturers have been allowed to satisfy federal OBD
requirements by installing OBD systems satisfying the OBD II requirements promulgated by the
California Air Resources Board (CARB).
Because hybrid electric vehicles and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles are equipped with conventional
internal combustion or diesel engines, they comply with CARB and EPA OBD requirements. In some
cases, there are special OBD requirements that are specific to these hybrid and plug-in hybrid electric
vehicles.
CARB’s OBD II rules can be found at:
- Title 13, California Code Regulations, Section 1968.2, Malfunction and Diagnostic System
Requirements for 2004 and Subsequent Model-Year Passenger Cars, Light-Duty Trucks, and
Medium-Duty Vehicles and Engines (OBD II); and
- Title 13, California Code of Regulations, Section 1968.5, Enforcement of Malfunction and
Diagnostic System Requirements for 2004 and Subsequent Model-Year Passenger Cars, Light-
Duty Trucks, and Medium-Duty Vehicles and Engines.
For copies, see http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/obdprog/obdregs.htm.
Note: In December 2011, CARB proposed amendments to its OBD II regulation which, among other
things, would clarify how certain requirements are to be applied to hybrid and plug-in hybrid electric
vehicles. The proposed amendments were adopted by the Board at a hearing held in January 2012. A
copy of the regulation as amended is available at:
http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/levprog/leviii/leviii.htm.
4.1.2.3 Audible Warning Systems
Numerous activities are underway to address the concern that electric and some hybrid electric vehicles
may not be audibly detectable by the blind. These include NHTSA rulemaking (stemming from the
Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act of 2010), Japanese and UNECE guidelines requiring EVs and HEVs to
generate a pedestrian alert sound, SAE and ISO technology neutral procedures for measuring vehicle
sound at low speeds, and the previously noted WP.29 effort to develop a Global Technical Regulation
(GTR).
In accordance with the Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act of 2010, electric and hybrid electric vehicles
must emit an alert sound that allows blind and other pedestrians to reasonably detect a nearby electric
or hybrid vehicle operating below a certain cross-over speed. The alert sound must be in compliance
with a new safety standard that NHTSA is required to create in accordance with the law. The NHTSA
notice of proposed rulemaking was published in the Federal Register on 14 January 2013 with comments

due by 15 March 2013. The law requires NHTSA to finalize the new standard by 4 January 2014. Under
the law, the new standard is required to be in effect within 36 months of publication of the final rule.
NHTSA has proposed to incorporate by reference portions of SAE J2889-1, Measurement of Minimum
Noise Emitted by Road Vehicles, which was published in September 2011. At the request of NHTSA, SAE
issued a revised version of J2889/1 in May of 2012 to include metrics and measurement procedures for
changes to pitch and volume for innate and synthetic vehicle sounds. The SAE work product is the basis
for ISO 16254, an identical sound measurement standard in development.
Outside the U.S., electric and hybrid electric vehicles are being designed to comply with voluntary
guidelines. The Japanese Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT) has voluntary
guidelines which require that EVs and HEVs generate a pedestrian alert sound whenever the vehicle is
moving forward at any speed less than 20 km/h and when the vehicle is operating in reverse. MLIT
guidelines do not require vehicles to produce an alert sound when the vehicle is operating but stopped,
such as at a traffic light. The manufacturer is allowed to equip the vehicles with a switch to deactivate
the alert sound temporarily. In Europe, the UNECE has adopted guidelines covering alert sounds for EVs
and HEVs that are closely based on the Japanese guidelines. The guidelines will be published as an annex
to the UNECE Consolidated Resolution on the Construction of Vehicles (R.E.3).
The WP.29 work on a GTR is currently ongoing and will likely continue in parallel with the NHTSA
rulemaking activity which is ongoing.
Partial Gap: Audible warning systems. Creation of the NHTSA safety standard and compliance with it
will effectively close any gap with respect to audible warning systems for electric vehicles sold in the U.S.
market. Ongoing standards work in SAE and ISO, and in WP.29 with respect to the development of a
Global Technical Regulation would provide a means for international harmonization around this issue.
Recommendation: Continue work on safety standards to address EV sound emission and measurement.
Priority: Near-term. Potential Developer: SAE, ISO, NHTSA, WP.29. Grid Related: No. Status of Progress:
Green.
4.1.3 Vehicle User Interface
4.1.3.1 Graphical Symbols
There are several international standards and guidelines relating to graphical symbols and how to
develop them. These are general in nature and not specific to electric vehicles, but may be utilized by
standards development groups to develop a set of electric vehicle graphical symbols standards. There
are also some publications that relate specifically to markings on electrical equipment and
instrumentation for electric vehicles. These include:
- IEC 60445, Basic and safety principles for man-machine interface, marking and identification -
Identification of equipment terminals, conductor terminations and conductors, published in
2010, which contains rules for markings of electrical equipment including colors for conductors.

- IEC TR 60784, Instrumentation for electric road vehicles, published in 1984, provides high level
guidance on information that should be provided to the driver regarding operating and other
states of an electric vehicle battery.
PEVs include indicators on battery state of charge, if there is a system failure, etc. but these vary by
OEM. There is an SAE committee working on an “electronic fuel gauge” document that is waiting for
additional input from committee members on the direction of future work.
In terms of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards and Regulations, there is:
- NHTSA FMVSS 101, Controls and Displays, most recently published in 2009, which provides
performance requirements for the location, identification, color, and illumination of motor
vehicle controls, telltales and indicators. It is not electric vehicle specific.
As described earlier, a DOT/NHTSA-funded SAE Cooperative Research Project is looking at functional
safety studies and failure modes. Once these issues are better understood, it is possible that future
rulemaking could explore having a consistent symbol for high voltage failures.
Gap: Graphical symbols for electric vehicles. Standards for graphical symbols for electric vehicles are
needed to communicate important information to the driver such as state of charge, failure or normal
system operation which can be understood regardless of the driver’s language.
Recommendation: Develop EV graphical symbols standards to communicate information to the driver.
Priority: Long-term. Potential Developer: SAE, NHTSA, ISO, IEC. Grid Related: No. Status of Progress:
Not started. Update: The text has been updated to note NHTSA sponsored research on functional safety
and failure modes. The roadmap version 1.0 gap statement and recommendation have been re-focused
on communication of information to the driver. NHTSA has been added as a developer and the priority
level has been changed to long-term. Regarding the roadmap version 1.0 gap statement and
recommendation relating to graphical symbols for “parts under the hood,” this aspect is addressed in
section 4.3.1.1 on EV emergency shut off.
4.1.3.2 Telematics – Driver Distraction
The following are relevant with respect to conventional vehicles and are not specific to EVs:
- Auto Alliance Driver Focus Telematics Guidelines. This guideline provides 24 design principles for
telematics systems human-machine interaction design to minimize the potential for driver
distraction. Each design principle has a rationale, design criteria and evaluation procedure to
help designers implement the requirements. Four categories of design principles for navigation,
telephone call management, electronic messaging, and interactive services are currently
addressed in this document.
- NHTSA Driver Distraction Guidelines. In February 2012, NHTSA issued proposed nonbinding,
voluntary guidelines to promote safety by discouraging the introduction of excessively
distracting devices in vehicles. These guidelines cover original equipment in vehicle device

secondary tasks (i.e., communications, entertainment, information gathering, and navigation
tasks not required for driving) performed by the driver through visual-manual means. See:
https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2012/02/24/2012-4017/visual-manual-nhtsa-driver-
distraction-guidelines-for-in-vehicle-electronic-devices. These NHTSA guidelines are still in the
proposal stage.
- NHTSA – FMVSS 101. This standard specifies performance requirements for location,
identification, color, and illumination of motor vehicle controls, telltales and indicators. The
purpose of this standard is to ensure the ready access, visibility and recognition of motor vehicle
controls and to facilitate the proper selection of controls under daylight and night time
conditions, in order to reduce the safety hazards caused by the diversion of the driver’s
attention from the driving task and by mistakes in selecting controls.
No gaps have been identified at this time.
4.1.3.3 Fuel Efficiency, Emissions and Labeling
In July 2011, a new federal regulation titled, “Revisions and Additions to Motor Vehicle Fuel Economy
Label” was issued (Federal Register: Vol. 76, No. 129, pages 39478 – 39587, [Docket ID; EPA–HQ–OAR–
2009–0865; FRL–9315–1; NHTSA–2010–0087]). This was a joint rule issued by both the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and NHTSA. The regulation establishes new requirements (40 CFR Parts 85, 86,
and 600, and 49 CFR Part 575) for the fuel economy and environmental label that will be posted on the
window sticker of all new automobiles sold in the U.S. The rule became effective in September 2011 and
the labeling requirements apply for model year 2013 and later.
This joint final rule by EPA and NHTSA represents the most significant overhaul of the federal
government’s fuel economy label or “sticker” since its inception over 30 years ago. The redesigned label
will provide new information to American consumers about the fuel economy and consumption, fuel
costs, and environmental impacts associated with purchasing new vehicles. The new rule will result in
the development of new labels for certain advanced technology vehicles entering the U.S. market, in
particular plug-in hybrid electric vehicles and electric vehicles. This rule uses miles per gallon gasoline
equivalent for all fuel and advanced technology vehicles available in the U.S. market including plug-in
hybrids, electric vehicles, flexible-fuel vehicles, hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, and natural gas vehicles.
The following four SAE standards are referenced in the regulation:
- SAE J1634, Electric Vehicle Energy Consumption and Range Test Procedure;
- SAE J1711, Recommended Practice for Measuring the Exhaust Emissions and Fuel Economy of
Hybrid-Electric Vehicles, Including Plug-in Hybrid Vehicles;
- SAE J2572, Recommended Practice for Measuring Fuel Consumption and Range of Fuel Cell and
Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicles Fuelled by Compressed Gaseous Hydrogen; and
- SAE J2841, Utility Factor Definitions for Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles Using Travel Survey Data.

The redesigned label provides expanded information to American consumers about new vehicle fuel
economy and fuel consumption, greenhouse gas and smog-forming emissions, and projected fuel costs
and savings, and also includes a smartphone interactive code that permits direct access to additional
web resources. Additional information for advanced technology vehicles includes driving range and
battery charge time.
4.2 Infrastructure Domain
4.2.1 Charging Systems
4.2.1.1 Wireless Charging
SAE International is currently in the process of developing a design standard, SAE J2954, Wireless
Charging of Electric and Plug-in Hybrid Vehicles. The standard will cover all equipment aspects of
stationary charging, from grid to vehicle charging with a key focus on interoperability between the
primary (charging mat) and secondary (pick-up located on vehicle) when the two aforementioned
components are manufactured by two different suppliers. The SAE taskforce is reviewing the state of
the art of wireless charging (e.g., inductive, magnetic resonance) and compiling an interoperability
study. The document, which initially will be published as a guideline, is due out in 2013. It will be a
working document as further research for this technology is currently underway, and it will become a
standard for publication in 2015.
UL is developing UL 2750 to cover safety aspects of wireless charging in parallel with the development of
SAE J2954.
The IEEE Standards Association has initiated pre-standardization activity related to electric vehicle
wireless power transfer (EVWPT) focused on dynamic wireless charging in light of the range limitations
of EVs and the costs of vehicle energy storage. This is intended to complement SAE J2954 which is
centered on stationary charging.
The IEEE will:
- Develop a peer-reviewed technology strategy guideline and technology roadmap for the
development of EVWPT infrastructure solutions (with respect to different use cases and
covering both stationary and dynamic wireless charging) and a focus on future standardization
needs; and
- Develop a white paper for dynamic wireless charging which can be utilized as input for future
joint IEEE/SAE standardization activities (considering both vehicle integration and infrastructure
integration aspects).

IEC/TC 69 has undertaken work on IEC 61980-1, Electric vehicle wireless power transfer systems (WPT) –
Part 1: General requirements, in cooperation with SAE and the Japan Automobile Research Institute
(JARI).
Gap: Wireless charging. Standards and guidelines for wireless charging are still in development.
Recommendation: Complete work on SAE J2954, UL 2750, IEEE deliverables and IEC 69180-1. Priority:
Near-term. Potential Developer: SAE, UL, IEEE, IEC/TC 69. Grid Related: Yes. Status of Progress: Green.
Update: The text and roadmap version 1.0 gap statement and recommendation have been modified to
account for IEEE and IEC/TC 69 work, with both added as potential developers.
4.2.1.2 Battery Swapping
To date, standards development activities with regard to battery swapping have been relatively limited.
In June 2011 the Chinese released for public comments nine standards that deal with battery swapping
including: terminology, general requirements, testing specifications and construction codes.
The CEN/CENELEC focus group report on European Electro-Mobility specified the need for international
battery swapping standards addressing safety, energy needs, exchangeability, ready access, data and
communication framework.
A new project has been established within IEC/TC 69 titled IEC 62840 Ed. 1.0, Electric vehicle battery
exchange infrastructure safety requirements. Publication is anticipated in mid-2015. At the kick-off
meeting for this project in February 2013, it was determined to work on a series of standards that deal
with safety, communication, interoperability and performance related to battery swapping. Progressing
the new work item on safety from a working draft to a committee draft will remain the initial focus,
while preparing new work item proposals for the additional work.
Gap: Battery swapping – safety. Currently, there is a need to define minimum requirements for the safe
operation of battery swapping stations, as deployment of battery swapping systems is currently
underway in several countries around the world.
Recommendation: Complete work on IEC 62840 to define minimum requirements for the safe operation
of battery swapping stations. Priority: Near-term. Potential Developer: IEC/TC 69. Grid Related: No.
Status of Progress: Green. Update: The text and recommendation have been updated to note the new
project IEC 62840 in IEC/TC 69.
Gap: Battery swapping – interoperability. Standards are needed to help facilitate the penetration of
battery swapping in the market. Issues to be addressed related to removable batteries include electrical
interfaces, cooling integration, data transfer integration, and common mechanical and dimensional
interfaces.

Recommendation: Define interoperability standards related to battery swapping. Priority: Near-term.
Potential Developer: IEC/TC 69. Grid Related: No. Status of Progress: Not started. Update: Currently,
there is some ongoing work on the standardization of battery packs in ISO TC 22/SC21. The inaugural
meeting of the working group for IEC 62840 in IEC/TC 69 raised an indication of interest in work on
interoperability related to battery swapping.
4.2.1.3 Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE)
Power Quality
The increasing number of plug-in electric vehicle chargers has caused concern over their combined
effects on the power quality and reliability of electric utility grids. SAE International has published SAE
J2894, Power Quality Requirements for Plug-in Electric Vehicle Chargers. SAE J2894/1, published in
December 2011, contains the requirements while SAE J2894/2, targeted for publication in June 2013,
contains the test procedures for those requirements.
SAE J2894/1 contains both requirements for the power quality of the vehicle chargers and the
characteristics of the electric grid. It includes power quality requirements on the power factor, AC to DC
conversion efficiency, harmonic current distortion, and inrush current. This document also describes
what the normal characteristics of the electric grid are and the characteristics of some events that could
occur on the electric grid. These events include voltage swell, surge, sag, and distortion, as well as
momentary outage and frequency variations.
SAE J2894 notes that generators that would be used in a home do not have the same power quality as
the electric grid and that user experiences could be affected by vehicle chargers that do not work
properly due to the use of these generators. SAE J2847/1 and J2836/1™ are referenced in J2894/1 to
link the communications and power quality documents. SAE J2894 discusses what is known as “cold load
pickup,” which is when power is restored after a loss of utility power with many devices still connected
and on that attempt to restart at the same time. All of these devices, including vehicle chargers then
draw their respective inrush currents, leading to a possible current of up to five times normal load. A
restart load rate is described in order to keep this initial load to a manageable level.
Partial Gap: Power quality. SAE J2894/1 was published in December 2011. At the time of publication of
roadmap version 1.0, SAE J2894, Part 2, was still in development.
Recommendation: Complete work on SAE J2894, Part 2. Priority: Near-term. Potential Developer: SAE.
Grid Related: Yes. Status of Progress: Closed. Update: With the publication of SAE J2894/2, the partial
gap on power quality identified in version 1.0 of this roadmap will be closed.
EVSE Charging Levels/Modes
SAE J1772™, the Recommended Practice for Electric Vehicle and Plug In Hybrid Electric Vehicle
Conductive Charge Coupler, organizes the potential charging options into different “levels.” IEC 61851
organizes charging into four “modes” based on the EVSE connection to the AC mains. These standards

identify the voltage, number of phases, maximum current, and required branch circuit protection for
each level or mode. These parameters, coupled with the battery charge parameters, dictate the length
of time the vehicle will take to charge. To determine the charge time, consider that the higher the level
or mode, the higher the voltage and current, and therefore the quicker the charge. Battery properties
and vehicle characteristics must also be taken into account in order to determine the charging time.
While the SAE and IEC standards for conductive charging dictate different power parameters for each
level or mode, the operational parameters of the vehicle and EVSE generally remain the same from level
to level or mode to mode. In future applications, very high power and/or high voltages may require
additional safeguards to address these special applications. Specifications such as vehicle state voltages
and control pilot circuit parameters are consistent for each level within SAE and each mode within IEC
standards. This allows EV drivers to utilize any of the AC levels/modes of charging available, provided
that the connector meets the SAE J1772™ or the car is compatible with one of the IEC connector types
available on that station.
EVSE manufactured for the U.S. market, and vehicles sold and operated in the U.S., generally follow the
SAE J1772™ standard. EVSE manufactured for the European market, and vehicles sold and operated in
Europe, generally follow the IEC 61851 standards.
In October 2012, a revision of SAE J1772TM
was published which integrates AC and DC charging into one
vehicle inlet/charging connector (the “combination coupler”). AC and DC charging incorporated the
same low level control pilot communication scheme. DC charging requires high level digital
communications for charge control. The 2010 version of SAE J1772™ defined AC Level 1 and AC Level 2
charge levels and specified a conductive charge coupler and electrical interfaces for AC Level 1 and AC
Level 2 charging. The October 2012 revision incorporates DC charging where DC Level 1 and DC Level 2
charge levels, charge coupler and electrical interfaces are defined. The standard was developed in
cooperation with the European automotive experts who also adopted and endorsed a combination
coupler strategy in their approach.
Figure 7 describes the SAE charging configurations and ratings terminology.
 AC L1: 120V AC single phase
- Configuration current 12, 16 amp
- Configuration power 1.44, 1.92kw
 DC L1: 200 – 500V DC
- Rated Current ≤ 80 amp
- Rated Power ≤ 40kw
 AC L2: 240V AC single phase
- Rated Power ≤ 19.2kw
 DC L2: 200 – 500V DC
- Rated Power ≤ 100kw
 AC L3: To Be Determined (TBD)  DC L3: TBD
Figure 7: SAE Charging Configurations and Ratings Terminology (Used with Permission of SAE International)
Voltages are nominal configuration operating voltages, not coupler rating.
Rated power is at nominal configuration operating voltage and coupler rated current.

SAE J1772™ has the following information:
It is recommended that residential EVSEs input current rating be limited to 32 amp (40 amp
branch breaker) unless the EVSE is part of a home energy management system. Residential
EVSEs with input current ratings of greater than 32 amp without home energy management may
require substantial infrastructure investment by the resident owner, utility, or both.
As noted, SAE J1772™ is used in the U.S. Many of the requirements found in SAE J1772TM
are included in
the IEC 61851 series of standards. IEC 61851, Parts 1 and 22, and the forthcoming Parts 23 and 24
include or will include other connectors that are used in Europe and other areas. The IEC 61851 series,
developed by IEC/TC 69, addresses safety aspects and EVSE and the IEC 62196 series, developed by
IEC/SC 23H, addresses the safety, dimensional compatibility and interchangeability of the connectors. All
of these aspects are covered in SAE J1772™.
Europe has variations for the infrastructure since they have Case A, B & C, described in IEC 61851-1 and
IEC 62196-1. Case A is when the cable is fixed to the vehicle. Case B is when the cable has a connector
on both ends. Case C is when the cable is fixed to the EVSE. They also have Modes 1, 2, 3 & 4. The
Modes and requirements are described in IEC 61851-1 (Ed. 2 (2010 edition) as follows (below text is
directly excerpted from the standard):
- Mode 1 charging: connection of the EV to the a.c. supply network (mains) utilizing standardized
socket-outlets not exceeding 16 A and not exceeding 250 V a.c. single-phase or 480 V a.c. three-
phase, at the supply side, and utilizing the power and protective earth conductors.
NOTE 2 In the following countries, mode 1 charging is prohibited by national codes: US.
NOTE 3 The use of an in-cable RCD can be used to add supplementary protection for connection
to existing a.c. supply networks.
NOTE 4 Some countries may allow the use of an RCD of type AC for mode 1 vehicles connected
to existing domestic installations: JP, SE.
- Mode 2 charging: connection of the EV to the a.c. supply network (mains) not exceeding 32 A
and not exceeding 250 V a.c. single-phase or 480 V a.c. three-phase utilizing standardized single-
phase or three-phase socket-outlets, and utilizing the power and protective earth conductors
together with a control pilot function and system of personnel protection against electric shock
(RCD) between the EV and the plug or as a part of the in-cable control box. The inline control
box shall be located within 0,3 m of the plug or the EVSE or in the plug.
NOTE 5 In the USA, a device which measures leakage current over a range of frequencies and
trips at predefined levels of leakage current, based upon the frequency is required.
NOTE 6 In the following countries, according to national codes, additional requirements are
necessary to allow cord and plug connection to a.c. supply networks greater than 20 A, 125 V
a.c.: US.

