Total fluff. In a nutshell, the new NHTSA Voluntary Guidance for Automated Driving Systems, which refers to autonomous vehicle levels 3-5 can be described with an analogy to educating three to five year olds: Less demanding than pre-school, where encouragement is used, but there are also actual rules. Brought to you by the word "encourage," with a good try by the word "should," the VOLUNTARY guidance has a vision of safety, cybersecurity, educated consumers, etc., but it is up to the innovators, be they startups or billion-dollar corporations, to decide whether to deliver on that vision.
We should all feel better that safety, for example, is not completely optional. Without regulation - because encouragement does not equal tech-neutral regulation - we can alway sue in the courts after the death or substantial injury. That works so well - dripping sarcasm here - with our current vehicle standards and self-certification and 30,000-plus deaths and many more injuries EVERY single year.
Yes, let's be technology neutral, but shouldn't we do more than encourage crash prevention for example? Similarly, there is no requirement to report "cyber vulnerabilities" discovered via "incidents, exploits, threats and vulnerabilities from internal testing, consumer reporting, or external security research." But such reporting is - repeat after me - encouraged.
Vague encouragement
Here's the list of encouraged areas of attention and documentation:
System safety
Operational design domain
Object and event detection and response
Fallback for "transitioning to a minimal risk condition" - like pulling over to the side of the road in the case of a malfunction
Validation methods
Human machine interface - leaving unmentioned the diverse needs of people with disabilities
Cybersecurity - including industry sharing and related standards
Crashworthiness
Post-crash vehicle behavior
Data recording
Consumer education and training
No AV federal requirements, sorry ADS requirements
Documentation, performance standards, cooperation - all should be accomplished; they are expressly encouraged. That sponsorship word is used 41 times in 16 pages of recommendations, well encouragement. And what "should" be done with the activities and documentation?
Entities engaged in ADS testing and deployment may demonstrate how they address – via industry best practices, their own best practices,
or other appropriate methods – the safety elements contained in the Voluntary Guidance by publishing a Voluntary Safety Self-Assessment.
... ... ...
Entities are not required to submit a Voluntary Safety Self-Assessment,
nor is there any mechanism to compel entities to do so. While these
assessments are encouraged prior to testing and deployment, NHTSA
does not require that entities provide submissions nor are they required
to delay testing or deployment. Assessments are not subject to Federal
approval. [Emphasis added.]
More encouragement - asking states to "consider" doing stuff - all 50 (plus territories and DC) separately
Yes, NHTSA has limited authority over states under current law. But it does have the power to strongly word recommendations to states, especially because we are still waiting for the enactment of federal preemption statute that establishes a framework for federal AV regulation. There are ways to have what is essentially national standards even where there is little or no federal regulation, but the NHTSA very Voluntary Guidance does not get that ball rolling at all.
The Voluntary Guidance is a remarkable retreat from the Obama Administration's leadership, which offered a template for uniform state legislation, which this Administration merely mentions as an option, but without reference to the statutory language supplied in the previous guidelines or another concrete method of uniformly ensuring that state lines do not impinge on research, development, testing or deployment of AV technology and vehicles.
It's as if the Voluntary Guidance is declaring, "here's vaguely what we want to see, but do what you want." Not leadership for establishing a structure for tech-neutral standards or documentation for advancement that compel results for safety, cybersecurity, privacy, or anything else. The entire document reads as if the speaker will end by saying, "no pressure."
Pet peeve: Automated Driving Systems or ADS - do we really need a new acronym here? We already have AV, HAV, CV, etc.
The House Energy and Commerce Committee boasts on its website that the US House of Representatives has passed the committee's autonomous vehicle (AV) legislation, HR 3388, the SELF DRIVE Act - standing for "Safely Ensuring Lives Future Deployment and Research 4 In Vehicle Evolution Act." (I refer to SELF DRIVE Act and the legislation interchangeably.)
Not only did the legislation pass, but the vote was UNANIMOUS. Unanimous = bipartisan + everyone from one end of the political spectrum to the other.
What is not included
The SELF DRIVE Act is carefully drafted to avoid controversy, so it leaves out quite a bit. Whole sectors of transportation are expressly not included - trucks and buses, be they local or intercity, of whatever size. No freight or transit. In statutory parlance, no commercial vehicles.
Federal/State balance of responsibilities
One limit that is made explicit in the SELF DRIVE Act is "The Secretary may not condition deployment or testing of highly automated vehicles on review of safety assessment certifications."
The legislation codifies for highly vehicles autonomous (HAVs) the existing federal/state division of authority over vehicle regulation. The House asserts power over safety, testing, and deployment. The word preemption is used. In a nutshell, preemption means here that the legislation claims federal authority and that it declares outright that states are banned from imposing such standards unless they are identical to the federal standard.
