Automated Vehicles: Safety Implications of Computers on Wheels

Automated Vehicles: Safety Implications of Computers on Wheels

INSIGHTi

Automated Vehicles: Safety Implications of
Computers on Wheels
September 14, 2021
On August 13, 2021, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) announced an
investigation of crashes involving “Autopilot” systems in Tesla electric vehicles. The investigation shows
that technologies that seek to automate tasks traditionally performed by drivers are becoming an
increasing part of NHTSA’s safety oversight.
Traditional vehicles powered by gasoline and diesel engines with human drivers have been regulated by
NHTSA for over 50 years. During that time, many types of vehicle defects have been addressed and
millions of vehicles have been recalled for safety-related modifications at the manufacturers’ expense. In
2020 alone, nearly 900 recalls of vehicles and parts were issued, affecting nearly 55 million vehicles.
Because of the widespread use of computers, sensors, and other automated technologies in vehicles, cars
are increasingly referred to as “computers on wheels.” The current shortage of semiconductors highlights
the dependence of motor vehicles on electronics, which are used in a wide variety of applications,
including airbags, emission sensors, engines, and media displays. By forcing vehicle and parts
manufacturers to scale back production, the semiconductor shortage has reduced the availability of cars in
dealers’ lots and driven up prices: the average new vehicle transaction price is nearly $42,000—a $6,000
increase from August 2020 prices for comparable vehicles.
In light of the computerization of motor vehicles, NHTSA will increasingly be faced with the need to
evaluate the safety impact of electronics-based technologies. The recently announced Tesla investigation
is to evaluate its Autopilot—an advanced driver assistance system (ADAS) that is thought to have been
involved in 11 crashes in nine states. Seventeen injuries and one death resulted from these incidents. The
inquiry could ultimately affect more than 700,000 Tesla electric vehicles, including Models 3, S, X, and
Y.
Autopilot is Tesla’s name for a technology that maintains a vehicle’s speed through cruise control,
ensures lane centering, and enables self-parking, along with other features. Other automakers have similar
systems. Despite the name Tesla has applied to its ADAS, its vehicles do not operate autonomously; they
must still be monitored and ultimately controlled by the driver, who must intervene when necessary to
identify obstacles in the road ahead or change the drive path based on actions taken by nearby vehicles. It
appears, however, that some Tesla drivers believe their vehicles can drive themselves with little or no
human involvement. NHTSA’s preliminary investigation is to “assess the technologies and methods used
Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
IN11749
CRS INSIGHT
Prepared for Members and
Committees of Congress

Congressional Research Service
2
to monitor, assist, and enforce the driver’s engagement” with Autopilot and also is to examine
circumstances surrounding each of the 11 designated crashes, each of which involved a first responder
vehicle.
Tesla’s vehicles fall into the Level 2 category of automation, under a classification system developed by
SAE International (formerly the Society of Automotive Engineers). The SAE system, which has been
adopted by NHTSA and other safety regulators, categorizes vehicle automation based on the amount of
driver intervention and attention required to safely drive the vehicle: Level 0 requires full driver control of
the vehicle; Level 5, which has not been achieved by any highway vehicle in commercial production,
would require no human intervention at all. Newer vehicles on the roads today are generally categorized
as Level 2, with partial automation for steering and acceleration, but with a human driver executing most
driving functions. An August 2021 NHTSA statement confirmed the current state of vehicle automation:
“NHTSA reminds the public that no commercially available motor vehicles today are capable of driving
themselves. Every available vehicle requires a human driver to be in control at all times, and all State
laws hold human drivers responsible for operation of their vehicles.”
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), an independent agency that investigates transportation
accidents and recommends steps to avoid similar incidents, has issued reports on several fatal Tesla
crashes, including those in Mountain View, CA, in 2018 and Delray Beach, FL, in 2019. Regarding the
California crash, NTSB’s final report noted that “contributing to the crash was the operational design of
Tesla’s partial automation system ... and the company’s failure to limit the use of the system to the
conditions for which it was designed.” NTSB reached a similar conclusion with regard to the Florida
fatality, in which the driver’s “overreliance” on Autopilot and its design “have led to tragic
consequences.”
To prevent similar crashes, NTSB recommended in February 2020 that automakers deploying Level 2
driving systems should (1) add safeguards to limit the use of automated vehicle control systems such as
Autopilot to those conditions for which they were designed, and (2) develop applications to alert drivers
when they are not paying attention to the road during use of ADAS. According to NTSB, several
automakers have confirmed their intention to undertake these steps, but not Tesla. The board also
recommended that NHTSA develop appropriate standards and verify that manufacturers of vehicles
equipped with Level 2 systems incorporate safeguards that limit their use to conditions for which they
were designed. In March 2020, NTSB went further and recommended NHTSA specifically evaluate
Tesla’s Autopilot.
While this is not the first time NHTSA has investigated a Tesla crash—it investigated a 2016 Tesla crash
involving a tractor-trailer in Florida—the current investigation of 11 vehicle crashes may be an indicator
that automated vehicle issues are rising in regulatory importance as the technologies become more widely
deployed. Congress may seek further information from NHTSA on the safety implications of ADAS and
examine why the agency has not issued relevant regulations. In addition, Congress may evaluate whether
NHTSA has appropriate resources to deal with these emerging technologies and promulgate effective
standards to ensure their safety.

Author Information

Bill Canis

Specialist in Industrial Organization and Business

Congressional Research Service
3

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff
to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of
Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of
information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role.
CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United
States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However,
as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the
permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

IN11749 · VERSION 1 · NEW