NOTE 7 For mode 2, portable RCD as defined in IEC 61540 and IEC 62335 is applicable.
NOTE 8 In Germany the inline control box (EVSE) shall be in the plug or located within 2,0 m of
the plug.
- Mode 3 charging: connection of the EV to the a.c. supply network (mains) utilizing dedicated
EVSE where the control pilot function extends to control equipment in the EVSE, permanently
connected to the a.c. supply network (mains).
- Mode 4 charging: connection of the EV to the a.c. supply network (mains) utilizing an offboard
charger where the control pilot function extends to equipment permanently connected to the
a.c. supply.
It is recognized that vehicle manufacturers may have to design vehicles with regional kits that will allow
the appropriate connector and voltage interface for the region of use.
Partial Gap: EVSE charging levels. At the time of release of version 1.0 of this roadmap, the levels for DC
charging within SAE J1772TM
had yet to be finalized.
Recommendation: Complete work to establish DC charging levels within SAE J1772TM
. Priority: Near-
term. Potential Developer: SAE. Grid Related: Yes. Status of Progress: Closed. Update: With the
publication of the new version of SAE J1772™, the gap identified in version 1.0 of this roadmap with
respect to DC charging levels in SAE J1772™ is now closed.
EV Supply Equipment and Charging Systems
Off-board charging stations and portable EV cord sets are covered by UL 2594, Standard for Electric
Vehicle Supply Equipment. Off-board chargers are covered by UL 2202, the Standard for Electric Vehicle
(EV) Charging Equipment.
A North American harmonization effort has taken place based on UL 2594 involving CSA C22.2 No. 280
and similar requirements in Mexico to cover the safety requirements for off-board charging stations and
portable EV cord sets, with respect to risk of fire, shock and injury to persons. As a result of this work, a
tri-national standard was published in February 2013: NMX-J-677-ANCE/CSA C22.2 NO. 280-13/UL 2594,
Standard for Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment. This aligns with the timing of the revision cycle of the
2014 National Electrical Code® (NEC®). There are additional technical items that will be addressed in a
Phase 2 harmonization effort through the Council for Harmonization of Electrotechnical Standards of the
Nations of the Americas (CANENA) upon the completion of this initial phase of harmonization.
UL 2594 references UL 2231 (Parts 1 and 2) as well as UL 2251, Standard for Plugs, Receptacles and
Couplers for Electric Vehicles whose requirements are also being harmonized with CSA and ANCE to
create North American standards.
In September 2012, the first two of these standards were published as North American standards. These
were based on UL 2231-1 and 2231-2 respectively.

- NMX-J-668/1-ANCE/CSA C22.2 No. 281.1/UL 2231-1 Standard for Safety for Personnel
Protection Systems for Electric Vehicle (EV) Supply Circuits: General Requirements;
- NMX-J-668/2-ANCE/CSA C22.2 No. 281.2/UL 2231-2 Standard for Safety for Personnel
Protection Systems for Electric Vehicle (EV) Supply Circuits: Particular Requirements for
Protective Devices for Use in Charging Systems.
These documents cover devices and systems intended for use in accordance with the NEC® Article 625
to reduce the risk of electric shock to the user from accessible parts, in grounded or isolated circuits for
charging electric vehicles. They are intended to be read together.
Partial Gap: Off-board charging station and portable EV cord set safety within North America. At the
time of release of version 1.0 of this roadmap, the harmonization of equipment safety standards within
North America based on the UL 2594 standard was still underway.
Recommendation: Finish North American harmonization effort based on UL 2594 addressing off-board
charging station and portable EV cord set safety Priority: Near-term. Potential Developer: UL, CSA,
ANCE (Mexico), NEMA. Grid Related: Yes. Status of Progress: Closed. Update: With the publication of
the tri-national North American standard based on UL 2594 in February 2013, the partial gap identified
in version 1.0 of this roadmap regarding off-board charging station and portable EV cord set safety
within North America is closed. There will be a need to address NEC® 2014 technical issues in the new
tri-national standard. There are additional technical items that will be addressed in a Phase 2
harmonization effort through CANENA.
There is currently no harmonization effort in progress for UL 2202. However, the harmonization of the
safety requirements for off-board chargers would be needed to address safety concerns in the same
manner as harmonization of UL 2594 as stated above.
Partial Gap: Off-board charger safety within North America. Harmonization of equipment safety
standards within North America is needed.
Recommendation: There appears to be a need to harmonize the safety requirements for off-board
chargers with the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. Priority: Mid-term. Potential Developer: UL, CSA, ANCE
(Mexico), NEMA. Grid Related: Yes. Status of Progress: Not started.
The IEC 61851 series of standards also address the safety of off-board chargers, off-board charging
stations, and portable EV cord sets:
- IEC 61851-1, Ed. 2.0, Electric Vehicle Conductive Charging Systems, Part 1: General
Requirements, (Ed. 3.0 currently under development with an anticipated publication date of
March 2014); and

- IEC 61851-22, Ed. 2.0, Electric Vehicle Conductive Charging Systems, Part 22: AC Electric Vehicle
Charging Stations (will be withdrawn upon publication of IEC 61851-1, Ed. 3.0).
The following standards are also under development in IEC/TC 69:
− IEC 61851-21-1, Ed. 1.0, Electric vehicle conductive charging system – EMC requirements for
electric vehicle for conductive connection to an a.c./d.c. supply (publication anticipated in
March 2014); and
− IEC 61851-21-2, Ed. 1.0, Electric vehicle conductive charging system – EMC requirements for off
board electric vehicle charging systems (publication anticipated in March 2014).
These two new parts are intended to replace the existing IEC 61851-21, Ed. 1.0 (2001) Electric vehicle
conductive charging system - Part 21: Electric vehicle requirements for conductive connection to an
a.c./d.c. supply. This original Part 21 will be withdrawn, and replaced by the two subparts 1 and 2 noted
above. The electrical requirements are being split and included in IEC 61851-1 and ISO 6469-3 and ISO
17409. The work to develop a 2nd
edition of Part 21 has been stopped and will likely be canceled when
Parts 21-1 and 21-2 are published.
Also being developed are:
- IEC 61851-23, Ed. 1.0, Electric vehicle conductive charging system – D.C. electric vehicle charging
station (publication anticipated in December 2013); and
- IEC 61851-24, Ed. 1.0, Electric vehicle conductive charging system – Digital communication
between a d.c. EV charging station and an electric vehicle for control of d.c. charging
(publication targeted for February 2014).
The IEC 61851-1 and 61851-22 standards have many requirements that are similar or identical to what is
featured in the North American standards, such as UL 2594 and UL 2202. However, an area of
discrepancy exists pertaining to the requirements for personnel protection systems. The IEC documents
require a form of protection system that is widely used in Europe but is not used in the U.S., while the
National Electrical Code® in the U.S. requires a different system of protection that is not used in Europe.
This difference in the standards affects the harmonization of these requirements. In addition, there are
differences in the standards used to cover components or subassemblies within the overall equipment,
and differences in the evaluation of required environmental ratings for outdoor equipment. From a
harmonization perspective, these differences are not as difficult to overcome as the previously
discussed personnel protection systems.
Harmonization between the North American safety standards and the IEC 61851 standards is being
driven through IEC work and U.S. participation in the appropriate IEC committees. However, no formal
program or specific project has been initiated to actually harmonize these standards. Up to this point,
the effort has been focused on introducing specific aspects into either the North American standards, or
the IEC standards, as opportunity allows.

Partial Gap: Off-board charger, off-board charging station and portable EV cord set safety globally.
There are some differences between the IEC 61851 series of standards and the North American
standards. While not a gap per se with respect to the U.S. market, the use of infrastructure equipment
and the means to mitigate risks would prove beneficial to manufacturers if harmonization was
completed.
Recommendation: Work to harmonize the IEC 61851 series standards and the North American
standards. Priority: Mid-term. Potential Developer: UL, IEC. Grid Related: Yes. Status of Progress: Not
started.
Conformance Programs
Various conformance programs exist, with each third party testing organization having a program in
place. Article 625 of the National Electrical Code® requires off-board chargers, off-board charging
stations, and portable EV cord sets to be listed. So, conformance programs are essential to listing the
product. Although all conformance programs have their own specific parts, for off-board charging
stations and portable EV cord sets, all North American conformance programs will be based on the
North American standards as shown above, and all will eventually be using the new harmonized tri-
national standard (based on UL 2594).
EV Couplers: Safety and Harmonization Efforts
Today, UL 2251, Standard for Plugs, Receptacles and Couplers for Electric Vehicles, exists to cover for EV
couplers. A North American harmonization effort has taken place based on UL 2251 involving CSA C22.2
No. 282 and similar Mexican documents to cover the safety requirements for vehicle connectors and
vehicle inlets with respect to the risk of fire, shock, and injury to persons for both AC and DC rated EV
couplers. As a result of this work, a tri-national standard was published in February 2013: NMX-J-678-
ANCE/CSA C22.2 No. 282-13/UL 2251, Standard for Plugs, Receptacles and Couplers for Electric Vehicles.
Partial Gap: EV coupler safety within North America. At the time of publication of version 1.0 of this
roadmap, harmonization of EV coupler safety standards within North America based on the UL 2251
standard was still underway.
Recommendation: Finish efforts to harmonize standards addressing EV coupler safety within North
America. Priority: Near-term. Potential Developer: UL, CSA, ANCE (Mexico), NEMA. Grid Related: Yes.
Status of Progress: Closed. Update: With the publication of the tri-national standard based on UL 2251
in February 2013, there are no gaps in standardization for EV coupler safety in North America and the
partial gap identified in version 1.0 of this roadmap is closed. There are additional technical items that
will be addressed in a Phase 2 harmonization effort through CANENA.
The IEC 62196 series of standards also address safety of the EV coupler:
- IEC 62196-1, Ed. 2.0, Plugs, Socket-Outlets, Vehicle Connectors and Vehicle Inlets – Conductive
Charging of Electric Vehicles – Part 1: General Requirements; and

- IEC 62196-2, Ed. 1.0, Plugs, Socket-Outlets, Vehicle Connectors and Vehicle Inlets – Conductive
Charging of Electric Vehicles – Part 2: Dimensional Compatibility and Interchangeability
Requirements for AC Pin and Contact-Tube Accessories.
Based upon the continuing development of EV couplers and EV charging stations, IEC 62196 parts 1 and
2 are in a revision phase started in 2012 and continuing through 2013, with publication of new editions
expected in the first half of 2014.
In addition to IEC 62196 parts 1 and 2, a new Part 3, Dimensional Compatibility and Interchangeability
Requirements for Dedicated DC and combined AC/DC Pin and Contact-Tube Vehicle Couplers, is being
developed. It will be similar to Part 2 in that it will standardize and contain all of the details to build
either DC or AC/DC vehicle couplers. Publication is anticipated during the first half of 2014.
The IEC 62196 standards are similar in many respects to the North American standards. They go further
in that the Part 2 and the developing Part 3 include or will include the specific vehicle inlet and
connector interface (configuration) drawings, ratings information and other details to allow
interchangeable devices to be made by many manufacturers. They also insure that other types of
vehicle couplers used in other countries will not mismatch with the devices recommended by U.S.
manufacturers.
There are some differences between IEC 62196 series standards and the existing North American
standards. These include some construction issues such as acceptance of components and the IEC
standards used to certify and test these components, the mandatory use of latching means, and the use
of IEC ingress protection (IP) ratings. They also include testing differences such as additional test
methods for enclosure strength testing, environmental testing on enclosures (IP ratings), and impact
testing on inlets.
Harmonization between the North American coupler safety standards and the IEC 62196 standards is
being driven through IEC work and U.S. participation in the appropriate IEC committees. However, no
formal program or specific project has been initiated to actually harmonize these standards. Up to this
point, the effort has been focused on introducing specific aspects into either the North American
standards, or the IEC standards, as opportunity allows. The fact that harmonized standards do not exist
globally creates the situation where different connectors are being used in different geographic areas. In
some cases, these differences cannot be eliminated because of differences in the infrastructure. In other
cases, harmonization would be a good thing, but at the moment it would appear to be more of a mid-
term goal.
Partial Gap: EV coupler safety globally. There are some differences between the IEC 62196 series
standards and the North American EV coupler safety standards. While not a gap per se with respect to
the U.S. market, global harmonization would help to reduce costs for vehicle manufacturers.
Recommendation: Work to harmonize the IEC 62196 series standards and the North American EV
coupler safety standards. Priority: Mid-term. Potential Developer: UL, IEC. Grid Related: Yes. Status of
Progress: Not started.

Section 1962.2, Title 13, of the California Code of Regulations, requires 2006 and later model year
vehicles to be equipped with a conductive charger inlet port which meets all the specifications
contained in SAE J1772™. This is also a requirement in states that have adopted the California Air
Resources Board (CARB) zero emission vehicle (ZEV) requirements pursuant to section 177 of the federal
Clean Air Act (42. U.S.C. Sec. 7507) (“S.177 states”). In March 2012, section 1962.2, Title 13, was
amended so as to permit a manufacturer to apply for approval to use an alternative to the AC inlet
specified in SAE J1772™ provided that the following conditions are met: (a) each vehicle is supplied with
a rigid adaptor that would enable the vehicle to meet all of the remaining system and on-board charger
requirements described in J1772™, and (b) the rigid adaptor and alternative inlet must be tested and
approved by a Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL).
Various other conformance programs exist, with each third party testing organization having a program
in place. Article 625 of the National Electrical Code® requires EV couplers, EVSE and EV charging systems
to be listed. So, conformance programs are essential to listing the product. Although all conformance
programs have their own specific parts, all North American conformance programs will be based on the
North American standards as shown above, and all will eventually be using the new harmonized tri-
national standard (based on UL 2251).
EV Couplers: Interoperability with EVSE and Harmonization Efforts
SAE J1772™ covers the interface, design, geometry, communication protocol, and pilot controls for
electric vehicle infrastructure as it is communicated through the EV connector. Conforming to this SAE
document means that any vehicle supplied with an SAE J1772™ inlet on the vehicle can pull up to any
SAE J1772™ infrastructure type device (which would be provided with an SAE J1772™ style connector)
and be able to charge the vehicle. Such charging interoperability is key to the mass deployment of PEVs.
As noted above, compliance requirements with respect to SAE J1772TM
and the charger inlet port are
specified in California’s ZEV requirements which also apply to S.177 states. As such, it is currently the de
facto EV charge coupler standard in the U.S.
Outside of the U.S. market, EV couplers are diverse:
- For AC charging, different connectors exist in Europe and China, while Japan uses the SAE
J1772™ EV coupler and Korea has adapted SAE J1772™ to allow for a detachable charge cable;
and
- For DC charging, Europe and China are developing their own EV coupler, while Japan is using the
CHAdeMO configuration, and Korea has looked at both CHAdeMO, a modification of it, and SAE
J1772™.
This diversity in the EV coupler has caused the need for different products to be manufactured for
different countries as well as modifications to vehicles that will be shipped around the world.

As explained earlier, SAE International has revised the SAE J1772™ standard to include both AC and DC
fast charging capabilities via the AC/DC combination coupler. The forthcoming IEC 62196-3 will describe
the new SAE J1772™ combination coupler as well several other different DC coupler configurations
(Japan, China, and Europe).
To date, the CHAdeMO configuration has been widely deployed for DC charging in North America. It is
anticipated that vehicles and infrastructure outfitted to accommodate the new SAE J1772™ combination
coupler will come to market in 2013.
Harmonization of EV couplers on a global scale would help to reduce costs for manufacturers of PEVs
and charging infrastructure. However, due to differences in electrical systems, each country’s own
national rules and regulations, and EV coupler configurations already having been well established in
some locations, global harmonization is not likely to occur. Also, with the advent of DC quick charging,
the need to harmonize AC connectors has become less of an issue. Once sufficient infrastructure is in
place, it may prove difficult to switch connector types, so the harmonization effort for DC connectors
would be considered a near-term goal if it is going to happen.
Partial Gap: EV coupler interoperability with EVSE globally. Different coupler configurations are used in
different parts of the world. Global harmonization would help to reduce costs for manufacturers. At the
time of release of version 1.0 of this roadmap, the revision of SAE J1772TM
was still in progress; it has
now been published.
Recommendation: Incorporate the new SAE J1772™ combination coupler into IEC 62196-3. Build out the
charging infrastructure to accommodate variations in EV coupler configurations for particular markets as
necessary, in particular with respect to DC charging. Priority: Near-term. Potential Developer: SAE, IEC,
CHAdeMO, vehicle and charging station manufacturers. Grid Related: Yes. Status of Progress: Green.
Update: The roadmap version 1.0 text has been updated to note the publication of the SAE J1772TM
AC/DC combination coupler and that the forthcoming IEC 62196-3 will describe the SAE J1772™ coupler
and several other different DC coupler configurations used elsewhere. The gap statement notes the
publication of SAE J1772TM
. The recommendation notes the need to incorporate SAE J1772TM
into IEC
62196-3 and the need to build out the charging infrastructure to accommodate variations in coupler
configurations for particular markets as necessary, in particular with respect to DC charging. CHAdeMO,
and “vehicle and charging station manufacturers,” have been added alongside SAE and IEC as “potential
developers.”
SAE is developing J2953, Plug-In Electric Vehicle (PEV) Interoperability with Electric Vehicle Supply
Equipment (EVSE), which will address interoperability in terms of both hardware requirements and
communication protocols between PEVs and EVSE for multiple suppliers. A draft of the first part is
expected to be published in the Spring of 2013.
There is also a verification program currently being developed by Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. that
may be used to prove that infrastructure equipment, which includes the vehicle connector, will be

compatible with all vehicles that meet the SAE J1772™ protocol for AC charging. A similar program is
under development in Japan for the CHAdeMO EV coupler.
Gap: Conformance programs for EV coupler interoperability within the U.S. market. A program(s) is
needed for the U.S. market to verify compatibility between the EV coupler, the infrastructure and the
vehicle.
Recommendation: Complete work on SAE J2953. Establish a program(s) to verify interoperability
between infrastructure equipment, including the vehicle connector, and all vehicles that follow the SAE
J1772™ protocol. Priority: Near-term. Potential Developer: SAE, UL. Grid Related: Yes. Status of
Progress: Green.
Light Electric Vehicles (LEV)
IEC/TC 69 has approved a new work proposal for a new 61851 Part 3, with subparts, to include
requirements for power supply systems for Light Electric Vehicles (LEV), including electric motorcycles,
bicycles and scooters.
The proposed standards will include:
- IEC 61851-3-1, Electric Vehicles conductive power supply system - Part 3-1: General
Requirements for Light Electric Vehicles (LEV) AC and DC conductive power supply systems;
- IEC 61851-3-2, Electric Vehicles conductive power supply system - Part 3-2: Requirements for
Light Electric Vehicles (LEV) DC off-board conductive power supply systems;
Light Electric Vehicles (LEV) battery swap systems; and
Light Electric Vehicles (LEV) communication.
This work will be done jointly with ISO TC 22/SC 22 & SC 23, with IEC/TC 69 having the lead. A first
meeting is planned for May 2013, with a target date for publication of July 2015.
The National Electrical Code® includes neighborhood electric vehicles and electric motorcycles in the
definition of EV because these are on-road vehicles that are expected to use the same or similar
charging infrastructure as a car. However, there is not yet any standards activity in the U.S. specific for
LEVs except for UL 2271, Batteries for use in Light Electric Vehicles (LEV), which covers both on-road and
off-road vehicles including electric bicycles, electric scooters and electric wheel chairs. These types of
vehicles are not expected to use the same charging infrastructure as an EV. In addition, off-road vehicles
are excluded in the NEC® definition of EV.

4.2.1.4 Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC)
SAE J551-1, Performance Levels and Methods of Measurement of Electromagnetic Compatibility of
Vehicles, Boats (up to 15 m), and Machines (16.6 Hz to 18 GHz), covers the measurement of radio
frequency (rf) radiated emissions and immunity. Each part details the requirements for a specific type of
electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) test and the applicable frequency range of the test method. The
methods are applicable to a vehicle . . . powered by an internal combustion engine or battery powered
electric motor. As all of the vehicle tests are evaluating the complete vehicle, the source of power is
immaterial. SAE J551-1 adopts by reference IEC CISPR 12 and CISPR 25 which apply to all vehicles and
other equipment. CISPR 25 is in the process of being updated to adapt the test methods to safely test
high voltage components in the vehicle. The SAE J1113 series covers EMC testing of vehicle components.
Presently, the only EV-specific standard for EMC is SAE J551-5-2012, Performance Levels and Methods of
Measurement of Magnetic and Electric Field Strength from Electric Vehicles, 9 kHz to 30 MHz, which
covers conducted emission measurements that are applicable only to battery-charging systems which
utilize a switching frequency above 9 KHz, are mounted on the vehicle, and whose power is transferred
by metallic conductors. Conducted emission requirements apply only during charging of the batteries
from AC power lines. Conducted and radiated emissions measurements of battery-charging systems that
use an induction power coupling device are not covered; radiated emissions for an electric vehicle in
operation at a constant speed are covered.
As noted earlier, the following standards are under development in IEC/TC 69, both with an anticipated
publication date of March 2014:
− IEC 61851-21-1, Ed. 1.0, Electric vehicle conductive charging system – EMC requirements for
electric vehicle for conductive connection to an a.c./d.c. supply; and
− IEC 61851-21-2, Ed. 1.0, Electric vehicle conductive charging system – EMC requirements for off
board electric vehicle charging systems.
Apparently, concerns are being raised on the limits contained in the committee draft for vote (CDV) for
IEC 61851-21-2 that are being worked with IEC CISPR/B and the IEC Advisory Committee on
Electromagnetic Compatibility (ACEC). There is a current international agreement between IEC and ISO
regarding EMC as follows: EMC immunity issues relating to vehicles (internal combustion, battery, fuel
cell or hybrid powered) while not connected to the power grid are the responsibility of ISO/TC 22 and rf
emissions are the responsibility of IEC CISPR/D. EMC issues relating to vehicles while connected to the
power grid for charging are the responsibility of IEC/TC 69 with IEC CISPR/B having responsibility for
emissions during charging. All of the activities are to take into account the basic IEC/TC 77 EMC
standards (the IEC 61000 series) where appropriate.
In terms of EMC standards for the electric grid, the main source is the IEC 61000 series. The 61000 series
has several parts that cover everything from the general application of the standard (part 1), through
discussions of environment, limits, testing and measurement, installation and mitigation, and finally a
generic catchall volume (parts 2 through 6 respectively). Propagated by various subcommittees of

IEC/TC 77, Electromagnetic compatibility, between electrical equipment including networks, the 61000
series has broad applicability in the infrastructure segment of the EV space.
IEC CISPR/D and ISO/TC 22/SC 3/WG 3 have been meeting back-to-back on a regular basis to address the
vehicle EMC issue while not connected to the power grid. CISPR has a liaison relationship with IEC/TC 69.
In addition, CISPR/B has been interacting with IEC/TC 69 in regard to emissions and the applicability of
CISPR 11 during charging.
The SAE Surface Vehicle EMC (SV) Standards Committee is also addressing EMC issues. Subsets of this
committee form the U.S. TAGS for CISPR/D and ISO/TC 22/SC 3/WG 3, respectively. There are SAE
product committees that are addressing the charging of electric vehicles. SAE J1772TM
includes EMC
requirements for the conductive charging interface unit, referring to UL 2231-2 and FCC part 15. SAE
J2954 is under development and will address inductive charging of electric vehicles. The SV EMC
Standards Committee is supporting the J2954 document development in regard to rf issues.
Gap: Electromagnetic compatibility (EMC). Standards to address EMC issues related to electric vehicle
charging are still in development.
Recommendation: Complete work on IEC 61851-21, Parts 1 and 2, and SAE J2954 to address EMC issues
related to electric vehicle charging. Priority: Near-term. Potential Developer: IEC/TC 69, SAE. Grid
Related: Yes. Status of Progress: New gap / Green.
4.2.1.5 Vehicle as Supply
Activities related to the EV as a distributed energy resource (DER) are being pursued by SAE and by the
International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC). In many areas, these activities are being coordinated,
such as the use cases, the DER functions for EVs, and the abstract object modeling. However, in a few
areas distinctly different approaches are being taken, primarily with respect to the expected
communications architectures and the protocols between the EV and external systems.
This coordination has been strong for use cases and the DER functions. SAE J2836/3TM
, published in
January 2013, provides use cases for EV communication as a DER to allow an EV to support V2G
applications serving the bulk grid, the distribution system, and behind the meter in a facility. The
information exchange with the EV for these use cases was derived from the IEC/TR 61850-90-7 (TR
signifies technical report) published in February 2013 which, in part, defines object models for inverter-
based storage devices. The IEC plans to incorporate the changes defined by this technical report in the
next planned update of the IEC 61850-7-420 standard. SAE J2836/3TM
includes some additional
information for using an EV as a DER, versus a stationary storage device, which should also be included
in the planned revision of IEC 61850-7-420.
However, divergence is occurring when these DER functions are mapped to protocols. SAE is planning to
use the Smart Energy Profile 2.0 (SEP 2.0), while it is unlikely that the IEC will accept SEP 2.0 as the
preferred protocol, partly due to its use of the RESTful web services approach.

