[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 3 (Monday, January 6, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 791-793]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-172]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
[FHWA Docket No. 96-49]


Achieving Interoperability With Dedicated Short Range 
Communication

AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice; request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: With this notice the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is 
requesting comments on three items of concern relating to the 
implementation of dedicated short range communication (DSRC) systems 
specified in the Intelligent Transportation Systems National 
Architecture. These issues are as follows:
    (1) Should the FHWA require that DSRC systems purchased with 
Federal-aid highway funds and ITS Federal funds meet draft standard 
specifications, such as that of the American Society for Testing 
Materials (ASTM) proposed Draft #6 standard and the Committee for 
European Normalisation (CEN) draft documents N473, N474, and N505 prior 
to their formal adoption as industry standards in an effort to reduce 
the proliferation of non-interoperable systems? Should the FHWA also 
include message set requirements, such as the Commercial Vehicle 
Information Systems and Networks (CVISN) Dedicated Short Range 
Communications Interface Requirements of April 2, 1996 (Johns Hopkins 
University-Applied Physics Lab)? Should compliance with specific draft 
standards be required for Commercial Vehicle Operations (CVO) 
applications only; for both CVO and Electronic Toll and Traffic 
Management (ETTM) applications; or for CVO, ETTM, and additional 
applications?
    (2) Should the FHWA require that DSRC systems purchased with 
Federal-aid highway funds and ITS Federal funds meet an escalating 
interoperability formula? An example would be that first, all CVO 
applications must be nationally interoperable; second, all new (after 
specified date) and upgrading electronic toll collection systems and 
other DSRC applications must be interoperable with CVO applications.
    (3) Should a single standard be developed for all applications, or 
should separate standards be developed with an assumption that trucks 
and buses, and perhaps other users, would likely require separate 
technology to perform those functions?

DATES: The FHWA requests comments by February 1, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Submit written, signed comments to FHWA Docket No. 96-49, 
Room 4232, HCC-10, Office of the Chief Counsel, Federal Highway 
Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, D.C. 20590. All 
comments received will be available for examination at the above 
address from 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, 
except Federal holidays. Those desiring notification of receipt of 
comments must include a self-addressed, stamped postcard.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Michael P. Onder, Intelligent 
Transportation Systems Joint Program Office, (202) 366-2639; Ms. 
Beverly M. Russell, Office of Chief Counsel, (202) 366-1355, Federal 
Highway Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, D.C. 
20590. Office hours are from 7:45 a.m. to 4:15, e.t., Monday through 
Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    In the 1980's a novel approach to facilitating transportation 
developed. The dedicated short range communication (DSRC) industry, as 
it came to be known, utilized radio frequency systems to facilitate 
hands-off data communication between vehicles and electronic reading 
devices on the roadside. This application of communications technology 
to transportation has enabled motorists to pay highway tolls and 
commercial motor vehicles to clear weigh stations and ports of entry 
without stopping. The main hardware components of the DSRC system 
consist of a transponder, or tag, mounted on a vehicle, communicating 
wirelessly with a roadside reading device. The transponder, or tag, 
stores at a minimum a unique ID number that is received by the reading 
device and is matched to a corresponding record on a computer system 
that identifies the vehicle/container/rolling stock and its associated 
records. The benefits derived from installation of this new technology 
reflect a significant return on investment; especially in the toll and 
fleet management business.
    The Department of Transportation's Intelligent Transportation 
Systems (ITS) program was established by Congress in the Intermodal 
Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) (Pub. L. 102-240, 
105 Stat. 1914). In the ISTEA, Congress directed the Department to 
develop and implement standards and protocols to promote widespread use 
of ITS. See Pub. L. 102-240, Sec. 6053(b), 105 Stat. at 2190 (as 
codified at 23 U.S.C. 307 note). A precursor to the development of 
standards has been the formation of a National System Architecture 
which provides a framework that describes how system components should 
work and interact. A system architecture addresses how system data 
flows, how various traffic and traveler information message formats are 
structured, how electrical interfaces are formed, and which 
communication system mediums are used for data transmission. The 
Department began an intensive ITS National Architecture Program in 
December 1994, and concluded with 29 user services in July, 1996. The 
29 user

[[Page 792]]

services have been defined to date as part of the national planning and 
architectural development process. A 30th user service (Highway-Rail 
Intersection) has recently been defined and is now being included in 
the national architectural process. The National Architecture envisions 
a transportation system in which DSRC is the favored method of wireless 
communication for Commercial Vehicle Operations (CVO) and for 
Electronic Toll and Traffic Management (ETTM) applications. The 
objectives of CVO services are to increase productivity of commercial 
vehicle regulatory agencies and commercial vehicle operators, and to 
enhance the safety of CVO drivers and vehicles. Examples of CVO 
services include automated permit and registration acquisition, vehicle 
performance monitoring, and hazardous materials incident response. ETTM 
allows drivers to pay highway tolls without stopping, and allows 
traffic managers to use transponders as probes in high traffic volume 
areas to facilitate incident detection.

