Skip to main content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Webinar: State of the Practice in DC Charging Station Site Evaluation and Deployment Processes (Text Version)

This is a text version of Webinar: State of the Practice in DC Charging Station Site Evaluation and Deployment Processes, presented on March 23, 2023.

Stephen Lommele, Joint Office of Energy and Transportation: Hi, everyone. Welcome to today's webinar. We're going to
get started in just a minute. Hello, everyone, and welcome to today's webinar. We're going to get started here in just a
minute. Letting folks roll in. And Derek, just confirming that recording has started?

Derek Barlyski, National Renewable Energy Laboratory: Correct.

Stephen Lommele: Thank you.

Gabriel Klein, Joint Office of Energy and Transportation: When you said, Steve, that we're letting people roll in, I
thought maybe we should have an intro song to the webinar.

Stephen Lommele: You're welcome to sing, Gabe.

Gabriel Klein: Like, (SINGING) Roll up! Like something like a 2000's hip hop sort of intro to the webinar.

Stephen Lommele: For those of you who are on already, we do have a member of the Joint Office staff who does sing
for us occasionally.

Gabriel Klein: That's right—John Smart. He's not a great singer, but he's an exceptional performer.

Stephen Lommele: [LAUGHS]

Gabriel Klein: Maybe we'll have him record our intro track for webinars going forward.

Stephen Lommele: Well, there's a proposal.

Gabriel Klein: Yes.

Stephen Lommele: And for those of you joining us, we are just bantering a bit here before we get started. We'll give
everyone another minute and we'll start two after the hour. But thank you for joining us.

Gabriel Klein: We can judge if we're doing well in our banter by how many people leave or come in. I saw, actually,
when I was speaking, we lost one person. Went down one.

Stephen Lommele: It was definitely you, not me.

Gabriel Klein: Oh, it was definitely me. [LAUGHS]

Stephen Lommele: Great, well, we'll go ahead and get started. Welcome, everyone, to today's webinar. I'm Steve
Lommele. I'm the communications and education manager for the Joint Office of Energy and Transportation. And today's
webinar is focused on the state of practice in DC charging. We're going to be talking with some panelists who are going
to be sharing some information on how they're approaching site evaluation and deployment for the NEVI Formula Program.

So just a quick couple of housekeeping tips here before we go ahead and get started. We are going to be taking question
and answer via the chat feature, or via the Q&A feature, on Zoom. So there is a chat feature as well as a Q&A, and we do
ask that you use the Q&A to submit questions. It makes it a lot easier for us to track. And if you hover over the Q&A at
the bottom of your screen, you can open up that Q&A, and we'll be addressing those here later on.

And then, I did want to let you all know that today's webinar is being recorded and will be posted on the Joint Office
website or used internally. So just a disclaimer that if you're speaking during the webinar or using video, you are
presumed to consent to recording and use of your video or image. So on today's webinar we're going to give you just a
quick overview of the Joint Office. I'm going to introduce you to Gabe Klein, our executive director. And then we'll
hear from the Colorado Energy Office, followed by Pennsylvania DOT. And then we'll have an opportunity for Q&A at the

So with that, I want to turn over to Gabe Klein. Gabe Klein is the Executive Director of the Joint Office of Energy and
Transportation, joined us last September, I believe, and comes from a previous background working for the Chicago
Department of Transportation, the Washington, D.C. District of Transportation. Experience in private sector as well
working on car share. Background in non-motorized mobility—bicycles, that kind of thing. So Gabe's a real asset to the
Joint Office, and we really appreciate having you on board. So Gabe, turn it to you to say a few words.

Gabriel Klein: Well, thank you, Steve. And thank you and all the team members that put this together. We are really
working hard to have more proactive technical assistance and outreach so that we can answer many more peoples' questions
and then, hopefully, get down into the more detailed, granular questions and uncover those.

We appreciate all of you that are on, taking time out of your Tuesday to join us and to hear from this great group
discussing the important considerations when evaluating sites for EV charging stations. And I would say that Colorado
and their Energy Office and the Pennsylvania DOT are two leaders in this space. So we're very excited to hear from
states who have actually implemented and are working and planning on implementing many more DC fast charging stations
and the programs that they've developed to support the further deployment.

We're going to not just learn about successes. We're going to learn about challenges, too. This is new for many of us,
particularly if you're on the transportation side of the equation, whether you're in a city or a state or an MTO. And
just so you know, we in the Joint Office—Steve, me, the entire team, which is growing, by the way—and feel free to
look at our website for open jobs—we're really working hard to accelerate this electrified multimodal transportation
system. It needs to be convenient, reliable, affordable, accessible, and equitable. And, as I keep repeating to our
team, it needs to be frictionless, which means it needs to really work well for everybody all the time. And it's going
to take a lot of regional and local coordination.

So while we represent the federal government and this national program, we know that it's you all, locally and
regionally, that are going to make it happen, and we're here to support you. Feel free to go to our website and ask
questions. There's 20 people there behind the website at to answer those questions. Thanks, everybody,
and back to you, Steve.

Stephen Lommele: Great. Thanks so much, Gabe. And again, welcome to all of you for joining us. Just a quick overview
of our panelists for today.

So first we have Christian Williss. Christian comes from the Colorado Energy Office, and he's the Managing Director of
Transportation Fuels and Technology at the Energy Office, where he leads efforts to accelerate the adoption of
zero-emission vehicles through policy planning and research, as well as management of statewide infrastructure, key
mobility grant programs, and supporting education and outreach. He previously served as director of programs and
initiatives, where he oversaw a team of program managers and engineers responsible for managing existing programs and
launching new initiatives in the energy efficiency and alternative fuels market.

