[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 102 (Tuesday, May 28, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 24449-24459]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-11038]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

49 CFR Chapter III, Subchapter B

[Docket No. FMCSA-2018-0037]
RIN 2126-AC17


Safe Integration of Automated Driving Systems-Equipped Commercial 
Motor Vehicles

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: FMCSA requests public comment about Federal Motor Carrier 
Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) that may need to be amended, revised, or 
eliminated to facilitate the safe introduction of automated driving 
systems (ADS) equipped commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) onto our 
Nation's roadways. In approaching the task of adapting its regulations 
to accommodate automated vehicle technologies, FMCSA is considering 
changes to its rules to account for significant differences between 
human operators and ADS.

DATES: Comments on this document must be received on or before August 
26, 2019.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Docket Number FMCSA-
2018-0037 using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of 
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building, Ground Floor, 
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building, Ground Floor, 
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. 
and 5 p.m. ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: 202-493-2251.
     Submissions Containing Confidential Business Information 
(CBI): Mr. Brian Dahlin, Chief, Regulatory Evaluation Division, 1200 
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these methods. See the 
``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of the 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for instructions on submitting 
comments, including collection of information comments for the Office 
of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Huntley, Division Chief, 
Vehicle and Roadside Operations, Office of Carrier, Driver, and Vehicle 
Safety, MC-PSV, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001 by telephone at (202) 366-
9209 or by email, michael.huntley@dot.gov. If you have questions on 
viewing or submitting material to the docket, contact Docket Services, 
telephone (202) 366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Public Participation and Request for Comments

A. Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this 
ANPRM (Docket No. FMCSA-2018-0037), indicate the specific section of 
this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for 
each suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and 
material online or by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but please use only 
one of these means. FMCSA recommends that you include your name and a 
mailing address, an email address, or a phone number in the body of 
your document so that FMCSA can contact you if there are questions 
regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov, 
put the docket number, FMCSA-2018-0037, in the keyword box, and click 
``Search.'' When the new screen appears, click on the ``Comment Now!'' 
button and type your comment into the text box on the following screen. 
Choose whether you are submitting your comment as an individual or on 
behalf of a third party and then submit.
    If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them 
in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for 
copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would 
like to know that they reached the facility, please enclose a stamped, 
self-addressed postcard or envelope.
    FMCSA will consider all comments and material received during the 
comment period and may initiate a proposed rule based on your comments.
Confidential Business Information
    The Agency notes that 49 CFR 389.9 provides protection for 
``confidential business information'' which includes trade secrets or 
commercial or financial information that is privileged or confidential, 
as described in 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4). Commercial or financial information 
is considered confidential if it is voluntarily submitted to the Agency 
and constitutes the type of information not customarily released to the 
general public. Under the Freedom of Information Act, CBI is eligible 
for protection from public disclosure. If you have CBI that is relevant 
or responsive to this ANPRM, it is important that you clearly designate 
the submitted comments as CBI. Accordingly, please mark each page of 
your submission as ``confidential'' or ``CBI.'' Submissions designated 
as CBI and meeting the definition noted above will not be placed in the 
public docket of this ANPRM.
    Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Brian Dahlin, Chief, 
Regulatory Evaluation Division, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, 
DC 20590. Any commentary that FMCSA receives which is not specifically 
designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for this 
rulemaking.
    FMCSA will consider all comments and material received during the 
comment period.

B. Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this 
preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov. Insert the docket number, FMCSA-2018-0037, in the 
keyword box, and click ``Search.'' Next, click the ``Open Docket 
Folder'' button and choose the document to review. If you do not have 
access to the internet, you may view the docket online by visiting the 
Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the 
DOT West

[[Page 24450]]

Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 
9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

C. Privacy Act

    In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the 
public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these 
comments, without edit, including any personal information the 
commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system 
of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at 
www.dot.gov/privacy.

II. Abbreviations and Acronyms

ADS Automated Driving Systems
ANPRM Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
CBI Confidential Business Information
CDL Commercial Driver's License
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CMV Commercial Motor Vehicle
CMVSA Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986
DDT Dynamic Driving Task
DOT U.S. Department of Transportation
E.O. Executive Order
FMCSA Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
FMCSRs Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations
FMVSSs Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards
FR Federal Register
HMRs Hazardous Materials Regulations
HOS Hours of Service
LCV Longer Combination Vehicle
MCA Motor Carrier Act of 1935
MCSA Motor Carrier Safety Act of 1984
MCSAC Motor Carrier Safety Advisory Committee
MCSAP Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program
NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology
ODD Operational Design Domain
OEDR Object and Event Detection and Response
OMB Office of Management and Budget
RFC Request for Comments
RIA Regulatory Impact Analysis
RIN Regulation Identifier Number
SBA Small Business Administration
SDLAs State Driver Licensing Agencies
Sec.  Section symbol
U.S.C. United States Code

III. Legal Basis for the Rulemaking

    This ANPRM is based on the general authority of the Motor Carrier 
Act of 1935 (MCA or 1935 Act) [49 U.S.C. 31502], the Motor Carrier 
Safety Act of 1984 (MCSA or 1984 Act) [49 U.S.C. 31136], and the 
Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986 (CMVSA or 1986 Act) [49 
U.S.C. chapter 313], as all of those statutes have been amended.
    These statutes provide sufficient legal authority for the Secretary 
to issue regulations on the operation of ADS-equipped CMVs. Further, 
FMCSA's current regulations, promulgated pursuant to these statutes, do 
not explicitly require human operators or drivers. Various provisions, 
therefore, would either have no applicability or would need to be 
adapted to take into account the differences between ADS-equipped CMVs 
and more traditional vehicles.

