1. AUTOMATED VEHICLES POLICY MAKING
The Utility of FARS Data
TRB Planning Applications Conference
Krishnan Viswanathan
May 15, 2017

2. State DOT Missions Primary Mission Emerging Areas Safety
Quality of Life and Environmental Responsibility
Economic development & Intermodal Connectivity
Emerging Areas
Technology
Demographics and Public Health
Land Use and Energy Policy

3. Why - Fatalities

4. Causes The Human is the weakest link
Source: Singh, S. (2015, February). Critical reasons for crashes investigated in the National Motor Vehicle Crash Causation Survey. (Traffic Safety Facts Crash•Stats. Report No. DOT HS ). Washington, DC: NHTSA.
The Human is the weakest link

5. Automated Vehicles
Automated vehicles are those in which at least some aspect of a safety-critical control function (e.g., steering, throttle, or braking) occurs without direct driver input.
An automated vehicle communicates with other vehicles and the infrastructure to self-drive. An autonomous vehicle is self-contained and does not interface with other vehicles or roadside.
Automated vehicles use on-board sensors, cameras, GPS, and telecommunications to obtain information to make their own judgments regarding safety-critical situations and act appropriately by effectuating control at some level.
For DOT, the excitement around highly automated vehicles (HAVs) starts with safety. Two numbers exemplify the need. First, 35,092 people died on U.S. roadways in 2015 alone. Second, 94 percent of crashes can be tied to a human choice or error.2 An important promise of HAVs is to address and mitigate that overwhelming majority of crashes. Whether through technology that corrects for human mistakes, or through technology that takes over the full driving responsibility, automated driving innovations could dramatically decrease the number of crashes tied to human choices and behavior. HAVs also hold a learning advantage over humans. While a human driver may repeat the same mistakes as millions before them, an HAV can benefit from the data and experience drawn from thousands of other vehicles on the road. DOT is also encouraged about the potential for HAV systems to use other complementary sensor technologies such as vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) and vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I) capabilities to improve system performance. These sensor technologies have their own potential to reduce the number and severity of crashes, and the inclusion of V2V and V2I capabilities could augment the safety and performance of HAV systems.

6. Levels of Automation
Highly
Automated
Vehicles

7. Federal Automated Vehicles Policy
Released Sept. 2016
Comments and Public Workshop – Nov. 2016
Policy sets out an ambitious approach to accelerate the Highly Automated Vehicles (HAV) revolution
Guidance rather than rulemaking
Sections on:
Vehicle Performance Guidance for Automated Vehicles
Model State Policy
NHTSA’s Current Regulatory Tools
New Tools and Authorities
Recognizing this great potential, this Policy sets out an ambitious approach to accelerate the HAV revolution. The remarkable speed with which increasingly complex HAVs are evolving challenges DOT to take new approaches that ensure these technologies are safely introduced (i.e., do not introduce significant new safety risks), provide safety benefits today, and achieve their full safety potential in the future. To meet this challenge, we must rapidly build our expertise and knowledge to keep pace with developments, expand our regulatory capability, and increase our speed of execution.
This Policy is an important early step in that effort. We are issuing this Policy as agency guidance rather than in a rulemaking in order to speed the delivery of an initial regulatory framework and best practices to guide manufacturers and other entities in the safe design, development, testing, and deployment of HAVs. In the following pages, we divide the task of facilitating the safe introduction and deployment of HAVs into four sections:

8. Legislative Climate February 2017 January 2014
Source:

9. Model State Policy Goal is to make it easy for users and manufacturers
Federal government will retain authority to
Set and enforce safety standards,
Communicate with the public about safety, and
Occasionally issue guidance about how to meet national standards
States will retain their authority to
License human drivers and register cars,
Set and enforce traffic laws, and
Regulate vehicle insurance and liability
DOT strongly encourages States to allow DOT alone to regulate the performance of HAV technology and vehicles. If a State does pursue HAV performance-related regulations, that State should consult with NHTSA and base its efforts on the Vehicle Performance Guidance provided in this Policy

10. Model State Policy Framework
Administrative
Designate lead agency and stakeholders
Test HAVs on Public Roadways
Jurisdictional Permission to Test
For Deployed Vehicles:
Definition of Drivers
Registration and Titling
Law Enforcement Considerations
Liability and Insurance

11. Modern Regulatory Tools
Pre-market approval of new technologies
Cease and Desist power
Post sale regulation of software updates
Variable test procedures
Data collection requirements

12. FARS in HAV Policy What is FARS Data obtained from: Data includes:
Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS)
Census of fatal traffic clashes
Data obtained from:
Police accident reports
State registration, vital records, drivers license
Death certificates, coroner/medical examiner reports
Emergency medical services
Data includes:
Characteristics of crash, the vehicles, and people involved

13. FARS in HAV Policy – Functional System

14. FARS in HAV Policy – Time of Day

15. FARS in HAV Policy – Bike Ped Crashes
Crash Type (Bicycle)
Percent
Crash Type (Pedestrian)
Motorist Overtaking - Other/ Unknown
17%
Pedestrian Failed to Yield
30%
Motorist Overtaking - Undetected Bicyclist
Not At Intersection - Other / Unknown 9%
Parallel Paths - Other / Unknown
10%
Standing/Walking/Running Along Roadway With Traffic - From Behind 8%
Bicyclist Left Turn - Same Direction
Dash 6%
Bicyclist Ride Out - Other Midblock 7%
Motorist Failed to Yield 5%
Wrong-Way / Wrong-Side - Bicyclist
Crossing an Expressway
Unknown Approach Paths
Motorist Overtaking - Misjudged Space
N = 818
N = 5,520

16. FARS in HAV Policy Knowing Functional Class Time of Day
Help select roadway segments for manufacturer testing
Time of Day
Determine law enforcement allocation
Insurance rate determination
Bike and Ped Crashes
Variable test procedures to detect bike and/or pedestrian

17. Questions