And then, we also have Natasha Fackler and Colton Brown from Penn DOT. So Natasha serves as PennDOT's infrastructure
implementation coordinator, and she advises the Governor's Office and PennDOT to develop practices on the use of and
receipt of Bipartisan Infrastructure Law program funds. She is also designated as the state's lead point of contact for
the NEVI Formula Program to guide investments in electrification across the Commonwealth. And prior to taking on that
role, she served as PennDOT's policy director and has over 25 years of experience in Pennsylvania.

Colton is the newly credited Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Coordinator for PennDOT, where he supports the development
and implementation of the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Formula Grant Program and leads electric vehicle
education initiatives. Previously, Colton worked for the Commonwealth to manage Level 2 and DC fast charging program
funds. So with that, very excited for our panelists today, and did want to note the Joint Office has convened these
panelists to share information. We're not necessarily endorsing specific recommendations that they're making, but they
are subject matter experts who do have valuable insights to share, and so we appreciate them being here and sharing that
with us today.

So with that, I'm going to stop sharing and turn it over to Christian, who will share his screen and begin sharing
Colorado's experience.

Christian Williss, Colorado Energy Office: Right. Just making sure that I'm doing the right screen, Steve. All
right, how does that look?

Stephen Lommele: Looks great, thank you.

Christian Williss: OK, great. All right, well, again, thanks for the opportunity to be here today. Really excited to
share the work that we're doing in Colorado. My name is Christian Williss. I'm the Managing Director for Transportation
Fuels and Technology and lead our Transportation Team at the Energy Office.

So as part of my presentation today, I'm going to start by just talking really briefly about our electric vehicle goal
and what we've established is the infrastructure need in Colorado. I'll spend a couple of minutes talking about our
existing programs, because I think you'll see a lot of what we've done in existing and past programming really
influences the way that we're approaching the NEVI funding. And then, I'll spend the rest of the time talking about our
NEVI deployment efforts, as well as the solicitation that we released a couple of weeks ago.

So back in 2018, we set a really aggressive goal as part of our initial Colorado Electric Vehicle Plan, and that goal is
940,000 light-duty electric vehicles on the road by 2030. I really like to show this chart here because it gives you a
good sense of what the year-over-year growth in electric vehicles really needs to look like in Colorado in order for us
to meet that aggressive goal, as well as a 70% EV market share for new vehicle sales in 2030.

Right now in Colorado, we're at about 80,000 electric vehicles, so we're on track. But you can see from this chart that
starting in about 2025, those year-over-year sales really start to increase. We do feel that with the right mix of
policy and program strategies, we can meet this aggressive goal. And it really starts with making sure that we have
enough infrastructure on the ground to accommodate all of these new electric vehicles.

So we did an analysis a couple of years ago where we looked at what sort of infrastructure would be needed to meet that
2030 goal, both in terms of the number of charging stations, the type of charging stations, the locations that these
stations need to go. And as you can see on the left table there, by 2030, to meet that high growth scenario, we're
looking at about 5,000 DC fast charging ports across the state, with about 1,100 of those being along our corridors.

Right now we have about 800 ports, so we're making good progress, but we clearly have a long ways to go. You can see on
the map on the right side—hopefully that's coming through clearly. But this gives you a sense of the concentration of
the number of charging stations needed in each county.

And so in the Central and Northern part of the state—that's the Denver Metro area, the urban Front Range—you can see
that the concentration is much greater. And that means we need not only a lot of corridor stations, but a lot of
community DC fast charging as well. And then, when we get out into the more rural parts of the state, you can see the
concentration is much lower. Really focused on corridor charging that enables long-distance travel, as opposed to a lot
of community-based Level 2 or community-based DC fast charging.

So I want to talk just for a minute about our existing programs. I'll note, though, that that last program on the
list—that's Fleet Zero—that's a program that's really focused on providing charging to help electrify medium- and
heavy-duty fleets in Colorado. That's something that we're working on and we'll launch later this spring. So I'm really
focused on these first three programs here.

And the first is Charge Ahead Colorado. That's a program we launched in 2013, designed to provide grants for
community-based Level 2 and DC fast charging stations across the state—really designed to provide grants for the kinds
of charging that people need to feel confident in meeting their daily driving needs in an electric vehicle. In 2018, we
launched the Corridors Program, designed to install high speed charging along our major transportation corridors,
providing confidence to the driving public that they can get anywhere in the state in an electric vehicle. And then, in
2020, we launched our Plazas Program, kind of a hybrid of the two. So high-speed charging, but in communities as well as
along our transportation corridors across the state.

So I'll talk for just a minute about Charge Ahead Colorado. Again, this is really focused on community-based Level 2 and
DC fast charging stations. I should note that typically what we see here in terms of DC fast charging is smaller or
lower power levels and smaller numbers as compared to the NEVI Program.

We do run a competitive grant program. We do three rounds per year. And then, last fall, we actually opened up a new
rolling grant cycle for projects that we really consider high priority projects—so workplaces, multifamily housing,
and for projects that are looking at three or fewer stations. And the idea here really is giving these high-priority
applicants the ability to apply any time. And we can get money out the door quickly and get stations built more quickly.