The DER function in SEP 2.0 is based on IEC/TR 61850-90-7 but also includes the additional information
required by SAE J2836/3TM
. SAE J2847/3, currently in development, shows how the Flow Reservation
and DER functions of SEP 2.0 can be used to implement the use cases and V2G applications defined in
J2836/3TM
. These additional information items are being provided back to the IEC for possible update of
the object models in appropriate IEC documents (such as IEC/TR 61850-90-8 that is still in development
and eventually IEC 61850-7-420).
While the primary purpose of SAE J2836/3TM
is to present use cases for communication with a PEV as a
DER, this document also provides a broader view of the issues associated with reverse power flow (RPF).
It defines some “requirements” for reverse power flow, but because the document is only a technical
information report, any actual requirements will need to be incorporated in future revisions of actual
recommended practices and standards. SAE J2847/3 will achieve this for DER communications.
Architecture and safety aspects associated with reverse flow would need to be incorporated in SAE
J1772TM
and other standards.
The customer interfaces and selection for these features will be included in SAE J2836/5™ and J2847/5.
The /5 documents include the two networks that are: (1) the Customer Network for Customer to EV and
Home Area Network (HAN)/Neighborhood Area Network (NAN) interface and (2) the Utility Network for
Energy Services Interface (ESI) to EVSE/EV communication. As with the /3 documents, SAE J2836/5™
identifies the use case and general information that corresponds to SAE J2847/5 for messages details.
This is a coordinated effort of the EV, EVSE and ESI for the various combinations of RPF.
Section 625.26, Interactive Systems, of the NEC® provides that EVSE and other parts of a system, either
on-board or off-board the vehicle, that are identified for and intended to be interconnected to a vehicle,
and also serve as an optional standby system or an electric power production source, or provide for bi-
directional power feed, shall be listed as suitable for that purpose. When used as an “Optional Standby
System” (i.e., V2H), the requirements of Article 702 shall apply, and when used as an “Electric Power
Production Source” (i.e., V2G), the requirements of Article 705 shall apply. The on-board or external
inverter is considered to be a “Utility-Interactive Inverter” for which there are special requirements in
the NEC®. The NEC® adequately provides for an EV serving as either a standby system or a grid
interactive system, and changes to the NEC® specifically to accommodate EV applications are not
anticipated.
The safety standard UL 1741, Inverters, Converters, Controllers and Interconnection System Equipment
for Use with Distributed Energy Resources, applies to an EV engaged in V2G. For utility-interactive
equipment, UL 1741 is intended to supplement and be used in conjunction with IEEE 1547TM
, Standard
for Interconnecting Distributed Resources with Electric Power Systems, and IEEE 1547.1TM
, Standard for
Conformance Test Procedures for Equipment Interconnecting Distributed Resources with Electric Power
Systems.
IEEE 1547.4TM
, Guide for Design, Operation, and Integration of Distributed Resource Island Systems with
Electric Power Systems, was released in July 2011 and may apply to certain V2G applications. IEEE
1547.8TM
, Recommended Practice for Establishing Methods and Procedures that Provide Supplemental

Support for Implementation Strategies for Expanded Use of IEEE Standard 1547TM
, is currently being
developed and will introduce new advanced capabilities for utility-interactive inverters that could also
impact V2G operations. Updates to Article 705 of the NEC® and UL 1741 may be required to
accommodate new DER capabilities.
Gap: Vehicle as supply / reverse power flow. Differences exist between the DER model defined by SAE
J2836/3TM
, IEC/TR 61850-90-7, IEC/TR 61850-90-8, and SEP 2.0.
Recommendation: Harmonize the information model for an EV as a DER between SAE J2836/3TM
, IEC/TR
61850-90-8, and SEP 2.0. Priority: Near-term. Potential Developer: SAE, IEC/TC 57, ZigBee Alliance and
the HomePlug Powerline Alliance. Grid Related: Yes. Status of Progress: Green. Update: The roadmap
version 1.0 text, gap statement, recommendation and list of potential developers have been
substantially reworked to focus specifically on the need for harmonization of the DER communications
model between SAE J2836/3TM
, IEC/TR 61850-90-8, and SEP 2.0. Potential changes to other standards to
address integration of inverter-based DER devices with the grid, or architecture and safety aspects of
reverse power flow, are contemplated in the text but not included as a gap.
4.2.1.6 Use of Alternative Power Sources
Much of the focus has been about electric vehicle charging using the bulk electric power system. But
there may be cases where alternative power sources could be used to provide power for charging an EV.
A solar PV array, small wind turbine, facility battery bank, or even another EV with reverse power flow
capability could be used to provide power for charging an EV in a facility. These alternate sources could
operate as optional standby systems under Article 702 of the NEC® or as electric power production
sources under Article 705 of the NEC® and provide AC power to the facility. The AC power could be used
for charging EVs and for other loads within the facility. However, it may be more efficient to use DC
power distribution rather than AC power distribution for this purpose. All of the facility power sources
as well as certain DC loads could connect to a DC power distribution system which would connect to the
electric power system using a single converter.
The EMerge Alliance is developing standards for a 380 VDC power distribution system. 600 VDC systems
have also been considered for use with PV arrays. It is not possible to directly connect an EV to a facility
DC power bus because of differences between the EV battery voltage and the facility bus voltage and
the need to precisely control the charging current into the EV battery. However this is easily done using
a DC to DC converter, such as a buck-boost converter. The EVSE for DC charging is generally thought of
as an AC-DC converter, or bi-directional converter for reverse power flow, but a DC-DC EVSE could easily
be used if the facility used a DC power distribution system.
Solar: ANSI/UL 1703, the standard for safety of photovoltaic (PV) equipment, and other UL standards,
address safety of PV modules. The National Electrical Code® contains requirements for PV systems in
Article 690. Car “sheds” with PV panel roofs and directly coupled EVSE beneath are being constructed
but are not specifically covered by standards at this time.

Wind: Small wind systems are addressed in NEC® Article 694. Consensus product standards are under
development for wind systems and should be published shortly. Wind power as a supply source is also
the subject of a proposed revision to the NEC® to include DC voltages up to 600 volts.
Battery banks: Battery banks are another alternative source of DC power. They can be charged off-peak
and used to charge vehicles directly. Battery banks are being addressed by a code proposal on NEC®
Section 625.4 to include power sources up to 600 volts DC.
V2G and V2H: As discussed in the prior section, Vehicle to Grid (V2G) and Vehicle to Home (V2H) power
schemes have been discussed and anticipated. The reserved energy in an EV battery may be used for
power quality, power efficiency, or emergency source measures. Articles 702 and 705 of the NEC®
would apply to how the entire DC system connects through the utility-interactive inverter to the electric
power system, but there is a gap for requirements between the EV and EVSE and the DC power
distribution system.
Gap: Use of alternative power sources. The National Electrical Code® does not specifically address the
integration of the EV and EVSE with a facility high voltage DC power distribution system for either
charging or reverse power flow.
Recommendation: Develop NEC® requirements for high voltage DC power distribution systems and the
integration of distributed energy resources and DC loads with the system. Priority: Near-term. Potential
Developer: NFPA. Grid Related: Yes. Status of Progress: Green
4.2.2 Infrastructure Communications
4.2.2.1 Communications Architecture for EV Charging
Most of the completed and ongoing standardization related to communications for EV charging
infrastructure has taken place within SAE International and the ISO/TC 22/SC 3 – IEC/TC 69 Joint
Working Group (JWG) developing the ISO/IEC 15118 standards. Other standards such as Smart Energy
Profile 2.0 (SEP 2.0), developed by the ZigBee Alliance and the HomePlug Powerline Alliance and
completed in April 2013, and Open Automated Demand Response (OpenADR), in development by the
Open Smart Grid User’s Group (OpenSG), are also incorporating EV charging-related communications.
Currently, charging-related communication between the EV and EVSE for conductive charging has been
standardized in SAE J1772TM
(and in IEC 61851-1). This communication is used to signal the readiness of
the EV to accept energy and of the EVSE to supply energy. It also allows the EVSE to determine if the EV
requires indoor ventilation and to signal the ampacity (maximum allowable current) that the EV should
consume. Verification of the connection, equipment grounding continuity, and proximity detection are
also provided.
SAE is currently developing standards for EV communication that go beyond SAE J1772TM
and define
communications functions for utility communications, DC charging, reverse power flow, diagnostics,
Customer-to-EV/HAN/NAN, and wireless charging. Figure 8 shows the interaction between the SAE EV

communications standards documents. These can be stand-alone (e.g., DC charging) or combined
(reverse power flow with off-board conversion includes both SAE J2847/2 plus /3 messages). The figure
uses a Venn diagram approach to show the fundamental documents (SAE J2836™, J2847 & J2931)
“wrapped” by the interoperability document(s) J2953 and finally the security document J2931/7.
Figure 8: The Interaction of SAE EV Communication Standards Documents
(Used with Permission of SAE International)
These documents have various slash sheets to keep the functions separated and concise, and yet build
on each other depending on the functions desired. SAE J2836™ includes the use cases and general
information for each function. SAE J2847 includes the corresponding slash sheets that use the
requirements defined in SAE J2836™ and adds messages, sequence diagrams, and other details. SAE
J2931 includes the communication protocol for various mediums including power line communication
(PLC), telematics, and dedicated short range communication (DSRC) for use in the messages of J2847.
SAE J2931/4, published in July 2012, is based on HomePlug Green PHYTM
which is an interoperable
subset of IEEE 1901-2010 (which is, in turn, based on HomePlug AV). EPRI and the DOE national labs
have done testing of PLC products to ensure that the technology meets the requirements in SAE
J2931/1, published in January 2012. Additional testing is planned by vehicle manufacturers. EMC testing

and standards implementation via field testing will provide feedback prior to a final determination
leading to standards updates and a production release for PEVs and EVSEs.
SAE J2953, under development, identifies the interoperability criteria for the various mediums (PLC,
telematics, DSRC, etc.) and associated communications protocols identified in J2931. Security is included
specifically in J2931/7, under development, and may have slight variations dependent on Smart Energy
Profile (SEP) 2.0 utility requirements, DC charging/discharging, and where the PEV is controlling the off-
board unit for wireless charging communication.
Harmonization Efforts
The ISO/IEC Joint Working Group (JWG) is working on EV communication standards concurrently with
SAE. The ISO/IEC 15118 EV communications standards are related to the SAE documents as follows:
ISO/IEC 15118 part 1 identifies use cases, part 2 message details and communication protocol, and part
3 physical and data link communications layers. ISO/IEC 15118-1 corresponds to SAE J2836™, while
15118-2 and 15118-3 correspond to various documents under the SAE J2847 and SAE J2931 series. The
ISO/IEC 15118 series also includes DC charging use cases and messages that correspond to dash 2 of SAE
J2836™ and J2847 (the same as in IEC 61851-24, Annex C).
Also to be developed are: ISO/IEC 15118-4, which defines the vehicle to grid communication network
and application protocol conformance test cases to be applied to EVs and EVSEs implementing ISO/IEC
15118-2; and ISO/IEC 15118-5, which defines the vehicle to grid communication physical layer and data
link layer conformance test to test the implementation of ISO/IEC 15118-3. Both of these documents will
provide test cases representing the use cases in ISO/IEC 15118-1, and include standard test case
attributes such as pre-conditions, test steps, expected results to evaluate a pass or fail, and post-
conditions. SAE has a parallel standard J2953 focused on interoperability testing that will include test
cases harmonized with ISO/IEC 15118-4 and 5.
In addition to the SAE and ISO/IEC standards, the Smart Energy Profile (SEP) 2.0 specification, based on
the OpenHAN requirements, is expected to provide much of the EV-related services identified by
regulators, policy makers, ESPs/utilities, EVSPs and vendors. Though not EV specific, this standard-in-
progress pertains to the energy-related infrastructure (e.g., thermostats, plugs, meters, displays, EVSE,
EV, etc.). It specifies communications to be used for pricing, demand response load control (DRLC),
distributed energy resources (DER) control, metering, billing, and other functions. SEP 2.0 is harmonized
with J2836/1™ and is being used as the basis of a revision to J2847/1.
In addition to the coverage of DRLC in the SEP 2.0 specification, Open Automated Demand Response
(OpenADR) 2.0 contains EV-specific communication and is expected to be harmonized with SEP 2.0 for
building infrastructure communication and aggregator functionality. It is anticipated that ESPs, and
possibly EVSPs, will use OpenADR for their automated demand response requirements.
For open and interoperable machine-to-machine (M2M) communication between entities such as ESPs
and EVSPs related to EV customer information (e.g., for pricing, metering, billing, and usage
information), the North American Energy Standards Board (NAESB) has completed work on the Energy

Services Provider Interface (ESPI) standard. A sub-metering profile of Green Button Connect my Data
(using the ESPI format) is nearing completion.
The ISO/IEC JWG and Zigbee Alliance / HomePlug Powerline Alliance are working with SAE to harmonize
common standards related to utility and DC messaging.
SAE utility messages (SAE J2847/1) correspond with the SEP 2.0 criteria per the Smart Energy 2.0
Technical Requirements Document (TRD) and the Application Specification that has now passed public
comment approval. SAE’s J2836/1™ use cases were included in the ZigBee + HomePlug Smart Energy
Marketing Requirements Document (MRD) that led to the TRD.
SAE is also working on the DC message format with the objective of harmonizing with ISO/IEC. DC
charging information in SAE J2847/2 is being included in Annex C of IEC 61851-24, and ISO/IEC 15118-2
is being included in Annex D. In the future, these annexes may be replaced by a harmonized solution in
the body of the IEC 61851-24 document. As PLC testing continues, it is expected that goals can be met
and both utility and DC charging messages can be harmonized.
4.2.2.2 Communications Requirements for Various EV Charging Scenarios
Locating and Using Public Charging Stations (EVSE)
Public charging stations are already available and in use; however, there is no standardized method to
identify the location and capabilities of a charging station. Presently, such a capability is available for
only a subset of stations via Google Maps, websites of EVSPs, smartphone applications, or navigation
applications/devices. Notably, DOE provides an Alternative Fuel Station Locator database which includes
EV charging station information at: http://www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/locator/stations/.
A well-known registry of public charging stations combined with a standardized querying method would
enable the broadest public awareness and utilization. It is likely some information about a charging
station will be static (e.g., location, type) and can be queried from a global registry, but other
information (availability, pricing) will be dynamic and must be queried from the station or the managing
entity.
Reserving Charging Stations (EVSE): Due to the relatively long duration of EV charging, the ability to
reserve a charging station in advance will be useful to EV drivers. Standardization of the messaging
required to reserve a charging station would allow a driver to use a variety of methods (smartphone
application, website, etc.) to reserve a station.

Gap: Locating and reserving a public charging station. There is a need for a messaging standard to
permit EV drivers to locate a public charging spot and reserve its use in advance.
Recommendation: Develop a messaging standard to permit EV drivers to universally locate and reserve
a public charging spot. Priority: Mid-term. Potential Developer: SAE, ISO/IEC JWG, NEMA. Grid Related:
Yes. Status of Progress: Green. Update: To address this roadmap version 1.0 gap, NEMA’s EVSE section
organized a working group (NEMA 5EVSE Network Roaming WG) to develop a standard that permits EV
drivers to universally locate a public charging spot. It decided that reserving a public charging spot was a
low priority and deferred action on reservations to a later phase of work.
Roaming: Public charging stations may be owned by hosts and managed by EVSPs. EV drivers may
subscribe to a charging plan offered by an EVSP (the Home EVSP). Roaming, in the context of EV
charging, is the ability to charge at a charging station managed by a different EVSP (Visited EVSP), using
the subscription to the Home EVSP.
Communication related to roaming scenarios may take place directly between two EVSPs. Alternatively,
a third party financial clearinghouse may be required to act as an intermediary between the Home EVSP
and Visited EVSP(s). In order to support roaming scenarios, standardization is required for
authentication of the EV/driver, authorization of the EV/driver for a certain quality of service, relaying of
accounting records related to the charging session, and settlement of billing.
Gap: Charging of roaming EVs between EVSPs. There is a need to permit roaming EVs to charge at spots
affiliated with a different EVSP.
Recommendation: Develop back end requirements as well as an interface standard that supports
charging of roaming EVs between EVSPs. Priority: Near-term. Potential Developer: NEMA, IEC. Grid
Related: Yes. Status of Progress: Green. Update: To address this roadmap version 1.0 gap, NEMA’s EVSE
section organized a working group (NEMA 5EVSE Network Roaming WG) to develop a standard that
supports roaming that allows charging services from a provider other than the Home EVSP. The standard
will include inter-operator interfaces to address the various stages of a charging session (e.g.,
authentication/authorization, charging data records, billing record exchange.) The NEMA working group
also is looking to develop a radio-frequency identification (RFID) credential protocol specification so that
all EVSEs that implement the specification will be able to read RFID cards that conform to the
specification. IEC also has initiated work on IEC 62831 Ed. 1.0, User identification in Electric Vehicle
Service Equipment using a smartcard, which describes the physical and protocol layers of an RFID card
used in charging spots.
In addition, a new group called eMI3
has been formed as an innovation platform under the aegis of
ERTICO (www.ertico.com). This group has brought together several significant players and eMobility
projects in the European EV mobility market, including auto OEMs, enterprise software vendors and EV
Services Providers, who recognize that the business realities will result in the existence of multiple EV
charging providers who need to interoperate in order to allow EV drivers to seamlessly charge across
provider and geographic boundaries. Its scope is to harmonize and develop ICT (information and

communication technology) standards and implementations in order to enable global EV services
interoperability. The work to be undertaken in this group overlaps with the NEMA work. The two
organizations are considering a liaison agreement to facilitate information exchange.
Access Control: In some cases, charging station owners may choose to restrict use of their charging
stations. For example, an enterprise may restrict daytime charging to employees only, and allow non-
employees to charge at night or during weekends. There are two facets of access control that can
benefit from standardization. First, a standard definition of access control data and standard messaging
to communicate the access lists to EVSEs would ease implementation of access control across EVSE
vendors. Second, the ability to communicate access lists to EVSEs would allow for offline access control
checks for situations when network connectivity of an EVSE is down.
Gap: Access control at charging stations. There is a need to develop data definition and messaging
standards for communicating access control at charging stations.
Recommendation: Develop data definition and messaging standards for communicating access control
at charging stations. Priority: Near-term. Potential Developer: NEMA. Grid Related: Yes. Status of
Progress: Yellow. Update: The NEMA 5EVSE Network Roaming WG also looked at this roadmap version
1.0 gap. It decided that offline access control lists were a low priority and deferred action on offline
access control to a later phase of work.
Communication Between EVSEs and Charging Network Operating Systems: The Open Charge Point
Protocol (OCPP) was initiated by a Dutch consortium (called E-laad) of grid operators to provide
interoperability between EVSEs and charging networks from different vendors and to reduce the effort
required to support multiple EVSEs and/or networks. This standard is still evolving and will require a lot
of work before it stabilizes. OCPP currently does not involve the grid (utilities) or EVs, and does not
support forward-looking features like V2G energy transfer. In the U.S., some argue that the internal
protocols between EVSE vendors and charging networks do not need to be standardized as long as
external interfaces like SEP 2.0, OpenADR, etc. are supported.
The eMI3
group in Europe is considering standards for communication between EVSEs and charging
network operating systems. It is working with the Green eMotion Project (www.greenemotion-
project.eu) to formulate a joint proposal to IEC for development of a standard for communication
between EVSEs and the network back end. The proposed protocol may end up being OCPP, or an
alternative proposed by Green eMotion, or some combination of the two.
There is also work ongoing in Europe in the area of inter-operator interoperability, similar to the NEMA
work but possibly different in architecture. An example of this is the Open Clearing House Protocol
(OCHP), which can be used by a charging network to communicate with a clearinghouse or broker, for
the purpose of finding and reserving stations, and clearing and settlement of bills, when an EV charges
on a "foreign" charging network. The Hubject joint venture in Europe also addresses the same set of
needs, by developing a central platform that allows eMobility related services to be offered and
consumed by different providers and consumers.

