Skip to main content

US regulator ‘paves the way for Google’s self-driving car’

A letter to Google, the US federal transport regulator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), appears to pave the way for self-driving cars, but adds the proviso that the rule-making could take some time. Google had requested clarification of a number of provisions in the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSSs) as they apply to Google’s described design for self-driving vehicles (SDVs). “If no human occupant of the vehicle can actually drive the vehicle, it is more reasonable
February 11, 2016 Read time: 4 mins
A letter to Google, the US federal transport regulator, 834 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), appears to pave the way for self-driving cars, but adds the proviso that the rule-making could take some time.

Google had requested clarification of a number of provisions in the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSSs) as they apply to Google’s described design for self-driving vehicles (SDVs).

“If no human occupant of the vehicle can actually drive the vehicle, it is more reasonable to identify the driver as whatever (as opposed to whoever) is doing the driving,” Paul A. Hemmersbaugh, NHTSA chief counsel said in the letter to Chris Urmson, director of Google’s self-driving car project.  “In this instance, an item of motor vehicle equipment, the SDS, is actually driving the vehicle.”

The NHTSA’s current 49 CFR 571.3 rule defines a driver as “the occupant of a motor vehicle seated immediately behind the steering control system.”

According to Google, its SDVs are fully autonomous motor vehicles, i.e., vehicles whose operations are controlled exclusively by a self-driving system (SDS).  The SDS is an artificial-intelligence driver, which is a computer designed into the motor vehicle itself that controls all aspects of driving by perceiving its environment and responding to it. Google believes that the vehicles have no need for a human driver and has asked the NHTSA for advice on the interpretation of provisions in the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSSs) for the operation of the new cars.

Google's description of its proposed vehicles corresponds to Level 4 Full Self-Driving Automation defined by a May 2013 preliminary policy statement of the NHTSA on automated vehicles, according to Hemmersbaugh.

According to that Statement, a Level 4 vehicle “is designed to perform all safety-critical driving functions and monitor roadway conditions for an entire trip. Such a design anticipates that the driver will provide destination or navigation input, but is not expected to be available for control at any time during the trip. This includes both occupied and unoccupied vehicles. By design, safe operation rests solely on the automated vehicle system.”

“In essence, Google seeks to produce a vehicle that contains L4 automated driving capabilities, and removes conventional driver controls and interfaces (like a steering wheel, throttle pedal, and brake pedal, among many other things),” said Hemmersbaugh.

However, the NHTSA is wrong to say the artificial intelligence guiding an autonomous robot car counts as the driver, Consumer Watchdog said, adding that Google's own test data demonstrates the need for a human driver who can take control when necessary.

"Google says its robot technology failed and handed over control to a human test driver 272 times and the driver was scared enough to take control 69 times," said John M. Simpson, Consumer Watchdog's privacy project director. "The robot cars simply cannot reliably deal with everyday real traffic situations. Without a driver, who do you call when the robots fail?"

Consumer Watchdog reiterated its support for regulations proposed by the California Department of Motor Vehicles covering the general deployment of autonomous robot cars on the state's highways.

"The DMV would require a licensed driver behind the wheel," Simpson noted. "If you really care about the public's safety, that's the only way to go."

Commenting on NHTSA's interpretation that the robot technology can count as a driver, Anthony Foxx, Secretary of Transportation said, "We are taking great care to embrace innovations that can boost safety and improve efficiency on our roadways. Our interpretation that the self-driving computer system of a car could, in fact, be a driver is significant. But the burden remains on self-driving car manufacturers to prove that their vehicles meet rigorous federal safety standards."

Related Content

  • Give offending drivers credit for good behaviour
    July 27, 2012
    Andrew Rooke and Dave Marples of Technolution B.V. take a look at what can be done to address a long-standing problem: the all-or-nothing approach of automated enforcement. To start, a brief history of speeding: on 14 November 1896, the first Veteran Car Run was staged in England from London to Brighton. It was organised to celebrate new British legislation to raise the maximum speed of vehicles from four to 14mph while also removing the need for a person waving a red flag to walk in front of the car and wa
  • US ITS sector needs strategic leadership
    January 31, 2012
    The US is losing its advantage in the ITS sector because of a lack of strategic leadership, according to a new report from the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation. Here, Stephen Ezell, one of the report's authors, talks to ITS International about what can be done to remedy the situation. A new report from the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF), Explaining International IT Leadership: Intelligent Transportation Systems, makes for sobering reading within the US ITS community.
  • Driverless vehicles ‘need quality road markings’
    September 20, 2013
    UK company Quality Marking Systems has released its comments on a recent road safety article in the Road Safety Markings Association’s (RSMA’s) Top Marks magazine entitled ‘ERF at the forefront of improving road safety in Europe’. The article examines the growing importance of a well maintained road infrastructure and indicates that the European Union Road Federation (ERF) has initiated a very promising cooperation with the European Road Assessment Programme and the European Association of Vehicle Manuf
  • Xerox counts on machine vision for high occupancy enforcement
    October 29, 2014
    Machine vision techniques can provide solutions to some of the traffic planners most enduring problems With a high proportion of cars being occupied by the driver alone, one of the easiest, most environmentally friendly and cheapest methods of reducing congestion is to encourage more people to travel in each vehicle. So to persuade people to share rides, high occupancy lanes were devised to prioritise vehicles with (typically) three of more people on board and in some areas these vehicles are exempt from