In terms of incentives, we provide a percentage of project costs up to a cap—typically 80%. And we think that helps to
constrain costs that are incurred by the state. But we also launched last fall some enhanced incentives that are really
designed to drive more investment into disproportionately impacted communities. And I'll talk about this more in a few

And then, I just wanted to note that these types of projects tend to be lower cost, smaller scale, and shorter duration
than what we're seeing as part of the NEVI program requirements. We think those are going to be, of course, much more
costly and take longer. However, we're even seeing, with some of these relatively simple projects, costs going up,
timelines extending. So we think that there's a caution there for the way in which we implement our NEVI programming.
And then, I would just note that to date, we've funded over 2,000 stations across Colorado with this program. And I
think what I want to leave with this slide is that we've really tested a lot of the programmatic strategies, the
incentive strategies that we've carried along to future programs, including our approach to NEVI.

And then, with our Corridor Program—as I mentioned, we launched this in 2018—you can see from the map on the upper
part of the slide there that we established six different corridors across the state and 34 locations. And this is a
little bit different than our typical program. We actually identified the locations that we wanted charging, and then we
required applicants to bid on an entire corridor. And the idea there was each corridor was a mix of stations that were
anticipated to see more utilization early on, as well as lower utilization, helping to create a reasonable business case
for an entire corridor.

And a lot of the specs for this program, I think, are similar to what we're seeing with NEVI. So we did require that
each project be in close proximity to a highway interchange. We required that each project be in close proximity to
amenities, and we required 24/7 access.

In terms of the technical specs, we required each location to have at least two or four ports per site—so two ports in
the rural parts of the state, four ports in the urban parts of Colorado as well as the interstates, and then we required
that each port be capable of providing at least 50 kilowatts of charging for each vehicle plugged in simultaneously, and
then using power sharing to provide a minimum of 150 kW if only charging one vehicle at a time. And then, we did require
modular design so that stations could be easily upgraded as the market evolved and higher power or higher charging
vehicles are introduced to the market.

And then one more thing that I would note is that we did require pretty prescriptive future-proofing. We wanted to make
sure that each of these sites could be doubled in size as the market grew. So we required that each site have enough
real estate for double the number of chargers, that they implement future-proofing strategies like extra conduit and
pre-wiring and concrete pads, and then the electrical capacity had to be capable of delivering electricity to those
additional stations at a rate of 350 kilowatts when using power sharing.

Again, we use—we have the grant approach of 80% to 90% of project cost up to a cap, and then we now have 30 locations
open, with full completion of the program anticipated by the end of the year. And so I would just note, for those of you
keeping track, we launched this program in 2018, it is 2023, and we're not yet done. So these projects take a really
long time to get through or to get complete—COVID didn't do us any favors—but they are very complicated projects and
they take quite a long time.

And then, the last thing I'll note on this slide is if you look at the pie chart in the lower right-hand corner, you can
see the kinds of site hosts that are participating in this program. So we have 12 local governments that are serving as
site hosts, eight fueling and convenience stores, and then a mix between retail lodging and dining site hosts.

And then, lastly, just want to talk about our DC Fast Charging Plazas Program. This is the program through which we're
going to deploy them the majority of our funding. So again, this was really designed to provide high-speed charging to
drivers that don't have access to home charging or workplace charging, as well as for high-mileage fleets like Lyft and
Uber. And then, we recently opened it up to also provide funding to fill gaps along our transportation corridors.

And so initially, this was really urban-focused. So we were looking at putting stations near high density areas like
downtown, commercial developments, transit hubs, and then, again, open it up so that we could begin to fill some of the
gaps that weren't covered by our Corridor Program. We maintained a lot of the technical requirement requirements from
the Corridors Program, but it is more streamlined so that it's easier for applicants to participate. And then, I'll talk
more about lessons learned over the next few slides, but we've incorporated a lot of lessons learned from the Corridors
Program and previous funding rounds, and we continue to iterate this program on an ongoing basis.

And then, lastly, we are incorporating NEVI funding, but we also have state funding that we'll be distributing through
this grant cycle as well. So I'm here to talk primarily about NEVI and corridor funding, but just note that we will also
be providing funding for community-based DC fast charging plazas through this funding round and this RFA, Request for
Applications, that I'll be talking about. And we've updated to include all of the NEVI requirements like Buy America,
the workforce certifications like EVITP and then the enhanced data collection requirements that we've seen in the final

And so I do want to switch gears and talk just a little bit about lessons learned because they really influence a lot of
what you'll hear in the rest of my comments. And I'll start with siting deployment. And I think we have found that we
can really use creative incentives and evaluation criteria that help to achieve the policy and program goals of the
state. And so I'll talk about incentives in a minute, but really focused on how do we use incentives to drive the kinds
of investments that we want to see in Colorado charging, as well as, how do we create incentives that help to increase
viability, improve the business case so that we see charging all over the state, and we're really effective at filling
those gaps?

We think it's really important to allow for a variety of business models, including multiparty arrangements. So when we
launched the Corridors Program, for instance, we thought that every site would have two parties—the grantee and the
site host. But we found over time that there's a lot of risk in installing some of these stations, and we really needed
a third-party owner-operator that can bring additional capital to the project and to de-risk the project for those
involved. So we actually have a number of projects in that Corridor Program that have multiparty arrangements.

And then, this is something that we've learned the hard way—recognizing that limited due diligence can be completed by
applicants prior to award. So it's really unlikely that, when somebody submits a proposal, that they have a final site
host agreement. They probably have not submitted a utility application. They probably haven't applied for permitting. So
there's going to be some level of uncertainty in each project before you have issued a contract to the grantee.

