Skip to main content

US DOT releases new automated driving systems guidance

The US Department of Transportation and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) have released new federal guidance for Automated Driving Systems (ADS): A Vision for Safety 2.0. The new Voluntary Guidance focuses on levels 3, 4 and 5 automated driving systems (ADS).
September 14, 2017 Read time: 2 mins

The US Department of Transportation and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) have released new federal guidance for Automated Driving Systems (ADS):  A Vision for Safety 2.0.

The new Voluntary Guidance focuses on levels 3, 4 and 5 automated driving systems (ADS). It clarifies the guidance process and says that companies do not need to wait to test or deploy their ADS and revises what it says are unnecessary design elements from the safety self-assessment. The guidance also aligns federal guidance with the latest developments and industry terminology and clarifies state and federal roles going forward.

According to US Transportation Secretary Elaine L. Chao, the new Guidance supports further development of this important new technology, which she says has the potential to change the way we travel and how we deliver goods and services. “The safe deployment of automated vehicle technologies means we can look forward to a future with fewer traffic fatalities and increased mobility for all Americans,” she continued.

However, John M. Simpson, US Consumer Watchdog’s privacy project director, says, “This isn’t a vision for safety. It’s a roadmap that allows manufacturers to do whatever they want, wherever and whenever they want, turning our roads into private laboratories for robot cars with no regard for our safety.”

He pointed out that the guidance omits Level 2 technology where only some driving technology is automated. “This is a serious short-coming and ignores the fact that Level 2 technology, like Tesla’s Autopilot, has killed people,” said Simpson. “How the human driver monitors and interacts with Level 2 technologies is potentially life threatening and requires Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards.”

USDOT emphasises that the guidance is flexible and will be amended as automated technologies advance.

Related Content

  • April 7, 2014
    America fires V2V starting gun
    Leo McCloskey, ITS America’s senior vice president for Technical Programs, talks to Jason Barnes about what the recent NHTSA ruling on light vehicle connectivity means for cooperative infrastructures in North America. In early February the US Department of Transportation’s (USDOT’s) National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) announced it had decided to start taking steps to enable Vehicle-to-Vehicle (V2V) communication technology for light vehicles. In so doing, the many safety-related applicati
  • October 22, 2018
    Grey areas: who's legally responsible for C/AVs?
    Connected and autonomous vehicles are an exciting development in the ITS sector – but amid the hype some big questions about their deployment remain unanswered, finds Ben Spencer Connected and autonomous vehicles (C/AVs) have the potential to change the way we travel - and to eliminate road fatalities. But policy makers and regulators will need to ensure user and public safety is included in future planning. The legal and insurance industries will have to catch up, too. For example, questions over who is
  • June 2, 2016
    Sorting myth from reality in vehicle automation
    Bob Denaro looks beyond the hype surrounding autonomous vehicles to the challenges that still need to be overcome. Automated vehicles (AVs) may be the perfect storm – in a positive way - with the automobile manufacturers, the government and consumers all embracing the emergence of a transformational new technology and product.
  • January 24, 2017
    Tesla Autopilot system ‘not at fault’ in fatal crash
    A nine-month investigation by the US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) into the fatal car crash involving a Tesla Model S in Florida last year has concluded that the car’s Autopilot system, which was in operation at the time, was not at fault. The decision noted that Autopilot is a Level 2 self-driving system and, therefore, requires the driver to always monitor the system and be at the ready to intervene – a stipulation that the driver failed to perform, the administration says.