Application of DSRC

    The largest installed base of DSRC systems are in electronic toll 
collection (ETC) systems. The northeastern region of the United States, 
where nearly two-thirds of all tolls in the United States are 
collected, has electronic toll collection systems in place from 
Virginia to Maine. ETC systems are also in place in California, Texas, 
Louisiana, Oklahoma, Kansas, Georgia, and Florida. Upcoming ETC systems 
are planned for widespread use in such high travel areas as the 
Maryland, Illinois, and Indiana tollways and the Pennsylvania, Ohio, 
and Florida turnpikes. None of the electronic toll facilities are 
interoperable with regard to reciprocity in collecting tolls. 
Relatively few are interoperable in terms of either utilizing the same 
transponder devices or having a common reading device that could read 
different transponders. Recent procurement requests from Maryland and 
Florida have addressed regional interoperability. Today there are 
several hundred thousand transponders in use on tollways. In the near 
future there are expected to be several million transponders in use. 
The problems caused by this lack of standards and interoperability will 
grow in intensity as demand and usage grow.
    Commercial Vehicle Operations do not have as large an installed 
base of transponders as ETC. Currently there are two major areas of 
operations in the United States where heavy vehicles are cleared 
electronically as they pass weigh stations. These are the I-75 corridor 
in the Mid-West and the I-5, I-8, and I-10 corridors on the West Coast. 
The I-75 corridor, under the Advantage CVO Project, has 29 sites 
electronically linked from Florida through Ontario to allow for non-
stop clearance of commercial vehicles as they are weighed at highway 
speeds. The three corridors on the West Coast comprise the HELP, Inc. 
Pre-Pass system which operates in a similar fashion to the Advantage 
CVO Project. Soon to be installed are CVO DSRC systems along the I-95 
corridor from Virginia to Maine. Both Idaho and Utah also have 
installed electronic clearance systems, and the State of Washington is 
in the process of implementing such a program. In addition, DSRC 
systems are currently being installed in four international border 
crossing sites at Otay Mesa, California, Nogales, Arizona, Buffalo, New 
York, and Detroit, Michigan. In the planning stages for installation of 
DSRC equipment are the Laredo and El Paso, Texas and the Blaine, 
Washington border crossings, as well as sites in seven model deployment 
states for CVISN. Interoperability tests have been done successfully 
between Advantage CVO and HELP, Inc. with equipment that is compatible 
with the ASTM draft #6 proposed standard. Requirements for 
interoperability are in place; letters of agreement, have been used to 
ensure that only equipment that is compatible with the ASTM draft #6 
proposed standard be used at the border crossing sites and in the model 
deployment States. However, a major growth of DSRC systems is also 
expected with CVO projects, and the problem of non-seamless 
transportation between DSRC sites will only be exacerbated without 
interoperability standards.

Problem

    The problem is that DSRC standards governing the wireless 
communication between the transponder and reader, and the message sets 
on the transponder, do not exist. Therefore, interoperability does not 
exist between the equipment of different manufacturers. 
Interoperability, in this case, is the ability of a roadside reading or 
interrogation device of one manufacturer to meaningfully process the 
data from any given transponder mounted in a vehicle. Over the past six 
years, the DSRC industry has been unable to agree upon a path for 
standardizing DSRC at levels one and two of the International Standards 
Organization's Open Systems Interconnect (OSI) reference model, which 
deals with the air interface and the physical properties of the system. 
During the same time frame, the FHWA has been developing the 
architecture for CVO and other ITS Programs. This development has 
matured to the point that the FHWA is ready to initiate seven model 
deployments of CVISN and the Intelligent Transportation Infrastructure 
in four major metropolitan areas to test the system under operational 
conditions. In order for the fundamental concept of wireless vehicle to 
roadside communication to be viable for commercial fleets, it is 
essential that interoperability exist nationwide. Therefore, the FHWA 
believes it must insist that model deployments be interoperable with 
each other. If the industry stalemate continues, the FHWA may be forced 
to seek a process to stop the proliferation of non-interoperable DSRC 
systems. To continue to allow Federal funds to be invested in non-
compatible systems will exacerbate the problem. As a result, unless the 
DSRC industry can identify a solution to non-interoperability 
immediately, the FHWA will be forced to find an interoperability 
solution that will not only support the near term deployment, but also 
the long term expanded deployments that are expected to be utilizing 
Federal-aid funds.