And, then, lastly on this slide, we have found that there are some optimal sites out there, but by and large, it's
really balancing different criteria like filling a charging gap, finding a willing site host, finding a site that meets
the site characteristics that are important like proximity to amenities, and then doing it at a reasonable project cost.
And sometimes all those things come together, but sometimes it's a couple and not all.

And so I'll show this example on the right side. This is a corridor in Western Colorado. You can see, with the red hash
marks, that's the 50-mile gap. And we have one population center there, and it's a very small community in Western

Now, we haven't seen a proposal from that community so we don't know what's possible, but it's highly likely that we
meet some but not all of the criteria that we're looking for just because we've got a limited opportunity there. And
then, if you contrast that with this map on the left side, this is some really neat mapping that CDOT did for us as we
started to think about our corridor planning. And you can see with this gap, there are actually quite a few population
centers. And in the purple shaded area, that's Justice40 communities. So the hope would be that between all these
population centers, we can find something that checks the boxes.

And then, lastly, I like to talk about this map here because I think it was a real-world example of us struggling to
balance these different competing priorities. This is a community in Southern Colorado. We actually got an application
for this community, but it was on the very outskirts of town.

So we found a willing site host, we filled a gap, but it wasn't close to proximity. And it missed what we think is an
opportunity with this investment, which is economic development. And so wherever possible, we really like to see these
stations sited in a community's main street where, when somebody is charging, they can get out. They can buy a cup of
coffee. They can stop at a restaurant, maybe pop into a store. And so looking at, how do we also use this to achieve
other goals beyond just filling gaps? And so we ultimately decided against funding this project in hopes that we could
encourage a site host along that Main Street to submit an application.

And then, just a couple more things on lessons learned. I think if you've taken away anything from my previous comments
here, it's an evolving market. Things are changing. There's some level of uncertainty when it comes to these projects.
So just making sure that you're building flexibility and continuous improvement into your program design, your program
administration, and in the projects themselves.

Excuse me. I'll talk in a few minutes about how we are using some reimbursement strategies to increase uptime and
reliability. You've heard me mention that you ought to prepare for longer project timelines. We're assuming that these
projects are probably going to take about 18 to 24 months, and that doesn't include actually putting our solicitation on
out on the street and then contracting.

And then, I think Colorado might be a little bit unique in this case, but we did not submit any exceptions in our
original NEVI plan. We're seeing in Colorado, the market is rapidly evolving. Places that are gaps today may not be
considered a gap a couple of years from now.

We're seeing new entrants come to the market and wanting to invest in rural parts of the state. So I think for us, it's
really important to let the market determine where the true gaps are. So we're not likely to apply for any exceptions
for a number of rounds because we do think we'll have success filling a lot of those gaps.

OK, so we submitted our NEVI plan like every other state. I think Colorado was a little unique in that we ended up
requesting a number of new designated corridors. So we went from eight corridors before the last round of nominations to
14 now. And our thinking there was we really wanted to be able to allocate funding on every corridor across the state
beginning on day one. We really wanted to make sure that we could open up all areas of Colorado to transportation

And so to that end, we're really focused on filling corridor gaps, particularly those that are in disproportionately
impacted communities, followed by expanding those existing stations that I mentioned a few minutes ago along those
designated corridors where it's cost effective to upgrade to meet those NEVI requirements. We certainly have the areas
where we've got charging today, but it's insufficient to meet the market demand. So we'll consider those proposals. And
then, finally, it may be a year or two before we see a lot of interest in public charging for medium- and heavy-duty,
but we want to make sure we keep our options open to provide funding to help electrify medium- and heavy-duty fleets in
Colorado by funding the kinds of public infrastructure that's going to be needed.

OK, so now I'm really digging into our most recent solicitation. On the right side here, you can see this is a chart
showing all of the incentives that are available through our Plazas Program. And you can see in part, the idea here is
to be responsive to the proposals that come into the market, but really drive investment, as I've said, where it's most

And so if you go midway down that chart, you can see that we've got incentives for disproportionately impacted and
disadvantaged communities. We'll provide an additional $5,000 per charger for those chargers installed in these
communities. We think this helps to increase access to those who have traditionally been left out of competitive grant
programs and makes more attractive investing in these communities where there are charging deserts.

So we've got new incentives you'll see in a minute that we're also evaluating these proposals more favorably, and we'll
do more targeted outreach to potential site hosts in this community. We also include tiered incentive levels. So if you
look at that the top part of the chart there, you'll see those are our base incentives for the seven-county metro area,
the urban Front Range, and rural parts of the state. And the idea here is to stimulate investment across the state
without over-investing.

So we know, for instance, that in the Denver Metro Area, we actually don't need to provide 80% of project cost because
site hosts will bring 50% or more match to the table. So that's what we'll provide—50% of the cost of a project, up to
$90,000, in this case, per charger, for the Denver Metro Area. In rural parts of the state, we still need that really
generous incentive, so we will provide up to 80% of the project cost.

And then, finally, we do provide incentives for battery storage. We think this will really help to open up parts of the
state that might not be open right now. We have a lot of rural corridors in Colorado where access to three-phase power
isn't a given, and it may actually be much more cost-effective and bring additional benefits if applicants are using
battery storage rather than running a really expensive three-phase power line extension.

And then, we're also providing multi-site awards. So we think this will encourage applicants to provide or to submit
proposals for three or more locations. Again, this is our idea or our approach to getting projects done more quickly,
getting funding out the door more quickly.

This is the evaluation criteria that we're going to be using. So these are the things that are important to Colorado in
evaluating proposals. You can also see how we've weighted each of those criteria on the right side of that table.