IV. Background

    FMCSA is responsible for overseeing the safety of CMVs, their 
drivers, and their operation in interstate commerce. The Agency works 
with Federal, State, and local enforcement agencies, the motor carrier 
industry, and interested stakeholders to reduce crashes, injuries, and 
fatalities involving large trucks and buses.
    The FMCSRs provide rules to support the safe operation of CMVs, as 
defined in the MCSA (49 CFR 390.5) and the CMVSA (49 CFR 383.5).
    On April 24, 2017, FMCSA held a public listening session to solicit 
information on issues relating to the design, development, testing, and 
integration of ADS-equipped CMVs (82 FR 18096, April 17, 2017). The 
listening session provided interested parties an opportunity to share 
their views and any data or analysis on this topic with Agency 
representatives. The Agency also invited interested parties to submit 
written comments by July 17, 2017. A full transcript of the listening 
session and all written comments are available in public docket FMCSA-
2017-0114, at www.regulations.gov.
    In addition to the public listening session discussed above, FMCSA 
commissioned the Department's Volpe National Transportation Systems 
Center (Volpe) to conduct a preliminary review of the FMCSRs to 
identify regulations that relate to the development and safe 
introduction of ADS. Volpe's final report is titled ``Review of the 
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations for Automated Commercial 
Vehicles: Preliminary Assessment of Interpretation and Enforcement 
Challenges, Questions, and Gaps,'' report number MCSA-RRT-17-013, 
August 2017. A copy of the report is available in public docket, FMCSA-
2017-0114, at www.regulations.gov.
    On September 12, 2017, the Department, through the National Highway 
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), published ``Automated Driving 
Systems 2.0: A Vision for Safety'' (A Vision for Safety 2.0), adopting 
the SAE International (SAE) J3016 standard's definitions for Levels of 
automation. The SAE definitions divide vehicles into Levels based on 
``who does what, when.'' Generally:
     SAE Level 0, No Driving Automation: The performance by the 
driver of the entire dynamic driving task (DDT), even when enhanced by 
active safety systems.
     SAE Level 1, Driver Assistance: The sustained and 
operational design domain (ODD) specific execution by a driving 
automation system of either the lateral or the longitudinal vehicle 
motion control subtask of the DDT (but not both simultaneously) with 
the expectation that the driver performs the remainder of the DDT.
     SAE Level 2, Partial Driving Automation: The sustained and 
ODD-specific execution by a driving automation system of both the 
lateral and longitudinal vehicle motion control subtasks of the DDT 
with the expectation that the driver completes the object and event 
detection and response (OEDR) subtask and supervises the driving 
automation system.
     SAE Level 3, Conditional Driving Automation: The sustained 
and ODD-specific performance by an ADS of the entire DDT with the 
expectation that the DDT fallback-ready user is receptive to ADS-issued 
requests to intervene, as well as to DDT performance-relevant system 
failures in other vehicle systems, and will respond accordingly.
     SAE Level 4, High Driving Automation: The sustained and 
ODD-specific performance by an ADS of the entire DDT and DDT fallback 
without any expectation that a user will respond to a request to 
intervene.
     SAE Level 5, Full Driving Automation: The sustained and 
unconditional (i.e., not ODD-specific) performance by an ADS of the 
entire DDT and DDT fallback without any expectation that a user will 
respond to a request to intervene.
    Using the SAE Levels described above, the Department generally 
draws a distinction between Levels 0-2 and 3-5, based on whether the 
human driver or the automated system is primarily responsible for 
monitoring the driving environment. For the purposes of this ANPRM, 
FMCSA's primary focus is SAE Levels 4-5 because it is only at those 
levels where the ADS can control all aspects of the driving task, 
without any intervention from a human driver.
    On March 26, 2018, FMCSA published ``Request for Comments [RFC] 
Concerning Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) Which May 
Be a Barrier to the Safe Testing and Deployment of Automated Driving 
Systems-Equipped Commercial Motor Vehicles on Public Roads'' (83 FR 
12933). The document solicited public

[[Page 24451]]

comments on existing FMCSRs that may need to be updated, modified, or 
eliminated to facilitate the safe introduction of ADS-equipped CMVs 
onto our Nation's roadways. Further, FMCSA requested comments on 
certain FMCSRs likely to be affected as ADS-equipped CMVs appear on our 
roadways, including regulations concerning hours of service (HOS) and 
driver fatigue, the use of electronic devices, roadside inspection, and 
Commercial Driver's License (CDL) requirements. The comment period 
ended on May 10, 2018. Interested parties can view the comments the 
Agency received at www.regulations.gov (docket number FMCSA-2018-0037).
    On June 19, July 12, and August 24, 2018, FMCSA conducted listening 
sessions that provided members of the public with an opportunity to 
share their perspectives on ADS. Transcripts of these listening 
sessions may be found in the docket (FMCSA-2018-0037) for this 
rulemaking.

V. U.S. DOT Role in Vehicle Automation

    As published on October 4, 2018, ``Preparing for the Future of 
Transportation: Automated Vehicles 3.0,'' (AV 3.0) explains that the 
Department's role in transportation automation is to ensure the safety 
and mobility of the traveling public while fostering economic growth. 
On October 9, 2018, the Department requested public comment on the 
document (83 FR 50746). The comment period ended on December 3, 2018.
    The Federal government will play a significant role in ensuring 
that automated vehicles can be safely and effectively integrated into 
the existing transportation system, alongside conventional vehicles, 
pedestrians, bicyclists, motorcyclists, and other road users.
    NHTSA has broad authority over the safety of ADS-equipped vehicles 
and other automated vehicle technologies. NHTSA has authority to 
establish Federal safety standards for new motor vehicles that are 
introduced into interstate commerce in the United States, and to 
address safety defects determined to exist in motor vehicles or motor 
vehicle equipment used in the United States. The latter authority 
focuses on the obligations that Federal law imposes on the 
manufacturers of motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment to notify 
NHTSA of safety defects in those vehicles or vehicle equipment and to 
remedy the defects, subject to NHTSA's oversight and enforcement 
authority.
    The Department, through FMCSA, regulates the safety of commercial 
motor carriers operating in interstate commerce, the qualifications and 
safety of CMV drivers, and the safe operation of commercial trucks and 
motor coaches. FMCSA is broadly considering whether (and, if necessary, 
how) to amend its existing regulations to accommodate the integration 
of ADS into commercial vehicle operations. While some FMCSA regulatory 
requirements for commercial drivers (such as drug and alcohol testing 
requirements) have no application to ADS, many of the Agency's current 
regulations can be readily applied in the context of ADS-equipped CMVs.
    In approaching the task of adapting its regulations to accommodate 
automated vehicle technologies, FMCSA is considering amendments to its 
rules to account for significant differences between human operators 
and ADS. The Agency's preliminary approach is to avoid development of 
an entirely separate set of rules for ADS-equipped CMVs and their 
operation. The Agency would rely on NHTSA to establish Federal 
standards, if necessary, applicable to ADS equipment manufacturers 
(whether of original or aftermarket equipment), while FMCSA would focus 
on those rules necessary to ensure that motor carriers operating ADS-
equipped CMVs have a uniform regulatory framework within which to 
operate in interstate commerce.

VI. Motor Carrier Safety Advisory Committee (MCSAC)

    In 2017, FMCSA requested that its MCSAC \1\ provide recommendations 
to the Agency to assist with policy issues concerning the integration 
of ADS-equipped CMVs into the commercial fleet. During the MCSAC's June 
12-13, 2017, meeting, the Agency requested (Task 17-1) that the group 
provide recommendations concerning the issues FMCSA should consider in 
ensuring that the Federal safety regulations provide appropriate 
standards for the safe operation of ADS-equipped CMVs, from design and 
development through testing and deployment. Specifically, the MCSAC was 
asked to consider the application of the following regulatory 
provisions in title 49, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), to ADS-
equipped CMV operations:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Motor Carrier Safety Advisory Committee (MCSAC) provides 
advice and recommendations to the Administrator of the Federal Motor 
Carrier Safety Administration on motor carrier safety programs and 
motor carrier safety regulations. The MCSAC is composed of up to 20 
members appointed by the Administrator for two-year terms and 
includes representatives of the truck and bus industries, safety 
advocacy groups, State motor carrier safety enforcement agencies, 
and labor communities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (1) Part 383, Commercial Driver's License Standards; Requirements 
and Penalties;
    (2) Part 391, Qualifications of Drivers and Longer Combination 
Vehicle (LCV) Driver Instructors;
    (3) Sections 392.80 and 392.82, Limiting the Use of Electronic 
Devices;
    (4) Part 395, Hours of Service of Drivers; and
    (5) Part 396, Inspection, Repair, and Maintenance.
    The MCSAC completed its task during its July 30-31, 2018, meeting. 
A copy of the MCSAC's final report can be found at: https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/advisory-committees/mcsac/mcsac-task-17-1-final-report.