Solicitation for Public Comment

    In the House report accompanying the 1996 DOT appropriations bill, 
the Committee on Appropriations explicitly stated that the Department 
should require that Federally supported ITS operations tests be 
consistent and compatible with the National Architecture to promote 
interoperability. H.R. Rep. No. 177, 104th Cong., 1st Sess. (1995). In 
the spirit of that requirement, this notice is being issued to solicit 
public comment on the following issues.
    (1) Should the FHWA require that DSRC systems purchased with 
Federal- aid highway funds and ITS Federal funds meet draft standard 
specifications, such as that of the American Society for Testing 
Materials (ASTM) proposed Draft #6 standard and the Committee for 
European Normalisation (CEN) draft documents N473, N474, and N505 prior 
to their formal adoption as industry standards in an effort to reduce 
the proliferation of non-interoperable systems? Should the FHWA also 
include message set requirements, such as the Commercial Vehicle 
Information Systems and Networks (CVISN) Dedicated Short Range 
Communications Interface Requirements of April 2, 1996 (Johns Hopkins 
University-Applied Physics Lab)? Should compliance with specific

[[Page 793]]

draft standards be required for Commercial Vehicle Operations (CVO) 
applications only; for both CVO and Electronic Toll and Traffic 
Management (ETTM) applications; or for CVO, ETTM, and additional 
applications?
    The FHWA must continue to meet schedules for deployment of ITS 
projects using DSRC as the communications medium. Our understanding is 
that at least two competing products exist that comply with the open 
architecture of ASTM draft #6. On the other hand, it is also our 
understanding that the European standard (CEN) is not used in any 
products available in the United States that use the 902-928 MHz 
spectrum. To disrupt the project schedules could have a severely 
detrimental effect on the ITS program. Although we desire to minimize 
any detrimental effect on the program, we also understand the need of 
the industry to set the DSRC standards. Our strongest desire is for 
standards to be set that will best serve the users and the industry. It 
is not our intention to institute a standards process that would not be 
agreeable to the industry and users.
    (2) Should the FHWA require that DSRC systems purchased with 
Federal- aid highway funds and ITS Federal funds meet an escalating 
interoperability formula? An example would be that first, all CVO 
applications must be nationally interoperable; second, all new (after 
specified date) and upgrading ETC systems must be interoperable with 
CVO applications; third, all other new (after specified date) and 
upgrading DSRC applications must be interoperable with CVO 
applications?
    Nationwide interoperability is critical for the efficient operation 
of vehicles using DSRC equipment transiting the nation, especially 
commercial vehicles. As such, it is imperative that CVO programs be 
built with a national focus. ETC programs, on the other hand, are 
focused on regional travel, and its customers may not be very concerned 
about interoperability outside the local travel area, with exception to 
commercial carriers. The same regional emphasis may hold true with 
other DSRC applications, like in-vehicle signing or transit vehicle 
signal priority, parking payments, and traffic network performance 
monitoring. It may not be practical to immediately hold all users of 
DSRC equipment to a single national standard. Instead, a course of 
action to achieve national interoperability may be to include a 
migration plan that requires CVO applications to adhere to a national 
DSRC standard, followed by DSRC applications with regional emphasis. A 
best fit date can be specified for new and upgrading regional 
projects to begin adherence with the national standard.
    (3) Should a single standard be developed for all DSRC 
applications, or should separate standards be developed with an 
assumption that trucks and buses, and perhaps other users, would likely 
require separate technology to perform those functions?
    The FHWA recognizes that CVO and ETTM applications, as well as 
other DSRC applications, have different requirements that have also 
shaped the design and operation of the equipment. While it may be 
desirable to have a single standard, it may not be practical. The FHWA 
is requesting comments on whether the agency should pursue the single 
standard approach, encourage the development of dual standards (one for 
the short term and one for the long term), or sponsor dual standards 
for the short term and pursue single standards for the next generation 
of DSRC?
    The FHWA is looking to the industry and users to come to some 
agreement as to DSRC standards for both the short term (1-3 years) and 
the long term (4-10 years). The FHWA has demonstrated its willingness 
to assist in this process by funding standards development 
organizations for this purpose. The solution to this problem must be 
sought together through a team effort by all of the stakeholders. The 
successful implementation of the ITS model deployments is not possible 
without a demonstrated willingness on the part of all parties to seek a 
solution through the established standard setting processes. The FHWA 
has further demonstrated its willingness to pursue a solution by 
funding a contractor to meet one-on-one with purchasers and 
manufacturers of DSRC equipment to develop a concept of operations, a 
migration plan, and a draft memorandum of agreement between purchasers 
of DSRC equipment. The FHWA has also been participating in all 
discussions sponsored by ITS America that have been taking place 
between users and manufacturers. We are now looking for the industry to 
do its part. The FHWA would prefer that the industry set the necessary 
standards through the consensus building process that the FHWA is 
sponsoring. In the meantime, the FHWA is seeking comments on how it can 
most effectively administer the ITS programs, that rely on DSRC 
systems, without the necessary standards in place.

    Authority: Pub. L. 102-240, Sec. 6053(b) (as codified at 23 
U.S.C. 307 note); 49 CFR 1.48.

    Issued on: December 24, 1996.
Rodney E. Slater,
Federal Highway Administrator.
[FR Doc. 97-172 Filed 1-3-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-P