Interoperability of Public Electric

Vehicle Charging Infrastructure

INTRODUCTION
This paper is a cooperative effort of the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), the Edison Electric Institute (EEI),
the Alliance for Transportation Electrification (ATE), the American Public Power Association (APPA), and the National
Rural Electric Cooperative Association (NRECA) to identify challenges, create awareness, and provide perspective
to achieve greater interoperability and open standards in the burgeoning U.S. electric vehicle (EV) charging market.
By definition, interoperability is the MOTIVATION
ability for multiple systems to work
The electric vehicle market is rapidly accelerating, as is investment
together without restriction. With in the charging infrastructure needed to support this growing
regards to electric vehicle charging market. While the vast majority of EV charging now takes place
infrastructure, interoperability refers at home and at work, widespread, open-access public charging
to the compatibility of key system infrastructure will be essential to support EV drivers beyond
components—vehicles, charging early adopters. Visible public infrastructure is a must for more
stations, charging networks, and the customers to consider EVs as viable for meeting all of their driving
grid—and the software systems that needs—from daily commutes to major expeditions—while also
supporting drivers who might not have access to workplace or
support them, allowing all components
home charging (such as apartment dwellers and other drivers
to work seamlessly and effectively. without dedicated residential parking). As a general expectation,
Research and stakeholder engagement over the last decade have public EV charging infrastructure should be convenient and
shown that interoperable, transparent, open standards-based reliable for drivers to use. A recent EEI/Institute for Electric
public EV charging infrastructure can improve the overall customer Innovation report1 projects that, by 2030, nearly one million
experience, promote efficient capital investment, enable more public charging ports will be needed in the U.S. to support nearly
optimal EV-grid integration, and support adoption of EVs. 19 million EVs. Today, fewer than 100,000 such ports are available
to U.S. drivers,2 and many of these impose limits on their access
This paper distills, at a high level, four key challenge areas
and use. As infrastructure scales to meet these needs, improved
related to interoperability:
interoperability and standardization will be essential to help
enable a multi-stakeholder approach to planning, investment,
and operation of public charging.

CHARGING NETWORK-TO- CHARGING STATION-

CHARGING NETWORK TO-NETWORK PUBLIC

WORKPLACE
PHYSICAL CHARGING VEHICLE-GRID
INTERFACE

And considers their implications for:

RESIDENTIAL

To date, public charging infrastructure in the U.S. has developed

CUSTOMERS through a patchwork of grant funding, settlement funds,
private investment, and electric company pilots and programs.
The largest portion of public charging is managed by charging
network providers, called electric vehicle service providers
(EVSPs)–companies that operate charging stations under a variety
SITE HOSTS
of business models. Many rely on proprietary software and
subscriber service models, resulting in different pricing structures
and service offerings for their subscribers versus non-subscribers.

ELECTRIC COMPANIES

1. Electric Vehicle Sales Forecast and the Charging Infrastructure Required Through 2030. Institute for Electric Innovation (IEI) and Edison Electric Institute (EEI), Washington, DC: 2018.
2. Plug-In Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Technology Update. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2018. 3002011592.

2
INTEROPERABILITY equipment. An open standards-based approach that includes
both technical capabilities and contractual rights allows owner-
WHERE TO FOCUS operators to switch between network service providers without
The four key interoperability-related challenge areas are having to purchase new charging stations and to install new
described below. charging stations without having to change network service
providers. This can help stimulate competition in the marketplace
and protect infrastructure investments against obsolescence.
The Open Charge Point Protocol (OCPP)* is an open networking
standard that is widely used in Europe and is growing in
acceptance in the U.S. While current versions (OCPP 1.5, 1.6, and
2.0) exhibit some gaps in functionality, their acceptance by most
network providers and continued development are important to
addressing network interoperability.
Charging network-to-charging network: EVSPs tend to operate
their respective networks as islands, lacking communication or
integration with other networks. In the current industry vernacular,
interoperability most often refers to a vision in which EV drivers
can access public charge points from any owner/operator through
a common platform and a single network subscription or contract,
often called “e-roaming.” Several EVSP networks have signed
bilateral agreements to implement roaming partnerships in the Physical charging interface: While a single standard for common
past year, marking vital progress towards increased access to AC charging is widely accepted in the U.S. (with Tesla vehicles
networked public charging. requiring an adaptor), three different DC charge ports3 are used
today. Issues with fragmentation of the early Level 2 AC charging
Behind the scenes, this customer-friendly, public charging
market were mitigated by adoption of the SAE J-1772 standard,
infrastructure depends on a web of business-to-business (B2B)
which provides automakers and those deploying charging
contracts between network providers, and interoperability among
infrastructure with a common system architecture. Meanwhile,
their respective back-end systems. Familiar analogies include the
the lack of a single accepted standard for DC charging for light
interoperability of financial and banking systems to enable inter-
duty EVs increases operational complexity and costs, and can lead
bank and cross-border automated teller machine (ATM) usage
to customer confusion as public DC fast charging expands.
and mobile roaming capabilities enabled by interoperability
among multiple wireless telecommunication networks.
DC Standard Connector Used By