4.2.2.3 Communication and Measurement of EV Energy Consumption
Overview
The basis of the following assessment is for billing purposes only although metering communication
could be used for customer information and control through the HAN (e.g., using SEP2.0) or vendor
provided value added services (e.g., using smartphone applications).
Sub-metering, whereby the EUMD is located on a branch circuit from the premises meter, measures
specific end use loads that are physically and electrically downstream of the meter used to collect the
premises usage (master meter). Unlike separate (parallel) metering, where there are effectively two
separate instances of usage data being collected and billed, in sub-metering the master meter is
recording the same usage that is being recorded by the sub-meter. Therefore the sub-meter usage must
be subtracted from the master meter in order to apply special device specific time of use (TOU) rates
(Figure 9). It is possible for the master meter and sub-meter to be on two different rates. Where used
for billing today, because of volume, complexity, and existing capabilities, a manual process is usually
used to collect, subtract, and bill sub-metering customers.
Figure 9: Third Party Sub-metering- The simplest use case as defined in the California Public Utilities Commission
sub-metering activities.
Third Party Sub-metering Use Cases
The method through which sub-metering occurs depends on regulatory and business policies, how the
meter is set up, and the communication capabilities of the system infrastructure. If the sub-meter is
utility provided, then most likely a meter similar to the master meter will be used, and existing
Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) or meter reading systems could be used to communicate
directly to back office systems or through the premises meter (e.g., using Zigbee mesh communications).
The SEP 2.0 HAN standard could be implemented on the sub-meter to send the data to back office
systems.
Another sub-meter option currently being explored by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC)
is to allow third party or customer ownership of the sub-meter and for third parties to provide the

bundled services directly to the customer. The sub-meters could therefore theoretically be located
anywhere downstream of the master meter including on a smart plug, on the EVSE, or even in the PEV.
These use cases have been defined in the existing CPUC sub-metering protocol work.6
The simplest use case is where a customer acquires a stationary fixed sub-meter and has it installed
downstream of the master meter. They then contract with a sub-meter data management agent (DMA),
who could also be the meter provider, to collect the data. The communication between the sub-meter
and the third party could be proprietary or could be based on an existing or expected metering
communication standard (e.g., ANSI C12 developed by NEMA (ASC/C12), SEP 2.0). The DMA, who has
previously established a relationship with the billing agent, then provides them with the customer PEV
consumption data (in a standardized format) so they can subtract the usage from the premises usage,
apply tariffs, and complete the billing processes. Though simple enough in theory, additional
complications arise based on the location of the sub-meter (EVSE, smart plug, PEV, mobile cordset),
number of sub-meters and sub-meter DMAs, regulatory structures (e.g., certification), system
requirements (e.g., transfer timing), and communication capabilities (e.g., data format).
These new types of metering and use cases create additional complexity including sub-meter
measurement (accuracy), access, performance, security/privacy, and communications, for example,
mobile sub-metering, which refers to sub-meters within EVs or combined with 110V or 220V cord sets
that can be transported and exchanged. Pre-authorization would be required if an EV consumed energy
at a visited premises but was to be billed to the owner’s home account. This pre-authorization would
have to be on file with the utility to subtract the energy used by the EV from the bill of the visited
premises. Additionally, the vehicle must associate with that premises and both the vehicle’s ID and
premises meter or account ID must be communicated with the utility. This would involve local
association (e.g., PLC or HAN technology). If the vehicle is travelling outside of the territory for which it
has an associated service account, utilities will most likely have to share customer and consumption
information. Similar to premises meters, mobile metrology could be collected using either a proprietary
or standardized communication method (e.g., telematics, AMI, or SEP2.0 for utilities), depending on
regulatory and utility policies.
Standardization Activities
Two broad areas of standardization related to sub-metering have been identified and are currently at
some stage of completion. The first is the standardized communications format necessary between the
third party DMA and the billing agent. The CPUC activities have identified the Energy Services Provider
Interface (ESPI) as a national standard that can be used for this interface. This work is ongoing in the
6
http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/NR/rdonlyres/01349C2F-3934-4D3C-AEA5-
905367C19A49/0/Submetering_Workshop_Joint_IOU.ppt

OpenADE working group, which is currently completing a Green Button Sub-metering Profile of ESPI that
will include testing and certification.
Gap: Communication of standardized EV sub-metering data. Standards are needed for communication
of EV sub-metering data between third parties and service providers.
Recommendation: Complete Green Button Sub-metering Profile of ESPI for communication of
standardized EV sub-metering data, for example, between a third party and a billing agent (e.g., utility).
Priority: Near-term. Potential Developer: OpenADE/NAESB. Grid Related: Yes. Status of Progress:
Green. Update: The roadmap version 1.0 text, gap statement, recommendation and potential
developers have been revised to be specific about communication of EV sub-metering data between
third parties and service providers and to complete work on the Green Button Sub-metering Profile of
ESPI.
Besides the utility interface standard, requirements and guidelines related to the standardization of
these third party sub-meters are being explored further by three separate activities discussed below:
NEMA, NIST, and the Smart Grid Interoperability Panel V2G Domain Expert Working Group (SGIP V2G
DEWG).
NEMA
NEMA has organized a working group (NEMA 5EVSE Submetering WG) that is developing a guide for
EVSE embedded metering and communication. The purpose of this document is to provide guidance for
EVSE applications that include an embedded meter incorporating a communication protocol for
monitoring or monitoring and control. Recognizing that many codes, standards and regulatory
documents relative to EVSE metering already exist, this guide will point to specific codes and standards
already in place that determine the requirements specific to meter accuracy and communication
protocols. Stakeholders expected to benefit from this document include EVSE manufacturers, utilities,
automakers, smart meter manufacturers, EV drivers, EVSE owners, and regulators.
The scope of the NEMA guide provides that the embedded meter may or may not be a “revenue grade”
meter. The document encompasses the North American types of meters that are emerging within EVSEs
including embedded meters. It is intended to address the different form factors, capabilities,
installations and certifications. The guide will also attempt to determine the optimal authority and
jurisdictional span for metering certification. The guide will recommend a tiered key functionality for
embedded meters including tamper resistance, accuracy, calibration, communication, security, and
reliability. An example of the proposed approach is the NEMA ratings for embedded meters similar to
NEMA enclosure ratings. The applicable EVSEs in the document include Level 1 and Level 2 (AC and DC).

NIST’s U.S. National Work Group on Measuring Systems for Electric Vehicle Fueling and Submetering
In August 2012, NIST formed the U.S. National Work Group on Measuring Systems for Electric Vehicle
Fueling and Submetering (USNWG EVF&S) to develop proposed requirements for commercial
electricity-measuring devices (including those used in sub-metering electricity at residential and
business locations and those used to measure and sell electricity dispensed as a vehicle fuel) and to
ensure that the prescribed methodologies and standards facilitate measurements that are traceable to
the International System of Units (SI). This work is not intended to address utility metering in the home
or business where the metered electricity is consumed by the end purchaser and that falls under the
authority of entities such as the local utility commission.
The USNWG EVF&S’s technical output may result in the revision of current standards or the
development of new standards for requirements and testing procedures for commercial devices and
systems used to assess fees and charges to consumers for electric vehicle fuel. The output of the
USNWG EVF&S will be submitted to be published in documents such as NIST Handbook 130 Uniform
Laws and Regulations in the Areas of Legal Metrology and Engine Fuel Quality; NIST Handbook 44
Specifications, Tolerances, and Other Technical Requirements for Weighing and Measuring Devices; the
NIST Handbook 105 Series for field standards; and NIST Examination Procedure Outlines.
SGIP V2G DEWG
The SGIP V2G DEWG has initiated a Priority Action Plan to establish a Sub-Meter Standards Working
Group consisting of representatives from NEMA, USNWG EVF&S, national labs, automakers, utilities, and
EVSE manufacturers to administer and coordinate the development of sub-meter standards for mobile
and stationary applications. Presently, the requirements for standardization of sub-meters are not well
defined nor understood by all involved parties. The primary elements to be addressed are access,
accuracy, form factor, tamper resistance, performance, reliability, data requirements, security, testing
and certification. The SGIP Priority Action Plan Sub-Meter working group is to: coordinate the definition
of sub-meter requirements, map the requirements to existing meter standards, engage the cognizant
organizations to address specified gaps in existing meter standards, and develop new standards if
deemed necessary. The resulting standards documentation will be evaluated for approval by the SGIP
for incorporation into the SGIP Catalog of Standards.
Gap: Standardization of EV sub-meters. Standards for EV sub-meters, including embedded sub-meters,
need to be completed to address performance, security/privacy, access, and data aspects.
Recommendation: Develop standards or guidelines related to the functionality and measurement
characteristics of the new types of sub-meters that are coming out for EVs, including embedded sub-
meters in the EVSE or EV. Such standards should address different form factors, capabilities, installation,
and certification. Priority: Near-term. Potential Developer: NEMA, USNWG EVF&S. Grid Related: Yes.
Status of Progress: New gap/ Green.

Gap: Coordination of EV sub-metering activities. Various existing activities (NEMA, USNWG EVF&S, SGIP
V2G DEWG) need to be coordinated as much as possible.
Recommendation: Organizations developing standards, guidelines or use cases related to EV sub-
metering should coordinate their activities in order to avoid duplication of effort, assure alignment, and
maximize efficiency. Priority: Near-term. Potential Developer: NEMA, USNWG EVF&S, SGIP V2G DEWG.
Grid Related: Yes. Status of Progress: New gap / Green.
4.2.2.4 Cyber Security and Data Privacy
SAE J2931/7, Security for Plug-in Electric Vehicle Communications, currently in development, is looking
to define use cases and security requirements for the digital communications and data in transit
between the following devices:
- Plug-in Electric Vehicle (PEV) and the Energy Service Interface (ESI);
- PEV and the Electrical Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE);
- EVSE and the Energy Management System, and/or ESI; and
- Wireless charging communication between the PEV and wireless charger.
It also looks at use cases and security requirements concerning protection of data at rest within the
devices.
ISO/IEC 15118-1 includes a subsection on security but does not address things like how certificates can
be stored, how data can be compromised, etc.
The current version of NISTIR 7628, Guidelines for Smart Grid Cyber Security, Volume 2: Privacy and the
Smart Grid (published in August 2010, http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/nistir/ir7628/nistir-
7628_vol2.pdf), includes a use case relating to privacy and EVs which keys off of the OECD Privacy
Guidelines. NISTIR 7628, Volume 2, is in the process of being substantially reworked in light of SAE
J2836TM
.
Gap: Cyber security and data privacy. There is a need for guidelines and standards to address cyber
security and data privacy concerns associated with PEVs and smart grid communications.
Recommendation: Complete work to develop SAE J2931/7, and to revise ISO/IEC 15118-1 and NISTIR
7628, volume 2. Priority: Near-term. Potential Developer: SAE, ISO/IEC JWG, NIST. Grid Related: Yes.
Status of Progress: New gap / Green.
4.2.2.5 Telematics Smart Grid Communications
Use cases are to be developed to determine whether Energy Service Provider requirements are not met
by existing standards and architectures. Among these might be aggregation control for ancillary services,
vehicle information for distribution load management, and access to dynamic consumer behavior data

(e.g., instantaneous usage, consumption usage, volts, amps, VAR, power factor, etc.). The use cases will
be defined in SAE J2836/5TM
through mapping to existing use cases for J2836/1TM
, J2836/3TM
, and
existing standards such as OpenADR 2.0 to assess and identify any gaps in the function sets.
Gap: Telematics smart grid communications. There is a need to develop use cases related to non-utility
aggregation control and vehicle information in order to assess the existing functionalities, and to
determine any missing requirements within the context of existing standards, Energy Service Provider
business requirements, and telematics networks to support smart grid load management.
Recommendation: Complete work to develop SAE J2836/5 TM
. Priority: Near-term. Potential Developer:
SAE. Grid Related: Yes. Status of Progress: New gap / Green.
4.2.3 Infrastructure Installation
4.2.3.1 Site Assessment / Power Capacity Assessment
The National Electrical Code® (NEC®) provides minimum requirements for performing site assessments,
specifically NEC® Articles 210, 215, and 220 contain rules that relate to calculations and loading of
services, feeders, and branch circuits in all occupancies. AC Level 1 and AC Level 2 EVSE are considered
continuous loads with the maximum current expected to continue for 3 hours or more. Pursuant to a
Tentative Interim Amendment (TIA) to the 2011 NEC®, if an automatic load management system is used,
the maximum electric vehicle supply equipment load on a service or feeder shall be the maximum load
permitted by the automatic load management system. If there is no load management, then they must
be sized for 125% of the maximum current. Fast-charging EV supply equipment operates for less than 3
hours but is calculated at 125% of the nameplate current rating. Section 625.14 of the NEC® contains
additional provisions related to the load calculations for EVSE.
In conducting a site/power capacity assessment for existing facilities (residential, commercial, and
industrial), the following needs to occur:
- Conduct site visit;
- Inventory electrical equipment;
- Interview the facility occupants to determine the cyclical daily and seasonal loading of the
facility;
- When available, review a minimum of 12 months of electric utility bills to determine the
maximum demand for incorporation into load calculations; and
- Verify by calculation the existing loads on the service or system. For commercial installations,
consideration for future expansion and multiple EVSE should be included in load calculations.
Involve electrical utility planners early in the process when planning EVSE for fleet applications.

Site Assessment Verifies Locations and Other NEC® Requirements
The site assessment is also required to verify acceptable location(s) of the EVSE and conformance with
the NEC® and other applicable codes such as the International Residential Code® for One- and Two-
Family Dwellings (IRC®), International Building Code® (IBC®), Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
requirements (ICC/ANSI A117), and any other state or local zoning regulations. Note that local codes and
regulations may be more restrictive than national codes and must be verified with the applicable
jurisdiction. This can be determined during the permitting process for installation.
Other NEC® Rules and Installation Standards
The NEC® also provides the minimum requirements for service equipment, overcurrent protection,
grounding and bonding, appropriate wiring methods, and locations or occupancy types that are often
determined as part of a site assessment. Branch circuit or feeder wiring method can vary depending on
the EVSE installation location. A National Electrical Installation Standard (NEIS) NECA 413, Standard for
Installing and Maintaining Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE), provides detailed information
about performing site assessments and installation of EVSE in new and existing electrical systems. NECA
413 covers the following related to performing effective site assessments:
- Supply Equipment/Charging Power Selection: AC Level 1, AC Level 2, Fast Charging;
- Charging Equipment (Type): Conductive, Inductive;
- Service or Power Capacity (load on new and existing systems or services);
- Electrical Load Calculations;
- Site Selection and Preparation;
- Zoning and Site Restrictions;
- Sites for Fleet Charging Installations;
- Energy Code Requirements;
- Mechanical Ventilation (where required);
- Electric Utility Interconnection Installation Requirements;
- Utility Interactive EVSE Installation;
- Special Metering or Special Metering Equipment Installation; and
- Time of Use or Off-Peak Metering Installation(s).
Some specific installations under the exclusive control of an electric utility are excluded from the scope
of the National Electrical Code® (NEC®) and fall under the scope of ANSI C2, the National Electrical Safety
Code® (NESC®). These are generally locations where the utility-owned installations are on legally

established easements or rights-of-way. The NESC® is a code that is primarily used for generation,
transmission, distribution, and metering of electrical energy. However, the National Electrical Code®
(NEC®) applies to some installations that are owned by electric utilities including utility owned office
buildings and garages. The addition of electric vehicles may necessitate the need for a utility
infrastructure upgrade to achieve an adequate power supply.
The site/power capacity requirements for EVSE connected to an electric service or other power source
are already well covered in the NEC®. The permit process usually captures any issues related to the site
as far as zoning or suitable locations for EVSE.
A harmonization assessment has been conducted examining NEC® Article 625, the Canadian Electrical
Code, and IEC 60364 to identify parallel sections which have already been harmonized and those which
may still need to be. This effort is nearly complete.
4.2.3.2 EV Charging – Signage and Parking
Public Signage
The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) for Streets and Highways contains federal
regulations that govern the design and usage of traffic control devices. These are minimum standards
for use which means that states and local agencies can establish standards above the MUTCD
minimums. In April 2011, the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Federal Highway Administration
issued an interim approval for the optional use of a General Service symbol sign that provides road users
direction to electric vehicle charging facilities that are open to the public.7
The U.S. Department of Energy’s Clean Cities program has been working with various stakeholders to
raise awareness of the importance of clear and consistent signage for EV charging. This includes:
working with agencies such as DOT, convening stakeholders to promote uniformity in way-finding and
regulatory signage, identifying best practices and disseminating case studies on successful signage
implementation, and encouraging sound and strategic investments in increased signage to support the
deployment of EVs.
7
http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/interim_approval/ia13/

Parking Space Allocation
Currently, the model International Green Construction CodeTM
(IgCCTM
) has an elective provision
requiring that for covered buildings8
5 percent of, but not less than two, parking spaces shall be
reserved for low emission, hybrid and electric vehicles (IgCCTM
, PV2, Sec. 403.4.2). There are no current
standards or model code provisions within either the IBC® or IgCCTM
requiring EV only parking or
charging. At some point, this may be desirable. Recommendations for new code provisions would have
to be made and accepted as part of the normal code revision cycle. The state of California does have a
law that governs electric vehicle charging station parking. See also the discussion below on accessibility
for persons with disabilities to EVSE.
As urban planning is a localized activity, harmonization is generally not a relevant issue.
Most jurisdictions in the United States regulate parking issues at the local level without reference to
national standards. This is accomplished through ordinances and accompanying regulations including
various means of enforcement (mechanical and electronic), as well as civil and criminal requirements
and penalties. No gaps have been identified at this time.
4.2.3.3 Charging Station Permitting
Normally the installation of EVSE is governed under a construction permitting process of the applicable
authority having jurisdiction, which could be a state, city, county, town, or other municipality. Often the
local jurisdiction has knowledge of additional permits necessary and advises this during the initial
permitting application process.
Another condition that may necessitate additional permits for installing EVSE is when the equipment is
located in public right-of-ways. In these cases, a state, county, or city may require a right-of-way work
permit and inspection. There may also be right-of-way specifications by the permit-issuing entity.
Airports, train stations, bus stations, and other public transit depots may have specific owner permits
that are required, in addition to the city, county, or state permit required for installation safety.
8
Generally, the IgCC
TM
scope covers all commercial buildings, except residential buildings. The IgCC
TM
applies to the
construction of all buildings, both old and new, except IRC® buildings, R-3 occupancies, R-2 and R-4 occupancies 4
stories or less in height. These exceptions are regulated by ICC 700, the National Green Building Standard
TM
, where
the jurisdiction indicates so in Table 302.1.

Residential Permitting: The primary purpose of the permitting process is to ensure an installation that is
safe from shock and fire hazards, as well as the potential for physical damage. EVSE installations are a
significant continuous duty load. Older homes may not have the capacity to safely supply the load. Even
some more modern homes with electric heating or air conditioning may be near their capacity limit.
The permitting process involves a review of the plans and an on-site inspection to ensure compliance
with the requirements of the National Electrical Code® (NEC®), published by NFPA. The NEC® is widely
adopted, and is also referenced in the International Residential Code® for One- and Two-Family
Dwellings (IRC®), published by ICC, that is used as the basis for regulation of residential buildings in all 50
states, at the state or local level. Provisions exist in the 2011 NEC® to cover EV charging systems and
their installation. The DOE Clean Cities program has published information which may be used as a
starting point for jurisdictions looking to establish permitting procedures for EVSE.9
Commercial/Public Permitting: The permitting process is also important for nonresidential installations.
Capacity of the electrical system is also a concern in these occupancies, particularly where there are
multiple EVSE that may be in use. Fire and shock hazards are a concern. There is also a higher risk of
vehicle damage and the potential for exposure to other hazards.
The permitting process will verify electrical system capacity and compliance with the requirements of
the NEC®. The NEC® is referenced in the International Building Code® (IBC®), published by ICC, which is
used as the basis for regulation of commercial buildings and residential buildings of 4 stories or greater
in most states, at the state or local level. As noted, provisions exist in the NEC® to cover EV charging
systems and their installation.
There are some ongoing challenges associated with the permitting process. These include: varying costs
of permits by jurisdiction, length of the permitting process, and achieving widespread adoption of the
DOE template (for example, some state laws preclude its use and inspection processes may vary from
the template). These issues continue to be the subject of discussion among affected stakeholders.
No standards gaps have been identified at this time with respect to this issue. See, however, the
education and training section in relation to raising awareness among code officials regarding this issue.
No gaps have been identified at this time as permitting is a local issue and as such does not really lend
itself to harmonization.
9
http://www.afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/electric_deployment.html

In the U.S., conformance with electrical and building codes relies on three inter-related mechanisms:
applicable installation codes and standards, product safety standards and certifications, and plan
approval and inspection. Each of the three components is considered critical to electrical and building
safety, and the system is compromised if one of the three is missing. While there may be some
variations in policies and procedures among jurisdictions, the three elements described are common to
most jurisdictions and have been largely successful in achieving safe buildings. While checklists can be of
assistance to jurisdictions in helping to assess conformance with common requirements, they should be
considered a starting point so that jurisdictions can address specific or unique concerns in their
inspection regimens.
No gaps have been identified at this time.
4.2.3.4 Environmental and Use Conditions
Product standards such as UL 2594, Standard for Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment, generally anticipate
maximum ambient temperatures of 40C, although higher limits may be declared by manufacturers and
validated in the testing. This is consistent with widespread use of a 40C default ambient threshold for
industrial and similar equipment. Product testing generally includes consideration for lower ambient
levels, such as -30C, for particular test conditions.
Exposure to the elements is generally addressed by established test methods, such as the NEMA
enclosure type designations and related testing. Environmental considerations are also addressed in UL
50E, Enclosures for Electrical Equipment, Environmental Considerations.
Exposure to corrosive agents for EV infrastructure equipment is addressed in various ways by product
standards, generally in consideration of the degrading effects of exposure to the elements, anticipated
fumes or solvents, and/or anticipated compounds such as gasoline fuels that may be present in
vehicular locations.
Use of equipment, including electric vehicle supply equipment, in hazardous (classified) locations is
addressed by well-established requirements. These requirements mitigate the potential fire or explosion
hazards by various strategies to minimize the risk of an electrical circuit from serving as a source of
ignition for the potentially hazardous gases, vapors, or other sources. The established requirements
include numerous product standards relevant to the use of the equipment in particular classified
locations, and installation requirements in Chapter 5 of the National Electrical Code®.
Electric vehicles will be exposed to many of the same hazards as conventionally powered vehicles. The
principal difference is that EVs are a source, as well as a user of large amounts of electrical energy. EVSE
installation must consider all of the potential environmental as well as occupancy exposures. For
example, in a parking garage, there may be more potential for exposure to vehicle impact damage.
Parking garages may be required to comply with NFPA 88A, Standard for Parking Structures, or with

Section 406 of the International Building Code® (IBC®), Motor Vehicle Related Occupancies. Which code
or standard applies depends on which code or standard the particular jurisdiction has adopted.
Another example would be that electric vehicles are likely to use automotive service stations. Parts of
these stations are considered to be hazardous locations in accordance with NFPA 30A, Code for Motor
Fuel Dispensing Facilities and Repair Garages, Article 514 of the National Electrical Code®, and Section
307 of the International Building Code® (IBC®). Exposure to this type of hazard will require the
compliance with additional requirements in Articles 500, 501, and 514 of the NEC® to ensure that EVSE
does not become an explosion hazard.
Other applicable hazards also need to be considered. Location of the EVSE installation away from
hazards is the primary means to minimize risk.
4.2.3.5 Ventilation – Multiple Charging Vehicles
Most batteries used in electric vehicles manufactured by major automakers do not emit hydrogen gas in
quantities that could cause an explosion. Preventive measures such as mechanical or passive ventilation
are not required.
SAE Standards
SAE International’s recommended practice SAE J-1718, Measurement of Hydrogen Gas Emission from
Battery-Powered Passenger Cars and Light Trucks During Battery Charging, can be used to assess
suitability for indoor charging. This standard includes provisions for tests during normal charging
operations and potential equipment failure modes.
NEC® Code Provisions
Some electric vehicles will require ventilation because they use batteries that generate hydrogen.
Section 625.29(D) of the NEC® has requirements for ventilation for single and multiple vehicles, and
Section 625.15(B)&(C) provides ventilation labeling requirements for EVSEs.
ICC Code Provisions
The model International Residential Code® for One- and Two-Family Dwellings (IRC®) has specific
requirements regulating ventilation requirements for “hydrogen generating and refueling operations.”
Such requirements could be referenced or modified for similar ventilation issues, should they exist with
respect to EV charging operations. The IRC® scope includes one and two family dwellings, as well as
multi-family dwellings of three stories or less in height.
The model International Building Code® (IBC®) has provisions requiring a ventilation system in all
“Enclosed Parking Garages.” The ventilation system must meet requirements of the International
Mechanical Code® (IMC®), which is referenced in the IBC®. The IBC® scope includes all commercial
buildings, as well as all residential buildings of more than 3 stories in height.

