This week on the communicators, the discussion about the guidelines and rules proposed for selfdriving cars. Our guests, mark rosekind, who is the admin straight tore of the national highway transportation administration. Dr. Rosekind, what should the public right now know about selfdriving cars . Theyre here. The question, not even a year ago, six months, when are they going to arif . Theyre here. Theyre on the roads. All of us need to focus to make sure that they are safe as possible because they offer us tremendous lifesaving potential. Your agency put out guidelines for proposed rules for selfdriving cars. What was your focus . The policy focuses in four areas. To make it sort of week, the vehicle performance guidance for people that are going manufacture these. If youre going to design, test, deploy, here is a 15point Safety Assessment you have to go through to make sure it is safe before it gets on the road. We can talk about this more but its a total reversal. Right now were trying to look how we build safety into a vehicle beforehand because for 50 years, nhtsa, national Highway SafetyTraffic Administration is only reactive. You have to wait until somebody gets injured or killed. How do we build in safety . We have a model of state policy we wanted to be specific as we could for the potential to uniform consistent framework of policies across the country. A patchwork could kill this technology. The last two fell into one area, what tools and authorities does nhtsa need. How do we use current ones to get the safely on the road now . What would the future need to help expedite that safety. Could you speak a little more about the premarket approval process. That is a big change as you noted. And thanks for bringing that up because i think the secretary talked about that a lot because he is really trying to emphasize for 50 years it has all been reactive. So basically we put out a regulation. Then we wait to see if you comply with it, or somebody gets hurt or killed, we find out if there is defect, recall, penalize you. It is after the fact. What the secretary focused on, nhtsa, d. O. T. , how do we become proactive . How do we get safety in the front . Specific to premarket type of approval that is just one of the 12 tools that are identified. We dont ask for it, dont necessarily say were going to do it but highlights the future method we might need to get these safely on the street. It is different, will take a while to get there but we need a conversation to explore how we might use new tools for safety. Joining us in our conversation is dave shepardson, Thomson Reuters and previous auto reporters as well. Mark, one of the things nhtsa opted for guidelines as opposed to regulations. Was that is function of the fact there are too many unknowns or there was not enough time to go through the regulatory process to create binding rules. Both of those. Lets start with the regulatory side. There are a lot of people for 50 years that you have to regulate and the only way you get your safety. The last Big Technologies weve had, so thats, rear visibility cameras, talking about electronic stability control we all have, advanced side airbags, six, eight, 10 years, to get rulemakings done. In six, eight or 10 years with this technology it would changing so is fast it would be outdated before you competent the regulation out. Thats why we need new tools. The other area you highlighted there are a lot of unknowns out here. Come out with the regulation, what is the performance objective, test data. Usually penetration in the market of 15 to 20 , we dont have all that. We have to finish it out. We try to find a safety framework but nuture and support innovation. By having our 15point list, both come to meet the priority performance items, totally different ways, be innovative as you want, but show us the data. Prove you have a safe way. When it comes to regulation well pick whoever does it best with data to support it. Lefts start filling in those unknowns with knowns. Do you think, what is the Auto Industry early reaction . Are they receptive to the voluntary requirements . Would congress agree to Something Like preapproval authority for the agency . The initial reaction is generally been fairly positive and i take that as ironically people dont think of the government this way but im trying to position this as were trying to be innovative as we do from the government side as we what we try to nuture and support on technology and manufacturing side. Its a little different. Some is flipping on its head but were trying to meet that. So i think the folks who are in this area appreciate the fact were trying not to jam them in a box with regulation but open it up for safety to see what they can do. And as far as congress goes, those discussions are for the future. And so what we did was identify 12 different tools. Each of them probably requires a group to look at what would you do. That happens to be the biggest one everyone is focused on. The secretary in particular highlights that. It is a example of flipping it on its side from reactive to proactive. There needs to be a lot of discussion before there is any action. Do you think california will drop its plans to go ahead with its own rules that require a driver in the driver seat and follow in line what nhtsa proposed for the model state guide is. For sure youre going to ask california that. I wont speak with them. What i want to highlight the american moat vehicle at administrators. Had a lot of actions with states including california. They helped us anticipate what the state issues are. We were interactioning with them with special groups. California is extremely collaborative telling us what their challenges are but also has been waiting to be patient as we come out with ours before they act. Pretty soon well hear about their next steps. The indicators they have given us to come out in step with what is our policy. Dr. Rosekind, were there any regulations prior to it your announcement on september 18th. Thank you for that question because it is so critical. We did our own analysis. We had volpi and part of the transportation administration, how automobiles are handled in current standards. They are not addressed. If you think about it, this is what we wrote, if you manufacture a car that complies with all the current standards and selfcertify thaw complied you can put any automation you want on the road. That is why this was so significant. This policy says if you want to do that, here is how you have to address safety before you ever put that on the road. Why choose selfdriving cars for the change in how you approach policy . Well, and that is another critcan element which is, and this is a number, im surprised i didnt start with this, but ill do it now, 35,092 number of lives lost in 2015 on our roads. That was 7. 