VII. FMCSA'S Safety Oversight Goals

    FMCSA has initiated this rulemaking to ensure that appropriate 
performance-based safety requirements are in place to support the 
integration of ADS-equipped CMVs into the U.S. fleets. The Agency 
believes the private sector will continue to make significant progress 
in the design, testing, and deployment of ADS technology and that the 
integration of ADS-equipped vehicles may provide improvements in 
transportation safety and the efficient movement of freight and 
passengers.
    Generally, FMCSA does not believe there is a need to revise the 
FMCSRs to accommodate the integration of Levels 1-3 equipment because a 
licensed CMV operator must be present at the controls of the vehicle at 
all times. FMCSA's driver-related rules would thus apply. The Agency 
reminds interstate motor carriers of their responsibility for having 
safety management controls in place to ensure the safe operation of 
such ADS-equipped CMVs, in full compliance with the applicable safety 
requirements. For example, for drivers of CMVs at Levels 1-3 (and 
obviously at Level 0) the Agency's CDL, controlled substances and 
alcohol testing, physical qualifications, driver distraction, and HOS 
rules would be applicable. The Agency, though, may consider guidance 
and other assistance that could identify best practices for safely 
operating vehicles with these lower-level systems, as they may present 
issues not present in more traditional vehicles.
    By contrast, revisions to some of the Agency's rules may be needed 
to address situations in which the ADS technology may have complete 
control of the CMV under certain circumstances (Level 4) or all 
circumstances (Level 5). Where ADS technology is operating the vehicle 
within its ODD, FMCSA expects that the ADS will be capable of safely

[[Page 24452]]

maintaining control of the CMV without the need for human intervention 
and that in the event of a malfunction, the ADS would be designed and 
equipped to revert to a fail-safe condition. This rulemaking considers 
what performance-based boundaries are needed to ensure that interstate 
motor carriers have appropriate safety management controls for the 
operation of ADS-equipped CMVs.

Operational Design Domains--Vehicle Types and Configurations

    As noted in A Vision for Safety 2.0, entities, including operators 
and developers of ADS-equipped CMVs, are encouraged to define and 
document the ODD for each ADS available on their vehicle(s) tested or 
deployed on public roadways, as well as to document the process and 
procedure for assessment, testing, and validation of ADS functionality 
within the prescribed ODD. The ODD should describe the specific 
conditions under which a given ADS or feature is intended to function. 
The ODD defines where (e.g., what roadway types and speeds) and when 
(under what conditions, such as day/night, weather limits, etc.) an ADS 
is designed to operate. At a minimum, the ODD would include the 
following information:
     Roadway types (interstate, local, etc.) on which the ADS 
is designed to operate safely;
     Geographic area (city, mountain, desert, etc.);
     Speed range;
     Environmental conditions in which the ADS will operate 
(weather, daytime/nighttime, etc.); and
     Other domain constraints.
    FMCSA expects that motor carriers interested in integrating ADS-
equipped CMVs into their fleets would have in-depth discussions with 
the technology vendors to fully understand the ODD limitations and only 
utilize Level 4 or 5 capabilities for the conditions for which the 
vehicle is intended. The Agency seeks to avoid discouraging innovation 
and technology development and implementation.
    In addition, FMCSA requests comments on whether there are CMV 
types/configurations or cargoes for which fully automated operations 
should be restricted or prohibited (e.g., hazardous materials, 
motorcoaches, multi-trailer or longer combination vehicles (LCVs), 
etc.). If commenters believe the Agency should consider restrictions, 
please explain why.

VIII. Discussion of Current Safety Rules and the Public Responses to 
the March 26, 2018, RFC

    FMCSA received 98 responses to its March 2018 RFC. The majority of 
commenters (68) were individuals. Four developers of ADS technology 
(Embark, Uber, Tesla, and WAYMO) provided comments, along with two 
insurance organizations (the Property Casualty Insurers Association of 
America and The Travelers Companies, Inc.), and one trucking company 
safety director. Other organizations and companies providing comments 
include the Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance, Amazon, the National 
Tank Truck Carriers, Inc., the Small Business in Transportation 
Coalition, the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, 
the Ad-Hoc HAV Data Access Coalition, the National Motor Freight 
Traffic Association, the Community Transportation Association of 
America, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, the Insurance Institute 
for Highway Safety--Highway Loss Data Institute, the National School 
Transportation Association, the MITRE Corporation, the Truck and Engine 
Manufacturers Association, the Motor and Equipment Manufacturers 
Association, the Transportation Trades Department of the AFL-CIO, the 
American Trucking Associations, Securing America's Future Energy, the 
National Automobile Dealers Association, the Owner-Operator Independent 
Drivers Association, the Commercial Vehicle Training Association, the 
Trucking Alliance, Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, and the Truck 
Safety Coalition.
    Based on public comments received in response to the RFC and during 
the recent public meetings noted above, FMCSA anticipates that, near-
term, Level 4 operations are likely to involve a human driver, either 
present in the vehicle to facilitate the transition into and out of 
full automation without stopping, or waiting at a designated location 
prepared to operate the vehicle for such transitions. Based on FMCSA's 
preliminary assessment of its safety requirements and the potential of 
ADS-equipped vehicles, the Agency believes individuals responsible for 
taking control of an ADS-equipped vehicle on a public road should be 
subject to the current driver-related rules.
    FMCSA is considering a rulemaking regarding the introduction of 
ADS-equipped CMVs on our Nation's roadways. Below are the major issues 
commenters raised and FMCSA's responses, as well as other issues 
applicable to operators of Level 4 ADS-equipped CMVs and how these 
requirements could be adapted for such vehicles. To assist in 
development of any regulatory revisions that may be deemed necessary, 
the Agency requests responses to the following issues and questions. 
Wherever possible, commenters should provide data in support of their 
responses.

1. Do the FMCSRs require a human driver?

    A Vision for Safety 2.0, issued by NHTSA in September 2017 and 
focusing on guidance to ADS developers and State governments, included 
a brief statement from FMCSA which said that, at the time, FMCSA 
believed that its regulations required that ``a trained commercial 
driver must be behind the wheel at all times, regardless of any 
automated driving technologies available on the CMV, unless a petition 
for a waiver or exemption has been granted.'' However, in the March 
2018 RFC, FMCSA stated that it was reconsidering its views on this 
issue, noting, ``[t]he absence of specific regulatory text requiring a 
driver be behind the wheel may afford the Agency the flexibility to 
allow, under existing regulations, ADS to perform the driver's 
functions in the operational design domain in which the system would be 
relied upon, without the presence of a trained commercial driver in the 
driver's seat.''
    Some technology companies are developing Level 4 ADS-equipped CMVs 
to be operated on limited-access highways from exit-to-exit (or on-ramp 
to off-ramp), with no human operator in the vehicle, and, then, if 
necessary, operated by a human off these highways. Commenters explained 
that some shipping companies have distribution centers/warehouses very 
close to major highways, which makes this ADS operating scenario 
desirable from a marketing and productivity perspective. Some 
commenters also stated that a Level 4 ADS-equipped CMV would not 
operate outside of that ODD without a driver. The technology companies 
requested that FMCSA issue interpretive guidance or otherwise clarify 
that the FMCSRs, as written, do not expressly require a human driver at 
all times. Alternatively, technology companies noted the need for FMCSA 
to reexamine the definition of ``driver'' in the FMCSRs, specifically 
as it relates to ADS-equipped CMVs. Many other commenters were opposed 
to driverless vehicles generally but did not specifically comment 
regarding whether the current FMCSRs require a human driver at all 
times.

