AASHTO Journal - AASHTO, NASEO Comment on NEVI Program Revisions

The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials and the National Association of State Energy Officials or NASEO recently provided input to the Federal Highway Administration in response to its revised guidance for the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure or NEVI formula program published in the Federal Register on August 13.

[Above photo by AASHTO]

AASHTO and NASEO both said they support FHWA’s efforts to revise NEVI formula program guidance and streamline the process for deploying charging infrastructure for electric vehicles or EVs. Both also believe the FHWA’s revised guidance will provide the flexibility needed by state departments of transportation and state energy offices to effectively and efficiently deliver their EV charging infrastructure projects on time and on budget.

Yet both AASHTO and NASEO highlighted areas where FHWA can further improve the EV charging infrastructure deployment process at the state level.

For example, 52 distinct NEVI Deployment Plans are under development by all 50 states along with the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico – each subject to review by the specific FHWA Division Office overseeing their state.

“These offices may interpret and apply guidance and existing regulations differently, resulting in inconsistent implementation across jurisdictions,” AASHTO and NASEO stressed. “These inconsistencies in the application of rules and guidance contribute to confusion and miscommunication. Therefore … FHWA [should] prioritize clear, consistent, and transparent communication in the processes of plan approval, obligation, project agreements, and the certification of fully built out [EV charging network] status.”

AASHTO and NASEO also noted that, while non-NEVI charging stations are not directly eligible for certifying a state’s fully “built-out” status, they may be indirectly considered when

assessing the need for NEVI funded EV chargers. “AASHTO and NASEO request FHWA confirm, refine, or correct this interpretation to avoid confusion or complications in state DOT fully built out certification requests,” they emphasized.

Both organizations also called on FHWA to make the Alternative Fuel Corridor or AFC program far more flexible for states as well. “Although the IIJA expanded the AFC program, states have been designating AFCs since 2016. And while several additional rounds of AFC designations have occurred, no formal process has been proposed for [their] de-designation,” AASHTO and NASEO said.

“Many state AFCs were designated prior to NEVI’s inception, and in some cases, changing conditions mean these corridors may no longer represent the most suitable locations,” they added. “As a result, states may need a mechanism to de-designate certain AFCs; an ability fundamental to effective EV infrastructure planning.”

Finally, both AASHTO and NASEO called for revisions to the NEVI formula programs “23 CFR 680 Requirements,” which mandate that states provide details on their outreach efforts to disadvantaged communities as part of their EV charging “build-out” efforts.

“The current 23 CFR 680 [rule] remains highly prescriptive, placing a significant technical burden on state DOTs working to deploy EV charging infrastructure,” they said. “To address this, AASHTO and NASEO recommend that FHWA establish a clear procedure or pathway for granting compliance discretion, thereby reducing uncertainty and enabling greater flexibility in the planning process.”