The European Union’s Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Regulation (AFIR), adopted in 2023, is one of the most consequential EV charging regulations globally. It sets mandatory deployment targets, requires open access to publicly-funded infrastructure, and mandates interoperability that has shaped how OCPI is used in European markets.
For operators in Europe (or those serving European markets), AFIR compliance is now a routine consideration. This article explains what AFIR requires, how it intersects with OCPI, and what operators need to do.
What AFIR actually mandates
A summary of the key AFIR provisions relevant to EV charging.
Deployment targets
Member states must deploy specific amounts of EV charging infrastructure along TEN-T (Trans-European Transport Network) corridors:
- Core network corridors: at least one charging station every 60 km, with 400 kW total capacity (including at least one ≥150 kW port).
- Higher targets over time: capacity requirements increase to 600 kW per station by 2027.
- Heavy-duty vehicle infrastructure along corridors as well.
The deployment is publicly funded in many cases, which brings open-access requirements.
Open access
Publicly-funded charging infrastructure must:
- Accept payment without prior contract (ad-hoc payment).
- Display pricing clearly before charging.
- Support multiple payment methods (cards, contactless, etc.).
- Allow access via mobile apps from multiple operators.
This pushes against proprietary single-network models.
Interoperability
CPOs must make their data accessible to:
- eMSPs for roaming.
- Member-state NAPs for national aggregation.
- Other parties as specified.
OCPI is the de facto protocol used. Some legacy protocols (OICP) remain but OCPI is preferred for new deployments.
Data accessibility
Member states must operate NAPs that aggregate data on:
- Charging point locations and status.
- Pricing.
- Availability.
Data is shared with other Member States and made available to commercial entities (subject to terms).
Pricing transparency
Pricing must be displayed at the charger and via digital means. Different pricing structures (ad-hoc vs subscriber, time-of-use, etc.) must be clear.
Reliability
The regulation includes reliability expectations, though specific uptime targets vary by member-state implementation.
OCPI’s role in AFIR compliance
AFIR doesn’t mandate OCPI by name but the regulation’s requirements map cleanly to OCPI’s capabilities.
Locations module provides the charging-station-and-status data that NAPs aggregate.
Tariffs module provides the pricing transparency data.
Sessions and CDRs modules enable cross-network roaming (coming soon) for eMSPs.
Credentials and Versions enable the multi-party interoperability AFIR requires.
Commands module enables app-initiated charging across networks (multiple-app access).
HubClientInfo (OCPI 2.2+) supports the hub-mediated aggregation that NAPs often use.
The new SCSP, NSP, NAP roles (OCPI 2.2.1) formalize the regulatory structures that AFIR creates.
OCPI 2.2.1 was significantly influenced by AFIR’s requirements; 2.3 continues this evolution.
The National Access Point (NAP) model
Each EU member state operates a NAP. The NAP:
- Receives data from CPOs operating in that country (typically via OCPI).
- Aggregates and standardizes the data.
- Makes it available to authorized parties (other member states’ NAPs, eMSPs, mapping services, regulators).
- May host pricing transparency tools.
The NAP is often operated by a designated government agency or an entity acting on its behalf. Examples:
- Germany: Nationale Datenplattform (NDP, operated by NOW GmbH).
- France: PSAR (Pour un Service d’Accès aux Réseaux).
- Netherlands: NDOV (Nationaal Data Open Vervoer).
- Similar structures in other member states.
NAPs typically expose data via OCPI endpoints. CPOs serving the country push their data to the NAP; consumers pull from the NAP.
flowchart LR
CPO1[CPO A] -->|OCPI push| NAP[National<br/>Access Point]
CPO2[CPO B] -->|OCPI push| NAP
NAP -->|OCPI pull| EMSP[eMSPs]
NAP -->|OCPI pull| MAP[Mapping<br/>services]
NAP -->|share| NAP2[Other NAPs]
style NAP fill:#2563eb,stroke:#1e40af,color:#fffWhat this means for European CPOs
If you’re a CPO operating in Europe:
Mandatory NAP connection. You’ll need to expose your CPO data to the relevant member state’s NAP. OCPI is the typical mechanism.
OCPI 2.2.1 or later support. The SCSP, NSP, NAP roles in 2.2.1 are necessary for clean NAP integration. Earlier OCPI versions can be made to work but with friction. See OCPI version history for what changed between releases.
