Inclusive AVs RFI from USDOT Secretary's Office

I am taking a break from reading comments on the NHTSA Advanced Notice of Proposed Rule Making (ANPRM) (because there is only one brief comment that I have not yet discussed) to examine the next AV release from somewhere at the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT). 

Today's glossary

RFI = Request for Information, specifically one released last week related to AVs

AVs = Autonomous Vehicles

Why now?

The RFI related to promoting standards and collaboration for designing accessible AVs for people with disabilities was released last week from the Office of the Secretary of Transportation (OST). Entitled the RFI for the Inclusive Design Reference Hub, one could ask why this RFI is being released now, on the eve of a new Administration and after almost four years of quite respectable lip service and some effort toward improving transportation for people with disabilities and older adults, as much as could be possible within an auto-oriented, national transportation network, and from a Republican Administration. Still, at every opportunity, Sec. Chao of the US Department of Transportation has promoted the idea that AVs hold the promise of independence for people with disabilities and seniors. That's not nothing.

I am imagining elves in the bowels of the USDOT building - or Madam Secretary Chao herself - wondering if now is the time to be bold, when no one but transportation nerds are noticing because of all of the crazy news emanating from the White House and Congress. But here is an RFI, an invitation for ideas about how to ensure that our autonomous vehicle (AV) future is an accessible one for those who have not been included equitably in our current transportation universe.

This is a document one would expect from a moderate Democratic Administration or what was once called a moderate Republican (or an Eisenhower Republican), in the mainstream and fearful of alienating the many normal people who assume driving and free parking are Constitutional rights.

Comments are due on or before Jan. 20, 2021.  As of Dec. 28, 2020, no one has submitted any comments in response to the RFI. Comments to this RFI can be submitted and found at Regulations.gov.

Recognition that people with disabilities and their loved ones are > 50% of US population

Perhaps this RFI is an acknowledgment of the fact that people with disabilities represent a quarter of the US population and, when combined with family members who live with and provide assistance to persons with disabilities, we are now at over half of the population. (R. Brooks, Disability Equity and Inclusion Within Transit - By the Numbers, Comto News in Motion (12/17/20)). Disability rights, therefore, are fast becoming mainstream voter concerns. The question is whether that broad and diverse population recognizes itself as one unit and votes together on its priorities.

RFI - What?

An RFI is generally used when a government agency is not completely certain about how to attain a goal or when it wishes to appear or to actually proceed as if it is open to a range of ideas. The stated purpose of this RFI is to promote the following for AV development:

1. [Encourage an] open and inclusive partnership to develop voluntary, consensus-based technical specifications, best practices, and standards.  
2. Provide a foundation for consistently and comprehensively meeting the needs of people with disabilities 
3. Inform the design of future automated vehicles. 
4. Accelerate the accumulation of knowledge and encourage private sector experimentation. Tracking and sharing less mature, early stage research through technical specifications and best practices—in addition to developing and maintaining published technical standards—can help clarify where technical consensus is emerging and where investment and attention is most needed to fill long-term gaps. 
5. [Compile] a library of technical specifications and best practices for designing accessible vehicle features,  
6. [P]rioritiz[e] development of new resources where there are knowledge gaps, ... including relevant standards development organizations, primarily through existing forums. 
7. [Commit] to an initial investment to launch [an] initiative [that] will seek to establish a process to maintain this resource [- a library] in regular consultation with stakeholders, including relevant standards development organizations, primarily through existing forums. 

The stated role of the USDOT will be to "assess potential approaches in terms of how likely they are to result in a self-sustaining long-term effort that includes active participation from all stakeholders with relevant expertise and perspective."

This RFI, hidden from most people in the Federal Register, and not exactly covered through major media outlets, can claim to be open for public comment, but it is a small subset of advocacy groups, associations, and corporations that will pay attention. Unless disability and senior rights organizations - and individuals - fully embrace the philosophy of "nothing about us without us" and stand up loudly for universal and accessible design, we will have AVs that mirror the mainly inaccessible vehicles that we have today.

Voluntary still

More details in the RFI reveal that under Sec. Chao's USDOT no one is talking actual regulatory requirements; we are still talking about voluntary standards, with a wish for a consensus on "technical specifications, best practices, and standards [that] can provide a foundation for consistently and comprehensively meeting the needs of people with disabilities and inform the design of future automated vehicles."