Most jurisdictions currently issue permits and inspect parking garages through building code
enforcement permitting and inspection processes that are well-established and well understood. No
gaps have been identified at this time with respect to this issue.
4.2.3.6 Guarding of EVSE
In general, available information with regard to guarding of EVSE is limited. NFPA 730, Guide to Premises
Security, addresses security in all occupancies from residential dwellings to large industrial complexes.
Provisions describe construction, protection, and occupancy features and practices intended to reduce
security risks to life and property. Specifically, Annex E is an informative annex which discusses the
placement/design of bollards. Another issue is when to design for physical protection as opposed to
designing for a breakaway scenario if a vehicle from a nearby roadway collides with the EVSE.
Gap: Guarding of EVSE. There is a lack of standards that address charging station design with respect to
physical and security protection of the equipment.
Recommendation: Guidelines or standards relating to guarding of EVSE should be developed. Priority:
Mid-term. Potential Developer: NFPA. Grid Related: No. Status of Progress: Unknown. Update: The
roadmap version 1.0 text and potential developers have been updated. NFPA has work on premises
security and, so, has been added as a potential developer. It does not appear that NHSTA has jurisdiction
in this area and neither it nor the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
(AASHTO) have developed guidelines or standards for guarding of EVSE. No other agencies or
organizations have been identified at this time that are working on this issue.
4.2.3.7 Accessibility for Persons with Disabilities to EVSE
Accessibility and compliance with requirements for accessibility in adopted building codes, and state or
federal accessibility requirements, i.e., the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Fair Housing Act
(FHA), is an issue for EVSE. According to the Electric Drive Transportation Association, the “ADA does not
specifically prescribe standards addressing the installation of charging infrastructure; however, it does
provide general guidance in sections 206, 208, 403.5 and 502 related to routes, clearances, and parking
spaces.”10
While some states have developed guidelines related to charging station accessibility,
enforcement rests with the local authority having jurisdiction.
There are two steps needed to address accessible EV parking and charging in standards and codes. The
first is to propose changes to a design standard (e.g., ICC A117.1) that addresses technical criteria for
10
http://goelectricdrive.com/index.php/accessibility

how you design and build something to be accessible. The second is to propose changes to scoping
requirements in a relevant code, for example, the IBC®, IgCCTM
, or International Zoning Code® (IZC®), for
when something must be accessible and the number that must be accessible. A submittal to revise any
code is premature without a reference to a design standard. Changes to ICC standards and codes must
come from outside parties; ICC staff cannot make such proposals.
Since EV charging stations will need to be available in both non-accessible as well as accessible parking
spaces, a code change proposal should suggest both a requirement for a certain percentage of parking
spaces to have charging stations, including minimum numbers, as well as a percentage / minimum
number of accessible parking spaces to have charging stations.
The DOE Clean Cities program is an information resource for guidance on accessibility in relation to EVSE
installations.
Gap: Accessibility for persons with disabilities to EVSE. There is a lack of standards that address
charging station design with respect to accessibility for persons with disabilities to EVSE.
Recommendation: Guidelines or standards relating to accessibility for persons with disabilities to EVSE
should be developed. Priority: Mid-term. Potential Developer: ICC (ICC A117.1 and IBC®, IgCCTM
or IZC®).
Grid Related: No. Status of Progress: Yellow. Update: Additional text has been added to the roadmap
describing the two-step process for addressing accessible EV parking and charging in relevant standards
and codes including the ICC A117.1, IBC®, IgCCTM
, and IZC®. Non-accessible EV parking and charging also
is addressed in the roadmap text. These roadmap revisions were prompted in part because a proposal
to specify a required number of EV charging locations in the parking requirements of the 2015 IBC® was
rejected and no appeal or comments were subsequently filed. The proposal only applied to accessible
parking spaces; it did not impose a general requirement or reference any standard. The proposal could
be re-submitted for the 2018 code cycle. Technical criteria supporting such a proposal could be provided
for in the A117.1 standard.
4.2.3.8 Cable Management
Functional management of EV cables in public parking spaces is not specifically addressed by codes or
standards.
EVSE standards, including ANSI/UL 2251, the Standard for Safety for Plugs, Receptacles and Couplers for
Electric Vehicles, and the National Electrical Code®, contain requirements for breakaway protection of
cables.
ANSI/UL 355, the Standard for Safety of Cord Reels, covers cord reels for general use, as well as special-
use cord reels intended to be mounted on or in electrical utilization equipment such as appliances or
similar equipment.
Section 406 of the IBC® addresses Motor-Vehicle-Related Occupancies, with 406.2 addressing parking
garages; however, cable management is not specifically addressed.

Security of EVSE cables, including means to discourage theft of copper cables from EVSE, is not
specifically addressed at this time. Attempted theft of EVSE cables may also lead to potential safety
hazards.
Gap: Cable management. There is a lack of standards or code provisions that address functional
management of EV cables in public parking spaces.
Recommendation: Guidelines or standards relating to EVSE cable management should be developed.
Priority: Mid-term. Potential Developer: UL, NFPA. Grid Related: No. Status of Progress: Green.
4.2.3.9 EVSE Maintenance
NECA 413, a national electrical installation standard (NEIS), provides information with regard to
maintaining EVSE. Specifically, Chapter 7 discusses maintenance in accordance with manufacturers’
recommendations and provides guidelines for the care of EVSE, including periodic inspections for wear,
damage, and vandalism, as well as cleaning.
NFPA 70B, Recommended Practice for Electrical Equipment Maintenance, applies to preventive
maintenance for electrical, electronic, and communications systems and equipment. Systems and
equipment covered are typical of those installed in industrial plants, institutional and commercial
buildings, and large multifamily residential complexes. NFPA 70B is not intended to duplicate nor
supersede manufacturer instructions for maintenance.
4.2.3.10 Workplace Safety
There are multiple published standards and codes that include general and specific requirements for
safety in the workplace. The process of installing and maintaining EVSE must include application and
implementation of all workplace safety rules and, specifically, electrical workplace safety requirements
as provided in NFPA 70E-2012, Standard for Electrical Safety in the Workplace. The U.S. Government
includes in the Code of Federal Regulations minimum requirements for workplace safety.
Minimum safety requirements for General Industry are provided in Part 1910, Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA) Standards Subpart S – Electrical. Subpart S includes general information,
design safety standards for electrical systems, safety-related work practices, safety-related maintenance
requirements, safety requirements for special equipment, definitions, and reference documents in
Appendix A. Minimum safety requirements for electrical construction are provided in Part 1926, OSHA
Subpart K – Electrical. Subpart K includes general information, installation safety requirements, safety-
related work practices, safety-related maintenance and environmental considerations, safety
requirements for special equipment, and definitions.

4.3 Support Services Domain
4.3.1 Education and Training
Standards and education and training are important elements needed to ensure the safety and security
of electric vehicle owners and those who service the vehicles or respond to vehicle emergencies, and to
ensure safe EVSE installations and consistency of information.
Much of the information needed by personnel who respond to emergencies or service EVs and
associated equipment is contained in original equipment manufacturer (OEM) or other manufacturer
information. There are standards for professional qualifications for rescue technicians and incident
managers (NFPA 1006 and 1026) but these cover generalized skills and safe methodologies without
getting into the specifics of vehicles or equipment.
4.3.1.1 Electric Vehicle Emergency Shut Off – High Voltage Batteries, Power Cables, Disconnect
Devices; Fire Suppression, Fire Fighting Tactics and Personal Protective Equipment
SAE J2990, Hybrid and EV First and Second Responder Recommended Practice, published in November
2012, provides a flow chart process to assess issues with the vehicle and battery. SAE J2990 also
provides recommendations for vehicle identification, high voltage disabling, and critical items to be
summarized from emergency response guides (ERGs) provided by vehicle manufacturers and others.
OEMs will be encouraged to reference SAE J2990 when creating industry design standards.
High voltage cabling in EVs is unlikely to become standardized in terms of location or routing. The
routing of EV cables is documented in shop manuals and ERGs. It is important that OEMs specify in their
ERGs the location of EV battery and disconnect devices and proper procedures/sequencing to shut off
power to the vehicle, and provide the same data to other ERG developers.
In May 2012, NFPA held a workshop on emergency responder personal protective equipment (PPE) for
hybrid and electric vehicles.11
The workshop brought together emergency responders and other
stakeholders to develop guiding principles and recommended action steps to address the proper PPE for
emergencies involving hybrid or electric vehicles, with a focus on minimizing the risk to emergency
responders due to hazards involving electrically energized equipment. The recommendations from this
workshop served as input to the development of SAE J2990.
NFPA’s Fire Protection Research Foundation, in partnership with the Auto Alliance, DOE and NHTSA, has
created a Technical Advisory Panel to research and develop best practices for fire suppression and fire
fighting tactics for incidents involving electric vehicle batteries. The results of this work are expected by
the third quarter of 2013 and may inform future revisions of SAE J2990 as well as NFPA 1971, Standard
11
http://www.nfpa.org/assets/files//Research%20Foundation/EVPPEWorkshopPart1.pdf.

for Protective Ensembles for Structural Fire Fighting and Proximity Fire Fighting; NFPA 1951, Standards
for Protective Ensembles for Technical Rescue Incidents; and NFPA 1999, Standard for Protective
Clothing for Emergency Medical Operations.
Partial Gap: Electric vehicle emergency shut off – high voltage batteries, power cables, disconnect
devices; fire suppression, fire fighting tactics and personal protective equipment. Standards /
guidelines are needed so that emergency responders can safely manage emergency events involving
electric vehicles.
Recommendation: Develop standards / guidelines so that emergency responders can quickly and easily
recognize high voltage batteries and power cables, operate disconnect devices, avoid electrical shock
hazards, and safely shut off power to an electric vehicle following an incident. Consider the need for
further standardization work with respect to fire suppression, fire fighting tactics, and personal
protective equipment, based on the results of research underway by NFPA’s Fire Protection Research
Foundation in partnership with others. Priority: Near-term. Potential Developer: NFPA, SAE, ISO, IEC.
Grid Related: No. Status of Progress: Green. Update: With the publication of SAE J2990, the partial gap
identified in version 1.0 of this roadmap with respect to vehicle emergency shut off largely has been
addressed. In this version 2.0, the text, gap statement and recommendation have been substantially
modified to more broadly capture the scope of safety concerns facing emergency responders including
the possibility that additional standardization work may be needed with respect to fire suppression, fire
fighting tactics and personal protective equipment.
CEN/CENELEC in their October 2011 eMobility Focus Group report recommended increased efforts to
ensure emergency services are able to respond appropriately with respect to battery hazards caused by
the use of electric vehicles, mechanical impact to the batteries, and exposure of batteries to fire or
water. The report also noted that there is no unified language for safety labeling regarding EV batteries.
The EU recognizes the need to standardize labels and graphics for the protection of first responders to
deal with incidents, but no appropriate standards now exist in Europe.
4.3.1.2 Labeling of EVSE and Load Management Disconnects for Emergency Situations
General safety labeling of residential/commercial/public EVSE is covered under UL 2594 and UL 2202.
However, the standards do not specifically address disconnecting the devices in emergency situations
when a vehicle is connected to the EVSE and where a load management system is involved.
Where load management equipment is independent of the EVSE, then NFPA 70®, the National Electrical
Code®, applies. NEC® Article 625 contains the requirements for installing EV charging stations and would
be an ideal repository for language related to graphical symbols and color-coding to identify load
management equipment and disconnects in emergency situations.

Gap: Labeling of EVSE and load management disconnects for emergency situations. Standards are
needed to address labeling of EVSE and load management disconnects for emergencies.
Recommendation: Develop standards to address graphical symbols and warning labels on EVSE as well
as disconnect instructions for emergency situations. Amend NEC® Article 625 to include requirements
for graphical symbols and color-coding of load management equipment and disconnects for emergency
situations. Priority: Near-term. Potential Developer: UL, NEMA, NFPA, SAE, ISO, IEC. Grid Related: No.
Status of Progress: Unknown. Update: The roadmap version 1.0 text, gap statement and
recommendation have been clarified to address labeling for emergency situations. UL and NEMA have
been added as potential developers.
4.3.1.3 OEM Emergency Response Guides
ERGs written by the OEMs are more abridged than shop and owner’s manuals and can be a valuable
resource to emergency responders, though the amount of information is still lengthy and in non-
standard formats across OEMs. NFPA has compiled the most crucial OEM information in their EV/Hybrid
ERGs into a single database available in both standardized electronic and print formats for use by
emergency responders and others as a quick reference on-scene guide. Manufacturers’ labels and
symbols are replicated, but once these are also standardized the database of ERGs will utilize the
universal symbols. NFPA also makes individual OEM ERGs available online in PDF format at
http://www.evsafetytraining.org/Resources/Auto-Manufacturer-Resources.aspx.
The previously mentioned May 2012 NFPA workshop included a recommendation to “continue efforts
to standardize vehicle response guide information, including universal content, style and format, to
facilitate universal implementation among emergency responders.”
4.3.1.4 Electrical Energy Stranded in an Inoperable RESS; Battery Assessment and Safe Discharge
Following an Emergency Event
The issue of stranded energy in an inoperable battery is being considered in SAE J3009, Stranded Energy
– Reporting and Extraction from Vehicle Electrochemical Storage Systems, now under development. The
intent of this document is to consider the type of information reported by the battery management
system (BMS) and recommended discharge level dependent on a collision or vehicle fire. The document
does not describe how the energy should be extracted.
In parallel, NHTSA and Argonne National Laboratory have started a project to develop safe assessment,
architecture and discharge procedures to extract stranded energy from high-voltage vehicle batteries.
The purpose is to reduce the risk of fire or electrical injury associated with stranded energy in an
“accident-compromised” rechargeable energy storage system (RESS). The project will examine the range
of conditions that may make the RESS inoperable through the life of the vehicle, including crash
incidents and exposure to fire. The project’s deliverables include defining a common interface port(s) to
support diagnostic assessment and discharge capability to an RESS mounted in a vehicle. In addition to

providing information on the condition / state of the battery, this may be a manual service disconnect.
The research project will last until 2014.
The SAE J2990 task force is not addressing the issue of stranded energy.
Gap: Electrical energy stranded in an inoperable RESS. Standards to enable common method
assessment of RESS condition and stability, and removal of the energy stranded in an inoperable RESS,
are needed to increase the safety margin to persons who may become exposed to the device in an
inoperable state for various reasons and conditions during the RESS life cycle.
Recommendation: Carry out research to independently identify a solution set to the issue of electrical
energy stranded in a damaged or inoperable RESS. Complete work on SAE J3009 to address a similar
scope. Priority: Near-term. Potential Developer: SAE, NHTSA/Argonne NL. Grid Related: No. Status of
Progress: New gap / Green.
Gap: Battery assessment and safe discharge following an emergency event. There do not appear to be
standards addressing the assessment of battery stability and the need for safe discharge of EV batteries
following an emergency event.
Recommendation: Standards and/or guidelines to assess battery stability and the need for safe
discharge following an emergency event are needed to identify safe practices for performing such
assessment and discharge and what training, equipment and personal protective equipment may be
required. The research on stranded electrical energy underway at NHTSA/Argonne NL is a first step
before developing such guidelines. Priority: Near-term. Potential Developer: SAE, NHTSA/Argonne NL,
NFPA. Grid Related: No. Status of Progress: Not started. Update: The roadmap version 1.0 gap
statement and recommendation have been modified to include an assessment of battery stability.
Emergency responders are no longer identified as the specific user of battery discharge procedures since
second responders (tow operators, roadside assistance) and OEM representatives also may need such
training. The development of such procedures is now described as contingent upon research underway
by NHTSA / Argonne National Laboratory on stranded energy. Argonne and NFPA have been added as
potential developers. Text regarding safe battery recharge in emergencies has been removed and a new
roadmap section on Disaster Planning / Emergency Evacuations Involving Electric Vehicles has been
added to separately address that concern.
4.3.1.5 Disaster Planning / Emergency Evacuations Involving Electric Vehicles
There do not appear to be any standards or guidelines in place that address disaster planning in terms of
the need for quick recharging of EVs during emergency evacuation situations. While technically that may
suggest a gap, the same can be said with respect to refueling gas powered vehicles under such
conditions. In either case, a vehicle would need to be towed if it could not leave the road under its own
power. There is no other readily apparent solution. As this issue initially was raised by a Federal

Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) representative, FEMA is invited to further consider planning for
such scenarios.
No gap has been identified at this time.
4.3.1.6 Workforce Training
Emergency First Responder Training
NFPA’s Electric Vehicle Safety Training Project, funded by the U.S. Department of Energy and NFPA, is a
nationwide program to help firefighters, law enforcement officers, emergency medical services and
other first responders prepare for the growing number of hybrid and electric vehicles in the United
States. This program provides information and materials necessary to safely respond to emergency
situations involving advanced hybrid and electric vehicles on the road today. The training is designed to:
create awareness of unique emergency response needs for electric vehicles; drive awareness of the
availability of training modules and reference materials; remove concerns about the inherent safety of
electric vehicles and the ability to safely respond to emergency situations; and reassure the public that
trained first responders know what to do in emergency situations.
Key topics of NFPA’s training include:
- Overview of the EV electrical and safety systems;
- Identification of electric and hybrid vehicles;
- Immobilization process;
- Electrical disabling procedures;
- EV extrication awareness, including high-strength steel;
- Vehicle fire recommended practices;
- Emergency operations (battery fire, submersion); and,
- New challenges presented by vehicle charging stations and infrastructure.
NFPA’s web portal, www.EVsafetytraining.org, serves as a central repository for all EV safety information
for first responders. This website hosts training, videos, and simulations; includes an events calendar,
blogging, and news; and has a separate area for each auto manufacturer’s safety information.
NFPA’s training is provided via the following platforms:
- Train-the-Trainer Classroom course: An 8-hour “Train the Trainer” Emergency Responder course
that covers the breadth of the program, along with strategies and learning objectives needed to
train a group of first responders. Currently being achieved through a partnership with the North

American Fire Training Directors, upon completion, attendees are capable of delivering the
program to their own agency/department.
- EV Safety Training Classroom Course: A 4 hour face-to-face instructor-led program for
firefighters, and a 3 hour face-to-face instructor-led program for law enforcement and
emergency medical services, that provides instruction on how to respond to EV incidents.
- Online Self-Paced Study Course: An online, self-paced web version, complete with video,
animations, simulations, data review exercises, and a final scenario room activity. A certificate is
mailed to the user following successful completion of the course.
- Vehicle Specific Online Training: Chevrolet Volt Electric Vehicle safety training has been
developed and released for the benefit of emergency responders on NFPA’s EV web portal, with
future model specific online training being released during the first quarter of 2012.
- Emergency Field Guide: This guide is a quick reference manual compiled from the
manufacturers’ emergency response guides, which contains the vital hybrid and electric vehicle
safety information for a first responder on each make and model of hybrid or electric vehicle.
This guide includes descriptions, diagrams, and locations of key high voltage EV components, as
well as vehicle power down and emergency procedures in order to successfully identify,
immobilize, and disable a hybrid or electric vehicle. This guide will be available in published and
online formats.
Several first responder agencies have reported utilizing the training provided by vehicle manufacturers
and other training consortiums. Law enforcement agencies have reported a need for increased access to
first responder specific training. Law enforcement and emergency medical services need access to
responder safety training designed for their respective roles but enabled to integrate with training of
other responders to ensure efficient emergency operations.
Standards developing organizations can and should continue to foster such multi-discipline input into
the development of standards and training programs regarding electric vehicles by including these
perspectives on appropriate technical and standards development committees.
In contrast to the U.S., there is no centralized training portal for electric vehicle responder safety in
Europe. Additionally, while the U.S. has developed a unified approach, where federal regulatory
agencies, vehicle and charging station manufacturers, standards organizations and the first responder
community have partnered to participate in the training and standards development process, no such
partnership has evolved in the EU.

