1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |NHTSA Heads Down the Road to New Vehicle-to-Vehicle Communications Regulations

NHTSA Heads Down the Road to New Vehicle-to-Vehicle Communications Regulations

Client Alert | 3 min read | 03.10.14


Recent Happenings in APRM
February 2014

On February 3, 2014, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) announced that it currently supports, and will eventually require, vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) communication technology in light vehicles. V2V technology connects vehicles by allowing them to “talk” to each other through the exchange of data, such as speed and location, ten times per second. The technology will initially be utilized to provide warnings to drivers, but ultimately could be combined with self-driving vehicle technology to accelerate, brake, or steer the vehicle automatically. The main intent of V2V technology is to prevent collisions, but it could also be used to provide real-time information related to more efficient routes, thus alleviating traffic congestion, reducing emissions, and saving time.

The Technology:

V2V technology uses sensors that collect information 360 degrees around the vehicle, including information that the driver could not detect alone. A short-range radio network allows vehicles to communicate with each other about 300 yards apart, or even farther away as the information passes from car to car.

NHTSA is wrapping up a year-long pilot program testing V2V technology.  The agency plans to release a report with its findings for public comment “in the coming weeks.” Subsequently, NHTSA will unveil a regulatory framework that would require V2V technology in new vehicles.

The Risks and Challenges:

While V2V technology has the potential to provide safety, environmental, and economic benefits, there are numerous risks and challenges to consider.  Some include: 

  • Compatibility problems with non-V2V vehicles – As NHTSA indicated that its mandate would apply to new light vehicles only, existing light vehicles and all heavy vehicles could be on the road without the same technology. A substantial number of vehicles without the V2V technology would preclude maximum effectiveness, and could actually pose serious risks. For instance, if drivers begin to rely on V2V technology, they may not be aware of the risks posed by an unconnected vehicle.
  • Cybersecurity and privacy – NHTSA sought to preempt cybersecurity and privacy concerns by insisting that “V2V technology does not involve exchanging or recording personal information or tracking vehicle movements.” NHTSA acknowledged, however, that vehicles could be identified through certain procedures that can be employed if there is a safety problem. Some lawmakers are demanding more privacy protections: Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY), for example, has requested that NHTSA and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) establish guidelines that would require vehicle manufacturers to notify drivers when they are being tracked and allow drivers to opt out from sharing information altogether. Allowing drivers to opt out of V2V technology would lessen the benefits of the information shared and increase driver uncertainty as to the comprehensiveness of the information.
  • Interoperability of parts – To achieve the benefits of V2V technology, interoperability between vehicles and parts supplied by different manufacturers is required. NHTSA’s regulatory framework will likely account for this issue by requiring particular technological standards.
  • Communications interference – The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has been considering whether to open the frequency band currently dedicated to short-range communications and used for V2V testing to unlicensed wireless Internet devices. Opening the frequency band has generated some concerns about interference with V2V devices.

While NHTSA has now made clear that V2V technology is inevitable, there are still a number of challenges to ponder. Interested parties should keep a close eye on further developments and should contact the professionals listed below, or their regular Crowell & Moring contact, with any questions or for more information.

Insights

Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.21.25

A Sign of What’s to Come? Court Dismisses FCA Retaliation Complaint Based on Alleged Discriminatory Use of Federal Funding

On November 7, 2025, in Thornton v. National Academy of Sciences, No. 25-cv-2155, 2025 WL 3123732 (D.D.C. Nov. 7, 2025), the District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed a False Claims Act (FCA) retaliation complaint on the basis that the plaintiff’s allegations that he was fired after blowing the whistle on purported illegally discriminatory use of federal funding was not sufficient to support his FCA claim. This case appears to be one of the first filed, and subsequently dismissed, following Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche’s announcement of the creation of the Civil Rights Fraud Initiative on May 19, 2025, which “strongly encourages” private individuals to file lawsuits under the FCA relating to purportedly discriminatory and illegal use of federal funding for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in violation of Executive Order 14173, Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity (Jan. 21, 2025). In this case, the court dismissed the FCA retaliation claim and rejected the argument that an organization could violate the FCA merely by “engaging in discriminatory conduct while conducting a federally funded study.” The analysis in Thornton could be a sign of how forthcoming arguments of retaliation based on reporting allegedly fraudulent DEI activity will be analyzed in the future....