There are really three areas that I think are relevant to our topic today. So the first is plaza locations and access to
amenities. And so we're looking here for things like, does the location fill a charging gap? Is it located in a
disproportionately impacted community or Justice40 community? Is it designed for safety in mind? So is there adequate
area lighting? Are they putting the station on a site that is in close proximity to a building's entrance or where
there's a reasonable level of activity? We want people to feel safe when charging their vehicles at these stations. And,
as I talked about earlier, are we providing opportunities for economic development?

Secondly, we're looking at, is this site suitable for location of the DC fast charging station, and is it in close
proximity to other stations? Particularly early on where we're really looking to fill these gaps, it doesn't make a lot
of sense to put a station in close to an existing DC fast charging station. Secondly, we're looking at plaza design,
facilities requirements, and minimum station specs. Here, we're really interested in does the site—is the site going
to be designed to accommodate those with disabilities or in a wheelchair? And, then, finally, this is really where we're
evaluating those sites that are investing in equity more favorably. We're looking at, where is it located within a
community? Is it in close proximity to multifamily housing? Have they done a meaningful effort to engage the community?
Do they have letters of support from community-based organizations?

We have put together a couple of resources for potential applicants that we think will make it easier for them to submit
proposals. The first is a teaming partner list. So this allows those that are interested in helping to support a
particular site to sign up and tell us who they are, what they have to offer, or what they're interested in.

So it may be that property owner who has a site that's available in a disproportionately impacted community along one of
our corridors is interested in connecting with developers. And so we've got a long list of folks who are interested in
being a partner to one of these projects, and we're hoping that we can do some matchmaking here. This map on the right
is an interactive map that CDOT has put together for potential applicants. It really allows them to get in and look at
the communities where locations are available today, whether or not they meet NEVI requirements or if they could be
upgraded. And then, the shaded area there, are areas in Colorado that are disproportionately impacted or Justice40

And then I just have a couple more slides. I did want to talk to our approach to reimbursement. Traditionally, we have
only reimbursed at the very end of a project. So once the project was fully complete, we would reimburse the entire

We are interested in encouraging new applicants to our programming, and we know that these projects are going to be
quite a bit more expensive than what we funded in the past. And because of those long timelines, we are moving to a
milestone-based reimbursement approach. We think that will be helpful for applicants, but we also know that it
introduces a little bit of risk to the state since we are providing funding before the station is done. So we are going
to retain 20% at each milestone payment, and then we will pay all of the retainer for the milestones back once the
project is complete. However, we are going to keep 5% of total project costs once that station is complete so that we
can ensure timely completion of reporting, required uptime, and continuous operation. And then, we will provide 1% of
that 5% each year over five years.

And then, lastly, this is just the communication that went out a couple of weeks ago launching this RFA. It went out to
all of our grant program stakeholders, as well as those that have signed up to stay in touch about our NEVI programming.
We have a link to our program web page, to the CDOT resources I talked about a minute ago. We have a link to the
application guide. We've also prepared an application in Word so that people can start working on their application
before they submit it online.

We have a formal Q&A period that ends tomorrow. All answers will be posted by the end of next week, as well as any
potential changes to the RFA itself. And then, we're keeping our RFA open for 60 days. It closes on May 5.

So I think with that, I'm done. Obviously, happy to chat more and answer questions at the end of the formal
presentations. Thank you.

Stephen Lommele: Thanks so much, Christian. That was wonderful. And we will, hopefully, have a couple of minutes
here at the end to take questions. At this point, I want to turn it over to Natasha and Colton from PennDOT.

Colton Brown, Pennsylvania Department of Transportation: All right, thank you. So hello, everyone. This is Colton
Brown with PennDOT. Going to provide an overview of PennDOT's NEVI program. And Natasha will share some information
about lessons learned that we've come across in planning for this program and developing it and getting it out there.

And this is actually the first time seeing—I did not previously know that we have the same due date for the first
round of our NEVI applications. So we'll get to that in a little bit. But May 5 for both of us, I guess. All right,
screen share is coming through, right?

Stephen Lommele: Yes, looks good. Thanks Colton.

Colton Brown: Thank you. All right, so, many of us have seen this if we've seen different states talk about their
NEVI programs. This is a snapshot of PennDOT, Pennsylvania's NEVI program. So we have $171 million over five years.

The first two years of our funding that we have access to now is about $62 million. Of that, we anticipate about $56
million will be available for awards, with the remainder going to administration and other eligible projects tied to the
NEVI program. We've gotten our state plan approved. We released our round one Notice of Funding Opportunity in early
January, and we later updated that to incorporate the final rule from FHWA.

So this is Pennsylvania's alternative fuel corridors. It is largely our interstate highway network. We do also have four
other major portions of four other major roadways designated.

This amounts to over 1,800 miles of roadway, so we anticipate that it will take a minimum of 40 to 50 sites to reach
that build-out certification, the range being dependent upon whether there are sites that fulfill multiple interstates,
such as being at the connections of multiple interstates. And then, potentially more sites than that along the
interstates to build in redundancy. So that's one of the other goals of our NEVI program.

So as mentioned, we have the first round of our program available. So at this point, we have our Notice of Funding
Opportunity out there. We're currently taking any technical questions that people have on it and applications. The
program will open on Monday, March 27. Our funding opportunity document has a variety of sections here that are listed,
and we'll go into a little more detail on some of those components.