Second Responder/Normal Operations Training Programs
Organizations like the National Institute for Automotive Service Excellence (ASE), the American
Automobile Association (AAA), and the Towing and Recovery Association of America Inc. (TRAA) have in
place training programs and certifications for their technicians who perform service functions on electric
vehicles. There does not appear to be a significant call for new training and/or certification programs at
this time.
EVSE Installer and Inspector Training
EVSE installations must comply with local, state, and national codes and regulations. The installation
process typically requires obtaining an electrical installation permit from local authorities, the use of a
licensed contractor for the actual installation, and a final electrical review by a certified electrical
inspector.
Article 625 of the National Electrical Code® (NEC®) sets forth installation safety requirements for typical
hard-wired connections of EVSE, addressing wiring methods, equipment construction, control and
protection, and equipment locations.
In order to support the build out of charging infrastructure for EVs nationally, a steadily expanding pool
of qualified electrical installers and inspectors for EVSE is required.
The National Electrical Contractors Association (NECA) Workshop on Managing Electric Vehicle Supply
Equipment (EVSE) – Electrical Contractors is a course that reviews necessary steps that must be
performed to ensure system capacity of electrical power sources and service equipment and safe
installation of EVSE branch circuits and feeders. It includes a review of applicable rules in the NEC® that
must be applied to EVSE installations, including what constitutes qualifications of contractors and
installers to perform EVSE installations. In addition to the minimum safety installation requirements of
the NEC®, safe work practices and applicable workplace safety requirements are reviewed. Applicable
performance and quality installation standards are integrated into this training program. Compliance
with regulatory agencies is also reviewed specifically as it relates to required work permits, inspections,
and approval of EVSE or vehicle charging equipment installations. The International Association of
Electrical Inspectors (IAEI) has partnered with NECA to develop the EV training that NECA has been
offering to its chapters. This information is available to IAEI to develop training for inspectors and
installers, but to date has not been fully developed. Upon completion, it is expected to provide 1-2
hours of training but be more NEC® Article 625 oriented, somewhat akin to an electrical checklist.
The Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Training Program (EVITP) – Electrical Workers is a 14-18 hour class
which comprehensively addresses the requirements, regulations, products and strategies which will
enable electrical contractors and electricians to master successful, expert, and professional customer
relations, installation, and maintenance of EV and PHEV infrastructure. Upon completion of this class,
participants gain thorough knowledge and practical application of all covered EV infrastructure subjects
including the critical areas of customer experience, protection of utility systems, and vehicle charging
technical applications.

Additionally, Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. has developed a short (2.5 hour) e-learning course on
Electric Vehicle Charging Station Installation for qualified electricians.
Charging Station Permitting
In addition to the model EVSE permitting template described earlier, the DOE Clean Cities program has
put together an EVSE 101 video that includes information for electrical installers and inspectors. DOE
funded projects are also exploring regional planning and workplace charging. The availability of this
information needs to be made widely and easily accessible to electrical installers and inspectors in
advance of when they find themselves faced with a potential EV charging station installation/permit
application. It also needs to be promoted in publications and websites that are regularly read or visited
by both the installer community and code officials (electrical, building and/or fire inspector). It is also
important to raise awareness with architects, community planners, land use planners, zoning officials,
and other authorities having jurisdiction over plans review of commercial real estate developments and
large residential tract developments, as the involvement of these individuals will be critical to the future
growth and development of EVSE installations.
Partial Gap: Workforce training – charging station permitting. From a training perspective, there may
be a need to assemble and promote a “Code Official Toolkit” related to EVSE permitting.
Recommendation: Develop a Code Official Toolkit on EVSE permitting that includes, among other things,
the DOE permit template, EVSE 101 video, and an FAQ document for code officials that explains, for
example, the importance of safe and code-compliant EV charging station installation requirements, and
relevant safety training programs. Consider creating a brief article that would highlight this issue and the
Toolkit as resources to run in appropriate association newsletters to increase awareness of resources
available to installers, inspectors and other authorities having jurisdiction. Priority: Near-term. Potential
Developer: DOE, ICC, NECA, IAEI, NFPA. Grid Related: No. Status of Progress: New gap / Green.
College and University Programs
As electric vehicle use increases, institutions of higher learning are beginning to address occupational
needs with education and training programs. Many of these programs are taking advantage of DOE
funding designed to increase adoption of electric vehicle technology. Programs vary from skill level
training for those repairing and maintaining electric vehicles and charging equipment, to engineering
programs for the next generation of designers.
The following educational institutions are known to offer electric vehicle training programs:
- J. Sargeant Reynolds Community College: The J. Sargeant Reynolds Community College in
Virginia is currently developing a career studies certificate in advanced automotive technologies
for electric vehicles. The courses include instruction on electric vehicles, plug-in hybrid electric
vehicles, fuel cell electric vehicles, and control electronics.
- Purdue University: Purdue University is currently working with a group of other universities to
develop over 30 courses supporting electric vehicle technology and workforce needs. These

courses support two and four year students and certificate and workforce development
programs.
- University of Central Missouri: The automotive technology management program at the
University of Central Missouri proposes to develop a new certificate program for non-degree
seeking individuals interested in advanced vehicle systems including electric vehicles, plug-in
hybrid electric vehicles, fuel cell electric vehicles, and other future technologies. The possibility
of developing this program into a minor is also being examined by the university. In addition,
materials from this program can be condensed and adapted for outreach to community colleges
and OEM partners. The certificate program will consist of six courses with all but the basic
electronics course being taught by faculty holding the Automotive Service Excellence (ASE)
master certification.
- University of Michigan, Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan offers undergraduate and
graduate courses and degree programs related to electrified vehicles, with all of them targeting
regular B.S., M.S and M.Eng. degrees (i.e., engineering students or professional engineers).
Partial Gap: Workforce training – college and university programs. Identified higher education
programs related to electric vehicles do not appear to cover some issues that relate to charging
infrastructure development such as land use, community planning, and architecture.
Recommendation: Develop higher education programs focused on electric vehicle charging
infrastructure development from the standpoint of land use, community planning and architecture.
Priority: Mid-term. Potential Developer: Colleges and Universities. Grid Related: No. Status of Progress:
New gap / Green.

5. Summary of Gap Analysis
Priority: Near-term (0-2 years); Mid-term (2-5 years); Long-term (5+ years).
Status of Progress on Gaps: Closed (completed), Green (moving forward), Yellow (delayed in progressing), Red (at a standstill), Not started, Unknown, or New Gap (for roadmap version 2.0).
Roadmap Issue
Section /
page Gap Recommendation Priority
Potential
Developer
Grid
Related
Status of
Progress
1.
Terminology 4.1 / 69
Terminology. There is a need for consistency with
respect to electric vehicle terminology
Complete work to revise SAE J1715.
Update: SAE J1715 is still in revision and is targeted
for publication in the Spring of 2013. Mid-term SAE, ISO No Green
2.
Power Rating
Methods 4.1.1.1 / 70
Power rating methods. It was noted in roadmap
version 1.0 that standards for electric vehicle power
rating methods are still in development.
Complete work to develop SAE J2907 and J2908.
Update: With respect to the roadmap version 1.0
gap, work on the power rating method standards
SAE J2907 and J2908 has been canceled because of
resource issues. It will be re-opened under a new J
number at a future date yet to be determined. Mid-term SAE No Red
3.
Functional Safety
in the Charging
System 4.1.1.2/ 73
Functional safety in the charging system. Potential
faults in the charging system, both on-board and
off-board, are the subject of NHTSA sponsored
research and may need to be addressed in future
rulemaking and/or standardization.
Future NHTSA rulemaking and/or revisions to SAE
J2929 should consider the results of the DOT/NHTSA-
funded SAE Cooperative Research Project with
respect to fault events in the charging system which
could lead to overcharging.
Update: The roadmap version 1.0 gap statement and
recommendation have been updated to note NHTSA-
funded research, that the issue may be with the
charging system rather than the battery, and that
NHTSA rulemaking may result. NHTSA has been
added as a potential developer and the priority level
has been changed from mid-term to near-term.
Recent updates to SAE J2929 do not address
charging system failure; rather, they relate to
electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) to ensure the
safety functions of the battery are not impacted. Near-term NHTSA, SAE No Green
4.
Delayed Battery
Overheating
Events 4.1.1.2 / 74
Delayed battery overheating events. The issue of
delayed battery overheating needs to be addressed.
Address the issue of delayed battery overheating
events in future rulemaking and/or revisions of SAE
J2929 based on the results of the DOT/NHTSA-
funded SAE Cooperative Research Project.
Update: The roadmap version 1.0 recommendation Near-term NHTSA, SAE No Yellow

Roadmap Issue
Section /
Potential
Developer
Grid
Related
Status of
Progress
has been updated to note NHTSA-funded research
which may result in future rulemaking. NHTSA has
been added as a potential developer. Version 2 of
SAE J2929 has been published. However, the topic of
delayed battery overheating events is not addressed
in this revision; it is pending the results of the NHTSA
sponsored research.
5.
Battery Testing -
Performance and
Durability 4.1.1.3 / 74
Battery performance parameters and durability
testing. There is a need for further work on EV
battery performance parameters and environmental
durability test requirements.
Complete work on SAE J1798 and if possible consider
harmonization with ISO 12405-2.
Update: There is not a lot of progress to date on SAE
J1798. Mid-term SAE, ISO No Yellow
6.
Battery Storage 4.1.1.4 / 75
Safe storage of lithium-ion batteries. At present,
there are no published standards addressing the
safe storage of lithium-ion batteries specifically,
whether at warehouses, repair garages, recovered
vehicle storage lots, auto salvage yards, or battery
exchange locations.
A standard on safe storage practices for EV batteries
must be developed, addressing both new and waste
batteries and the wide range of storage situations
that may exist, including when the batteries are
separated from their host vehicle.
Update: The roadmap version 1.0 gap statement has
been modified to say there are no published
standards addressing safe storage. IEC 62840 and the
research project of the NFPA’s Fire Protection
Research Foundation are noted in the text. Near-term
SAE, NFPA,
ICC, IEC/TC
69 No Green
7.
Battery Packaging,
Transport and
Handling 4.1.1.4 / 77
Packaging and transport of waste batteries.
Current standards and regulations do not
adequately cover transportation aspects of waste
batteries (damaged, aged, sent for repair, end-of-
life) in terms of packaging, loading limitations,
combination with other dangerous goods on same
transport, etc.
There is a need for a harmonized approach toward
communication, labeling, packaging restrictions, and
criteria for determining when a battery is waste.
Update: The UN SCOE was added as a potential
developer as there is a proposal before it. Near-term
UN SCOE
on the
Transport
of
Dangerous
Goods,
ISO/TC
22/SC21,
SAE or UL No Green
8.
Battery Packaging,
Transport and
Handling 4.1.1.4 / 77
Packaging and transport of batteries to workshops
or battery swapping stations. Unloading a battery
in a battery swapping station is extremely
challenging with the original packaging used for
dangerous goods transportation. There is a need for
standards for intermediate packaging to cover
transport to battery swapping stations.
Intermediate packaging is required between the
import location of the battery and battery swapping
stations and needs to be standardized around
geometry, safety and matching to UN packaging
requirements. Mid-term
ISO/TC
22/SC21,
SAE or UL No Not started

Roadmap Issue
Section /
Potential
Developer
Grid
Related
Status of
Progress
9.
Battery Recycling 4.1.1.5 / 78
Battery recycling. Standards are needed in relation
to EV (li-ion) battery recycling.
Complete work on SAE J2974 and J2984. EV (li-ion)
battery recycling standards are desirable to address
the calculation method toward recycling efficiency
and recovery rates based on an agreed unit (possibly
weight) and/or life-cycle assessment tools, including
energy recovery.
Update: The roadmap version 1.0 text and
recommendation have been updated to note
relevant work by SAE. The priority level has been
changed from long-term to near-term. Near-term SAE, IEC No Green
10.
Battery Secondary
Uses 4.1.1.6 / 79
Battery secondary uses. There is a need for
standards to address battery second life
applications for grid storage and other uses.
Explore the development of standards for battery
secondary uses, addressing such issues as safety and
performance testing for intended applications, grid
connection/communication interfaces, identification
of parts/components that can be removed from the
pack without destroying it, etc.
Update: The text has been updated to note some of
the considerations in the work thus far by the SAE
committee. The priority level has been changed from
long-term to mid-term. UL has been added as a
potential developer. Mid-term SAE, UL No Green
11.
Crash Tests/
Safety 4.1.1.7 / 79 No Gap N/A N/A N/A No N/A
12. Internal High
Voltage Cables,
On-Board Wiring,
Component
Ratings and
Charging
Accessories 4.1.2.1 / 81 No Gap N/A N/A N/A No N/A
13. Vehicle
Diagnostics -
Emissions 4.1.2.2 / 83 No Gap N/A N/A N/A No N/A

Roadmap Issue
Section /
Potential
Developer
Grid
Related
Status of
Progress
14.
Audible Warning
Systems 4.1.2.3 / 84
Audible warning systems. Creation of the NHTSA
safety standard and compliance with it will
effectively close any gap with respect to audible
warning systems for electric vehicles sold in the U.S.
market. Ongoing standards work in SAE and ISO,
and in WP.29 with respect to the development of a
Global Technical Regulation would provide a means
for international harmonization around this issue.
Continue work on safety standards to address EV
sound emission and measurement. Near-term
SAE, ISO,
NHTSA,
WP.29 No Green
15.
Graphical Symbols 4.1.3.1 / 85
Graphical symbols for electric vehicles. Standards
for graphical symbols for electric vehicles are
needed to communicate important information to
the driver such as state of charge, failure or normal
system operation which can be understood
regardless of the driver’s language.
Develop EV graphical symbols standards to
communicate information to the driver.
Update: The text has been updated to note NHTSA
sponsored research on functional safety and failure
modes. The roadmap version 1.0 gap statement and
recommendation have been re-focused on
communication of information to the driver. NHTSA
has been added as a potential developer and the
priority level has been changed from near-term to
long-term. Regarding the roadmap version 1.0 gap
statement and recommendation relating to graphical
symbols for “parts under the hood,” this aspect is
addressed in section 4.3.1.1 on EV emergency shut
off. Long-term
SAE,
NHTSA,
ISO, IEC No Not started
16.
Telematics –
Driver Distraction 4.1.3.2 / 86 No Gap N/A N/A N/A No N/A
17.
Fuel Efficiency,
Emissions, and
Labeling 4.1.3.3 / 87 No Gap N/A N/A N/A No N/A
18.
Wireless Charging 4.2.1.1 / 88
Wireless charging. Standards and guidelines for
wireless charging are still in development.
Complete work on SAE J2954, UL 2750, IEEE
deliverables and IEC 69180-1.
Update: The text and roadmap version 1.0 gap
statement and recommendation have been modified
to account for IEEE and IEC/TC 69 work, with both
added as potential developers. Near-term
SAE, UL,
IEEE,
IEC/TC 69 Yes Green

Roadmap Issue
Section /
Potential
Developer
Grid
Related
Status of
Progress
19.
Battery Swapping 4.2.1.2 / 89
Battery swapping – safety. Currently, there is a
need to define minimum requirements for the safe
operation of battery swapping stations, as mass
deployment of battery swapping systems is
currently underway in several countries around the
world.
Complete work on IEC 62840 to define minimum
requirements for the safe operation of battery
swapping stations.
Update: The text and recommendation have been
updated to note the new project IEC 62840 in IEC/TC
69. Near-term IEC/TC 69 No Green
20.
Battery Swapping 4.2.1.2 / 89
Battery swapping – interoperability. Standards are
needed to help facilitate the penetration of battery
swapping in the market. Issues to be addressed
related to removable batteries include electrical
interfaces, cooling integration, data transfer
integration, and common mechanical and
dimensional interfaces.
Define interoperability standards related to battery
swapping.
Update: Currently, there is some ongoing work on
the standardization of battery packs in ISO TC
22/SC21. The inaugural meeting of the working
group for IEC 62840 in IEC/TC 69 raised an indication
of interest in work on interoperability related to
battery swapping. Near-term IEC/TC 69 No Not started
21.
Power Quality 4.2.1.3 / 90
Power quality. SAE J2894/1 was published in
December 2011. At the time of publication of
roadmap version 1.0, SAE J2894, Part 2, was still in
development.
Complete work on SAE J2894, Part 2.
Update: With the publication of SAE J2894/2, the
partial gap on power quality identified in version 1.0
of this roadmap will be closed. Near-term SAE Yes CLOSED
22.
EVSE Charging
Levels/Modes 4.2.1.3 / 90
EVSE charging levels. At the time of release of
version 1.0 of this roadmap, the levels for DC
charging within SAE J1772TM
had yet to be finalized.
Complete work to establish DC charging levels within
SAE J1772TM
.
Update: With the publication of the new version of
SAE J1772™, the gap identified in version 1.0 of this
roadmap with respect to DC charging levels in
SAE J1772™ is now closed. Near-term SAE Yes CLOSED
23.
EV Supply
Equipment and
Charging Systems 4.2.1.3 / 93
Off-board charging station and portable EV cord
set safety within North America. At the time of
release of version 1.0 of this roadmap, the
harmonization of equipment safety standards within
North America based on the UL 2594 standard was
still underway
Finish North American harmonization effort based on
UL 2594 addressing off-board charging station and
portable EV cord set safety. Once that is completed,
address NEC® 2014 technical issues in the new tri-
national standard.
Update: With the publication of the tri-national
North American standard based on UL 2594 in
February 2013, the partial gap identified in version
1.0 of this roadmap regarding off-board charging
station and portable EV cord set safety within North
America is closed. There will be a need to address
NEC® 2014 technical issues in the new tri-national
standard. There are additional technical items that Near-term
UL, CSA,
ANCE
(Mexico),
NEMA Yes CLOSED

Roadmap Issue
Section /
Potential
Developer
Grid
Related
Status of
Progress
will be addressed in a Phase 2 harmonization effort
through CANENA.
24.
EV Supply
Equipment and
Off-board charger safety within North America.
Harmonization of equipment safety standards
within North America is needed.
There appears to be a need to harmonize the safety
requirements for off-board chargers with the U.S.,
Canada, and Mexico. Mid-term
UL, CSA,
ANCE
(Mexico),
NEMA Yes Not started
25.
EV Supply
Equipment and
Off-board charger, off-board charging station and
portable EV cord set safety globally. There are
some differences between the IEC 61851 series of
standards and the North American standards. While
not a gap per se with respect to the U.S. market, the
use of infrastructure equipment and the means to
mitigate risks would prove beneficial to
manufacturers if harmonization was completed.
Work to harmonize the IEC 61851 series standards
and the North American standards Mid-term UL, IEC Yes Not started
26.
EV Couplers:
Safety and
Harmonization
Efforts 4.2.1.3 / 96
EV coupler safety within North America. At the
time of publication of version 1.0 of this roadmap,
harmonization of EV coupler safety standards within
North America based on the UL 2251 standard was
still underway.
Finish efforts to harmonize standards addressing EV
coupler safety within North America.
Update: With the publication of the tri-national
standard based on UL 2251 in February 2013, there
are no gaps in standardization for EV coupler safety
in North America and the partial gap identified in
version 1.0 of this roadmap is closed. There are
additional technical items that will be addressed in a
Phase 2 harmonization effort through CANENA. Near-term
UL, CSA,
ANCE
(Mexico),
NEMA Yes CLOSED
27.
EV Couplers:
Safety and
Harmonization
Efforts 4.2.1.3 / 96
EV coupler safety globally. There are some
differences between the IEC 62196 series standards
and the North American EV coupler safety
standards. While not a gap per se with respect to
the U.S. market, global harmonization would help to
reduce costs for vehicle manufacturers.
Work to harmonize the IEC 62196 series standards
and the North American EV coupler safety standards. Mid-term UL, IEC Yes Not started
28.
EV Couplers:
Interoperability
with EVSE and
Harmonization
Efforts 4.2.1.3 / 98
EV coupler interoperability with EVSE globally.
Different coupler configurations are used in
different parts of the world. Global harmonization
would help to reduce costs for manufacturers. At
the time of release of version 1.0 of this roadmap,
the revision of SAE J1772TM
was still in progress; it
has now been published.
Incorporate the new SAE J1772™ combination
coupler into IEC 62196-3. Build out the charging
infrastructure to accommodate variations in EV
coupler configurations for particular markets as
necessary, in particular with respect to DC charging.
Update: The roadmap version 1.0 text has been Near-term
SAE, IEC,
CHAdeMO,
vehicle and
charging
station
manufactur
ers Yes Green

