Federal Highway Administration National Dialogue on Highway Automation: June 26-27, 2018 Policy and Planning Workshop Summary

Breakout Session I: Policy and Planning Issues and Challenges

This section summarizes stakeholder discussion from the first breakout session. Questions asked during this discussion included the following:

• In your perspective, what is the biggest policy challenge for enabling automation on the roadways?
• What current legislation, regulations, and/or State programs constrain or enable AV operations, maintenance, or investment?
• What are the potential impacts of AVs to system users? What are the policy questions in this area?
• What is the most important issue facing the transportation planning community as it relates to AVs?
• What are the potential effects of AVs on transportation mode choice and travel behavior over time?
• How can planning prepare for the safe and efficient integration of AVs into the roadway system?

Clarifying Roles at Federal, State, and Local Levels

It is important to clearly define roles at the Federal, State, and local levels for promoting and supporting automation. Stakeholders want to know the direction, responsibilities, and authority of agencies at all levels of government as they relate to AVs. It is not clear that all stakeholders, such as ADS technology companies, understand the distinction between the various roles that Federal, State, local agencies, metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs), and other organizations play. There is a need for clarification and communication regarding government roles and activities in order to reduce confusion and support AV operations crossing jurisdictional lines.

Keeping Pace with Technology Development

Participants discussed the tension between rapidly developing automation technologies and the slower pace of regulation. It may be difficult for legislation and regulation to keep pace with automation technology as it changes. As a result, flexibility and strategic planning are necessary to support agencies, elected officials, and policymakers in making informed decisions. More research and discussion may be needed to better understand and manage the uncertainty of AV impacts. Also, existing laws (e.g., local laws, ordinances) do not necessarily take AVs into account and may need to be updated in the future.

Funding and Planning for Future Infrastructure

Improved condition of the roadway infrastructure is important for both human-driven and automated vehicles. As a result, there may be a need for greater discussion around Federal funding availability, flexibility, and requirements. Participants suggested more infrastructure funding and resources to support a State of Good Repair. There are significant policy questions around how to fund not only maintenance of the existing infrastructure, but also any new infrastructure that may be needed to support AVs. A major challenge is that it is not clear what infrastructure standards are required for AVs, so agencies face uncertainty in where to allocate their infrastructure funding, especially given competing budgetary priorities. In addition, there is a risk of investing in certain technologies or other roadway upgrades that could become obsolete in the future. Some participants pointed to callboxes as an example of a now obsolete technology, after widespread adoption of mobile phones. Overall, State and local agencies will need to consider the long-term viability of such investments as they make infrastructure investment decisions.

Preparing the Workforce for New Vehicles and Technology

The introduction of AVs could potentially impact professional drivers and the greater transportation workforce. Workshop participants discussed the need to assess the skillset of the current workforce and to determine how skills and training may need to adapt in the future to address AVs. The existing transportation workforce, particularly within local or smaller transportation agencies, will need to consider building a level of expertise around automation and related technologies as more of these vehicles operate on public roads. Additional study should also be conducted on impacts to professional drivers, including those within the transit and trucking industries.

Standardizing Terminology for AVs

Currently, there is notable confusion and inconsistency in the terminology and definitions around AVs. The lack of clear definitions makes it difficult for planners and policymakers to have meaningful conversation around AVs and to support AV readiness. A lack of consistent definitions can contribute to misinformation and potentially decrease public trust in the technology and ultimately impact public acceptance. A standardized lexicon around AVs could also be important for a national policy framework for AVs and could support development of State-level policy. Having a consistent and clear way of speaking about AVs could help policymakers, planners, State and local agencies, and industry communicate with each other and with the public.

Clarifying Data Management and Access

Data privacy and security were highlighted as important areas of concern for workshop participants. Participants discussed the need for more guidance or best practices around data collection, storage, and access. As AVs present the ability to collect and generate significant amounts of data regarding the roadway environment, stakeholders desire guidance on how to manage and use AV-related data. In addition, FHWA and other planning organizations may want to evaluate data needs to support future transportation planning processes. Participants recommended working closely with States, MPOs, and other local organizations in order to develop data collection specifications and strategies.

Understanding Impacts on Congestion and Transit

Automated vehicles introduce a range of impacts on congestion, private vehicle ownership, mobility trends, and the use of transit. Several participants expressed concern that AVs could increase commuting distances, increase sprawl, and discourage the use of mass transit. There was also much discussion on how broader trends in ride-sharing and travel patterns could influence the use of AVs and even lead to negative impacts on congestion. Participants remarked that scenario planning would be an important tool to better understand how these multiple factors could come together in the future and the implications for transportation planning processes. Some suggested that enabling more interaction between the planning community and industry (those developing the AV technology) could help the planning community better understand potential future scenarios and inform future planning models.

Developing a Roadmap

Throughout this breakout session, participants pointed to the FHWA and USDOT as having an opportunity to set goals and develop a national roadmap on automation. The lack of a clear national direction contributes to the risk that simultaneous, but separate, projects relating to AVs are occurring and with potentially disparate end goals. A national roadmap could explain what each stage of AV technology deployment looks like, outline different milestones for AV integration onto the roadways, and provide a common framework with milestones for stakeholders to work toward. With concrete descriptions and objectives, stakeholders can begin working together more effectively to achieve the goals of each stage. Several participants noted that FHWA could coordinate the development of this roadmap in partnership with State and local agencies, industry, associations, and other stakeholders.