V2V Proposal Travels Winding Road
This story appears in the Jan. 2 print edition of Transport Topics.
The United States has been on the cusp of connected vehicles that communicate directly with each other and with traffic signs and highway infrastructure since 1999, when a slice of electromagnetic spectrum was reserved for such a purpose by the Federal Communications Commission.
Then came the great stagnation of testing, thinking and hypothesizing that finally cracked Dec. 13 with a proposed rule from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The proposal calls for vehicle-to-vehicle connectivity, or V2V, starting around 2021 for cars and light trucks. A vehicle-to-infrastructure system, or V2I, could follow soon from the Federal Highway Administration.
The proposal must now travel an uncertain path to become a rule, though, if that does happen. Not only is a pro- regulation Democratic administration giving way to an anti- regulation Republican one, but NHTSA and the FCC have to agree with each other.
“I don’t think we know if [President-elect Donald] Trump has plans for autonomous cars, or if his appointees will,” communications lawyer Laura Stefani said.
V2V is not a typical regulation, she said. While industry, including the automakers that would have to install V2V, often dislikes regulation, that might not hold here.
“It would be significant if the new administration lets this languish. The auto industry would not want this,” said Stefani, who works as counsel for technology and telecommunications firm Fletcher, Heald & Hildreth.
“On this rulemaking, industry wants a final rule so they know what to design to,” she said, adding, “Automakers don’t want to put more money into yet more research and development.”
The communication, if and when implemented, will take place on the 5.9 gigahertz band. NHTSA and other proponents of the technology said V2V and V2I have the power to save lives by reducing accidents should drivers be caught off guard during dangerous situations.
“V2V is a safety issue,” said Michael Cammisa, the new vice president of safety policy and connectivity for American Trucking Associations. “I don’t know that there’s a particular partisan outlook on this.”
Vehicle makers are often looking for technologies they think their customers will enjoy. Cruise control was once exotic, but now it’s standard. Backup cameras and autonomous braking assistance for day-dreaming drivers are advertised as cool car technologies.
All four of the large North American truck makers offer choices for active safety systems. V2V and V2I, collectively known as V2X, could follow that practice.
“We think V2X technology holds great promise to improve vehicle safety, efficiency and productivity. We look forward to continue working with NHTSA as heavy-duty V2X technologies move from research to deployment,” said Jonathan Miller, a North American vice president for Volvo Group, the parent of Mack and Volvo trucks.
In October, Daimler Trucks North America gave the technology a tentative nod but has not commented on it since NHTSA published its proposal.
A big problem for the NHTSA rule could come from the FCC rather than private industry. Stefani said the independent agency is considering whether to subdivide the 5.9 GHz band and give some of it to the fast-growing Wi-Fi industry, while keeping “enough” for transportation safety data transmission.
Public comment on the issue shows a strong disagreement among parties on how to define “enough.”
Another potential conflict Stefani sees could be privacy and security. NHTSA Administrator Mark Rosekind said in announcing the proposal that V2V is for preventing accidents between anonymous vehicles, not tracking specific drivers. The public needs to be convinced of that.
Regulators also need to set standards so that connected vehicles can’t be hacked or hijacked like a scenario from an action movie.
While the five FCC commissioners are always a bipartisan group, by tradition the old chairman steps down on inauguration day so a new president can appoint a new chairman, Stefani said.
If there is a disagreement, though, within the executive branch between the FCC and NHTSA, Congress might be the arbiter that decides, said Stefani.
“It might come down to political pressure from the Hill. I don’t see a set course,” she said.