Roadmap Issue
Section /
Potential
Developer
Grid
Related
Status of
Progress
updated to note the publication of the SAE J1772TM
AC/DC combination coupler and that the
forthcoming IEC 62196-3 will describe the SAE
J1772™ coupler and several other different DC
coupler configurations used elsewhere. The gap
statement notes the publication of SAE J1772TM
. The
recommendation notes the need to incorporate SAE
J1772TM
into IEC 62196-3 and the need to build out
the charging infrastructure to accommodate
variations in coupler configurations for particular
markets as necessary, in particular with respect to
DC charging. CHAdeMO, and “vehicle and charging
station manufacturers,” have been added alongside
SAE and IEC as “potential developers.”
29.
EV Couplers:
Interoperability
with EVSE –
Conformance
Programs 4.2.1.3 / 99
Conformance programs for EV coupler
interoperability within the U.S. market. No
programs yet exist for the U.S. market to verify
compatibility between the EV coupler, the
infrastructure and the vehicle.
Complete work on SAE J2953. Establish a program(s)
to verify interoperability between infrastructure
equipment, including the vehicle connector, and all
vehicles that follow the SAE J1772™ protocol. Near-term SAE, UL Yes Green
30. Electromagnetic
Compatibility
(EMC) 4.2.1.4 / 101
Electromagnetic compatibility (EMC). Standards to
address EMC issues related to electric vehicle
charging are still in development.
Complete work on IEC 61851-21, Parts 1 and 2, and
SAE J2954 to address EMC issues related to electric
vehicle charging. Near-term
IEC/TC 69,
SAE Yes
NEW gap /
Green
31.
Vehicle as Supply 4.2.1.5 / 102
Vehicle as supply / reverse power flow. Differences
exist between the DER model defined by SAE
J2836/3TM
, IEC/TR 61850-90-7, IEC/TR 61850-90-8,
and SEP 2.0.
Harmonize the information model for an EV as a DER
between SAE J2836/3TM
, IEC/TR 61850-90-8, and SEP
2.0.
Update: The roadmap version 1.0 text, gap
statement, recommendation and list of potential
developers have been substantially reworked to
focus specifically on the need for harmonization of
the DER communications model between SAE
J2836/3TM
, IEC/TR 61850-90-8, and SEP 2.0. Potential
changes to other standards to address integration of
inverter-based DER devices with the grid, or
architecture and safety aspects of reverse power
flow, are contemplated in the text but not included
as a gap. Near-term
SAE, IEC/TC
57, Zibgee
Alliance
and the
HomePlug
Powerline
Alliance Yes Green

Roadmap Issue
Section /
Potential
Developer
Grid
Related
Status of
Progress
32.
Use of Alternative
Power Sources 4.2.1.6 / 104
Use of alternative power sources. The National
Electrical Code® does not specifically address the
integration of the EV and EVSE with a facility high
voltage DC power distribution system for either
charging or reverse power flow.
Develop NEC® requirements for high voltage DC
power distribution systems and the integration of
distributed energy resources and DC loads with the
system Near-term NFPA Yes Green
33.
Locating and Using
Public Charging
Stations (EVSE) 4.2.2.2 / 108
Locating and reserving a public charging station.
There is a need for a messaging standard to permit
EV drivers to locate a public charging spot and
reserve its use in advance.
Develop a messaging standard to permit EV drivers
to universally locate and reserve a public charging
spot.
Update: To address this roadmap version 1.0 gap,
NEMA’s EVSE section organized a working group
(NEMA 5EVSE Network Roaming WG) to develop a
standard that permits EV drivers to universally locate
a public charging spot. It decided that reserving a
public charging spot was a low priority and deferred
action on reservations to a later phase of work. Mid-term
SAE,
ISO/IEC
JWG,
NEMA Yes Green
34.
Roaming 4.2.2.2 / 109
Charging of roaming EVs between EVSPs. There is a
need to permit roaming EVs to charge at spots
affiliated with a different EVSP.
Develop back end requirements as well as an
interface standard that supports charging of roaming
EVs between EVSPs.
Update: To address this roadmap version 1.0 gap,
NEMA’s EVSE section organized a working group
(NEMA 5EVSE Network Roaming WG) to develop a
standard that supports roaming that allows charging
services from a provider other than the home EVSP.
The standard will include inter-operator interfaces to
address the various stages of a charging session (e.g.,
authentication/authorization, charging data records,
billing record exchange.) The NEMA working group
also is looking to develop a radio-frequency
identification (RFID) credential protocol specification
so that all EVSEs that implement the specification
will be able to read RFID cards that conform to the
specification. IEC also has initiated work on IEC
62831 Ed. 1.0, User identification in Electric Vehicle
Service Equipment using a smartcard, which
describes the physical and protocol layers of an RFID
card used in charging spots.
In addition, a new group called eMI3
has been
formed as an innovation platform under the aegis of
ERTICO (www.ertico.com). This group has brought Near-term NEMA, IEC Yes Green

Roadmap Issue
Section /
Potential
Developer
Grid
Related
Status of
Progress
together several significant players and eMobility
projects in the European EV mobility market,
including auto OEMs, enterprise software vendors
and EV Services Providers, who recognize that the
business realities will result in the existence of
multiple EV charging providers who need to
interoperate in order to allow EV drivers to
seamlessly charge across provider and geographic
boundaries. Its scope is to harmonize and develop
ICT (information and communication technology)
standards and implementations in order to enable
global EV services interoperability. The work to be
undertaken in this group overlaps with the NEMA
work. The two organizations are considering a liaison
agreement to facilitate information exchange.
35.
Access Control 4.2.2.2 / 110
Access control at charging stations. There is a need
to develop data definition and messaging standards
for communicating access control at charging
stations.
Develop data definition and messaging standards for
communicating access control at charging stations.
Update: The NEMA 5EVSE Network Roaming WG
also looked at this roadmap version 1.0 gap. It
decided that offline access control lists were a low
priority and deferred action on offline access control
to a later phase of work. Near-term NEMA Yes Yellow
36.
Communication of
Standardized EV
Sub-metering Data 4.2.2.3 / 112
Communication of standardized EV sub-metering
data. Standards are needed for communication of
EV sub-metering data between third parties and
service providers.
Complete Green Button Sub-metering Profile of ESPI
for communication of standardized EV sub-metering
data, for example, between a third party and a billing
agent (e.g., utility).
statement, recommendation and potential
developers have been revised to be specific about
communication of EV sub-metering data between
third parties and service providers and to complete
work on the Green Button Sub-metering Profile of
ESPI. Near-term
OpenADE/
NAESB Yes Green
37.
Standardization of
EV Sub-meters 4.2.2.3/ 113
Standardization of EV sub-meters. Standards for EV
sub-meters, including embedded sub-meters, need
to be completed to address performance,
security/privacy, access, and data aspects.
Develop standards or guidelines related to the
functionality and measurement characteristics of the
new types of sub-meters that are coming out for EVs,
including embedded sub-meters in the EVSE or EV.
Such standards should address different form
factors, capabilities, installation, and certification. Near-term
NEMA,
USNWG
EVF&S Yes
NEW gap /
Green

Roadmap Issue
Section /
Potential
Developer
Grid
Related
Status of
Progress
38.
Coordination of EV
Sub-metering
Activities 4.2.2.3 / 113
Coordination of EV sub-metering activities. Various
existing activities (NEMA, USNWG EVF&S, SGIP V2G
DEWG) need to be coordinated as much as possible.
Organizations developing standards, guidelines or
use cases related to EV sub-metering should
coordinate their activities in order to avoid
duplication of effort, assure alignment, and maximize
efficiency. Near-term
NEMA,
USNWG
EVF&S,
SGIP V2G
DEWG Yes
NEW gap /
Green
39.
Cyber Security and
Data Privacy 4.2.2.4 / 115
Cyber security and data privacy. There is a need for
guidelines and standards to address cyber security
and data privacy concerns associated with PEVs and
smart grid communications.
Complete work to develop SAE J2931/7, and to
revise ISO/IEC 15118-1 and NISTIR 7628, volume 2. Near-term
SAE,
ISO/IEC
JWG, NIST Yes
NEW gap /
Green
40.
Telematics Smart
Grid
Communications 4.2.2.5 / 115
Telematics smart grid communications. There is a
need to develop use cases related to non-utility
aggregation control and vehicle information in order
to assess the existing functionalities, and to
determine any missing requirements within the
context of existing standards, Energy Service
Provider business requirements, and telematics
networks to support smart grid load management. Complete work to develop SAE J2836/5 TM
. Near-term SAE Yes
NEW gap /
Green
41.
Site Assessment /
Power Capacity
Assessment 4.2.3.1 / 116 No Gap N/A N/A N/A Yes N/A
42.
EV Charging –
Signage and
Parking 4.2.3.2 / 118 No Gap N/A N/A N/A Yes N/A
43. Charging Station
Permitting 4.2.3.3 / 119 No Gap N/A N/A N/A Yes N/A
44.
Environmental and
Use Conditions 4.2.3.4 / 121 No Gap N/A N/A N/A No N/A
45.
Ventilation -
Multiple Charging
Vehicles 4.2.3.5 / 122 No Gap N/A N/A N/A No N/A
46.
Guarding of EVSE 4.2.3.6 / 123
Guarding of EVSE. There is a lack of standards that
address charging station design with respect to
physical and security protection of the equipment.
Guidelines or standards relating to guarding of EVSE
should be developed.
Update: The roadmap version 1.0 text and potential
developers have been updated. NFPA has work on
premises security and, so, has been added as a Mid-term NFPA No Unknown

Roadmap Issue
Section /
Potential
Developer
Grid
Related
Status of
Progress
potential developer. It does not appear that NHSTA
has jurisdiction in this area and neither it nor the
American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials (AASHTO) have developed
guidelines or standards for guarding of EVSE. No
other agencies or organizations have been identified
at this time that are working on this issue.
47.
Accessibility for
Persons with
Disabilities to EVSE 4.2.3.7/ 123
Accessibility for persons with disabilities to EVSE.
There is a lack of standards that address charging
station design with respect to accessibility for
persons with disabilities to EVSE.
Guidelines or standards relating to accessibility for
persons with disabilities to EVSE should be
developed.
Update: Additional text has been added to the
roadmap describing the two-step process for
addressing accessible EV parking and charging in
relevant standards and codes including the ICC
A117.1, IBC®, IgCCTM
, and IZC®. Non-accessible EV
parking and charging also is addressed in the
roadmap text. These roadmap revisions were
prompted in part because a proposal to specify a
required number of EV charging locations in the
parking requirements of the 2015 IBC® was rejected
and no appeal or comments were subsequently
filed. The proposal only applied to accessible parking
spaces; it did not impose a general requirement or
reference any standard. The proposal could be re-
submitted for the 2018 code cycle. Technical criteria
supporting such a proposal could be provided for in
the A117.1 standard. Mid-term
ICC (A117.1
and IBC®,
IgCCTM
or
IZC®) No Yellow
48.
Cable
Management 4.2.3.8 / 124
Cable management. There is a lack of standards or
code provisions that address functional
management of EV cables in public parking spaces.
Guidelines or standards relating to EVSE cable
management should be developed. Mid-term UL, NFPA No Green
49.
EVSE Maintenance 4.2.3.9 / 125 No Gap N/A N/A N/A No N/A
50.
Workplace Safety 4.2.3.10 / 125 No Gap N/A N/A N/A No N/A

Roadmap Issue
Section /
Potential
Developer
Grid
Related
Status of
Progress
51.
Electric Vehicle
Emergency Shut
Off – High Voltage
Batteries, Power
Cables, Disconnect
Devices; Fire
Suppression, Fire
Fighting Tactics
and Personal
Protective
Equipment 4.3.1.1 / 126
Electric vehicle emergency shut off – high voltage
batteries, power cables, disconnect devices; fire
suppression, fire fighting tactics and personal
protective equipment. Standards / guidelines are
needed so that emergency responders can safely
manage emergency events involving electric
vehicles.
Develop standards / guidelines so that emergency
responders can quickly and easily recognize high
voltage batteries and power cables, operate
disconnect devices, avoid electrical shock hazards,
and safely shut off power to an electric vehicle
following an incident. Consider the need for further
standardization work with respect to fire
suppression, fire fighting tactics, and personal
protective equipment, based on the results of
research underway by NFPA’s Fire Protection
Research Foundation in partnership with others.
Update: With the publication of SAE J2990, the
partial gap identified in version 1.0 of this roadmap
with respect to vehicle emergency shut off largely
has been addressed. In this version 2.0, the gap
statement and recommendation have been modified
to more broadly capture the scope of safety
concerns facing emergency responders including the
possibility that additional standardization work may
be needed with respect to fire suppression, fire
fighting tactics and personal protective equipment. Near-term
NFPA, SAE,
ISO, IEC No Green
52.
Labeling of EVSE
and Load
Management
Disconnects for
Emergency
Situations 4.3.1.2 / 127
Labeling of EVSE and load management
disconnects for emergency situations. Standards
are needed to address labeling of EVSE and load
management disconnects for emergencies.
Develop standards to address graphical symbols and
warning labels on EVSE as well as disconnect
instructions for emergency situations. Amend NEC®
Article 625 to include requirements for graphical
symbols and color-coding of load management
equipment and disconnects for emergency
situations.
statement and recommendation have been clarified
to address labeling for emergency situations. UL and
NEMA have been added as potential developers. Near-term
UL, NEMA,
NFPA, SAE,
ISO, IEC No Unknown
53.
OEM Emergency
Response Guides 4.3.1.3 / 128 No Gap N/A N/A N/A No N/A
54.
Electrical Energy
Stranded in an
inoperable RESS 4.3.1.4 / 128
Electrical energy stranded in an inoperable RESS.
Standards to enable common method assessment
of RESS condition and stability, and removal of the
energy stranded in an inoperable RESS, are needed
Carry out research to independently identify a
solution set to the issue of electrical energy stranded
in a damaged or inoperable RESS. Complete work on
SAE J3009 to address a similar scope. Near-term
SAE,
NHTSA/
Argonne NL No
NEW gap /
Green

Roadmap Issue
Section /
Potential
Developer
Grid
Related
Status of
Progress
to increase the safety margin to persons who may
become exposed to the device in an inoperable
state for various reasons and conditions during the
RESS life cycle.
55.
Battery
Assessment and
Safe Discharge
Following an
Emergency Event 4.3.1.4 / 128
Battery assessment and safe discharge following
an emergency event. There do not appear to be
standards addressing the assessment of battery
stability and the need for safe discharge of EV
batteries following an emergency event.
Standards and/or guidelines to assess battery
stability and the need for safe discharge following an
emergency event are needed to identify safe
practices for performing such assessment and
discharge and what training, equipment and
personal protective equipment may be required. The
research on stranded electrical energy underway at
NHTSA/Argonne NL is a first step before developing
such guidelines.
Update: The roadmap version 1.0 gap statement and
recommendation have been modified to include an
assessment of battery stability. Emergency
responders are no longer identified as the specific
user of battery discharge procedures since second
responders (tow operators, roadside assistance) and
OEM representatives also may need such training.
The development of such procedures is now
described as contingent upon research underway by
NHTSA / Argonne National Laboratory on stranded
energy. Argonne and NFPA have been added as
potential developers. Text regarding safe battery
recharge in emergencies has been removed and a
new roadmap section on Disaster Planning /
Emergency Evacuations Involving Electric Vehicles
has been added to separately address that concern. Near-term
SAE,
NHTSA/
Argonne
NL, NFPA No Not started
56. Disaster Planning /
Emergency
Evacuations
Involving Electric
Vehicles 4.3.1.5 / 129 No Gap N/A N/A N/A No N/A
57.
Workforce
Training –
Charging Station
Permitting 4.3.1.6 / 133
Workforce training – charging station permitting.
From a training perspective, there may be a need to
assemble and promote a “Code Official Toolkit”
related to EVSE permitting.
Develop a Code Official Toolkit on EVSE permitting
that includes, among other things, the DOE permit
template, EVSE 101 video, and an FAQ document for
code officials that explains, for example, the
importance of safe and code-compliant EV charging
station installation requirements, and relevant safety Near-term
DOE, ICC,
NECA, IAEI,
NFPA No
NEW gap /
Green

Roadmap Issue
Section /
Potential
Developer
Grid
Related
Status of
Progress
training programs. Consider creating a brief article
that would highlight this issue and the Toolkit as
resources to run in appropriate association
newsletters to increase awareness of resources
available to installers, inspectors and other
authorities having jurisdiction.
58.
Workforce
Training – College
and University
Programs 4.3.1.6 / 133
Workforce training – college and university
programs. Identified higher education programs
related to electric vehicles do not appear to cover
some issues that relate to charging infrastructure
development such as land use, community planning,
and architecture.
Develop higher education programs focused on
electric vehicle charging infrastructure development
from the standpoint of land use, community planning
and architecture. Mid-term
Colleges
and
universities No
NEW gap /
Green

6. On the Horizon
While this roadmap represents a specific snapshot in time, it maintains a distinctively outward looking,
over the horizon posture that will continue to facilitate discussions with domestic, regional and
international partners regarding coordination and harmonization of standardization activities and
adaptation to technological and policy changes.
The DOE EV Everywhere Grand Challenge Blueprint12
outlines technology challenges that must be
overcome if the EV market is to become ubiquitous. Battery technology is focused on improving
performance and reducing costs. In the short-term, the goal is to double lithium-ion battery pack energy
density, whereas the longer-term goal is to explore other battery chemistries that may offer significantly
greater energy densities than li-ion. Reducing the costs of electric drive systems is also a goal, through
the development of advanced power electronics, electric motors and traction drive system technologies.
The goals of reducing the weight of electric vehicles using lightweight metals and composites, and
introducing more energy efficient climate control technologies, will help to extend vehicle range. Aside
from enhancements to the vehicles, there are supporting efforts aimed at expanding the charging
infrastructure such as the EV Everywhere Workplace Charging Challenge.
Developing technologies may also introduce new opportunities into the rapidly evolving landscape for
EVs and charging infrastructure. For example, wireless charging potentially may offer a level of
convenience that does not exist today. And as PEVs become more fully integrated into the smart grid,
there is likely to be increased interest in exploiting their use as distributed energy resources.
Depending upon the needs of stakeholders, and available resources, periodic updates on significant
electric vehicle standardization activities and progress to address the gaps identified in this roadmap will
be made. Issues that are new or that require further discussion also may be explored. The aim behind
any such efforts will be to continue to help guide, coordinate, and enhance the standards landscape as
needed to support the widespread introduction of PEVs and charging infrastructure.
12
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/electric_vehicles/pdfs/eveverywhere_blueprint.pdf

Appendix A. EV Charging Actors and Communications
A.1 Introduction
This appendix provides an overview of the current and envisioned EV charging infrastructure, and at a
high level describes the components of this infrastructure that may require or benefit from
communications between those components. It lists the main actors involved in the communications
and provides a sampling of various types of communications between them. The term actor refers to
any system that communicates with another system for the purpose of enabling or enhancing some
aspect of EV charging.
This appendix does not provide details about the overall electric grid, nor about the smart grid
communications within the electric grid's generation, transmission and distribution systems. Rather, it
focuses on those aspects of the electrical infrastructure and communications that are specific to
charging EVs.
A.2 Role of Communications in EV Charging Infrastructure
The basic communications requirement for EV charging is to facilitate the transfer of power from the
EVSE to the EV. The conductive charging interface standard in North America for all AC Level 1 and 2
EVSE, and DC combo charger products, is SAE J1772TM
. This standard provides the specifications for the
AC-only and AC/DC combo connectors and vehicle inlets, and also provides the basic sequence of
control pilot signals and charge control communications between the EV and the EVSE or DC charger, to
ensure a safe interconnection and power transfer process.
Beyond the SAE J1772TM
required charging communications, there are information and control
communications technology functions that add new dimensions to the EV charging process. The added
dimensions that communications offers to EV charging are the capability for utilities to monitor and
interactively manage EV charging loads – to maintain the reliability and improve the efficiency of their
respective distribution grids. Communications will also provide consumer interaction for automated
access to utility special EV time of use (TOU) rate tariffs, incentivized demand response programs,
charging status, and EV charging electricity consumption information. EV customers will be able to set
specific schedule parameters and preferences for EV charging, enabling the ability to cost-effectively
manage their charging behavior and minimize impact to the grid. This requires bi-directional
communications functionality between the utility and the EV customers.
Consider the scenario of charging an EV in a single family home (e.g., in the garage). The utility
communicates its EV TOU rate tariff and schedule information to the EV or to an EVSE. The customer
accesses the information either directly using interactive displays in the EV and/or EVSE or through a
smartphone, website, etc. The EV and/or EVSE can then be programmed by the customer to only allow
charging during the times electricity rates are cheapest, typically at night and in the early morning
during the utility off-peak period.

Another scenario involves a cluster of EVs in a residential area that if charged simultaneously may stress
the capacity of the utility transformer. The utility, via communications connectivity to the EV, EVSE, or
an entity that manages the EVSEs, may be able to query the EV load on a particular transformer, and if
necessary, send out a demand response signal to the EVs and/or EVSEs to either stop charging or to
curtail the charge power level for a specified period of time. The customer would have the ability to opt-
out of the demand response event based on their specific circumstances.
An example of communications enhancing the electricity infrastructure is the Green Button initiative.
This provides a way for consumers to download their electricity usage from their utilities or designated
third parties. Coupled with smart metering infrastructure, consumers can view almost real-time data
about their usage patterns.
Communications is a powerful enhancement to the basic charging scenario. In some cases it is actively
required; in others it provides value beyond the actual charging itself and enables new applications to
be created and delivered.
Communications is not limited to the communication between the utility, the EV and the EVSE. As the
next section describes, the path from the producer (i.e., the utility) to the consumer of energy (i.e., the
EV) may involve other intermediary systems that communicate with each other.
A.3 EV Charging Aspect of the Smart Grid
In order to understand the communications requirements of EV charging infrastructure, one must
examine the different actors, applications and business models involved in EV charging.
EV charging is, at a very high level, similar to other markets where goods are created by a producer,
delivered to a consumer via an intermediary, and offered for consumption via multiple outlets.
Consider applications such as TV or video content, which involve creation, transmission and distribution
of content (e.g., TV programs) to end users over different communications media such as wireline (e.g.,
cable, DSL, fiber) or wireless (e.g., satellite, 3G/4G services, over-the-air HDTV). In each of the above
media, different communication protocols may be used to accomplish tasks specific to the medium and
to the business model that best supports that medium. Also, depending on whether the content is
delivered to a private or a public destination, a user may need to be authenticated to access
subscription content. For example, a consumer receiving over-the-air HDTV programming typically does
not require authentication in order to view the content, whereas a consumer enjoying the same
program on a device via the Internet must be authenticated by a service provider (e.g., Comcast, AT&T)
and/or by the content provider (e.g., Netflix, HBO, Major League Baseball). A consumer may also have
multiple ways to obtain information about available programming content. As an example, a user may
view an electronic programming guide (EPG) on a set-top box connected to a television; may look up
programming information on a service provider's website; may access EPG-style information on a
website or via a mobile device application (e.g., TVGuide.com or a TVGuide app); or may obtain
programming information via a specific channel’s website (e.g., networks, local origination stations).