States are expressly permitted to continue regulating motor vehicle dealerships and "registration, licensing, driving education and training, insurance, law enforcement, crash investigations, safety and emissions inspections, congestion management of vehicles on the street within a State or political subdivision of a State, or traffic unless the law or regulation is an unreasonable restriction on the design, construction, or performance of highly automated vehicles, automated driving systems, or components of automated driving systems." The interpretation of what constitutes an "unreasonable restriction" will be left to the courts and generally the US Department of Transportation (USDOT) to decide.
Requirements for manufacturers - getting into SAL weeds here
The House - and very possibly, soon, the Senate - imposes requirements on vehicle manufacturers. These cover safety assessment letters (SALs), damage reporting, and cybersecurity and privacy plans.
What are SALs? This is where matters get somewhat complicated and where next week's expected update of the NHTSA Autonomous Vehicle Policy, first issued in September 2016 under President Obama and USDOT Secretary Foxx, becomes quite important. These came out this week and I am reading through them now. The key words in the new NHTSA AV guidelines are "voluntary" and "encourage." More in another post.
The SAL in the current NHTSA Autonomous Vehicle Policy is a 15-page letter with all sorts of information for manufacturers to supply. The SELF DRIVE Act provides that the USDOT has 24 months before it is required to "issue a final rule requiring the submission of safety assessment certifications regarding how safety is being addressed by each entity developing a highly automated vehicle or an automated driving system." In the interim:
[S]afety assessment letters shall be submitted to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration as contemplated by the Federal Automated Vehicles Policy issued in September 2016, or any successor guidance issued on highly automated vehicles requiring a safety assessment letter. [Emphasis and link added.]
The SELF DRIVE Act warns that USDOT may NOT, however, "condition deployment or testing of highly automated vehicles on review of safety assessment certifications."
At least for now, any SALs should include, according to the current Federal Automated Vehicles Policy issued in September 2016, "[the name, title, and signature
of an authorized company official and the date. This would be repeated for each area
covered in the letter. This is intended to ensure appropriate transparency, awareness,
and oversight within the submitting organization."
The signature provides some accountability, even if it not written upon penalty of perjury. The upcoming policy update could alter this policy.
Presumably, any Senate legislation and final bill for both houses to consider will integrate the new NHTSA AV guidelines. Congress will also be free to depart from such a policy if it so wishes; however, with broad bipartisan agreement in both houses, there is a big question whether Congress will wish to jeopardize this beautiful situation with any controversy.
USDOT timeline
The legislation imposes a timeline on the USDOT to research, plan, and initiate rulemaking that addresses self-certifications, cybersecurity, safety, and what information must be supplied to consumers.
These provisions include:
180 days - Initiate or continue review of federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS)
18 months - Initiate rulemaking
12 months - A rulemaking and safety priority plan
24 months - Final rule for safety assessment letters - The SELF DRIVE Act would give NHTSA the authority to prescribe these rules. More on that in post about completely voluntary guidelines issued this week by NHTSA. (Coming attraction: One senator called the new guidelines "anemic.")
36 months - Complete research to determine how to inform consumers about capabilities and limitations of PARTIAL and highly automated vehicles. A rulemaking is supposed to follow this.
Exemption number - HUGE increase - with some requirements for manufacturers
The SELF DRIVE Act would give industry its long-expressed wish to greatly increase the number of vehicles per manufacturer that may be exempted from the FMVSS from 2,500 to 100,000. However, this number will go only to 25,000 in the first year and then go up incrementally over three years to 100,000. The legislation provides for a database to be created with information about exempted vehicles, but not to include personal information about any vehicle owner.
In turn, manufacturers are required to create cybersecurity and privacy plans, and they must submit crash information. There is no sale, lease, or other introduction of AVs - partial or highly - into interstate commerce without those plans. By the way, interstate commerce does not actually have to involve any transaction across state lines.
Few demands on PARTIAL AVs
The SELF DRIVE Act mainly concerns AVs that do not rely at all on human operators, but there are a few provisions that relate to partial AVs. These refer to (1) informing consumers about capabilities and limitations of partial AVs; (2) cybersecurity plans that manufacturers must create; and (2) privacy plans that manufacturers must create.
Kitchen sink advisory council
Yes, the SELF DRIVE Act does allow for subcommittees, BUT the advisory council it calls for establishing throws in together every major challenge that AVs present. These are:
Access for people with disabilities, older adults, and people underserved by traditional public transit;
Cybersecurity;
Vehicles and equipment recalls;
Protected sharing of information among manufacturers relating to crashes and near misses;
Labor and employment;
Environmental impacts;
Consumer privacy;
Cabin safety;
Testing and deployment in rural areas; and
Independent verification and validation procedures.
