SAFETY ASSURANCE FOR AUTOMATED DRIVING SYSTEMS DECISION REGULATION IMPACT STATEMENT November 2018 Council of Australian Governments Regulation Impact Statement Report outline Title Safety Assurance for Automated Driving Systems: Decision Regulation Impact Statement Type of report Council of Australian Governments Decision Regulation Impact Statement Purpose The purpose of this decision Regulation Impact Statement is to analyse options for the safety assurance of automated driving systems. This analysis is intended to inform a Transport and Infrastructure Council decision on a safety assurance approach. Abstract This decision RIS uses a multi-criteria analysis to assess options for the safety assurance of automated driving systems (ADSs). The baseline option (option 1) does not develop a new safety assurance system. The reform options (2, 3 and 4) all introduce safety assurance systems based on mandatory self-certification by automated driving system entities. These options have increasing levels of government oversight. Following consultation on the options we recommend an approach that incorporates self-certification against safety criteria for ADSs into Australian Design Rules (option 2) to manage safety at first supply. We recommend further work to consider the most appropriate way to manage the safety of ADSs while they are in- service. This work will consider safety duties and the parties they should apply to, and the institutional arrangements that should govern the in-service framework. Key words automated driving systems, automated driving system entities, automated vehicles, cost-benefit analysis, multi-criteria analysis, primary safety duty, regulation impact statement, safety assurance system, Statement of Compliance, compliance and enforcement Contact National Transport Commission Level 3/600 Bourke Street Melbourne VIC 3000 Ph: (03) 9236 5000 Email: [email protected] www.ntc.gov.au ii Safety Assurance for Automated Driving Systems: Decision Regulation Impact Statement November 2018 Council of Australian Governments Regulation Impact Statement Foreword Australian transport and infrastructure ministers have recognised that automated vehicles offer the possibility of fundamentally changing how transport is provided and unlocking a range of safety, productivity, environmental and mobility benefits. The National Transport Commission is working with state, territory and the Commonwealth governments on a program of regulatory reform to ensure the Australian community can gain the potential benefits of automated vehicles. Our aim is to develop a flexible and responsive regulatory environment for the commercial deployment of automated vehicles that supports both safety and innovation. This decision Regulation Impact Statement delivers a key aspect of this reform agenda. Ministers have agreed to a mandatory self-certification approach to safety to provide assurance to the community and government that companies developing automated driving technology are managing safety risks appropriately. This approach also allows for ongoing innovation by enabling different business models and mixes of technology to be brought to Australia. The development of a safety assurance system based on mandatory self-certification is a significant step in preparing Australia for the commercial deployment of automated vehicles. It will give the Australian public and manufacturers clarity, certainty and consistency, and ensure Australia is able to align with developments in the international regulatory landscape. I would like to acknowledge the valuable input provided by stakeholders in informing this decision Regulation Impact Statement. I encourage government, industry and the wider community to continue to work with us on the next steps in our automated vehicle regulatory reform agenda to ensure Australians can gain the benefits of this technology. Carolyn Walsh Chair and Commissioner iii Safety Assurance for Automated Driving Systems: Decision Regulation Impact Statement November 2018 Council of Australian Governments Regulation Impact Statement Contents Report outline ii Foreword iii Contents iv Executive summary 1 1 Context 5 1.1 Introduction – what are automated vehicles? 