I am happy to say that bipartisan cooperation is alive and well in the US House of Representatives at the House Energy and Commerce Committee, which voted favorably on an autonomous vehicle legislative package in late July concerning testing, cybersecurity, and the appearance of incorporating concerns about rural areas, people with disabilities and older adults.
Warnings
- Long post, and
- The legislation discussed below does not address autonomous commercial vehicles, meaning trucks and intercity passenger buses.
Grumble: Congress seems to have bought into the misleading marketing speak of Tesla and the car companies that "autonomous" means partially self-driving and "highly autonomous" means actually autonomous, as in hands off.
1. HR 3406 - Star of the show
Arguably the most important of the package of bills is
HR 3406, the PAVE Act, which stands for Practical Automated Vehicles Exemptions Act, and is also the first in a list of impressive acronyms. This bill would increase the current exemption limit from 2500 vehicles to 100,000 for motor vehicles to be "sold, leased, or otherwise introduced into commerce in the United States in any 12-month period" that do not meet federal motor vehicle safety standards.
2. HR 3388 - Kicking can down the road
HR 3388, the DECAL Act, which stands for "Designating Each Car’s Automation Level Act.," concerns both partially self-driving vehicles as well as fully autonomous vehicles.
HR 3388 calls upon the
US Department of Transportation to produce a report - in three years. What will be studied and reported on? "[D]etermin[ing] the most effective method and terminology for informing consumers for each highly automated vehicle or a vehicle that performs partial driving automation about the capabilities and limitations of that vehicle."
Only AFTER completion of that study - more than three years from now - will USDOT be authorized to issue regulations "to require manufacturers to inform consumers of the capabilities and limitations of a vehicle’s driving automation system or feature for any highly automated vehicle or any vehicle that performs partial driving automation."
Studying and reporting = delaying
With technology advancing so fast,
HR 3388's mandate that the USDOT produce a report, let alone regulations - in three years - this seems pretty meaningless. My guess is that by three years from now we will see superseding legislation.
Other details
"Let us know if you change anything" is the bill's message to
SAE International, which has defined the
levels of vehicle automation used by vehicle manufacturers, tech businesses, non-profit groups, and government institutions. SAE will be required to inform the USDOT if its automation level designations and definitions change. This provision is included as well wherever relevant in those bills mentioned below.
Other bills
3. HR 3407 - Cybersecurity
This bill would require that manufacturers "not sell, offer for sale, introduce or deliver for introduction into commerce, or import into the United States" any automated vehicle without having a written cybersecurity plan and "an officer or other individual of the manufacturer [identified] as the point of contact with responsibility for the management of cybersecurity."
HR 3407 would mandate that manufacturers plan for "preventative and corrective" actions that account for cybersecurity vulnerabilities; and declare how access to autonomous systems are being limited. The bill also strives for incorporation of the plan into operation via: "A process for employee training and supervision for implementation and maintenance of the policies and procedures required by this section, including controls on employee access to automated driving systems."
4. HR 3411 - Cybersecurity Advisory Council
This bill would require that NHTSA form a Cybersecurity Advisory Council (CAC) of 15-30 people that would make recommendations. CAC membership will be comprised of "a diverse group representative of business, academia and independent researchers, State and local authorities, safety and consumer advocates, engineers, labor organizations, environmental experts, a representative of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, and other members determined to be appropriate by the Secretary."
Like all advisory councils, CAC will have no actual authority. It is incumbent on the press and bloggers to make sure to monitor CAC's recommendations and follow up at NHTSA and the USDOT.
5. HR 3412 - Federal authority and preemption
HR 3412 makes clear that regulation of autonomous vehicles will be under the authority of the federal government - not the states - and that NHTSA will be the responsible agency. Specifically, NHTSA will regulate "the design, construction, or performance of highly automated vehicles, automated driving systems, or components of automated driving systems." No information about the amount of money to be appropriated so that NHTSA will have the resources to fulfill its role.
States retain authority over "registration, licensing, driving education and training, insurance, law enforcement, crash investigations, safety and emission inspections, congestion management of vehicles on the street." Car dealers successfully lobbied Congress because states will also continue to regular dealerships.
6. HR 3416 - Another advisory council - this time for rural residents
Rural America has reason to be concerned as the economics of shared-transportation business models favor densely-populated areas.