So for our discussion here today in particular—and much of it focuses on, how are we choosing sites? So this right
here, you see a small screenshot of a portion of our interactive map. What we've done is we have grouped each of
Pennsylvania's interstate highways into what we call corridor groups. These groups are, give or take, 25 miles each,
with the goal of getting to that 25-mile redundancy, more than just the charging every 50 miles.

And then, each of these corridor groups we have designated as being a Priority I, II, or III—Priority III meaning that
we already have that high-powered DC fast charging station that we need to comply with the NEVI program, you have four
ports, 150 kilowatts each, within a mile of the exit; Priority II meaning that we have an NEVI-compliant site not too
far away; and a Priority I meaning that a large gap and it would be very beneficial if we had a site in that corridor
group for building out our highway network.

So as part of our scoring and selection, we will first look to get a site within each of our Priority I corridor groups,
followed by a site within each of our Priority II corridor groups. So I'm going to briefly pull over our interactive map
so you can see the full thing. So this is all of our interstates, all of our corridor groups. As I said, that shows
which sections of highway are competing with each other.

Then, if we zoom in to each one of these bubbles, you can actually see the 1-mile polygon around each of the exits along
the highway. So you can see the specific locations that are eligible to apply. So that tells you what locations are
eligible, and the large bubble tells you that everyone who applies within one of those eligible locations is competing
against each other for a single award through our program.

OK, so utility coordination is obviously a key component of these projects, and we see it as being very important for
project development and selecting sites that will be more likely to reach project completion. So we're requiring all of
our applicants to submit this form to their electric utility in advance. The electric utility then completes it and
sends it back to them.

We've worked this—we've developed this form in consultation with our major utilities, and it's really designed to just
provide a conceptual price and timeline for what the utility upgrade cost could be. We know that these projects are
speculative, so we do not expect our utilities to be doing 10,000 hours of engineering on each of their sites to get a
detailed cost estimate, but this can at least give both the applicant as well as us an idea of what work might be
involved and what costs could be involved in the timeline to be providing power to the sites. Furthermore, if, after a
project award, for any reason—maybe it's the utility connection cost turns out to be much higher than expected, or any
other reason that a project could fall through, say it's an agreement, or NEVA, environmental approval—we have in our
NOFO that we could go to our second highest-ranked site within that corridor group and then offer them an award instead
if the first selected project does not pan out.

So here's our timeline. Highlights here, obviously, is that Monday is when we will open for applications. May 5 is when
we close for applications. We're in a different time zones. We'll only be a couple of hours off of Colorado there. We'll
have some time for reviewing those applications, and then we hope to go through the environmental clearance and be
getting to Notice to Proceed sometime this fall for our Round I projects.

But we've been very transparent with our scoring and selection process. This is the breakdown for the full 100 points.
There's a number of scoring criteria in between or within many of these scoring items. And here you can see the full
scoring rubric that we have for one of those.

So this is our sustainability, equity, resilience, and economic development scoring category, worth 12 points. And you
can see exactly how much each question will be worth and how we will be scoring every one as we work towards our project
selections. So that was a quick snapshot. I will now turn it over to Natasha for some lessons we've learned along the

Natasha Fackler, Pennsylvania Department of Transportation: Thanks, Colton. So I love this slide, the herding cats
image here for all of you. But when you think about your NEVI program, it really takes a lot of stakeholders to put
forth a successful—even just a launch of your funding opportunity within your state. And I won't read through all of
these or highlight all these, but a couple of them I really want to focus on is, first off, making sure you have
engagement with your regional office.

I was on a call yesterday with many of the state NEVI coordinators, and that seems to be one point where the different
division offices are reviewing things differently and making sure that they understand what process you're going
through, what ways that you are complying with Title 23. And for us, we knew that the division office was going to be
really important in our conversation, so we actually included them on our core EV Team that meets weekly.

So that's just one that I wanted to highlight from the list. I know additionally for us, our sibling agencies, I know
from Pennsylvania's perspective, understanding the Alternative Fuels Tax and the ways the Department of Revenue is
capturing that. Our DEP, which Colton previously worked at, really has been a good partner to us. We meet with them
weekly to talk about lessons learned overall because they manage our Volkswagen settlement fund.

Additionally on this list, as Colton mentioned, utilities are super important. But again, also just talking through who
your stakeholders are and understanding their needs. As we put together our NEVI plan initially, we spent countless
hours and countless meetings meeting with stakeholders to make sure our program was one that those who would be applying
for it were happy with the way that the program came out. So again, just making sure you're meeting with as many people
as possible to put together your program. Next slide?

Some kind of general lessons learned. And I'm not going to read through these. We put a lot of information on the
slides—more than we typically do. But really, understanding what kind of program you want to put together.

Obviously, new programs can be challenging to work through all the details to make sure you're understanding what
process you want, who needs to be involved, what decisions need to be made as you put together that, and making sure
that you're having plenty of time and, most importantly, having the right people in the room to make decisions. I know
for us, we initially started out having a core team, which we expanded to involve more individuals within our agency to
make sure that we had the right people in the room at the right time to help make decisions quickly so we could put
together a thoughtful program. Next slide?

I think this is an important one as well when you think about the rules of engagement, 1023 and the federal guidelines
that came out officially, the federal rules. Making sure that you are following that, but also making sure you're
following the state rules that you have in place. I know for us, as a state, we are not doing the procurement. We are
doing a competitive grant.