[[Page 24453]]

    FMCSA Response: As announced in AV 3.0, the Department will 
interpret and, consistent with all applicable notice and comment 
requirements, adapt the definitions of ``driver'' and ``operator'' to 
recognize that such terms do not refer exclusively to a human, but may 
include an automated system. Because the regulations do not require the 
presence of a human driver or operator, FMCSA will interpret its 
regulations to no longer assume that the CMV driver is always a human 
or that a human is present onboard a commercial vehicle during its 
operation, provided that the vehicle is equipped with a Level 4 or 
Level 5 ADS and is operating within its ODD (in the case of Level 4).
    This does not mean that ADS-equipped CMVs operate without FMCSA 
oversight. Rather, FMCSA is required by statute to prescribe 
regulations that ensure that CMVs are maintained, equipped, loaded, and 
operated safely. The Agency, therefore, needs to consider promulgating 
rules to account for ADS-equipped CMVs, including subjects such as 
vehicle inspection, repair and maintenance, and other areas that may 
emerge. In addition, until Level 5 ADS-equipped CMVs are available, 
human drivers and operators will continue to play a crucial role in the 
operation of Level 4 ADS-equipped CMVs, as those vehicles can operate 
without a human only within their ODDs. As such, certain requirements 
that apply to humans involved in the operation of these vehicles will 
also need to be revised. Further, FMCSA emphasizes that both the 
vehicles themselves and entities responsible for the operation of an 
ADS-equipped CMV in interstate commerce (i.e., motor carriers) remain 
subject to safety oversight by the Agency, whether a human operates the 
vehicle or not, and FMCSA retains its authority to take enforcement 
action if an ADS-equipped CMV is not operated in a safe manner.
    Questions: 1.1. How should FMCSA ensure that an ADS-equipped CMV 
only operates consistent with the ODD for the ADS equipped on the 
vehicle? 1.2. What are manufacturers' and motor carriers' plans for 
when and how Levels 4 and 5 ADS-equipped CMVs will become commercially 
available? 1.3. Should FMCSA consider amending or augmenting the 
definition of ``driver'' and/or ``operator'' in 49 CFR 390.5 or define 
a term such as ``ADS driver'' to reduce the potential for 
misinterpretation of the requirements?

2. Commercial Driver's License (CDL) Endorsements

    The March 2018 RFC requested comments on whether FMCSA should 
require a specific endorsement for human drivers and operators of ADS-
equipped CMVs to ensure they (1) understand the capabilities and 
limitations of the advanced technologies, and (2) know when it is 
appropriate to rely on automatic, rather than manual, operation. 
Further, if such an endorsement is required, the Agency requested 
comment on what types of test(s)--knowledge, skills, or both--should be 
required to obtain the endorsement, and whether there should be 
separate endorsements for different types of ADS-equipped CMVs.
    Many commenters noted that it is imperative that human drivers and 
operators of ADS-equipped CMVs fully understand the capabilities and 
limitations of the advanced technologies that are deployed on vehicles 
they operate. Some commenters believe that in mixed-use scenarios in 
which a human may have to take control of a CMV from the ADS, an ADS 
endorsement should be required for the CDL holder. Given the wide range 
of technologies and ODDs in which these technologies are able to 
operate, some commenters expressed concern regarding whether a 
standardized test could be developed for an ADS CDL endorsement.
    FMCSA Response: FMCSA is responsible for the establishment and 
enforcement of CDL requirements applicable to every person who operates 
a commercial motor vehicle, as defined in 49 CFR 383.5, in interstate, 
foreign, or intrastate commerce; to all employers of such persons; and 
to State Driver License Agencies (SDLAs) that issue CDLs. The Agency 
believes that any individual who is expected to control the ADS-
equipped CMV at any time the vehicle is in operation on a public road 
must be fully qualified to do so. However, given the way the CDL 
program is administered by the Agency and the 51 SDLAs, it would be 
difficult to distinguish between current knowledge and skills 
requirements and those arguably sufficient for limited Level 4 
operations.
    In Level 5, the ADS technology is, by definition, capable of 
performing all driving functions under all conditions. In some 
operational models, there may be an individual responsible for remotely 
monitoring multiple CMVs, a scenario that is obviously not covered by 
the existing CDL regulations. For Level 4, however, the technology 
would be limited to certain ODDs, which may require the presence of a 
human prepared to take control as the vehicle approaches the limits of 
those domains. Preliminarily, the Agency is inclined to maintain the 
CDL rules, essentially as written, but to clarify that these rules 
apply to any person who may be relied upon to control any aspect of 
operation of the ADS-equipped vehicle on a public road.
    Under the current rules, the basic CDL requires knowledge and 
skills tests, with additional testing required to remove certain 
restrictions or to obtain endorsements. The skills test, or road test, 
must be given in a representative vehicle. However, ADS technology is 
advancing rapidly, and there will continue to be a range of approaches 
to automation. At this time, it would be very difficult to establish 
uniform knowledge and/or skills tests to adequately assess a CDL 
holder's understanding of the vehicle's ADS and the specific operating 
scenarios under which human control may be needed, versus those 
scenarios where relying solely on the ADS is appropriate. Therefore, it 
is premature for the Agency to consider proposing rules in this regard. 
Moreover, it is also difficult at this time to estimate the costs and 
safety benefits of requiring an ADS endorsement for CDL holders. 
However, FMCSA agrees that this is a critical issue and, to the extent 
necessary, will work with stakeholders to provide guidance to ensure 
that human operators are aware of the technological capabilities of 
their vehicles.
    Questions: 2.1. Should a CDL endorsement be required of individuals 
operating an ADS-equipped CMV? 2.2. If so, what should be covered in 
the knowledge and/or skills test associated with an ADS endorsement? 
2.3. What would be the impacts on SDLAs? 2.4. Should a driver be 
required to have specialized training for ADS-equipped CMVs? 2.5. In an 
operational model that has an individual remotely monitoring multiple 
CMVs, should the Agency impose limitations on the number of vehicles a 
remote driver monitors? 2.6. Is there any reason why a dedicated or 
stand-by remote operator should not be subject to existing driver 
qualifications?

3. Drivers' Hours of Service (HOS) Rules

    Given that the FMCSRs include limitations on the number of hours 
that a driver may drive during a day and a week to reduce the risk of 
driver fatigue and fatigue-related crashes, FMCSA requested comments on 
how drivers' HOS should be recorded if the ADS is relied on to perform 
some or all of the driving tasks otherwise performed by a human driver.

[[Page 24454]]

    Commenters stated that the HOS rules should not be applicable for 
operating scenarios where the ADS technology controls the CMV and there 
is no human present because there would be no limit on the number of 
hours the ADS technology could operate the vehicle. However, for 
scenarios in which a human is needed to operate the vehicle for a 
portion of a given trip, commenters asked how the HOS rules would apply 
to the human operator.
    FMCSA Response: The FMCSRs include limits on the amount of driving 
time during a work shift and prohibit individuals from operating CMVs 
after the individual has accumulated 15 hours of on-duty time (for 
drivers of passenger-carrying CMVs), or after the 14th hour from the 
beginning of the work day (for drivers of property-carrying CMVs). 
Drivers of passenger-carrying vehicles are limited to 10 hours of 
driving time during the work shift and drivers of property-carrying 
vehicles to 11 hours of driving time during the work shift.
    Drivers of passenger-carrying vehicles must have at least 8, and 
drivers of property-carrying vehicles at least 10, consecutive hours 
off-duty at the end of the work shift. Drivers of CMVs are prohibited 
from driving after accumulating 60 hours of on-duty time within 7 
consecutive days (60-hour rule) or 70 hours of on-duty time within 8 
consecutive days (70-hour rule). Drivers of property-carrying vehicles, 
however, may restart weekly calculations at any time after taking 34 
consecutive hours off-duty.
    The Agency believes, preliminarily, that the basic approach for 
applying the HOS rules should continue to be used; that is, any time a 
human is at the controls of an ADS-equipped CMV, either in the driver's 
seat or operating it remotely, the time should be recorded as on-duty, 
driving. Any time the human is working without having the 
responsibility for taking control of the ADS-equipped vehicle (because 
it is operating in a fully autonomous mode within its intended ODD) 
should be considered on-duty, not driving. For scenarios in which the 
human is in a sleeper-berth on a vehicle controlled by ADS technology, 
the human may record his/her duty status in the same manner as a team 
driver with hours off-duty in the passenger seat or sleeper-berth time. 
The Agency welcomes comments on whether these preliminary regulatory 
approaches are appropriate or whether other structures are preferable.
    Questions: 3.1. Should HOS rule changes be considered if ADS 
technology performs all the driving tasks while a human is on-duty, not 
driving; off-duty or in the sleeper berth; or physically remote from 
the CMV? 3.2. Should the HOS requirements apply to both onboard and 
remote operators? 3.3. If so, how should HOS be recorded when an 
individual is not physically in control of the vehicle?