5 1.2 Background 6 1.2.1 Road crashes in Australia 6 1.2.2 Benefits and risks of automated vehicles 6 1.2.3 Regulatory environment 8 1.2.4 National reform program for automated vehicles 8 1.2.5 Safety assurance for automated driving systems 11 1.2.6 International developments 14 1.3 About this decision Regulation Impact Statement 15 1.3.1 Scope 15 1.3.2 Structure 16 1.4 Key terms and concepts 16 2 Problem statement and need for government intervention 18 2.1 The problem 18 2.2 Stakeholder feedback on the problem 19 2.3 NTC response 20 2.4 ADSs may fail to deliver improved road safety outcomes 22 2.4.1 Existing mechanisms to manage safety risks are not fit for purpose 22 2.4.2 Evidence of automated vehicle safety risks that may not be addressed under the existing framework 23 2.5 Lack of consumer confidence in ADS safety may reduce or delay their uptake 24 2.5.1 Evidence that a lack of consumer confidence in ADS safety may reduce or delay their uptake 24 2.6 ADSEs may face inconsistent and/or uncertain regulation to supply ADSs in the Australian market 25 2.6.1 Evidence of inconsistent and/or uncertain regulation to supply ADSs 26 2.7 Need for government intervention 27 2.8 Stakeholder feedback 27 2.9 NTC response 28 3 Options to address the problem 30 3.1 Introduction 30 3.2 Stakeholder feedback 30 3.3 NTC response 32 3.3.1 Significant changes in the decision RIS 33 iv Safety Assurance for Automated Driving Systems: Decision Regulation Impact Statement November 2018 Council of Australian Governments Regulation Impact Statement 3.4 Options 34 3.4.1 Option 1: Baseline approach 36 3.4.2 Option 2: Safety assurance system in existing frameworks 38 3.4.3 Option 3: New safety assurance system 40 3.4.4 Option 4: New safety assurance system + primary safety duty 43 3.5 Further work on institutional arrangements 47 3.6 Alignment with international standards and transition to pre-market approval 48 4 Safety criteria for automated driving systems 49 4.1 Overview 49 4.2 Safety criteria and other obligations for the Statement of Compliance: general feedback 50 4.2.1 Stakeholder feedback 50 4.2.2 NTC response 50 4.3 Principles-based safety criteria: requirements for the Statement of Compliance 51 4.3.1 Safe system design and validation processes 51 4.3.2 Operational design domain 53 4.3.3 Human–machine interface 54 4.3.4 Compliance with relevant road traffic laws 56 4.3.5 Interaction with enforcement and emergency services 57 4.3.6 Minimal risk condition 58 4.3.7 On-road behavioural competency 59 4.3.8 Installation of system upgrades 60 4.3.9 Verifying for the Australian road environment 62 4.3.10 Cybersecurity 63 4.3.11 Education and training 64 4.4 Other obligations on ADSEs: requirements for the Statement of Compliance 66 4.4.1 Data recording and sharing 66 4.4.2 Corporate presence in Australia 69 4.4.3 Minimum financial requirements 70 4.5 First supply and in-service safety compliance 71 4.6 Criteria and other obligations that have not been included 71 4.6.1 Ethical considerations 71 4.6.2 Crashworthiness 72 4.6.3 C-ITS capability 72 4.6.4 Privacy 73 4.7 Provisions that could be captured in legislation 74 4.7.1 Stakeholder feedback 74 4.7.2 NTC response 74 5 Method for assessing the options 76 5.1 Introduction 76 5.2 Stakeholder feedback and NTC response 77 v Safety Assurance for Automated Driving Systems: Decision Regulation Impact Statement November 2018 Council of Australian Governments Regulation Impact Statement 5.2.1 Choosing the multi-criteria analysis approach 77 5.2.2 Impact categories, assessment criteria and high-level weightings 77 5.2.3 Affected individuals and groups 80 5.2.4 Timeframe for assessment 81 5.2.5 Assessing the options 81 5.3 Multi-criteria analysis approach 81 5.4 Impact categories and assessment criteria 82 5.4.1 High-level weighting of impact categories 83 5.5 Individuals and groups likely to be affected 84 5.6 Timeframe for assessment 85 5.7 Assessing the options 85 5.8 Testing the validity of the outcomes of this assessment 86 6 Assessment of the options 87 6.1 Introduction 87 6.2 Assessment of the options – general stakeholder feedback 87 6.3 Road safety impacts 88 6.3.1 Stakeholder feedback 88 6.3.2 NTC response 89 6.3.3 Assessment of options against road safety assessment criteria 90 6.4 Uptake impacts 92 6.4.1 Stakeholder feedback 93 6.4.2 NTC response 93 6.4.3 Assessment of options against uptake assessment criteria 94 6.5 Regulatory costs to industry impacts 95 6.5.1 Stakeholder feedback 95 6.5.2 NTC response 96 6.5.3 Assessment of options against regulatory costs to industry assessment criteria 97 6.5.4 Summary of regulatory costs to industry impact assessment 100 6.6 Regulatory costs to government impacts 101 6.6.1 Stakeholder feedback 102 6.6.2 NTC response 102 6.6.3 Assessment of options against regulatory costs to government assessment criteria 102 6.7 Flexibility and responsiveness impacts 103 6.7.1 Stakeholder feedback 104 6.7.2 NTC’s response to stakeholder feedback 104 6.7.3 Assessment of options against flexibility and responsiveness assessment criteria 105 7 Summary of assessment 107 7.1 Introduction 107 7.2 Summary of multi-criteria analysis 107 7.3 Testing the validity of the outcomes of this assessment 109 vi Safety Assurance for Automated Driving Systems: Decision Regulation Impact Statement November 2018 Council of Australian