HR 3416, if passed, would establish a Rural and Mountainous Advisory Council that would concentrate on safety and logistical issues particular to isolated areas or "caused by natural geographical or man-made features, or adverse weather conditions." Though this advisory council is not authorized to address economic challenges, the bill's description of the council's composition suggests otherwise. "Members of the Council shall include a diverse group representative of business, academia and independent researchers, State and local authorities, safety and consumer advocates, engineers, labor organizations, environmental experts, a representative of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, and other members determined to be appropriate by the Secretary."
This generic language is repeated over and over in language of Congressional hankering for advisory councils.
7. HR 3405 - Definitions of testing vehicles and paperwork
This bill is all about testing cars and light trucks and specifically not about selling or leasing those vehicles. Certification of autonomous testing vehicles will not be required, but manufacturers will need to submit, if
HR 3405 passes, "a description of each type of motor vehicle used during development of highly automated vehicles, automated driving systems, or components of automated driving systems manufactured by the individual, partnership, corporation, or institution of higher education;" and proof of insurance.
Fans of acronyms - here you go:
HR 3405 is the Maximizing Opportunities for Research and the Enhancement of Automated Vehicles Act” or the “MORE Act”.
8. HR 3414 - Throwing a crumb to people with disabilities
My rant first - Regulators, planners, and car and tech manufacturers, as well as start ups repeat the mantra about the life-changing freedom of autonomous vehicles for people with disabilities. BUT that freedom of movement, on par with everyone else, will only happen if vehicles have various interfaces and accessible interior design and doorways suitable for a wide range of disabilities - not just for the visually impaired or people in wheelchairs. And I have not seen anything from Congress or federal transportation agencies about design for or achieving transportation equity for people in wheelchairs.
HR 3414 would establish a Disability Mobility Advisory Council, to be comprised of - OMG, identical language to
HR 3416 (rural advisory council) - "a diverse group representative of business, academia and independent researchers, State and local authorities, safety and consumer advocates, engineers, labor organizations, environmental experts, a representative of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, and other members determined to be appropriate by the Secretary."
Nothing in that language addresses different disabilities, whether individuals with disabilities must be included, or even a mention that organizations that work to improve the lives of people with disabilities be included. Not encouraged here despite the duties of the council for "advancing mobility access for the disabled community with respect to the deployment of automated driving systems to identify impediments to their use and ensure an awareness of the needs of the disabled community as these vehicles are being designed for distribution in commerce."
9. HR 3404 - HAV advisory council
Oh happy day for the endless, ignored archives or recommendations, reports, and agendas of federal advisory councils: Another one to add to the list.
HR 3404 would establish a Highly Automated Vehicle Advisory Council, to be made up of - oh yes - "a diverse group representative of business, academia and independent researchers, State and local authorities, safety and consumer advocates, engineers, labor organizations, environmental experts, a representative of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, and other members determined to be appropriate by the Secretary."
No way to guess that one, right?
This advisory council will look at employment, environmental, privacy and security of information, and safety impacts. A grab bag that makes me question how seriously this council will analyze each particular issue within its scope.
10. HR 3401 - Standards and self-certification paperwork
Are you bored yet? I am. These in-the-weeds details would work wonders for insomnia. I could use a nap right now.
This bill gives the USDOT two years to issue regulations governing safety assessment certifications - who must submit them, what data and test results will be required, and what circumstances will trigger required updates. In the meantime, companies operating in the autonomous vehicle sphere will be governed by NHTSA's "
Federal Automated Vehicles Policy issued in September 2016, or any successor guidance issued on highly automated vehicles requiring a safety assessment letter."
That two years, however, includes a deadline one year in for an actual "rulemaking and safety priority plan" and an 18-month deadline for rulemaking to commence. There is no enforcement mechanism to ensure compliance with these deadlines and there is an escape hatch if timing becomes an issue.
HR 3401 directs NHTSA to "identify elements that may require performance standards including human machine interface and sensors and actuators, and consider process and procedure standards for software and cybersecurity as necessary."
11. HR 3430 - Sharing around an exclusive campfire
Entitled the SHARES Act, short for the Sharing Automated Vehicle Records with Everyone for Safety Act,
HR 3430 would not mandate a singalong, but rather direct the birth of yet another advisory council. Boy, they really know how to copy and paste in the halls of Congress. The "Highly Automated Vehicle Information Sharing Advisory Council" would be comprised of - oh yes, you guessed it - "a diverse group representative of business, academia and independent researchers, State and local authorities, safety and consumer advocates, engineers, labor organizations, environmental experts, a representative of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, and other members determined to be appropriate by the Secretary."
