The revolution in wireless communications, already well underway, will dramatically reshape the way we work, play, shop and travel. Which technologies survive and flourish depends not only upon their consumer acceptance in the marketplace, but also, on a more basic level, their ability to be granted access by the federal government to the radio frequencies they need to operate efficiently.
As more and more technologies are developed, the internecine fighting among these new technologies for access to the nation’s limited radio spectrum will surely become more and more fierce.
One major new field of technology-intelligent vehicle-highway systems-is already involved in such a skirmish at the Federal Communications Commission, and the outcome may portend how successful this potentially billion dollar industry will become.
IVHS is envisioned as linking various existing and emerging technologies to create an integrated system of computers, wireless radio communications systems and various sophisticated sensors to be used in cars and highways that has the potential to greatly alter the way millions of Americans drive and interact with the roadway in the not-too-distant future.
The Intelligent Vehicle-Highway System Act, or IVHSA, passed by Congress in November 1991, directs the U.S. Department of Transportation to research, develop, and test such “smart car” technology, and to promote implementation of such systems.
The IVHSA defines intelligent-vehicle highway systems as “the development or application of electronics, communications, or information processing (including advanced traffic management systems, commercial vehicle operations, advanced traveler information systems, advanced public transportation systems, satellite vehicle tracking systems and advanced vehicle communications systems) used singly or in combination to improve the efficiency and safety of surface transportation systems.”
DOT foresees IVHS as an open architecture, nationally compatible system, allowing components from many different sources and vendors to be combined in various configurations. It will accommodate a wide variety of newly developing traffic safety and management technologies, including advanced surveillance, sensor, communications, software, data management and display technologies.
A few examples of possible IVHS applications include vehicle identification and location for commercial fleet management, weigh-in-motion for truckers (eliminating the delays associated with stopping at weigh stations), active traffic management systems, using on-board sensors to avoid collisions, automatic distress signaling when a collision occurs, on-board travel information and route guidance displays, electronic toll collection and, ultimately, completely automated highways.
Benefits of IVHS
DOT estimates the annual cost of traffic congestion in lost productivity alone, not including wasted fuel and pollution, is approximately $100 billion. In addition, about 40,000 people are killed and another five million injured each year in traffic accidents, costing another $137 billion. By creating a smarter transportation system that both provides the driver with significantly enhanced information and automates some of the driving, IVHS could dramatically reduce these costs.
The development of IVHS
Successfully developing IVHS will require coordination between the private and public sectors. The private sector will develop and market IVHS technology and may provide and operate some of the infrastructure. Professional societies and academia will collect information, conduct research and development and provide a forum for discussing the direction IVHS should take. State and local governments will control the purchasing, installation, ownership, operation and maintenance of the IVHS infrastructure. The federal government will provide leadership, assist in developing national standards and fund certain research.
Within DOT, the Federal Highway Administration, the Federal Transit Administration, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the Research and Special Programs Administration are all working on IVHS. Other federal agencies involved in developing IVHS include the departments of Commerce, Justice, Defense, and Energy, and the FCC, National Telecommunications Information Administration, Environmental Protection Agency and National Science Foundation. In addition, IVHS America, a forum composed of industry, government and academia, has been designated a federal advisory committee on IVHS.
Proposed frequencies
DOT’s two main goals in obtaining spectrum for IVHS are:
1. To work with the FCC and NTIA to obtain specific dedicated frequencies for IVHS, suitable for supporting certain basic IVHS functions throughout the country; and
2. To preserve currently available frequencies and identify new opportunities for sharing spectrum with other emerging communications technologies wherever possible.
DOT, through the Federal Highway Administration, requested NTIA and the FCC set aside frequencies for IVHS in the new 220-222 MHz land mobile band.
Five nationwide, narrowband frequency pairs in this band were subsequently allotted to FHWA by NTIA for a 15-year period, with an option to renew, for experimental IVHS use, and IVHS has been registered as a priority national system, which gives it protection from interference. FHWA will maintain administrative control over the use of these frequencies and intends to share their use with its partners in selected IVHS projects.
FHWA has divided these frequencies into base station and mobile frequencies, and imposed attenuation and power limits. Assignments will be made for a period of one to three years, with possible extensions based on technical merit.
Radio equipment that is to be operated on these frequencies must be type accepted by the FCC. The maximum possible effective radiated power (ERP) from a mobile station is 50 watts; ERP limits for base stations range from 5 to 500 watts, depending on the antenna height.