And so the rules for a procurement versus a grant are different. And our legal team has made sure that in everything
that we say, we actually say that we're not doing a procurement because of those rules and parameters around that. As
we're putting together our program, additionally, we had a lot of decisions to make on how many rounds of funding we
wanted to do, what would be in those rounds of funding, and ways that we could make sure that the money that we have is
really going towards the overall NEVI guidelines and parameters, knowing that they want a nationwide network to support
travel long distance on interstates. So making sure that that was the focus of our initial rounds of funding was
important to us.

Next slide? Again, this one is way more, many more words than I would prefer to be on the slide. But hopefully, you can
look at them later if we have time. But a couple of them I want to highlight again.

Colton mentioned our utility form. That was something we thought was important—knowing you can't put an EV site in
without the utility, working with them on the form that we created, making sure they were part of that conversation,
understanding what they need to know plus what we would need to know to make sure we're making a good site decision.
Also, making sure in that program requirements that the first bullet there on the slide, making sure what you, as a
state, want to identify as requirements above and beyond, maybe, the federal guidelines. Maybe there's a minimum
standard. What do you want to do, maybe, that's a little more stringent or a little bit more above those minimum
guidelines from the federal government?

Additionally for us, I know in the application process, we had heard, as Colton mentioned, that everyone wanted us to be
very transparent on how we were evaluating and scoring our projects. We've been very transparent in that. You can see
for every single question in our NOFO, what points you can receive in that evaluation process. And we wanted applicants
to know what ways they could improve their application just from reading those criteria and the scoring rubric as well.

So again, a lot of details on this slide. I know we're running short on time, and I want to make sure that we have a
chance to operate or go through some of the questions here as well. So I'll go to our last slide, which I think is just
our contact information. Again, we're happy to answer questions during the Q&A time period.

Stephen Lommele: Great. Thanks so much, Natasha, Colton, and Christian. Really appreciate it. Colton, if you could
stop sharing your screen here, we can all come back on.

We do have a number of questions from panelists. And I think kind of a common theme was just—this is something that
you all touched on—was this idea of flexibility, understanding that grant applicants may reach out to utilities and
collect information, but actually working with the utility to deploy a site can have challenges, and capacity can change
quickly. Christian, you talked about permitting and how that can be a process as well. So in practice, how does that
flexibility work? Do you allow awardees to change the location slightly? Or I know Natasha, you talked about potentially
going with a secondary applicant. How does that all work in practice?

Christian Williss: I'm happy to start. And I can tell you that in the Corridor Program, our grantee came to the
table with primary site host, secondary site host, tertiary site host. And in many cases, we blew through all of those
trying to find a site host that was willing to bring match to the table, had the real estate requirements, were
cost-effective from a utility perspective. So we had to be extremely flexible in allowing them to identify another site

I think we anticipate—we hope that we don't experience that same moving through multiple site hosts with our Plaza
Program. We are encouraging applicants to do more due diligence, but again, we still understand that there is some level
of uncertainty. So there certainly is the opportunity to find an additional site host—although, if we think it's going
to take an extended amount of time, we might ask them to drop that site from the contract and then reapply in a future
round when they've had the ability to do that extensive stakeholder or site due diligence.

Colton Brown: Yeah, I would just say there's kind of a couple pieces to dealing with it. One is what you ask for or
require up front. So we are requiring everyone to basically describe to us, what is their project team? So that will
include their site host. That will include who they would plan to use for equipment, for installation—if not a
specific company, at least what sorts of requirements and terms they would put into an agreement, or who they'd be
looking for. So some of it is making sure that there already is this coordination among their team and that everyone who
is going to be part of the project is ready and willing.

And then, after an award is when the flexibility and location can come in. I know when I was working on our Volkswagen
settlement fund programs, we did have some provisions that allowed for minor location changes still in the same
couple-mile area. Had to make sure that it still would have checked out and been awarded a project if that was the
originally proposed site. But we did have some projects that moved site occasionally.

Things are a little more complicated and stringent when you have federal funds involved, so we don't anticipate having a
process like that for NEVI. But that's where our ability to say, OK, this project fell through; we're going to go to the
next in line if we have another good project so that we can make sure that we don't lose out and delay getting our
network built.

Stephen Lommele: Great, thanks. There's another theme to some questions. I mean, you've identified locations that
are priorities, and you have expectations for those, but you may have proposers suggesting that they want to build more
ports that could drive up the cost. They may want to make those stations accessible to medium-duty, heavy-duty vehicles,
and that would be a slightly different comparison to a station that was designed primarily for light-duty vehicles. So
how do you factor in, or how do you, how do you allow those who are applying for grants to be competitive when they may
be proposing things that have a slightly different value that they're offering to the end user?

Colton Brown: Yeah, we do have some—sorry, we do have some smaller point categories for those sorts of
things—having more ports, having a higher total power level, also having provision in there for medium- and
heavy-duty. But we have really tailored our points and our focus on the overarching goal of the NEVI Program, which is
initially building out this interstate network for light-duty vehicle charging. So that is our primary focus, but if
they want to have some of those things as add-ons, we'll certainly word them for them. But it's not—it's kind of how
we balance those.

Christian Williss: I would agree with that. I think for us, we're very open to projects that are more than four
ports, but I think we're going to want to see a justification for that. Where it's very common that we will see
applications come in our other programs for more than seems appropriate for the use case, so we're really looking at,
did they right-size the proposal for the identified use case? And so that's going to figure into whether or not we would
choose to fund stations or ports more than the four-port minimum.

Stephen Lommele: OK, and Christian, on one of your slides, you showed the various incentives that you were tacking
on to some projects. What funds are you using for those? Do those all come out of NEVI, or do you have different buckets
of funding that can be paired together?

