sou · H6B316 · 2018-03-07 00:00:00 — A more detailed description of the proposals is presented below, following a more general section on starting points for the work and longer-term development. Starting points and time perspectives Proposals only when special regulation is necessary The issues and areas that affect automated vehicles affect other ve- hicles as well to a great extent. Many regulations are already techno- logy-neutral regarding vehicles’ level of automation. has merely submitted proposals for the elements where it is felt that special regulation is necessary for automated vehicles. The areas that have been excepted and so are not discussed in greater detail here are those whereby rules or conditions are appli- cable in the same way regardless of the level of automation, and those that need to be discussed in a cohesive and more general context than is possible and appropriate in this case. Issues relating to the government undertaking regarding the digitisation of the trans- port system or the availability of, access to and use of data connected to vehicles are just a few examples. Regarding certain other areas, the regulations are already designed to be technology-neutral and do not directly impede market intro- duction of automated vehicles. One example is the civil liability systems, which are deemed to be able to meet the need for financial compensation in the event of harm caused by vehicles, regardless of automation level. As for motor insurance, the Swedish system is formulated in such a way that the mandatory insurance follows the vehicle and the insurance is a responsibility for the vehicle’s owner. Although insurance models and concepts may need to be altered in the long term, motor insurance is expected to be applicable to all vehicles regardless of automation level. No proposals for changes to the regulations are submitted in respect of these areas, either. How- ever, there may be a need to monitor development in areas that should be discussed at a more general level so that interests in promoting automation with respect to vehicles are considered. For some other areas, it is too early to provide any proposals on formulation of the national legislation. This includes consideration of how training for licensing and professional skills are to be formu- lated in respect of automated vehicles. New elements may be needed for vehicles that are partly automated regarding both standard driver training and professional driver training. For example, development of driving automated vehicles in convoy may affect the need for training and licensing. Boundaries may be erased or moved for certain regulations, e.g. regarding taxi operations in relation to the hire or sharing of vehicles, publicly funded in relation to new mobility concepts involving automated driving as one element, and the public undertaking as regards infrastructure in relation to private undertakings. A review should take place in these areas within three to five years, or when the introduction of such vehicles has made a more progress. This is also an issue that is the subject of international discussion, and changes may be proposed within the framework for a new Directive on Driving Licences or the Profes- sional Qualifications Directive. Regarding driving licences, opportunities for people with physical disabilities to use road vehicles may be extended in that the auto- matic systems will be able to take over driving completely and compensate for physical disabilities or human shortcomings in a that is not possible at present. It can already be stated that the EU’s third Directive on Driving Licences prevents some groups of individuals with physical disabilities from benefiting from the new driver aid technologies that have been developed. can help to bring about a change in this respect and ensure that more groups are given the opportunity for exemption and adaptation of vehicles in accordance with the development of technology. The legislation in respect of community-funded such as car allowances, parking permits or mobility services is not technology-neutral, either. This needs to be reviewed when driverless vehicles are permitted on a more general level and if the rules for driving licence conditions are amended. In other words, all these issues should be reviewed more thoroughly when automation and mobility services have developed in a way that will make this possible. Concerning the infrastructure, certain changes are proposed with respect to authorisations for road owners, for example. However, it is too early in this area as well to propose solutions relating to the use of road capacity, the need for parking and rearranging areas or specific adaptations to the infrastructure, for example. The next five years In the short term, over the next five years, the Swedish regulations should be adapted to prepare for automated driving and facilitate the introduction of highly or fully automated vehicles (essentially corre- sponding to SAE levels 4–51). During this time, it is primarily a matter of facilitating the market introduction of certain automated vehicles 1 SAE is a global organisation for engineers that produces standards for engineers in a variety of industrial fields, primarily in the field of transport (such as autonomous vehicles and aircraft). Among other things, the organisation has devised levels for autonomous vehicles that have been disseminated widely on an international level; see chapter 3, section 2. and facilitating trials of advanced automated functions for driving in convoy (platooning), freight transport and passenger transport. The more general constitutional amendments for a regulation that can be applied regardless of vehicle automation levels and a shift in penalties for automated driving as proposed by the committee may, in the opinion of the committee, primarily be applied even when broader introduction of automated vehicles becomes possible. Furthermore, the