Mobile stations must maintain their carrier frequency within 0.000015 percent; base stations within 0.00001 percent. Use of these frequencies shall otherwise conform to Part 90 of the FCC’s rules governing private land mobile radio services. The final digital modulation type (or types) that will be authorized on these frequencies has not been determined.
DOT estimates the annual cost of traffic congestion in lost productivity alone, not including wasted fuel and pollution, is approximately $100 billion.
The deployment of operational IVHS systems likely will use frequencies in the same band, drawn from the nongovernment, nationwide, noncommercial allotment managed by the FCC. The only applications that appear to require spectrum above 2 GHz are “adaptive” cruise control (i.e., adjusting a car’s speed based on the proximity of other cars or hazards), centrally determined route guidance systems (using microwave or infrared beacons), and automatic vehicle identification (AVI). AVI will need spectrum in the 5.8 GHz band in order to be compatible with European systems.
It is doubtful, however, that enough dedicated spectrum will be made available to support an entire IVHS infrastructure. FHWA has thus been working to identify current and planned communications technologies that may have reserve capacity that could be used for IVHS, such as the emerging technologies of low-earth-orbit satellites and personal communications services. IVHS also might represent a new market for cellular service providers.
An example of IVHS’s ability to share spectrum with an existing technology is FHWA’s FM Broadcast Subsidiary Communications Authorization experiment, aimed at developing a high-speed, low-cost broadcast data link on existing FM subcarrier channels to distribute traffic and other information over conventional car radios.
However, spectrum sharing may not be practical for IVHS core emergency and control services that need dedicated systems and spectrum, such as distress signaling, collision avoidance and vehicle guidance systems.
Because of IVHS’s ability to share spectrum and the limited amount of dedicated spectrum it will require-and that likely coming from the newly allocated 220-222 MHz band-no significant disputes concerning the relocation of incumbent users of spectrum is foreseen. As such, relocation will likely not be necessary.
FCC rulemaking on AVM
Though the FCC has yet to initiate a single, unified docket for IVHS, it has proposed permanent rules for the existing Automatic Vehicle Monitoring system, which is used to locate and track vehicles using non-voice methods and to relay information to and from vehicles, an important component of IVHS.
The FCC has proposed to continue using frequencies in the 902-928 MHz band for AVM, as well as in the bands below 512 MHz on a restricted basis. There are currently seven federal government and nonfederal radio functions authorized in this band, and each service must not cause interference to, and must accept interference from, all services higher in the hierarchy.
For example, AVM systems operating in the 902-928 MHz band must accept interference from industrial, scientific and medical (ISM) devices operating under Part 18 of the FCC’s rules, as well as from the federal government radiolocation (such as high-powered Navy radars located on ships and at certain shore locations), fixed and mobile services.
Although interference to AVM from ISM devices and government radar systems has not yet been a problem, as the number of AVM systems increases the possibility of receiving interference also will increase. Similarly, the potential for interference increases as the number of ISM devices multiplies. For example, hospitals are now using wireless local area networks to relay patient data directly from a hospital bedside to remote computers, enabling more effective, real-time responses to medical emergencies.
Interference to AVM systems also might be received from unlicensed devices, such as cordless telephones, spread spectrum systems, wireless security alarms, wireless meter reading systems, wireless stereo/video devices and wireless bar code readers, authorized under Part 15 of the FCC’s rules, and amateur radio operations under Part 97. Although AVM systems would be entitled to interference protection from unlicensed devices, it can be time-consuming to identify the source of the interference and eliminate the problem.
The FCC has requested comments on how to protect AVM systems from such interference, short of removing Part 15 users and amateur operations from the band, restricting where such users could operate in the band, or placing stricter limitations on the operation of such users in the band.
Finally, in what may be a precursor of FCC action on other IVHS equipment, the commission has proposed that all AVM equipment be preapproved by the commission through the relatively burdensome “type acceptance” procedures of Part 15.
Because of the significant potential for interference as such systems become more widespread, it will be increasingly important that new equipment complies with required technical standards.
Conclusion
As the IVHS concept continues to grow and additional technologies are developed, the FCC will no doubt conduct future rulemakings to resolve spectrum allocation and interference issues. However, because IVHS will be competing with other emerging technologies for scarce radio spectrum, such rulemakings will be very contentious.
The FCC’s central role in providing enough of this resource to allow IVHS to flourish cannot be overstated.
Keith Barritt is a communications and trademark attorney with Fish & Richardson, which specializes in equipment authorizations and spectrum issues before the FCC.