GM BMW
SAE Combined Ford Mercedes
Charging System Honda Porsche
(CCS) KIA Audi
Hyundai VW

Nissan
CHAdeMO Mitsubishi

Charging station-to-network: By definition, networked charging

stations must communicate with their supporting networks.
Proprietary protocols can create “vendor lock-in” challenges that Tesla Supercharger Tesla

commit customers (typically the charging station owner) to a

single, closed-network provider for the lifetime of the charging

3. Direct Current Fast Charger System Characterization: Standards, Penetration Potential, Testing, and Performance Evaluation. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2011. 1021743.
* Use of OCPP does not guarantee charging station-to-network interoperability.

3
 network must complete a lengthy signup process or use a toll-
free phone line to initiate a charge session. “Islanded” charging
networks limit the ability to provide customers with charging sta-
tion maps that include real-time station status data from multiple
networks, which is already a concern where EVs are widespread,
Vehicle-grid: Collaboration among EV and charging station as drivers must often wait in queue for public charging.
manufacturers, network operators, site hosts, and electric
companies will be necessary to implement emerging vehicle-grid Charge station-to-network interoperability: Open stan-
integration (VGI) technologies.4 Vehicle-to-grid charging benefits dards-based communications protocols offer service providers
both the electricity grid and the vehicle owner. At present, electric and site hosts flexibility in equipment selection that could fos-
companies and grid operators are limited in their engagement to ter competition and encourage industry innovation by enabling
support secure, cost-effective, reliable public charging stations at adoption of new technologies, to the benefit of customers.
scale by the lack of interoperability among networked systems and
Physical charging interface interoperability: The existence of
limited implementation of open protocols for electric company
multiple interface designs for DC fast charging may add to cus-
communications.
tomer confusion if the charging plaza does not have all the con-
nectors at its stations and limits the portion of installed charging
available to any given driver.

Vehicle-grid interoperability: Increased end-to-end interoperabil-

ity of EV charging infrastructure could streamline communications

CUSTOMER IMPACT needed to implement electric company smart charging programs

that offer financial incentives to customers (such as special
rates to charge EVs at certain hours of the day).
Improving the overall charging experience means making it easy
for EV drivers to find and use charging stations. Increased in-
teroperability and standardization of EV charging infrastructure
would streamline the public EV “fueling” experience, which is
essential for widespread adoption of EVs.

Charging network-to-charging network interoperability: A lack

of such interoperability—and the enabling “e-roaming” arrange-
ments—requires that customers who are “roaming” be-
tween networks set up accounts and carry access
credentials issued by multiple vendors
at stations where other forms of
payment are not available.
Customers desiring
to use a new
Unlike gas stations, the vast majority of EV charging occurs at home, work, or public locations that the driver frequents—the “fueling” lo-
cation is infrequently a destination in itself. Electric vehicle charging is an entirely different “refueling” paradigm with a range of cost and
convenience advantages, but it is still imperative to ensure that the public charging experience meets or exceeds customers’ expectations
set by the baseline “gas station model.”
To highlight customer challenges posed by non-interoperable public charging infrastructure, the table below compares the public “fuel-
ing” experiences of electric vehicle drivers to those of conventional vehicle drivers:
Conventional Vehicle Public Electric Vehicle Ongoing Efforts to Improve Public
Fueling Experience Fueling Experience Charging Experience

Fill up at any gas station; no Must maintain accounts and access

Access membership or prior contract credentials with all networks they wish Many EVSPs are working towards e-roaming.
required. to utilize.