Couple of things tossed into the legislation as well do concern motor vehicles, but not necessarily AVs. These are a phased-in requirement for back seat alarms and safety and performance
standards for headlamps.
One really cannot be a busy person who pays attention on the side to autonomous vehicles (AVs). Today, I'm waiting for the new NHTSA guidelines to be released and tomorrow is a Senate hearing on autonomous trucks and "other large vehicles." Ooh! The guidelines were released four minutes ago. (Four minutes after I wrote that sentence, that is.)
A must read for all AV nerds and insomniacs. Okay, lots of reading ahead, but first this post.
Warning: Analogy, then London
If you've ever been apple picking at a big farm or at a large state fair, you have likely enjoyed a hay ride. The Ohio State Fair uses them as parking shuttles. Kids love them. AV shuttle pilots are providing the same thrill throughout the world, while, I hope, inculcating a positive outlook on AV shared use and transit modes.
Some quite recent examples:
London is having a 19-day pilot in its Olympic Park. Don't ask me why the random 19-day duration. The shuttle will be slow and it will be quite careful of pedestrians.
The Navya autonomous pod is limited to 5mph in the park but has a claimed top speed of nearly 30mph on the open road. It cost “in the hundreds of thousands of pounds” and was brought to London by Euston-based firm Keolis UK following trials on the Las Vegas Strip.
The UK government (apology for the "England" label on this blog) has been actively supporting investment in AVs and in realizing that pilots have a significant role in delighting and educating the public about the transportation transformation to come.
I see a Super Bowl ad coming
I hope that we get a good Superbowl ad out of the AV shuttle at the 2018 game. Super Bowl LII (52 for those of you who missed Roman numeral day in the third grade), will be held in Minneapolis in a domed stadium. The AV shuttle routes will ferry visitors between hotels and events. No report that the shuttles will operate all during game week, but I am making that assumption.
The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MNDOT) selected EasyMile, a French company that makes self-driving technology, to supply buses for testing the technology’s capabilities in the state’s snow and ice in February 2018. The first tests will be in a closed facility. The second testing phase would dispatch the buses as shuttles along pre-programmed routes on public streets, closed to other vehicular traffic— just as thousands of people pour into the Twin Cities for Super Bowl LII.
This MNDOT pilot hinges on a NHTSA waiver from Federal Motor Vehicle Saffety Standards (FMVSS) for the state and for EasyMile. MNDOT is seeking permission for the waiver to cover a bigger road show throughout Minnesota to give people across the state a glance, a local news report, or perhaps a ride to spark thoughts about AV shuttle possibilities.
I confess that I did not realize that Super Bowl (SB) was two words - this after many years of hosting a SB party and hoping that the Giants win if they are in the game so that household is not gloomy for days thereafter. I actually hail from more of a Jets community, but I have to keep that quiet at home. Plus I have zero interest in the game.
Rural approach to AV
Most AV pilots - one could say dog and pony shows - have been happening in large cities. Japan, quite smartly, is exploring the connection between transportation access in rural areas with depopulation and aging populations. These same trends are also taking place in the US rural communities, so, I hope, other Americans in transportation are paying attention to the Japanese work on this issue.
In the US, fewer available drivers for rural senior transportation services is a big problem and it is coupled with the challenge of expensive, long-distance rides to medical care and even shopping, not to mention a lack of transportation for everyday socializing or employment. Isolation for many older adults who live in rural areas is the sad result.
Japan is experimenting with AV transit shuttles "in rural communities such as Nishikata, 115 km (71 miles) north of the capital, Tokyo, where elderly residents struggle with fewer bus and taxi services as the population ages and shrinks. ... Japan could launch self-driving services for remote communities by 2020, if the trials begun this month prove successful."
Gets better
Wait, Japan's well-coordinated approach has one more feature - one meant, I am guessing, to cut costs. Instead of each older person in his or her own podcar, Japan is planning to use existing highway rest stops as feeder points to take people to "to medical, retail and banking services."
The Jacksonville Transportation Authority (JTA), a transit system in Florida, is progressive when it comes to technology of all kinds. Look at it's multimodal and multi-purpose website, TransPortal. Autonomous shuttles testing is part of the plan, though JTA is not initiating a pilot project. Instead the transit system will use a test track for trying out different AV shuttle vehicles as part of its vision for a monorail-type skyway, which is dubbed the "Ultimate Urban Circulator."
The controlled, small-scale test track allows JTA to work out the kinks of autonomous transit, but it also gently introduces the public to driverless technology, JTA Vice President of Planning, gently introduces the public to driverless technology, JTA Vice President of Planning, Development and Innovation Brad Thoburn previously told the Business Journal. ... "It's why something like a test track is important, to get the public comfortable with it," he said at the time.
