Self-Driving Vehicle Bill Sponsors Seek Regulation After Pedestrian Fatality

Asked about potential liability for the vehicle, lead Democratic sponsor Sen. Gary Peters, D-Mich., noted the safety certifications and mandates included in the legislation. “Obviously, we want to make sure that when these vehicles are on the road, they’re safe as they possibly can be,” Peters told us.

One report suggests a human driver could have avoided the collision. Another said an initial investigation from Tempe police suggests the autonomous vehicle wasn't at fault for the death of the pedestrian. Andrew Maynard, professor at Arizona State University’s School for the Future of Innovation in Society, said his understanding from the dash-cam video and reports is that the car’s autonomous systems didn’t detect the crossing pedestrian, and neither did the backup driver, meaning the collision was avoidable. “So it looks at the moment that there was a failure both with the technology and the human in the car,” Maynard said.

Thune called it an “unfortunate accident.” That it's big news highlights how unusual it is that autonomous vehicles are involved in these types of accidents, he said: “One of the most compelling arguments in favor of autonomous vehicles is the 35,000 people that are killed every year on America’s highways, 94 percent of which are human error. If you take some of the human error out of the equation, I think it will save a lot of lives.”

Maynard said many unknowns remain, and technically, the pedestrian was also at fault for jaywalking in an area with a sign warning pedestrians not to cross. It’s “obviously not appropriate that you apply the death penalty to anyone who jaywalks, so there’s a bit of a legal gray area,” Maynard said. Like Thune, Maynard believes if the technology is researched and launched properly, it will save lives in the long run. The key will be deciding how much risk people are willing to take, he added. It may be that people agree the occasional crash is an acceptable price to pay, but that shouldn’t be assumed without involving people in the discussion, he said. Local stakeholders haven't been involved in the discussions, Maynard said, saying the current regulatory framework was established so companies like Uber and Waymo can quickly deploy test vehicles. Citing the ongoing investigation, an Uber spokeswoman directed questions to the National Transportation Safety Board.

Bryant Walker Smith, University of South Carolina assistant professor, said the mood in some states, especially in the Northeast, and even in Congress, could shift somewhat toward a larger supervisory role for governments. “It's even possible that some developers may support that, either because they need credibility or they want to protect their credibility from less reputable would-be developers,” he said.

An aide from Peters’ office said that the Senate Commerce Committee passing the legislation with unanimous consent indicates it could get strong bipartisan support from the full chamber. Peters said sponsors will seek unanimous consent, and if they don’t get it, “we’ll look for an appropriate vehicle to put it up for a vote.”

The legislation would require manufacturers to submit safety evaluation reports to the secretary of transportation, and it establishes a technical advisory committee to be filled by consumer safety and manufacturing representatives, plus federal researchers. The legislation has two main goals: to update National Highway Traffic Safety Administration motor vehicle standards in the long term and establish a temporary safety framework to guide the technology in the short term. Similar legislation was introduced in the House: the Safely Ensuring Lives Future Deployment and Research In Vehicle Evolution Act (HR-3388). The FY 2018 omnibus spending law (see 1803230038) included $100 million for autonomous vehicle research and development.