This appendix is primarily concerned with the consumer end of the network. From the consumer's
perspective, details of the overall service delivery network are of little concern. Rather, the consumption
end of the network, often called the "last mile," is of vital importance. For example, the TV consumer is
interested in the quality of the viewing experience, including high-quality video (which implies no
pixelation or macroblocking), perfect or near-perfect (sub-100 ms) audio-video synchronization, and
sufficiently low-latency remote control response. Other concerns include options for content delivery to
multiple TVs in the home, cost of receiving the service, and capability to view service provider content
on mobile devices, among many others. Similarly, with regard to EV charging, this appendix is mainly
concerned with communication aspects of how the EV is charged and the user billed, rather than
communication within utility (i.e., Energy Service Provider) networks.
Note that the business relationships are also different, based on the usage scenario. In order to view the
same content in different scenarios, the consumer may need to establish transient or longer-term
associations with the content provider, the distributor, the service provider, and others. Competition
between various providers is almost always in the consumer's best interest. The different players or
actors in the market may compete or cooperate to provide unique and/or cost-effective services.
Depending on variables such as the location of the charger, the business entity that owns and operates
the charger, and the type of charging offered, different business models may be used in order to obtain
a return on investment in the charging infrastructure. Also, the EV driver may be billed for multiple
aspects of EV charging, such as monthly access fees, per-kWh tariffs, fees related to the time the EV
occupied the EVSE/parking spot, fees related to additional services such as the ability to reserve
stations, etc. Some examples of different business models are:
- For charging in a single family home, the business model may be the same as the existing model
for the home's electricity consumption. Here the business relationship may be directly between
the utility and the home owner.
- In a multi-dwelling unit (MDU) such as an apartment complex, the MDU owner may install
several shared charging stations for use by their tenants. In this case, there may be an additional
business relationship between the tenants and the MDU owner. For example, tenants may pay a
monthly access fee and also pay per kWh fees. Also, access to the charging stations may be
restricted to only those tenants that establish this business relationship. The management of the
charging stations may be outsourced to an EV Services Provider.
- A retailer may offer free or subsidized charging at their premise, in order to attract a certain
demographic of customers and to encourage them to stay longer at the store. At such locations,
the retailer may offer additional incentives based on loyalty cards. An EV Services Provider may
manage the charging stations at such locations.
- The hospitality (hotel) industry may offer free or subsidized charging for similar reasons.
- For public charging on city streets, the city may install and operate charging stations, optionally
managed by an EV Services Provider. Since such charging stations may be used by a large
number of drivers, the EV Services Provider may offer drivers the ability to search for EVSEs and
reserve them. The EV Services Provider may derive revenue from the city as well as from the
driver for these services.

- An EV manufacturer (OEM) or an affiliated telematics provider may offer services substantially
similar to an EV Services Provider - in fact, they can be considered a type of EV Services Provider.
The EV manufacturer may provide subsidized charging to its customers at EVSEs it operates.
- At commercial & industrial locations, EVSEs may be operated by a corporation for restricted use
by its employees and visitors. Alternatively, use of the EVSEs may be restricted during certain
times of the day only, or could be subsidized for employees but not for non-employee drivers.
The infrastructure communications required to support these different use cases and business models
are varied and use different communication protocols to accomplish their purposes. For example, an EV
may communicate with the utility via its telematics network, to download tariffs and make decisions
about when to charge, based on cost. An EV may alternatively communicate with an EVSE to get the
same information. Different EV Services Providers may compete for the EV driver's business.
Even though some business models today offer free EV charging, that is not likely to be the case in the
future and eventually the consumer will need to pay for the electricity their EV is consuming. This means
that the consumer must be recognized (i.e., authenticated), authorized (i.e., allowed access to the
type/amount of charging for which they've paid) and their charging sessions must be accounted (i.e.,
metered), so that they can be billed appropriately.
Furthermore, the unique properties of EV charging bring with them additional requirements for
communication.
Since an EV can take several hours to charge, the driver will typically be away while the EV is charging.
Therefore, it is important that the driver be notified if there is a charging fault, or when charging is
completed. In addition, being able to find charging stations and check whether they are available, check
their pricing, and possibly reserve their use, is considered to be a useful value-add.
From the perspective of the utility, since EVs can consume a significant amount of energy, there needs
to be a way to control or manage their load on the grid at times of peak demand. Communications allow
the utility and EVs to be able to perform such functions in real time and in a flexible way. Intermediary
actors may assist these communications. For example, a demand response aggregator or an Energy
Management System may aggregate the load of a large number of EVs, and communicate with the
utility on behalf of the group of EVs. An End Use Measurement Device (EUMD) may be provided to offer
special tariffs and help customers shift loads for demand management.
EVs can also act as a distributed energy resource. They can then act as a source of energy and feed
energy back into the home or into the grid when required. In order to do so, it may be necessary or
desirable for communications to happen.
A.4 Functional View of EV Charging Infrastructure Communications
This section lists some of the functions that may be enabled or enhanced by EV charging infrastructure
communications.

AAA (Authentication, Authorization and Accounting)
AAA (Authentication, Authorization and Accounting) functions are commonly deployed in multiple
markets (such as cellular voice/data) and require communication between the consumer device
(EV/EVSE) and the provider's AAA back end systems. Depending on the business model, an EV driver
may need to be identified and authenticated, in order to access charging services that the driver has
authorization to use. While charging is in progress, charging records must be sent to appropriate actors,
so that the energy consumed by the EV is correctly recorded and used for billing and potential future
taxation purposes.
Access Control
EVSE owners may wish to restrict charging services. A company may want to provide EV charging only to
its employees, or it may wish to restrict charging services to its employees during working hours and
allow anybody to charge outside of working hours. This requires access control mechanisms to be
downloaded to the EVSEs, or a network where the EVSEs can query whether a driver can access the
EVSEs.
Charging
The process of charging itself may require communications between the EVSE, the EV and other actors,
to coordinate the direction, time, and amount of electricity. Basic communication between the EVSE and
the EV, as defined in SAE J1772™ or IEC 61851-1, may be used to coordinate the amount of electricity
and provide other charging related functionality. However, a higher-level communication is required to
facilitate advanced functionalities, such as DC charging or bi-directional energy flow.
Depending on the scenario, infrastructure capabilities, and agreements in place, communications used
for charging control may also address prices, customer preferences, local demand, or other criteria, and
may be managed by the EV, EVSE, a local Energy Management System, third party, service provider,
over the internet, or using mobile devices, among others. Additionally, driver notification messages may
be necessary when faults occur, when the EV battery is full, or when other conditions occur.
Demand Response, Demand Shifting, Energy Storage and Distributed Energy Resource
From the standpoint of grid stability and customer costs, demand response, demand shifting, energy
storage, and EV as distributed energy resource are applications that are considered to be important
functions of the smart grid. Demand response can be considered a function of the service provider
whereby, with permission of the EV operator, charging is temporarily stopped or limited due to local or
distribution grid constraints. Demand shifting is more likely to be done by the EV operator based on
pricing messages, EV tariffs (combined with EV measurement), facility demand, or a combination of
these factors. Energy storage in relation to an EV consists of the use of on-board or off-board batteries
that may be used to provide energy to or from the EV when electricity costs are high (e.g., during peak
time periods) or, combined with reverse energy flow, during emergencies as a back-up power source. As

a device that may be able to supply power or other ancillary services back to the grid, an EV can also be
considered a distributed energy resource (DER).
EVs that participate in these functions may require communications between a service provider or
intermediate entity such as an aggregator or an EV operator and the EVs/EVSEs.
Measurement (metering), Pricing (tariffs) and Billing
The discrete measurement of EV energy consumption can be considered a necessary function of EV
charging for many reasons. In home charging scenarios, EV metering and tariffs provide utilities the
ability to incentivize customers to shift charging to off peak times with less grid demand. To do this,
utilities may provide special tariffs for the energy consumed by their EVs, that can be deducted from the
bill if the meter is downstream of the premises meter (e.g., sub-metering) or billed separately if the EV
usage is not recorded by the premises meter (e.g., separate metering). These meters (often called End
Use Measurement Devices or EUMDs), which may be located near the premises meter, on an outlet, or
in the EVSE or EV, must be able to communicate consumption and timing data back to the utility or third
party (in certain circumstances) to apply the charges. In addition to the benefits of grid protection and
reduced customer costs, these special tariffs and rates may also help drive the adoption of EVs.
In commercial charging scenarios, similar to home charging scenarios, utilities may provide special rates
for the time and amount of charging. Facilities may also use the discrete measurement of EV charging to
monitor and manage their own loads in order to minimize demand charges.
Many public charging scenarios involving EUMDs are possible. The charging provider may charge
customers by how much energy their EVs have consumed (similar to gasoline stations). In this scenario a
consumer must be able to see the amount that will be billed before starting an EV charging session.
Alternatively, the charging provider also may offer different service plans, such that different consumers
pay varying amounts for charging at the same station, based on their service plan (e.g., monthly
contract). Another alternative is for a customer to be charged based on the time charging rather than
the amount of energy consumed. Some of these scenarios may not require the use of EUMDs.
Depending on the circumstance, the program (e.g., utility sub-metering, ISO ancillary service, etc.), and
regulatory rules, the EUMD may need to meet certain standards for measurement. The EV, EVSE, third
party, Energy Management System, or service provider may use EV tariffs, in combination with customer
preferences, pricing schemes, local demand, and other criteria to provide communications and
functionality to automatically manage charging.
Public Charging Station Locations Databases
An EV driver may be able to search for EVSEs (e.g., via the EV's navigation system, a smartphone, a
computer, etc.) that are near the driver’s current or planned locations. The driver should also be able to
know in advance whether the EVSEs are compatible with the driver’s EV, whether the EVSEs are
available for charging, at what cost, and whether they can be reserved. This function will need a
searchable Point Of Interest (POI) database of EVSE locations that contains for each listed EVSE a set of

fixed attributes like location and type (e.g., L1/L2/DC/wireless charging), and a set of dynamically
variable attributes (e.g., availability, pricing, fault status).
Reservations
Due to the time it takes to charge EVs and the currently limited number of publicly available EVSEs, it
may be beneficial in some scenarios for an EV driver to be able to reserve an EVSE in advance.
A.5 Communications Architecture for EV Charging
Note: This is the same as roadmap section 3.2.2.1.
The actors and communication methods involved in EV charging may vary, depending on criteria such as
the location of charging; the EV-related infrastructure (communications-capable or not); the type of
charging (AC/DC/wireless); the charging provider (utility, corporation, municipality, EV Services Provider,
etc.); and the requirements for authentication, authorization, accounting, and billing of the charging
session.
An actor is an entity that serves as one end point of communications. For example, when an EV
communicates with an EVSE, the two actors are the EV and the EVSE. The primary actors involved in EV-
related communication are expected to be the: (1) EV, (2) EV driver / operator, (3) EVSE, (4) Energy
Service Provider (ESP), (5) Energy Management System (EMS), (6) End Use Measurement Device
(EUMD), and (7) EV Services Provider (EVSP).
Figure 5 shows a sample communications-oriented architecture containing the primary actors, including
three different locations where charging may occur.
EV charging infrastructure is a subset of the electric grid or smart grid. For simplicity, the generation,
transport and distribution parts of the grid can be bundled up and referred to as the utility or Energy
Service Provider.
Broadly speaking, EV charging infrastructure downstream from the utility may be subdivided into home
(residential) charging, public charging and commercial charging.
In all these scenarios, the utility, the EV, and in most cases the EVSE are the constants.
Home Charging
For home charging, the utility may communicate directly with the smart meter(s) installed at the home.
These meters send consumption data to the utility, and the costs can be calculated according to the
tariff schedules. This scenario only requires communication between the smart meter (operated by the
utility) and the utility. This could happen over the Advanced Measuring Infrastructure (AMI) network
deployed by the utility.
In a more advanced scenario, the EV may use the Original Equipment Manufacturer’s (OEM) telematics
network to download demand response information and tariff rates, and schedule charging accordingly.

In cases where a jurisdiction (such as a public utilities commission) has mandated that sub-metering be
opened up to third party agents, a sub-meter that resides in the EVSE, EV, or outside of them needs to
communicate its metering data to the third party, and the third party needs to then forward that data
(as-is or in an aggregated format) to the utility.
Home charging communication may happen over a Home Area Network, or it may use the customer's
internet connection, or it may use its own cellular data connection.
Commercial Charging
In scenarios where EVSEs are restricted to authorized access only EVs or EV drivers, then communication
is required for authentication purposes, e.g., using an RFID card, credit card, QR code, smartphone
application, etc.
The commercial charging scenario includes entities such as corporations, supermarkets, universities,
hospitals, etc. A commercial entity may offer different levels of service to different customers. For
instance, a supermarket may provide benefits to customers who charge at their EVSEs. Hospitals and
corporations may restrict EV charging to their employees only, in certain spaces. In other cases, charging
may be allowed for everyone.
The commercial charging scenario could also include multi-dwelling units (MDUs) such as apartment
complexes. If a small number of EVSEs are shared amongst all the EV driving residents of an MDU, then
the MDU operator may want to restrict access to those residents who sign up for a charging plan.
Public Charging
As EVs proliferate, there may be a large number of EV owners who do not have the luxury of charging at
home because they have to park their EVs on the street or they have to travel long distances.
Public charging may require the AAA (Authentication, Authorization and Accounting) function to be able
to bill the appropriate consumer, i.e., the consumer must be unambiguously identified such that the
proper service can be provided, and the service (electricity delivered to the EV) must be metered
accurately and securely, so that the consumer can be billed for their EV charging.
Also, since EVSEs are not ubiquitous, there needs to be a means for a driver to locate them, view
information (such as pricing and availability), and possibly reserve their use.
Communications High Level Architecture
Typically, there is an entity that manages the energy flow within each location and acts as an interface
between the Energy Service Provider and the various charging locations.

Figure 5: Sample Communications-Oriented Architecture for
Commercial, Home, and Public Charging
In a home, an Energy Management System (EMS) could act as an analog of a building EMS and control
all the energy loads in the home, including EVs. While the external communication with the Energy
Service Provider uses an Energy Services Interface (ESI), communication between the EMS and the
internal charging infrastructure takes place via a Home Area Network (HAN). Optionally, an EV Services

Provider may manage the EV portion of the load, leaving the EMS to handle the remaining loads such as
air-conditioning.
In the case of a commercial/industrial building, an EMS may be the entity managing the energy flow. It
communicates with the ESP via a standard ESI, and with the building's charging infrastructure via some
internal communications mechanism (e.g., BACnet).
For public charging stations, an EV Services Provider manages a network of EVSEs and provides charging
availability to EV drivers. The EVSP communicates with the ESP using a standard protocol such as
OpenADR 2.0 or ESPI, and may act as an aggregator, providing a single communication point with the
ESP for all the EVSEs in its purview. Creating and/or harmonizing standards specific to public charging
communication is desirable in order to provide services such as finding and reserving charging stations.
A.6 Actors
EV
Electric Vehicle
EV Driver
A driver or operator of an EV. The term EV driver is used to include anybody who requests authorization
to charge the EV (e.g., a fleet operator).
Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE)
The conductors, the electric vehicle connectors, attachment plugs, and all other fittings, devices, power
outlets, or apparatuses installed specifically for the purpose of delivering energy from the premises
wiring to the electric vehicle.
Energy Service Provider (ESP)
An entity that generates, transmits, and distributes electrical power (e.g., a utility). In this document,
this term is also used to describe an Energy Retailer. An Energy Retailer is a seller of electricity and
related services such as customer service and billing, but is not involved in generation, transmission and
distribution.
Energy Management System (EMS)
A logical entity that manages energy consumption in a home/building/premises. This may be controlled
by a consumer (e.g., homeowner, premises owner) or an Energy Service Provider (e.g., a utility).

End Use Measurement Device (EUMD)
A revenue-grade meter responsible for directly measuring energy delivered to an EV. The physical form,
location and ownership of the EUMD may be unique for different applications.
EV Services Provider (EVSP a/k/a EVSE Host Management Services)
An entity that provides services related to EV charging, such as locating charging stations, reserving
charging stations, subscription/fee-based charging, status/alerts via smartphones, etc. This entity may
be an Energy Service Provider (such as a utility), a municipality, or an independent company providing
these services.
A.7 Sample Types of Communications Between Actors
EV – EV Driver
Communication between an EV and its driver or operator. Although the user interface and possibly
much of the communication involved may be proprietary, it may be useful to standardize a basic level of
communication that covers alerts and status.
EV – EVSE
Communication between an EV and the EVSE to which it is physically connected. This communication is
used for authentication, authorization of charging, metering and sign-off by the EV of metering data;
communicating EV data such as state of charge (SOC) to the EVSE/EMS/grid; selection of charging plan
and time based on available tariff information obtained from the EVSE, etc. Depending on whether the
EV, the EVSE or both are intelligent, the communication to the grid may be performed by either (or
both) of them.
EV – Energy Service Provider
The EV and the Energy Service Provider may communicate directly with each other (in certain scenarios
such as when an EVSE acts as a PLC-ZigBee bridge or via OEM owned telematics link) and exchange
messages related to pricing/tariffs, demand response, metering, etc.
EV – EMS
An EMS may control multiple devices that act as loads or sources in the home/building/premises.
Communication between the EV and the EMS provides the EMS with information about the EV charging
requirements, real-time status, errors, etc. The EMS may control charging parameters such as start/stop
time and amount of energy dispensed. It may also act as an interface for the Energy Service Provider, by
acting on demand response messages, adapting charging schedules based on the grid status, and
managing reverse energy flow to the grid (V2G).

EV – EV Services Provider
An EV may communicate with an EV Services Provider and exchange messages related to state of charge
(SOC), selection of charging parameters based on tariffs, demand response, etc.
EV Driver – EVSE
The interaction between an EV driver and an EVSE will probably take place via a user interface or via an
EMS or EV Services Provider
EVSE – Energy Service Provider
The EVSE and the Energy Service Provider may communicate directly with each other and exchange
messages related to pricing/tariffs, demand response, metering, etc.
EVSE – EV Services Provider
EVSEs are managed by an EV Services Provider. The communication involved relates to status,
diagnostics, reservations, pricing, access control, metering data, demand response, etc.
EMS – Energy Service Provider
Communication between the EMS and an Energy Service Provider may include handling of demand
response, DER (distributed energy resources, e.g., for energy flow from the EV to the grid), pricing/tariff
related information, etc.
EUMD – EV Services Provider/Energy Service Provider
The billing entity, whether it is the EVSP or the ESP, may communicate with the EUMD in order to collect
EV energy consumption data and apply billing parameters or tariffs. In certain scenarios, the EUMD data
might also be used to validate program compliance (e.g., demand response or ancillary services).
EV Services Provider – Energy Service Provider
Communication between an EV Services Provider and an Energy Service Provider may include demand
response and pricing related messaging, as well as charging records.
EV Services Provider – EMS
An EMS or home/building/premises automation system may query charging records from the EV
Services Provider that manages the charging stations at the home/building/premises. Also, charging
constraints such as time of charge, energy to be dispensed, and access control may need to be
communicated to EVSEs via the EV Services Provider.

EV Services Provider – EV Services Provider
Two EV Services Providers may communicate directly or via a third party when the customer of one
provider charges at a station managed by the other. This communication would include authentication,
authorization, accounting, and settlement.

Appendix B. Glossary of Acronyms and Abbreviations
See also Appendix A. EV Charging Actors and Communications and the ANSI EVSP Roadmap Standards
Compendium.
AC – Alternating Current
AEV – Battery-Powered All Electric Vehicle
ANCE (Mexico) – La Asociación Nacional de Normalización y Certificación del Sector Eléctrico, A.C.
CANENA – Council for Harmonization of Electrotechnical Standards of the Nations of the Americas
CEN – European Committee for Standardization
CENELEC – European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardization
DC – Direct Current
DER – Distributed Energy Resource
DOE – U.S. Department of Energy
EMC – Electromagnetic Compatibility
EPRI – Electric Power Research Institute
EREV – Extended Range Electric Vehicle
ESO – European Standards Organization
EV – Electric Vehicle
EVSE – Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment
FMVSS – Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards
GTR – Global Technical Regulation
HAN – Home Area Network
HEV – Hybrid Electric Vehicle
IAEI – International Association of Electrical Inspectors
IBC® – International Building Code®
ICC – International Code Council

IEC – International Electrotechnical Commission
IEEE – Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
IFC® – International Fire Code®
IgCCTM
– International Green Construction CodeTM
IMC® – International Mechanical Code®
IRC® – International Residential Code® for One- and Two-Family Dwellings
ISO – International Organization for Standardization
IZC® – International Zoning Code®
NAN – Neighborhood Area Network
NEC® – NFPA 70®, the National Electrical Code®
NECA – National Electrical Contractors Association
NEMA – National Electrical Manufacturers Association
NFPA – National Fire Protection Association
NHTSA – National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
OEM – Original Equipment Manufacturer
PEV – Plug-in Electric Vehicle
PHEV – Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle
PLC – Power Line Communication
RESS – Rechargeable Energy Storage System
RFID – Radio-Frequency Identification
RPF – Reverse Power Flow
SAE – SAE International
SGIP – Smart Grid Interoperability Panel
SDO – Standards Development Organization
UL – Underwriters Laboratories, Inc.

UNECE – United Nations Economic Commission for Europe
V2G – Vehicle to Grid
V2H – Vehicle to Home
V2L – Vehicle to Load
V2V – Vehicle to Vehicle
WP.29 – World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations

1899 L Street NW, 11th Floor
Washington, DC 20036
T: 202.293.8020
E: info@ansi.org
VSP
www.ansi.org/evsp
STANDARDIZATION ROADMAP
FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLES
VERSION 2.0
www.ansi.org

ANSI_EVSP_Roadmap_May_2013.pdf

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Similar to ANSI_EVSP_Roadmap_May_2013.pdf (20)

More from Zulhamidi Zulhamidi (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

ANSI_EVSP_Roadmap_May_2013.pdf