4. Medical Qualifications for Human Operators

    The FMCSRs include physical qualification standards for humans 
driving CMVs to ensure that they are medically qualified to do so. In 
the RFC, FMCSA requested comment on what medical conditions that 
currently preclude medical qualification (1) could become inapplicable 
as ADS technology develops, and (2) should not be considered 
disqualifying for a human driver who is simply monitoring an ADS-
equipped CMV.
    Several commenters believe FMCSA's current medical requirements for 
drivers/operators of CMVs should apply when individuals have the 
responsibility for driving an ADS-equipped CMV. They indicated that for 
the non-driving tasks (Levels 4-5), further study is needed before 
considering potential changes to the associated medical requirements.
    FMCSA Response: FMCSA's regulations in 49 CFR part 391 include 
physical qualifications standards for individuals operating CMVs, as 
defined in 49 CFR 390.5. Such standards were originally established in 
the late 1930s and have been modified significantly since that time. 
The Agency also provides advisory criteria for use by healthcare 
professionals in making the determination whether a driver with certain 
medical conditions should be issued a medical certificate. Based on 
FMCSA's preliminary assessment of its safety requirements and the 
potential of ADS-equipped vehicles, the Agency presently believes 
individuals responsible for taking control of an ADS-equipped vehicle 
on a public road should be subject to the current physical 
qualification standards.
    Questions: 4.1. Should some of the physical qualification rules be 
eliminated or made less stringent for humans remotely monitoring or 
potentially controlling ADS-equipped CMVs? 4.2. If so, which of the 
requirements should be less restrictive for human operators who would 
take control of an ADS-equipped CMV remotely? 4.3. Should the Agency 
consider less restrictive rules for humans who have the benefit of ADS 
technology to assist them in controlling the vehicle (e.g., 
technologies that would enable individuals with limb impairments to 
operate at a level comparable to individuals without such impairments)?

5. Distracted Driving and Monitoring

    The FMCSRs prohibit individuals from texting and using hand-held 
wireless phones while driving CMVs in interstate commerce. In the RFC, 
FMCSA requested comment regarding what changes, if any, should be made 
to the distracted driving regulations for human operators of ADS-
equipped CMVs operating in an automated mode.
    Some commenters believe changes to regulations would depend on the 
SAE Level designation of the vehicle, its operational capabilities, and 
the role of the driver in safe operation. Commenters also believe that 
if a human is present and responsible for the safe operation of the 
CMV, current restrictions against distraction should remain in effect.
    FMCSA Response: Sections 392.80 and 392.82 of the FMCSRs prohibit 
individuals from texting and using handheld wireless phones, 
respectively, while driving CMVs in interstate commerce. A CDL holder, 
whether operating in interstate, foreign, or intrastate commerce, may 
also be disqualified for violating State or local laws on texting and 
use of handheld phones (49 CFR 383.51(c), Table 2, paragraph 10). The 
regulations do not provide an exception for individuals who are in the 
driver's seat but have chosen to rely on advanced technologies such as 
lane departure warning systems, collision avoidance systems, etc. From 
the above, the requirements related to distracted driving set forth in 
the FMCSRs apply to human operators of ADS-equipped CMVs, and such 
operators must remain focused on their duties. While FMCSA is inclined 
to believe it will remain appropriate to require human operators to 
comply with all existing regulations concerning distraction while 
operating ADS-equipped CMVs, the Agency welcomes comments regarding 
distraction and whether FMCSA should consider amending the rules 
regarding distraction for cases where an onboard or remote human 
operator is not actively controlling a Level 4 or 5 ADS-equipped CMV.
    Question: 5.1. How should the prohibition against distracted 
driving (i.e., texting, hand-held cell phone) apply to onboard 
operators responsible for taking control of the CMV under certain 
situations, and to remote operators with similar responsibilities?

[[Page 24455]]

6. Safe Driving and Drug and Alcohol Testing

    FMCSA's controlled substances and alcohol testing requirements in 
49 CFR part 382 are intended to prevent crashes and injuries resulting 
from the misuse of alcohol or use of controlled substances by drivers 
of CMVs. The rules include requirements for pre-employment drug 
testing, random alcohol and drug tests, post-crash testing, reasonable 
suspicion testing, and, for individuals that have tested positive for 
the misuse of alcohol or use of controlled substances, return-to-duty 
testing.
    Part 392 of the FMCSRs includes requirements for and prohibitions 
against certain actions of CMV drivers. For example, the rules require 
drivers to obey the laws, ordinances, and regulations of the 
jurisdiction in which the CMV is operated and prohibit drivers from 
operating a CMV while ill or fatigued. Drivers are also prohibited from 
possessing or being under the influence of drugs or alcohol while on-
duty. The regulations also cover matters such as the inspection of 
cargo and cargo securement devices and systems during trips and 
procedures for travelling through railroad crossings.
    FMCSA did not specifically request comment on these issues in the 
RFC. However, the Agency believes preliminarily that these rules should 
continue to apply to any human who is expected to take control of the 
operation of the ADS-equipped CMV while it is on a public road.
    Questions: 6.1. Should FMCSA consider revising its rules to ensure 
that (1) any human exercising control of an ADS-equipped vehicle must 
continue to comply with all the rules under Part 392, and (2) a CMV 
under the control of a Level 4 or Level 5 ADS must satisfy the 
operational rules? 6.2. For example, should FMCSA require that the ADS 
be capable of identifying highway-rail grade crossings and stopping the 
CMV prior to crossing railroad tracks to avoid collisions with trains, 
or going onto a highway-rail grade crossing without having sufficient 
space to travel completely through the crossing without stopping? 6.3. 
For scenarios in which the control of the ADS-equipped CMV alternates, 
or may alternate, between a human and the technology, should FMCSA 
require that both the human operator and ADS comply with the applicable 
operational rules?