Most public charge points do not

accept credit/debit cards; EV drivers
Standard forms of payment Concepts that allow for automatic charging session
must juggle multiple network-specific
Payment (credit/debit, cash) accepted at initiation and payment are being introduced by
access cards, apps, and associated
any gas station. automotive companies and charging networks.
accounts to pay for public charging
sessions.
Fuel prices are market-driven Many pricing schemes are
Complexity in pricing remains an open issue due
and consistently displayed on complex and lack consistency and
Pricing to regulation, business models, and bundling with
a $/gallon basis; drivers can transparency; may be displayed as $/
parking/other services or even the purchase of an EV.
easily compare options. kWh, $/unit time, or $/session.
-Each network has its own app with station locations,
and this information is also often available through
Difficult to find accurate station
third party apps.
Reliability Navigate to virtually any gas status, with public charge points often
-Google Maps recently added charging station
and station with the expectation to unavailable because they are either in
locations, and real-time availability info is available for
availability refuel immediately. use, out of order, or access is blocked
certain networks.
by a non-charging vehicle.
-The charging industry is also working on allowing EV
drivers to make reservations for public charging.
For DC fast charging, drivers must
Universal expectation that the
Vehicle locate chargers compatible with their For non-Tesla DC fast charging stations, site hosts often
fuel nozzles at every gas station
compatibility vehicles; connection types differ by install both CCS and CHAdeMO connectors.
will fit.
automaker and region.

Charging network-to-charging network interoperability: Net-

work interoperability enables customers to use stations across
networks. This can broaden the customer base with access to a
particular site host’s charging equipment. It also allows for site
inclusion in public charging mapping programs, including those

SITE HOST IMPACT providing real-time status, thus improving equipment utilization.

Charge station-to-network interoperability: Many commercial

Chargers are widely available for purchase by commercial
charging equipment providers bundle their charging hardware
landlords as well as network operators. While network opera-
with software so that the hardware is incompatible with other
tors generally possess the knowledge and experience to make
networks. When the lack of open standards is compounded by
informed decisions about chargers and associated software,
contractual restrictions for charging station control systems, a
commercial and multifamily landlords typically are unaware of
host desiring to change network service providers will likely need
the limitations presented by hardware that is restricted from
to purchase and install entirely new charging hardware. By install-
moving between networks. In cases where the charger owner
ing a networked charging station, site hosts are often tied to the
wants to change network providers, for pricing, service, or other
original network provider for the hardware’s lifetime, limiting cus-
reasons, the lack of interoperability typically presents obstacles
tomer mobility and competition.
that often are costly and burdensome.

5
Information barriers resulting from networked chargers’ pro- may select one network as the turnkey operator after issuing an
prietary communications protocols present challenges to the RFP. Others electric companies may engage multiple vendors
site hosts, hardware owners, and other stakeholders respon- and operating systems to operate in their service territories –
sible for their long-term operation and maintenance. Open integrating their IT and management systems with the vendors’
standards-based approaches would mitigate these integration systems and associated data (which is generated, controlled,
challenges, while improving site hosts’ ability to monitor the con- and managed by the EVSPs).
dition of their charging stations in real time to ensure timely main-
Charging network-to-charging network interoperability: En-
tenance.
abling customers to use stations across networks broadens the
Physical charging interface interoperability: Site hosts are forced customer base for installed equipment, increasing utilization of
to decide which of the three prevalent DC fast charging standards the charging infrastructure.
they will support. Supporting multiple formats adds equipment
Charge station-to-network interoperability: Like site hosts, some
complexity and cost and may increase the footprint required to
electric companies install, own, and operate public EV charging
serve a given number of vehicles.
infrastructure through third-party networks, meaning resulting
Vehicle-grid interoperability: The inability to manage the vehi- charging points are not open-access. To access these (often rate-
cle-grid interaction may hamper the site host’s ability to manage based) public infrastructure investments, customers must first
on-site charging in ways that reduce electricity costs for the site subscribe to a proprietary network as a member.
host.
Due to proprietary back-end software and the charge station
hardware locked to it, the electric company owner-operators of
networked public charging risk stranding assets, potentially ren-
dering these investments unusable if the selected network pro-
vider curtails or ceases operations.

ELECTRIC COMPANY When charging assets are deployed with bundled hardware and
IMPACT proprietary software, utility owner-operators may be tied to the
same lifetime vendor commitment (and associated challenges)
faced by site hosts, but on a much larger scale. They may face
Some electric companies install, own, maintain, and operate
restrictions in negotiating the most cost-effective solution for cus-
public EV charging infrastructure as utility owner-operators,
tomers.
while others focus on providing the conduit, wiring, and other
necessary on-site infrastructure. To meet customer needs, elec- Physical charging interface interoperability: Depending on local
tric companies are engaged in various ways with EVSPs, site and site-specific infrastructure, new DC fast charging installations
hosts, and others in the early stages of charging infrastructure may require distribution upgrades. As the fast charging market
development. Electric companies serving as the owner-operator expands and as vehicles capable of higher-powered charging en-