2 in crease from 2014. Over a decade we you saw 25 drop in lives lost. Last year we lost a third of that progress in one year. People will say, keep doing stuff so we can save those lives. It was einstein, keep doing the same thing, expect a different outcome, not going to happen. We need to find new solutions. Technology innovations were looking at in vehicles represents that transformative opportunity to save those lives. Everyone has a the potential to be saved. Given that this is technology, it is in an automobile, but given that it is technology, will there be other Government Agencies involved in setting rules and regulations about this . Thats a great question because i think were, keep trying to highlight, everybody keeps talking about their vision for this space and i think were watching it, that future is being created right in front of us. Thats a great question, right now nhtsa, d. O. T. Were smack in the middle of it, part of that is secretary foxs vision that we need to play a role. Federal motor carrier safety administration, they deal with trucks. They will have a role in this. Were looking potentially spectrum, how that is shared for vehicle to vehicle communication which is rule making were looking at, connected automation. There will be a lot of Government Agencies that will be involved. When you start with a vehicles central point, that puts nhtsa, d. O. T. Right smack in the middle of it. Dave shepardson. The critics on selfdriving cars there is not enough miles. Google for example, has driven two million miles. In fact one of the witnesses who testified at the hearing in senate said we need hundreds of millions of miles for testing. It is too early to have these vehicles out on the road. What do you say to that . And do you think more testing needs to be done before we can be assured these vehicles are safe . I hope people start reading the policy and understand how thoughtful it is, and by the way i wasnt at the senate hearing. That was someone else. One of the questions ive been asking what are the new safety metrics we need . Were in transformative place than we cant keep counting lives lost. We need new safety metrics. What are those . Counting miles traveled, is that really the metric we need. If you read the policy i hope people will see how thoughtful it is, talk about simulation, track, on the record. It really expedites the exemption process to get more on the road for better data. I really think we need more data through different means and different mechanisms. Some of them we outline. Well have more date today in different ways. I still think the bottom line, what are the safety metrics. For example, in california you have to report when you disengage, et cetera. What about a hard braking . What if the hard braking because somebody stepped in front of the car and they didnt hit the pedestrian. All you see is hard braking bad, but hard braking good. We dont collect data. To collect date that to prove this is saving lives, that is harder to do. That is the metrics we have to figure out beyond miles traveled. A company selfcertify can put out anything out as long as they meet guidelines. Google for example this year it had a crash admitted some responsibility for hitting a us about. Tesla had autopilot crash it acknowledged the system did not work as it intended. Should these systems be on the road now without nhtsa having some preapproval or more oversight into niece near fullyautomated vehicles . What you highlighted how fast is this is moves. So in january section take fox announced president s proposal, 3. 9 billion for this area and secretary announced within six months we would come out with this guidance. What is interesting is, how much happened in that time. So if you think about it, it is accelerating literally so fast, trying to get in front of it is a guess for anybody. One of our challenges was to put a stake in the ground that basically says Going Forward heres what we expect but there is also a section in there that says if youre already on the road well give you a little bit of grace period but within this amount of time we want you to fill the same safety requirements now for stuff that is on the road. That is how you get to future but also what is out there now. But isnt a question if a Company Reports to you to meet the 15 guidelines, if they dont, you dont agree, what is nhtsas recourse at that point . This is critical. This is a policy but we have High Expectations that people will follow them and one of the things that also came out when this policy was issued was an enforcement bulletin, when it did, say all is current authorities we have, recall, penalty, all that, that applies to new Vehicle Technology as well. And so we have a lot of authorities. We could use more that would help us be even more effective. That is in our 12 tools for the future but our current authorities apply to whats going on here and so we have investigations that we can start, we have all kinds of other tools already available for us to try and be sure to safety is built in the front end. Dr. Rosekind who can comment in the 60day period were on for the guidelines . Everybody. That is really important. I hope you send something in. Learn bit because we want the public, potential drivers in the future, passengers, there 16day comment period. There is comment period. Nhtsa. Gov, you can find it there and anyone can submit any kind of comments. But i point out in the policy we identify 23 next steps beyond the comment period. Well have interactive work shops. Well have an expert review of the policy well start working groups to look at some legislative issues. We specifically