Strongly Worded Letter

I'm wondering what President Obama - or whatever assistant - was thinking when he opened his morning email and read the quite strongly worded letter opposing autonomous driving technology. While the letter specifically targets the partially driverless technology of the Tesla Model S that arguably, through bad design and interface with the human driver, resulted in a deadly crash in May, the letter does not limit its message to that particular incident or to any particular driverless technology.

The ire of the signing partners is targeted directly at the US Department of Transportation and especially at the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA). The signatories of the four-page diatribe are:

• Joan Claybrook, a former NHTSA Administrator and President Emeritus, Public Citizen, 
• Clarence Ditlow of the Center For Auto Safety,
• Rosemary Shahan of Consumers for Auto Reliability and Safety, and 
• John M. Simpson of the Privacy Project at Consumer Watchdog.

Having seen Ms. Claybrook at the first NHTSA hearing in April, she chooses her words carefully and she does not make frivolous points. Though I disagree with quite a bit in the letter, there are some valid issues raised.

In a nutshell

The heart of the letter reads as follows.

Thus far the administration’s policies on automated technologies have been developed in the shadows. NHTSA granted Google the right to consider the robot the “driver” in its autonomous vehicles in an interpretation issued without public notice, let alone the opportunity for public input. In March, NHTSA announced an agreement with 20 automakers on voluntary standards for automatic emergency braking that were substantially lower than the findings of NHTSA’s own scientists. They also circumvented the public rulemaking process for auto safety features contrary to the law. The rules of the road for automated technologies that would dramatically alter transportation in this country should be developed thoughtfully, in the light of day and with the highest level of transparency and public participation.

Tell us what you really think.

Oh, but there is so much more. The signatories also praise the state of California for its backward - my word - regulations that require specially trained human drivers even in completely autonomous vehicles and its onerous (arguably burdensome) reporting requirements for any incidents involving autonomous vehicles.

Looks matter

The signatories most valid points go to the appearance of impropriety if not to propriety itself. The revolving door and relationships of current NHTSA officials do not pass the smell test of a normal person. Very fishy. I have to say I noticed this at the NHTSA public hearings this spring where NHTSA staff seemed quite familiar and chummy with car company representatives, for example. And their attention to the words of other parties was not impressive either. (Hint: If you conduct a public engagement process, at least buy into your own hype about it and actually listen.)

And the letter goes after all parties, not just the usual corporate adversaries of public interest organizations. Car companies are not specifically taken to task except insofar as they are adopting partially autonomous technology, but tech companies are. Google is named and the letter rails against "Silicon Valley hype."

It's not all negative: Kind words are written in the missive about Volvo and Mercedes, which have declared that they will accept liability if their autonomous vehicle technology is responsible for a crash. (Okay, as a person with a legal education, I just have to say that word "responsible" could launch a thousand lawsuits, subject as it is to various interpretations. This was not pointed out in the letter. Plus, those two companies do not have the screw-you attitude that Tesla flaunts, so they would probably be inclined to take responsibility, settle lawsuits, and make any bad press go away.)

Follow the yellow-brick link

If you have five minutes, definitely read the whole letter. The document is a complete attack on what the signatories see as the Administration's tendency thus far to be in thrall with this new technology and to permit its adoption and operation on the roads without proper rulemaking procedures - that is without transparency and public comment.

You can't stop progress or technology

Meanwhile, the Pentagon is doing quick prototype testing of autonomous vehicles and the Mayor of Beverly Hills is meeting with staff from Google and others as part of a strategy to bring transit AV shuttles to the wealthy enclave (well, small city) as quickly as possible.