Christian Williss: We do. We do have state funding as well. So we anticipate that for projects that are along the
designated corridors that are filling gaps, that's going to be primarily NEVI funding. But we do have state funds that
are available for corridors that may not be designated, or projects in communities that might be more designed to serve
those that don't have access to home charging or high-mileage fleets, like I mentioned—Lyft or Uber. So we are
fortunate to have a combination of funds, and we'll look to put stations along our corridors, as well as within

Stephen Lommele: Natasha, we had a follow-up question for you. Can you speak a little bit more to that idea about
how you chose competitive grants instead of a procurement process?

Natasha Fackler: Sure. As a team, we had met with all of our program staff, our legal staff, and with our PA
division office. And really, knowing that we had a goal of getting our program up and running fast, the grant program
seemed to us to be the fastest mechanism to get money back out the door and to build out our corridors.

In Pennsylvania, we do have a P3 law, but it can take up to two years just to put out your P3 procurement. Again, our P
here in Pennsylvania can take up to 18 months as well. So the grant program for us seemed to be the one that we could
move forward with and get projects out the door as soon as we could get the program up and running.

Colton Brown: Yeah, and the other piece that really weighed in favor of a competitive grant was that PennDOT is not
interested in owning or operating any of these stations, and like our state P3 law says that PennDOT has to take
ownership of the project after it's completed. So competitive grant made sense from the perspective of supporting the
private industry and getting these stations up and running, and then letting them continue to operate them.

Stephen Lommele: I'm going to get back to a question about utilities because I think you all suggested that
proposers have to coordinate with utilities in advance. We had a webinar earlier this week where we talked to a DOT, a
utility, and a utilities commission, and they had some advice for things that states could do to maybe streamline the
process a little bit, maybe highlighting areas where there was green—like, we think there's enough grid capacity here.
We've talked to the utility. Yellow—it seems like this could be a challenge. Or, red—you may want to revisit this in
a couple of years. Are you doing anything in Colorado and Pennsylvania to help station developers understand where there
may be more suitable locations than others?

Christian Williss: Short answer, Steve, is no. We do have 53 electric utilities in Colorado, and the information
about grid capacity, where there's close and cost-effective access to three-phase power, is really going to be something
that each of the utilities has information on. I think there's probably more we can do to support this dialogue, so I
think that's certainly a takeaway from for me.

I really loved the idea of the form that the Pennsylvania team has put together, where everybody fills out the same form
so you're getting consistent utility information for each project. So that's, I think, a best practice that we'll
certainly consider. But so far, it has been difficult to get really good information about grid capacity upfront, though
there are some utilities in Colorado that are making this information available proactively. And where we know about
that, we do communicate that.

Stephen Lommele: Thanks, Christian.

Natasha Fackler: This is Natasha. I would say I would echo what Christian said. We don't have a map that shows that
across our state. We did meet with every single one of our utilities, all of our major players plus our rural
cooperatives, and they really all said that they would do the analysis as projects came in and would be very helpful in
doing that analysis per site. But none of them have shared with us publicly any maps that showcase where that is up

Stephen Lommele: I guess bottom line is to communicate early and often with your utilities. We've heard that a lot.
So definitely something that we try to encourage as well.

Well, we're nearing the end of our time here. Before we go, any parting words of wisdom from any of you?

Christian Williss: I just would encourage folks to be flexible, I think—to recognize that this is a
rapidly-evolving market and we often need to evolve our approach along with it, that the first solicitation you put out
is likely to look different than the third or the fifth or the eighth because the market is changing, and just to really
be comfortable iterating over time as the market evolves.

Natasha Fackler: I think that's a really great point. I was actually on a call right before this, and someone was
already asking me what we were going to change in our next round. And I don't know that we know that answer, but I do
think as we put out future rounds, we will be changing and evolving to see where we need to additionally put in
infrastructure to support the overall NEVI goals. Especially for us, knowing our round one is focused on those AFCs,
once we get past that, what are going to be our priorities, and how we're going to incorporate changes into that, will
be a great learning lesson.

Colton Brown: And I would just add that, as a lesson learned that we have for—in designing NEVI programs—is to
be accommodating to different types of projects and business models. We've gone through great lengths to allow the
property owner to be the applicant, to have the site host ownership model for charging stations, because it's not just
national charging companies that will come in and find a willing site host. And we're also doing the site by
location-by-location selection. So that way, a small business who owns one property still has the ability to play in the
program. We're not requiring people or even having an incentive for multiple locations because we want to have a level
playing ground that even the smaller entities can compete.

Stephen Lommele: Well thanks again so much, Christian, Natasha, and Colton. We really appreciate you being with us
today. I want to encourage all of our participants to visit, where we've got a lot of additional
resources that can help you in your corridor planning. I've got a few highlighted here right now.

The National Renewable Energy Lab has a resource—a suite of resources—to help evaluate electric vehicle
infrastructure deployment. Also, some from Idaho National Laboratory, and then some that we've seen from DOTs and MJ
Bradley. So again, you can visit We've got a Data and Tools page that has a lot of resources that are
available to support you.

I would also encourage you to sign up for our news alerts so you can be informed of future webinars that we have
planned. We have one coming up next Tuesday. It's on contracting and procurement considerations for EVSE deployment,
where we'll be hearing from the Federal Highways Administration, as well as a utility and a DOT who are going to be
talking about some of their experience in the past deploying large-scale charging infrastructure along their highway

So again, thanks so much to Christian, Natasha, and Colton. And we will post a recording of this on And we look forward to seeing you all on a future webinar. Thanks so much