[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