Distribution Pad Mounted Meter Panel Charging EV

Network Transformer Station
Business as Usual
Electric Company Site Host

Make-Ready Model
Electric Company Site Host

Owner-Operator Model
Electric Company

Electric Company Incentive

Electric Company Site Host/Third Party

Electric Company Incentive

6
ter the market, the frequency and extent of required upgrades to
the grid will likely increase. The existence of multiple disparate,
COLLABORATIVE AREAS OF
non-interoperable DC fast charging standards could limit the effi- FOCUS
ciency of these charging infrastructure investments.
Charging network-to-charging network interoperability: Imple-
Vehicle-grid interoperability: The lack of networked charging mentation of a standard protocol for B2B connectivity that facili-
system transparency and interoperability inhibits the ability of tates customer roaming between charging networks.
electric companies to manage public charging infrastructure se- Charge station-to-network interoperability: Implementation of
curely, cost-effectively, and reliably, while also planning for future open, nonproprietary protocols enabling interchangeable ser-
public charging growth. For electric company owner-operators, vices and operations between charge stations and networks.
this creates inefficiencies in the operation and maintenance of
Physical charging interface interoperability: The adoption,
public charging. Secure, integrated communication between the
through appropriate standards-setting organizations, of a DC
grid and downstream components of EV charging infrastructure
charging protocol and interface, or alternative solutions to facili-
is required for optimal EV-grid integration, but is impeded by a
tate interoperability, for light duty EVs to improve charging access
lack of open standards, interoperability, and transparency in the
and scale infrastructure efficiently.
current model.
Vehicle-grid interoperability: Development and implementation
CONCLUSION of open standards for grid-condition based charging manage-
ment.
Without broadly addressing interoperability issues, U.S. public
By working together, all stakeholders in public EV infrastructure—
charging infrastructure will continue to scale along fragmented
including EVSPs, electric companies, EV supply equipment OEMs,
and inefficient paths, potentially resulting in higher costs, less
and automakers—can help advance both technical and best prac-
than optimum customer experience, and stranded investments.
tice solutions to interoperability-related challenges. This includes
Sustainable, effective infrastructure development requires a
collaborative efforts to inform and support standards develop-
shared focus on interoperability, transparency, and open-stan-
ment and implementation through industry forums such as The
dards to streamline system integration and improve the customer
National Electric Transportation Infrastructure Working Council
experience. From the customer’s perspective, the goal should be
(IWC).
more than a system that “just works” – and one that offers conve-
nience, confidence, and security.
 www.epri.com

GLOSSARY OF TERMS
AC, DC: alternating current, direct current. The U.S. electricity grid operates on AC. A
typical household outlet is 110–120 VAC (volts alternating current). Large home appli-
ances use 240 VAC. Electric car batteries operate on DC.

Charging Level: The terms, AC Level 1, AC Level 2, and DC Fast describe how ener-
gy is transferred from the electrical supply to the car’s battery. Level 1 is the slowest
charging speed. DC Fast is the fastest. Charging rate varies within each charging level,
depending on a variety of factors including the electrical supply and the car’s capability.

CHAdeMO: An abbreviation of “CHArge de MOve”, A DC fast charging standard co-de-

veloped by Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) and Japanese automakers.

CCS: Stands for “Combined Charging System.” A charging standard developed by the
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) and the European Automobile Manufacturers
Association that supports both AC and DC charging, combined in a single plug design.

Connector: The plug that connects the electricity supply to charge the car’s battery.
J-1772 is the standard connector used for Level 1 and Level 2 charging. CCS or “Combo”
connectors are used for DC Fast charging on most American and European cars. CHAde-
MO is the connector used to DC Fast charge some Japanese model cars.

EVSE: Electric vehicle supply equipment. An industry term for the charging appliance.
Most people say chargers or charging stations. Charging station once referred to just
the appliance but now is also being used to describe a location with multiple chargers
(think: gas station).

EVSP: Electric vehicle service providers. Companies that deploy and operate charging
station networks.

3002017164 August 2019
Electric Power Research Institute
3420 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304-1338 • PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303-0813 USA
800.313.3774  • 650.855.2121 • [email protected] • www.epri.com © 2019 Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), Inc. All
rights reserved. Electric Power Research Institute, EPRI, and TOGETHER . . . SHAPING THE FUTURE OF ELECTRICITY are registered service marks of the
Electric Power Research Institute, Inc.