recommend a commission that the states put together to look at Liability Insurance issues for example. There is a whole set of next steps that will go for months forward. Decides the 60 days there are many other being a activities we expect everyone, manufacturers, media, passengers, anybody should be making comments so we take those into consideration. We made a commitment to annually review and potentially update this policy. On your checklist of 15 points for these guidelines, the first one is data recording and sharing. Is this a sharing of technology or a sharing of data . It is data sharing and i would just say while the response has generally been positive the one caution that people like to raise is what about data sharing . Because within confidential business realms people worry thats especially in this data era, right, theres money there. And so i think what i like to highlight, im a recovering nasa scientist, so i come out of aerospace, in the Aviation Industry where safety is not just a High Standard but they have done so well, there is a lot of sharing of safety data. So what were focused on how do you share safety data. I give you two examples quickly. There are a lot of what people call corner or edge cases. That google, valentines day, google meets bus, that happens, that may not happen to anyone else. Everyone trying to Program Vehicles should know about the one instance because everyone can learn about that the other part about sharing, talking about all the vehicles on the road that learn all safety information, they all get to share that information. You only know your driving is going to improve because of experience you get on the road. Just think of the millions of vehicles that could be adding to the vehicle that is actually taking you in a driverless car. That is opportunity you dont get with humans right now. Another one on the checklist is vehicle cybersecurity. We recently visited with raj kumar at Carnegie Mellon university who is working on driverless cars. Here is a little bit what he had to say. Because they are driven by computers and hundreds of lines of software code, we have to be cognizant of and be cautious about possible threats to the technology. These could include cybersecurity attacks, if i can send information out, i can also receive information back in. Those entry and exit lines become potential portals for attack. We have to be aware of attacks that come across the state, the country, the continent or globally. Again besides cybersecurity threats, one also has to be worried about what can be done in a physical context. For example, you can jam gps. You can possibly spoof gps. You can use, for example, even simple laser devices you can buy very cheaply to confuse the light or sensors causing the vehicle to brake itself. So there are cybersecurity threats and also physical attacks that are possible. Dr. Rosekind. I think we have to look at both the positive and negatives. Let me start with the positives which is one example of how all this technology is over the air updates. You can update software over the air. You can have a brand new car with all kinds of safety features when you wake up in the morning, remarkable. Another one, say there is a recall or defect has to be fixed. Everyone wakes up there is 100 recall completion in the morning when everyone wakes up to their car. That is remarkable. What is being pointed out that represents a portal or vulnerability, somebody, any bad actor, concerned what cybersecurity risk i can get to, that opens up. Why nhtsa shortly come out with cybersecurity best practice. We identify a whole list of them for that particular point in the vehicle guidance. There is the auto isac that the industry started that we pushed them to begin. This already exists in energy and infrastructure. They already have systems and report and share data. They already share data about these. It is acknowledged. The challenge, this moves so quickly, how do we make sure the best practices are in place to protect people. There is a lot of sort of two schools of thought here. That selfdriving cars will come faster than we thought. Others say there are too many complexities, Companies Like toyota say, hey, it is probably a little further away. In terms of what you come down where we see level four, level five vehicles and deployment . More in the 2020 range or further, 2025 and beyond . Let me go at that by saying i think one of the challenges everyone has is actually trying to segment these a little bit more clearly than the way we talk about them. So you talk about levels. Only three of us know what youre talking about. Everyone else is like what is that . There is full selfdriving. Where we expect no input from the humans. The car is monitoring the environment. Then there is other levels where the human is still responsible for monitoring the environment or car or some piece of it. The reason i say that i think fully selfdriving in all environments, thats probably 2020 beyond. I think were looking a little bit longer than that. But its on the road already. So i think the question more is, we may get specialized version of these. So one of our 15 has to do with operational design demand. What does that mean . Where should the car operate . If you have a pizza delivery only during the day on these three blocks, that is very specific application. That could be, quote, selfdriving but it is a very specific place with low risk, a bunch of different things. All the way up to the selfdriving or the, i think it depends what youre looking at. These things are already on the street. They are going to happen real quickly. Full selfdriving in all environments i think that is 2020 and beyond before we get there. One of the things the guidelines say maybe intuitively that the selfdriving car should follow the law. Google, for example, as it reports these crashes is getting rearended quite a bit because driving very safely. Following to law. Coming to complete stops at stops signs. Should in the future selfdriving cars be allowed to drive more like human beings do, going beyond speed limit, not coming to full stops at stop signs and how do we have environment with human drivers which are less than why thal and selfdriving cars followi