7. Inspection, Repair, and Maintenance

    The FMCSRs require all CMVs to be systematically inspected, 
repaired, and maintained, all parts to be in safe and proper operating 
condition at all times, and each vehicle to pass an inspection at least 
once every year. In the RFC, FMCSA requested comments regarding how 
motor carriers will be able to ensure the proper functioning of ADS 
prior to operating in automated mode, whether motor carrier personnel 
responsible for maintaining ADS equipment should be required to have a 
minimum level of training, and what types of malfunctions or damage on 
an ADS-equipped CMV would be considered an imminent hazard.
    Commenters stated that safety rules should require that ADS include 
self-diagnostic capabilities and reporting for critical subsystems as 
well as for the full ADS itself. They also believe the Department 
should establish minimum performance or equipment criteria, and test 
procedures for self-certification and marking of ADS-equipped vehicles. 
Commenters also stated that individuals responsible for maintaining the 
ADS equipment should have minimum training and certification.
    FMCSA Response: The FMCSRs include requirements for motor carriers 
to have systematic inspection, repair and maintenance programs for 
their CMVs and to maintain certain records documenting the types of 
maintenance performed. Drivers are required to prepare reports of any 
defects or deficiencies discovered by or reported to them during the 
work shift and the motor carrier is responsible for taking appropriate 
actions after receiving such reports, but before the vehicle is 
dispatched again.
    In addition, a comprehensive inspection of CMVs must be conducted 
at least once every 12 months based on a checklist provided in Appendix 
G to the FMCSRs and proof of the annual inspection must be maintained 
on the CMV.
    FMCSA prescribes minimum qualifications for individuals conducting 
the annual inspection if the inspection is not conducted in accordance 
with a State inspection program that FMCSA considers comparable to the 
Federal requirements. FMCSA also prescribes minimum qualifications for 
motor carrier employees responsible for brake-related inspection, 
repair and maintenance tasks.
    FMCSA believes that motor carriers must have appropriate 
inspection, repair and maintenance programs to ensure that any ADS-
equipped CMVs they dispatch are capable of operating safely. This means 
the CMV must be capable of performing within its ODD. Recognizing that 
the advanced safety systems used in Level 4 and 5 ADS-equipped CMVs 
will rely heavily on advanced software programs that will invariably be 
subject to periodic updates and revision, it will be critical for motor 
carriers to establish a system to ensure that all vehicles are using 
the most up-to-date version of safety-critical software.
    FMCSA believes it is appropriate to consider amending part 396 to 
provide clear guidance to motor carriers dispatching Level 4 and Level 
5 ADS-equipped CMVs that would operate on a public road. At a minimum, 
the Agency believes consideration should be given to require:
     Pre-trip inspections before dispatching ADS-equipped CMVs;
     A means for en route inspection for cargo securement 
devices to ensure proper tension--currently the driver is required to 
check the devices, but there may be alternative solutions based on 
improved technology;
     Post-trip inspection requirements, which may vary 
depending on the sensors and detectors, to identify mechanical/
electrical problems that may or may not be related to the ADS 
technology;
     Periodic or annual inspection of ADS technology.
    Consistent with the current FMCSRs concerning qualifications of 
individuals conducting the annual inspection of CMVs and brake-related 
inspection, repair, and maintenance tasks on CMVs, the Agency is 
considering the adoption of similar requirements for motor carrier 
personnel responsible for ADS-related inspection, repair and 
maintenance tasks.
    Questions: 7.1. What qualifications should be required of the 
individual performing the pre-trip inspection? 7.2. What kind of 
routine or scheduled inspections should be performed and what types of 
ADS-related maintenance records should be required? 7.3. Should the 
inspection period be more or less frequent than annual for an ADS-
equipped CMV? 7.4. Should inspections be mileage-based or time-based 
(e.g., 1,000 miles, 3 months or 1,000 hours of operation)? 7.5. Should 
FMCSA impose general requirements for motor carrier personnel 
responsible for ADS-related inspection, repair, and maintenance tasks 
similar to the Agency's brake inspector qualification requirements? 
7.6. How could FMCSA ensure that motor carriers apply safety-critical 
software updates?

8. Roadside Inspections

    FMCSA and its State partners conduct roadside inspections of CMVs 
to identify and remove unsafe drivers and vehicles from service. In the 
RFC, FMCSA requested comment regarding

[[Page 24456]]

how an enforcement official will be able to identify CMVs capable of 
various levels of automated operation, i.e., should ADS-equipped CMVs 
be visibly marked to indicate the level of automated operation they are 
designed to achieve.
    Although commenters did not state that ADS-equipped CMVs should be 
subject to a greater level of scrutiny than CMVs operated by humans 
during roadside inspections, some believed ADS-equipped CMVs should be 
marked in a manner visible to enforcement personnel, or have some form 
of electronic vehicle identification to facilitate inspections. Some 
commenters believe that ADS-equipped vehicles should have malfunction 
indicators to identify problems in the event there is a roadside 
inspection.
    FMCSA Response: The FMCSRs include requirements for truck and bus 
parts and accessories necessary for safe operations on public roads. 
The requirements are provided under 49 CFR part 393. To the extent 
there are Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSSs) under 49 CFR 
part 571 to cover the safety equipment or features, FMCSA cross-
references those NHTSA requirements applicable to the vehicle and 
equipment manufacturers. Through the cross-reference, FMCSA imposes on 
the motor carriers the responsibility for maintaining the safety 
equipment and features that NHTSA required the vehicle manufacturers to 
install.
    Currently, neither the FMVSSs nor the FMCSRs include technical 
requirements specific to ADS technology. There are no ADS-specific 
Federal performance standards that manufacturers must satisfy for 
operation in a fully autonomous mode. However, the Agency expects that 
ADS technology companies will generally follow the Department's 
voluntary guidance and conduct thorough safety assessments.
    FMCSA believes that certain regulatory requirements should be 
considered to ensure that motor carriers using ADS-equipped CMVs have 
clear Federal direction for safe operations, irrespective of 
manufacturers' voluntary safety assessments. FMCSA expects vehicle 
manufacturers or ADS technology companies to provide motor carriers 
with a form of self-certification of the capabilities of the ADS 
technology, based on completion of the voluntary safety assessment. The 
certification would enable the motor carrier to understand the ODD 
limitations of the ADS technology. FMCSA also preliminarily anticipates 
that Level 4 and 5 ADS-equipped vehicles would be marked to enable 
identification by Federal and State personnel, if there are no other 
visible indicators (e.g., the absence of a driver's seat and steering 
wheel). While marking of vehicles to identify the ADS Level of 
capability would enable Federal and State personnel, motor carriers and 
drivers to know which vehicles can operate safely without a human at 
the controls under certain ODDs (i.e., Level 4), or under any operating 
conditions (i.e., Level 5), identification of the vehicle-specific ODD 
would likely need to be conveyed separately, through the self-
certification based on the voluntary safety assessment.
    Roadside inspectors must be able to verify that ADS components are 
functioning properly. This could be accomplished through a system 
validation indicator that allows confirmation that the ADS systems are 
working to full capacity, or through individual malfunction indicators 
that would let enforcement officials know that a particular subsystem 
has a fault or defect and that maintenance is needed. The faults or 
defects might not be critical to safety but suggest that repairs should 
be made before the vehicle is dispatched again. Malfunction indicators 
are a routine requirement under both the FMVSSs and FMCSRs (e.g., the 
antilock brake system malfunction indicator required under FMVSS Nos. 
105 and 121 and section 393.55 of the FMCSRs). FMCSA believes 
requirements for such indicators should be considered to alert motor 
carrier maintenance personnel as well as Federal and State enforcement 
officials whether the ADS is fully operational or in need of repair. 
Motor carriers would then know whether a human must maintain full 
control of the vehicle and drive it as if there were no ADS technology, 
or whether the ADS may be relied on as the manufacturer intended it to 
be used.
    Given the many scenarios an ADS-equipped vehicle may encounter on a 
public road, FMCSA preliminarily believes it would be appropriate to 
require that the ADS-equipped vehicle, like a human driver, have a 
means of detecting emergency vehicles such as police, fire, and rescue, 
and moving out of the path of first responders, as well as taking 
appropriate action while driving through work-zones.
    In addition to basic safety requirements for ADS technology, the 
Agency is considering enforcement tolerances that could be used by 
Federal and State enforcement personnel to identify the levels of non-
compliance that would warrant placing an ADS-equipped CMV out of 
service until the problem is corrected.
    FMCSA acknowledges that Federal and State enforcement officials may 
need further training to identify problems with ADS-equipped CMVs, but 
it is not the Agency's goal to have these officials be responsible for 
conducting diagnostic tests of a CMV's ADS. FMCSA would discourage 
inspectors from delaying the movement of ADS-equipped CMVs unless there 
are clear indications of safety-critical CMV violations and/or ADS 
faults or malfunctions. FMCSA would work with the private sector and 
State safety agencies to develop enforcement tolerances for use in 
determining whether certain faults or malfunctions warrant placing the 
ADS-equipped CMV out of service.
    Questions: 8.1. Should motor carriers be required to notify FMCSA 
that they are operating Level 4 or 5 ADS-equipped CMVs? 8.2. If so, how 
should the carrier notify FMCSA? 8.3. Should FMCSA require markings 
identifying the ADS Level of a vehicle? 8.4. Should the Agency require 
motor carriers to utilize ADS-equipped CMVs that have a malfunction 
indicator? 8.5. Should the Agency require that motor carriers deploying 
ADS-equipped CMVs ensure the vehicle can pull over in response to 
Federal and State officials or move out of the way of first-responders? 
8.6. How might that be achieved, and at what cost? 8.7. How would 
roadside enforcement personnel know that a vehicle can no longer 
operate safely? 8.8. Absent an FMVSS, how could standard indications be 
provided to enforcement personnel?