Open-access compliance. Publicly-funded sites must accept multiple payment methods, support ad-hoc payment, and not lock to one network’s app.
Pricing transparency. Your tariffs must be exposed via OCPI to the NAP and displayed at the charger. Pricing must be clear before the user commits.
Reliability monitoring. While AFIR’s specific reliability targets vary by member state, expect to be monitored.
Reporting. Periodic reporting to regulatory authorities on deployment, uptime, energy delivered.
For CPOs already on OCPI 2.2.1 with good operational practices, compliance is largely a configuration and partnership exercise. For CPOs on older OCPI versions or proprietary stacks, meaningful work is required.
What this means for European eMSPs
If you’re an eMSP serving European users:
NAP integration as a data source. You can pull comprehensive Locations data from member-state NAPs to give users complete pictures. This is increasingly the canonical data source.
Roaming coverage. Your customers expect to charge at any AFIR-compliant station. Build broad OCPI roaming relationships.
Pricing transparency in your app. AFIR’s transparency requirements apply to you too — users should see prices before committing.
Cross-border compatibility. A user driving from Germany to France should be able to use their account seamlessly. NAP aggregation helps but doesn’t replace robust roaming relationships.
What this means for new entrants
If you’re starting fresh in European EV charging:
Build OCPI-native from day one. Don’t waste time on proprietary protocols that won’t comply.
Plan for NAP integration. Choose a CSMS that handles NAP integration cleanly.
Open-access UX. Multiple payment methods, clear pricing, app-friendly. From day one.
Track compliance dates. AFIR has rolling implementation deadlines; know what applies when.
The cross-border roaming dimension
AFIR’s vision includes seamless cross-border EV travel. A user with one account should be able to charge anywhere in the EU.
In practice, this requires:
- OCPI roaming chains across borders.
- Or NAP-to-NAP information sharing plus eMSP coverage in each country.
- Or hub coverage spanning multiple countries.
The reality in 2026 is good but not perfect:
- Major hub operators (GIREVE, Hubject, e-clearing.net) provide broad coverage.
- Some gaps remain in specific country pairs or with specific operators.
- The user experience is dramatically better than five years ago.
By 2027-2028, with NAP infrastructure mature in all member states, cross-border EV travel should be effectively seamless for most routes.
Common compliance pitfalls
A list of issues European operators run into.
OCPI version mismatch with NAP. NAP supports 2.2.1+; operator is still on 2.1.1 or 2.2. Need to upgrade.
Tariff data quality. NAP rejects tariff submissions because of malformed restrictions, incorrect VAT, etc. OCPI 2.2.1’s stricter Tariffs module handling matters.
Payment-method gaps. Operator supports app-based payment only; AFIR requires also accepting contactless cards. Hardware upgrade needed.
Reliability under-reporting. Some operators self-report optimistic uptime; regulators audit and find gaps.
Cross-border eMSP confusion. A user from one country can’t charge in another due to broken roaming or NAP mismatches.
Pricing display issues. App shows one price; charger displays another; user is billed a third. Sync issues across the system.
Tooling and resources
A few resources for European compliance.
EVRoaming Foundation publishes the OCPI specification and works closely with member states on AFIR implementation.
Member-state NAP documentation typically published on official websites. Specifies submission formats, deadlines, validation rules.
European Commission AFIR resources — the original regulation text, FAQs, implementing acts.
Industry associations (ChargeUp Europe, others) advocate and publish compliance guides.
What’s coming next
AFIR is not static. A few evolutions to watch.
More stringent deployment targets through 2030.
Heavy-duty corridor build-out for trucks and buses.
MCS (Megawatt Charging) requirements as the standard matures.
Smarter pricing transparency — possibly real-time across operators via NAP infrastructure.
Carbon-aware pricing requirements — possibly mandated as the EU’s renewable goals advance.
OCPI 3.0 alignment — when 3.0 ships, AFIR-related provisions likely align.
The honest summary
AFIR is the regulatory framework that’s shaping European EV charging infrastructure. OCPI is the technical foundation that satisfies most of AFIR’s interoperability and data-access requirements. For European operators, the right baseline is OCPI 2.2.1+ with full NAP integration, open-access payment methods, transparent pricing, and broad roaming relationships. For non-European operators serving Europe, the same standards apply when you operate in EU markets. Compliance is increasingly mainstream; the operators that integrated AFIR thinking early are well-positioned, those that didn’t are catching up.