The RFI places the USDOT, a government agency, in the role of convener to "establish a process to maintain this resource [- a library -] in regular consultation with stakeholders, including relevant standards development organizations, primarily through existing forums. seeking input from its stakeholders and potential partners on defining its scope, the most critical first steps, the necessary qualifications and expertise to support it, and how to ensure long-term ownership and maintenance of the resulting resources. I imagine this is all carefully worded language to the traditional powers in the auto and tech industries and known advocacy groups representing people with disabilities. 

Change of Administration

Library - My first question is who gets that sizable contract. This RFI will provide valuable information and ideas to a new Administration that will do what it prefers with the RFI responses. Contrary to words spoken in the heat of the presidential campaign, President-Elect Biden is no progressive. Remember that this is a moderate Democratic Administration with a Congress that lacks a strong majority for either party. There is a limit to what the Biden Administration will do. Do not expect that we are going to make AVs all accessible or get rid of free parking or tear down scores of highways.

Addressed to whom?

To whom is the RFI actually addressed? It is looking for input from parties who are a "coalition of industry, disability advocacy, academia, and government partners [that] can help ensure shared understanding of the needs of individuals with a range of disabilities and corresponding technical specifications and best practices." Such coalitions exist - but separately by industry or advocacy coalitions -  and I wonder if it addressed to such groups to encourage work together, attempting, without the promise of money or the mandate of regulations, to spur AV accessibility.

Such coalitions and industry associations are likely to be:

We Will Ride: A coalition of disability rights and support organizations.

Consortium of Citizens with Disabilities (CCD) Transportation Committee: The committee is made up of a small group of professionals who are very knowledgable about, active, and committed to AV transportation for people with disabilities. CCD is composed of representatives of a range of disability organizations, which represent a range of sensory, physical, and cognitive disabilities. 

Transportation associations, including, but not limited to : 

American Public Transportation Association - APTA represents medium and large transit agencies.

Community Transportation Association of America - CTAA mainly represents medium, small and tiny transit agencies and volunteer and community transportation services, often funded through social, medical, and other service programs. CTAA members often provide transportation for people with disabilities, seniors, students, and low-wage workers. [Note: I am a former employee of CTAA.]

Alliance for Automotive Innovation - Members are auto and tech companies. 

Global Alliance Automotive - Car companies from around the world, though members are not listed.

Auto Alliance - Members are US and international car companies. 

Self-Driving Coalition for Safer Streets boasts tech, auto, and ridehailing companies as members. There are also a few non-profits, including disability organizations, that are non-voting "partners."

Ridehailing companies, basically Uber and Lyft, have resisted demands for accessible vehicles, mainly providing such service in large cities or per contracts to provide pilots or other service supplemental to transit. There have been quite a few lawsuits demanding accessibility and service for people with disabilities, but these have been settled without any determination that these are transportation companies subject to the ADA. 

Transportation Alliance - This organization was formerly the Taxi, Limousine, and Paratransit Association. It is focuses a great deal on non-emergency medical and paratransit issues, but it has not been active on AV issues.  

Organizations representing seniors or those who provide services to them should also participate. I won't go into these at the moment, but some are active on or pay some attention to AV issues. 

There is no particular organization just representing the AV shuttle manufacturers. They generally work with cities, campuses, and transit agencies - and the small group of companies compete directly with one another. 

Others I am not going to spend time on here, though relevant, are regional and city planning organizations, and pedestrian and biking organizations. Accessibility and safety of the street space for non-drivers will determine whether people with disabilities will be able to access transit or shared-use vehicles (such as microtransit and ridehailing).

What is accessible now?

At the moment, the only mode of transportation that is broadly accessible - by the minimum standard of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and regulations promulgated in furtherance of the ADA - is fixed-route transit (buses, subways and other rail services), with supplemental paratransit for those unable to use conventional transit for whatever reason (such as lack of access to a bus stop because there is no curb cut or it is icy in winter or there is no place to sit or have shelter). Taxis, ridehailing, microtransit and the private vehicle might or might not be accessible. (That would be a whole other blog post to explain the ins and outs of the ADA and the reality that has grown up around it, and around the politics of mobility on demand.) More and more microtransit is partnering with transit and providing accessible transportation.

To summarize, any service partnered with transit, such as subsidized Lyft rides or microtransit to a bus station per a contract to partner with a transit agency, will have to make accessible vehicles available for the rider who is eligible. That would also be included in the whole other blog post to explain.

Again, comments are due on or before Jan. 20, 2021. Click here for the webpage on Regulations.gov where the comments to this RFI can be submitted and found.