9. Cybersecurity

    Numerous commenters expressed concerns regarding cybersecurity and 
hacking of ADS-equipped CMVs and recommended that vehicle data access 
be protected against hacking through recognized principles of data 
security by design.
    FMCSA Response: ADS technologies depend on an array of electronics, 
sensors, and computer systems. In advancing these features and 
exploring the safety benefits of these new vehicle technologies, FMCSA 
and NHTSA are focused on strong cybersecurity to ensure these systems 
work as intended and are built to mitigate safety and security risks. 
To ensure a comprehensive cybersecurity environment, NHTSA has adopted 
a multi-faceted research approach that leverages the National Institute 
of Standards and Technology's (NIST) Cybersecurity Framework, and 
encourages industry to adopt practices that improve the cybersecurity 
posture

[[Page 24457]]

of their vehicles in the U.S.\2\ FMCSA will work with NHTSA and the 
automotive industry to proactively address vehicle cybersecurity 
challenges and to continuously seek methods to mitigate the associated 
safety risks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ https://www.nhtsa.gov/technology-innovation/vehicle-cybersecurity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Questions: 9.1. What types of safety and cargo security risks may 
be introduced with the integration of ADS-equipped CMVs? 9.2. What 
types of rules should FMCSA consider to ensure that motor carriers' 
safety management practices adequately address cybersecurity?

10. Confidentiality of Shared Information

    FMCSA acknowledges that companies may be reluctant to share certain 
proprietary data or information with the Agency. While FMCSA notes that 
49 CFR 389.9 provides certain protections for ``confidential business 
information,'' which includes trade secrets or commercial or financial 
information that is privileged or confidential, the RFC requested 
comment regarding what measures original equipment manufacturers and 
technology developers expect of FMCSA before sharing confidential 
business information. Additionally, FMCSA requested comments on how the 
Agency might obtain information sufficient to assess the safety 
performance of ADS-equipped CMVs without collecting confidential 
business information.
    Several commenters stated that they expect FMCSA to establish 
standards/regulations concerning access to proprietary safety 
information regarding certain components that directly relate to 
safety-sensitive functions. They believe NHTSA, FMCSA, and other DOT 
agencies should work with the private sector to obtain critical safety-
related information that may be proprietary. Commenters also believe 
that these DOT agencies should seek confidentiality agreements to 
ensure Federal and State enforcement agencies' access to safety data 
associated with the performance of ADS systems, while protecting the 
ADS developers' proprietary information.
    FMCSA Response: The Agency has established procedures to protect 
confidential business information submitted as part of a rulemaking (49 
CFR 389.9). Additionally, FMCSA will work with motor carriers, 
manufacturers, and developers to ensure, to the greatest extent 
practicable, the protection of sensitive data relating to the design, 
testing, production, and marketing of ADS or proprietary information 
submitted in response to an Agency request. Unless required by law, 
FMCSA will not unilaterally or proactively release confidential 
business information to the public.
    Questions: 10.1. As the development of ADS technology continues, 
the Agency believes there is a need to learn about the performance 
limitations of these systems. FMCSA draws a distinction between 
information about performance limitations (e.g., how well does the ADS 
keep the vehicle in its lane and under what environmental conditions, 
etc.) and details about the system design (e.g., the specific types of 
sensors, or the arrays of sensors and cameras used for input to the 
central processing unit for the ADS). To what extent do ADS developers 
believe performance data should be considered proprietary and withheld 
from the public? 10.2. Are the Agency's current processes under 49 CFR 
389.9 for submission and protection of confidential business 
information in the context of a rulemaking sufficient to allow ADS 
developers and motor carriers to communicate essential information to 
the Agency regarding the operation of ADS? 10.3. If not, how should 
those processes be modified?

IX. Voluntary Consensus Standards

    As noted above, FMCSA would like to build upon best practices from 
the private sector in providing guidance to motor carriers on safe 
practices for the integration of ADS-equipped CMVs. The Agency would 
consider use of private sector standards to ensure cost-effective, 
performance-based safety requirements.
    OMB's revised Circular A-119, ``Federal Participation in the 
Development and Use of Voluntary Consensus Standards and in Conformity 
Assessment Activities,'' (81 FR 4673), states that ``. . . the 
effectiveness of the U.S. standards system in enabling innovation 
depends on continued private sector leadership and engagement.'' 
Circular A-119 is intended to encourage Federal agencies to benefit 
from the expertise of the private sector, promote Federal agency 
participation in standards bodies to support the creation of standards 
that are useable by Federal agencies, and minimize reliance on 
government-unique standards or regulations where an existing standard 
would meet the Federal government's objectives.
    One of the primary means that FMCSA uses to fulfill the intent of 
Circular A-119 is to incorporate by reference certain voluntary 
standards. For example, under 49 CFR 393.7, Matter incorporated by 
reference, FMCSA adopted several private-sector standards concerning 
vehicle safety equipment required on CMVs operated in interstate 
commerce. Rather than crafting and imposing Federal standards or 
requirements where voluntary consensus standards were followed by the 
majority of parties, the Agency adopted the private-sector standards by 
reference. As a result, the Agency can enforce the referenced standards 
as part of the FMCSRs. Specific areas where such references are used 
for regulatory requirements include lamps and reflectors for CMVs that 
were not subject to NHTSA's FMVSS No. 108 (49 CFR 571.108) and 
standards for cargo securement devices (e.g., chains, synthetic 
webbing, wire rope, cordage, etc.). FMCSA thus allowed companies 
following industry best practices to simply continue operating as 
usual.
    Because of the advances in ADS technology, FMCSA's preferred 
approach to adopting safety requirements at this time is to rely on the 
development of consensus standards, whenever practicable. Voluntary 
standards offer flexibility and responsiveness to the rapid pace of 
innovation, can encourage investment and bring cost-effective 
innovation to the market more quickly, and may be validated by private 
sector conformity assessment and testing protocols. The Department 
supports the development and continuing evolution of stakeholder-driven 
voluntary standards, which in many cases can be an effective non-
regulatory means to support interoperable integration of technologies 
into the transportation system. The Department, for example, has 
already adopted SAE's terminology for automated vehicles, including the 
levels of automation. The Agency requests public comment on the extent 
to which the private sector has developed consensus standards that the 
Agency could reference, if necessary, to ensure motor carriers have 
appropriate guidance on the safety management practices they should 
have in place to operate ADS-equipped vehicles safety.

X. Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Programs (MCSAP)

    FMCSA is responsible for the administration of the MCSAP, a Federal 
grant program that provides financial assistance to States to reduce 
the number and severity of CMV-related crashes and hazardous materials 
incidents. The goal of the MCSAP is to improve CMV safety through 
consistent, uniform, and effective CMV safety programs. The MCSAP 
regulations (49 CFR part 350) include conditions for participation by 
States and local

[[Page 24458]]

jurisdictions and promote the adoption and uniform enforcement of State 
safety rules, regulations, and standards that are compatible with the 
FMCSRs and the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMRs) issued by the 
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, for both 
interstate, foreign, and intrastate motor carriers and drivers.
    Section 350.331 requires participating States to conduct reviews of 
their laws and regulations for compatibility with the Federal safety 
rules and HMRs and to report the results of that review in their 
Commercial Vehicle Safety Plans. The regulation also requires 
participating States to amend their laws or regulations to make them 
compatible with the FMCSRs and/or HMRs within three years of the 
effective date of any newly enacted regulations.
    In the event FMCSA amends the FMCSRs to adopt rules concerning the 
operation of ADS-equipped CMVs, FMCSA anticipates its State partners 
would adopt compatible rules. Through this rulemaking, FMCSA 
discourages States from adopting more stringent rules concerning ADS, 
which could interfere with interstate commerce.

XI. Questions

1. Do the FMCSRs require a human driver?

    1.1. Should FMCSA establish a rule that would prohibit an ADS-
equipped CMV from operating outside its designated ODD?
    1.2. What are manufacturers' and motor carriers' plans for when and 
in what way Level 4 and 5 ADS-equipped CMVs will become commercially 
available?
    1.3. Should FMCSA consider amending or augmenting the definition of 
``driver'' and/or ``operator'' provided in 49 CFR 390.5 or define a 
term such as ``ADS driver'' to reduce the potential for 
misinterpretation of the requirements?

2. Commercial Driver's License (CDL) Endorsements

    2.1. Should a CDL endorsement be required of individuals operating 
an ADS-equipped CMV?
    2.2. If so, what should be covered in the knowledge and/or skills 
test associated with an ADS endorsement?
    2.3. What would be the impacts on SDLAs?
    2.4. Should a driver be required to have specialized training for 
ADS-equipped CMVs?
    2.5. In an operational model that has an individual remotely 
monitoring multiple CMVs, should the Agency impose limitations on the 
number of vehicles a remote driver monitors?
    2.6. Should a dedicated or stand-by remote operator be subject to 
existing driver qualifications?

3. Drivers' Hours of Service (HOS) Rules

    3.1. Should HOS rule changes be considered if ADS technology 
performs all the driving tasks while a human is off-duty or in the 
sleeper berth, or physically remote from the CMV?
    3.2. Should the HOS requirements apply to both onboard and remote 
operators?
    3.3. If so, how should HOS be recorded when an individual is not 
physically in control of the vehicle?

4. Medical Qualifications for Human Operators

    4.1. Should some of the physical qualification rules be eliminated 
or made less stringent for humans remotely monitoring or potentially 
controlling ADS-equipped CMVs?
    4.2. If so, which of the requirements should be less restrictive 
for human operators who would take control of an ADS-equipped CMV 
remotely?
    4.3. Should the Agency consider less restrictive rules for humans 
who have the benefit of ADS technology to assist them in controlling 
the vehicle (e.g., technologies that would enable individuals with limb 
impairments to operate at a level comparable to individuals without 
such impairments)?

5. Distracted Driving and Monitoring

    5.1. How should the prohibition against distracted driving apply to 
onboard operators responsible for taking control of the CMV under 
certain situations, and to remote operators with similar 
responsibilities?

6. Safe Driving

    6.1. Should FMCSA consider revising its rules to ensure that (1) 
any human exercising control of an ADS-equipped vehicle must continue 
to comply with all the rules under Part 392, and (2) a CMV under the 
control of a Level 4 or Level 5 ADS must satisfy the operational rules?
    6.2. For example, should FMCSA require that the ADS be capable of 
identifying highway-rail grade crossings and stopping the CMV prior to 
crossing railroad tracks to avoid collisions with trains, or going onto 
a highway-rail grade crossing without having sufficient space to travel 
completely through the crossing without stopping?
    6.3. For scenarios in which the control of the ADS-equipped CMV 
alternates, or may alternate, between a human and the technology, 
should FMCSA require that both the human operator and ADS comply with 
the applicable operational rules?

7. Inspection, Repair and Maintenance

    7.1. If so, what qualifications should be required of the 
individual performing the inspection?
    7.2. What kind of routine or scheduled inspections should be 
performed and what types of ADS-related maintenance records should be 
required?
    7.3. Should the inspection period be more frequent than annual for 
an ADS-equipped CMV?
    7.4. Should inspections be mileage-based or time-based (e.g., 1,000 
miles, 3 months or 1,000 hours of operation)?
    7.5. Should FMCSA impose general requirements for motor carrier 
personnel responsible for ADS-related inspection, repair, and 
maintenance tasks similar to the Agency's brake inspector qualification 
requirements?
    7.6. How could FMCSA ensure that motor carriers apply available 
after-market software updates?

8. Roadside Inspections

    8.1. Should motor carriers be required to notify FMCSA that they 
are operating Level 4 or 5 ADS-equipped CMVs?
    8.2. If so, how should the carrier notify FMCSA?
    8.3. Should FMCSA require markings identifying the ADS Level of a 
vehicle?
    8.4. Should the Agency require motor carriers to utilize ADS-
equipped CMVs that have a malfunction indicator?
    8.5. Should the Agency require that motor carriers deploying ADS-
equipped CMVs ensure the vehicle can pull over in response to Federal 
and State officials or move out of the way of first-responders?
    8.6. How might that be achieved, and at what cost?
    8.7. How would roadside enforcement personnel know that a vehicle 
can no longer operate safely?
    8.8. Absent an FMVSS, how could standard indications be provided to 
enforcement personnel?

9. Cybersecurity

    9.1. What types of safety and cargo security risks may be 
introduced with the integration of ADS-equipped CMVs?
    9.2. What types of rules should FMCSA consider to ensure that motor 
carriers safety management practices adequately address cybersecurity?

10. Confidentiality of Shared Information

    10.1. As the development of ADS technology continues, the Agency 
believes there is a need to learn about

[[Page 24459]]

the performance limitations of these systems. FMCSA draws a distinction 
between information about performance limitations (e.g., how well does 
the ADS keep the vehicle in its lane and under what environmental 
conditions, etc.) and details about the system design (e.g., the 
specific types of sensors, or the arrays of sensors and cameras used 
for input to the central processing unit for the ADS). To what extent 
do ADS developers believe performance data should be considered 
proprietary and withheld from the public?
    10.2. Are the Agency's current processes under 49 CFR 389.9 for 
submission and protection of confidential business information in the 
context of a rulemaking sufficient to allow ADS developers and motor 
carriers to communicate essential information to the Agency regarding 
the operation of ADS?
    10.3. If not, how should those processes be modified?

    Issued under authority delegated in 49 CFR 1.87.

    Dated: May 21, 2019.
Raymond P. Martinez,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2019-11038 Filed 5-23-19; 4:15 pm]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