The topic is actually important and could likely use a nudge (maybe more than a nudge) from a federal agency. The advisory council is tasked with coming up with options for tech and vehicle companies to both share within a limited circle and limit dissemination of "relevant, situational information related to any testing or deployment event on public streets resulting or that reasonably could have resulted in damage to the vehicle or any occupant thereof and validation of such vehicles in a manner that does not risk public disclosure of such information or disclosure of confidential business information."
12. HR 3413 - Watering down through division of vulnerable populations into different advisory councils
Called the Addressing Community Challenges Emerging From Self-Driving Systems or Access Act,
HR 3413 would establish an advisory council to make recommendations to NHTSA regarding older adults and "populations underserved by traditional public transportation services and educational outreach efforts" - but not people with disabilities, an overlapping population with similar mobility concerns, whose interests are covered under the separate
HR 3414 advisory council.
Yes, sing the chorus, the council will be comprised of "a diverse group representative of business, academia and independent researchers, State and local authorities, safety and consumer advocates, engineers, labor organizations, environmental experts, a representative of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, and other members determined to be appropriate by the Secretary." Yes, 15 to 30 members.
13. HR 3408 - Great acronyms accumulate
HR 3408 is known as the EXEMPT Act, which stands for "Expanding Exemptions to Enable More Public Trust Act." The bill provides for allowable exemptions if the highly autonomous vehicles are either "a highly automated vehicle providing a safety level at least equal to the safety level of the standard for which exemption is sought; or (II) a highly automated vehicle providing an overall safety level at least equal to the overall safety level of nonexempt vehicles.”
This bill would amend
49 USC § 30113, which gives authority to the Secretary of Transportation to exempt testing vehicles from safety standards. Vehicles would be searchable by VIN number and not by owner name.
14. HR 3421 - Weirdly Cold War acronym
HR 3421 is the INFORM Act, which stands for Increasing Information and Notification to Foster Openness Regarding Highly Automated Vehicles Matters to States Act. The bill would create a publicly searchable exemption database for all vehicles granted exemptions pursuant to
49 USC § 30113.
Outside of the package, a few more morsels - not quite miscellaneous
None of the above applies to commercial vehicles, whether trucks or intercity buses. Provisos abound in
HR 3353, but up to $100 million would be allowed for Motor Carrier Safety grants, BUT the money must come out of the Highway Trust Fund.
$100,000,000 in additional obligation limitation is provided for a highly automated commercial vehicle research and development program, in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31108, and shall remain available until September 30, 2022: Provided further, That the activities funded by the previous proviso may be accomplished through direct expenditure, direct research activities, grants, cooperative agreements, contracts, intra or interagency agreements, other agreements with private and public organizations, and transfers to other Federal agencies for activities under this heading. Provided further, That such funds as necessary for payment of obligations incurred in carrying out this section shall be derived from the Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account), to be available until expended. [Emphasis in original.]
S 1519 would permit the Department of Defense to "establish one or more multi-institution task order contracts, consortia, cooperative agreements, or other arrangements to facilitate expedited access to university technical expertise, including faculty, staff, and students, in support of Department of Defense missions in the areas specified" - which includes artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, materials science, and autonomous systems, among a host of others.
Whether we like it or not, lots of good research gets funded by Defense, even for things that go beyond military and defense-related stuff.
Perth, Australia has an AV transit shuttle service - open to the public - that just turned one year old. The Navya shuttle, called Arma, operates on public roads. The shuttle reads signs and turns right. Unlike human drivers, it regularly improves due to software upgrades. [See photo.]:format(webp)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/50589169/self-driving-bus-vehicles-Finland-Helsinki-transportation-1.0.jpg){kind=spacer}
Arlington, Texas has a pilot AV shuttle program that began on Aug. 26 and will continue through mid-2018. The shuttle will provide AV transportation around the Arlington entertainment district and to Texas Rangers and Dallas Cowboys games on game days and when concerts and other events are held. EasyMile shuttle vehicles will be used. Arlington is already considering expanding the use of AV transit shuttles beyond the pilot project. The vehicles hold 12 passengers, according to one enthusiastic report.