committee proposes further analyses and facilitation of the trials and demonstration projects that are needed to facilitate introduction. Efforts are also needed for various stakeholders to work in cooperation and devise concepts for holistic solutions for freight transport and passenger transport in urban and rural areas that may assist with attainment of important transport and community targets. In the longer term A great deal of effort will be needed, primarily at authority level, to facilitate market introduction of automated vehicles at a high level. In the first instance, this will involve continuing to participate in on- going international efforts in a constructive and, at a later stage, introducing and adapting vehicle-related regulations and gen- eral recommendations in a that promotes the development of automation and digitisation of the transport system. Forthcoming work regarding a new Directive on Driving Licences, the use of data, and trials and rules for vehicles with automated driving functions are some issues that will have a major influence on development, and these are discussed below. Besides the changes to international regulations that will have direct repercussions for Swedish provisions, a great number of na- tional regulations – relating to matters such as community-funded , public transport and regulations relating to taxis, hire car operations and infrastructure – that will need to be reviewed in the event of a broader market introduction. A decision will also need to be made on the government’s undertakings concerning the digitisa- tion of road information, etc. Applicable statutes should be reviewed again when it becomes possible to introduce driverless driving of vehicles on the roads. should continue its efforts to adapt the international regu- lations so that market introduction of higher levels of automated vehicles becomes possible, in a safe and sustainable way. Given the work going on at an international level in matters such as automated vehicles and digitisation and data issues, it is likely that major amendments to regulations and recommendations will be made within five to ten years. In the opinion of the committee, needs to continue to further adapt its regulations in line with the amendment of international regulations. Transport policy targets and automated vehicles To assist with the meeting of transport policy targets, automated driving must – if possible – be introduced in a that markedly contributes to a sustainable transport system in which the environ- ment, climate, road safety, noise and good accessibility for all are considered. However, automation is merely one element in the further changes that are happening in society. One focus of the work on this may be that the technical solutions devised should be used to facilitate and assist people in their daily life, and the committee’s job is prima- rily to prepare and facilitate the introduction of automated vehicles. The 1968 Convention on Road Traffic, which was ratified by , includes the fundamental rules for road traffic, drivers, ve- hicles and driving licenses on which the EU’s regulations – and hence ’s regulations as well – are based. The Convention’s provisions stating that every vehicle on the road must have a driver and that the driver must have control of the vehicle is what may primarily be considered to constitute an obstacle to higher levels of automated vehicles. Amendments to the Convention were introduced in 2016 which permitted certain automated functions if there is a driver who is capable and prepared to take over the driving and who can control this. Efforts are in progress within the scope of UNECE’s for Road Traffic Safety (WP.1) to allow road use of automated vehicles at higher levels according to the classification provided by SAE; see the description in chapter 3. However, there is presently a requirement in the affiliated countries – including – to have a driver for every vehicle operating on the road. UNECE also has a world forum, WP.29, UNECE/GRRF, which devises technical rules for vehicles known as the Vehicle Regulations. Intensive efforts are also in progress within the EU to facilitate the introduction of automated and connected vehicles. How larger- scale trials and cross-border tests of automated driving and connec- ted vehicles can be promoted is the primary topic of discussion. Al- though there are no express requirements for drivers for every road vehicle, the third Directive on Driving Licences includes an implicit requirement to have a driver2. The licensing rules in the Directive on Driving Licences are in turn based on the provisions on driving licences in the Convention on Road Traffic, which also contains provisions on which vehicles require special licences. The harmonised provisions in the EU’s Directive on Driving Licences have been introduced via ’s provisions relating to driving licences. These in turn are based on the provisions on driving licences in UNECE’s Conventions on Road Traffic. Given these rules, there is currently no scope to amend or permit exceptions to the applicable provisions on driving licences for vehicles that require a driving licence in accordance with the Directive on Driving Licences, nor would it be appropriate to do so. Therefore, the com- mittee proposes no amendments to this element in the short term. When proposals on a new Directive on Driving Licences and other efforts with a bearing on automated driving have been announced over the next few years, ’s work on this should include addressing issues relating to automated vehicles and resolving these on an international level. Regarding vehicles that are regulated nationally in terms of driver authorisations, the committee believes that ’s scope for action and interpretation is greater than in areas where the requirements relating to driving licences are harmonised. It is proposed that cautious introduction of fully automated vehicles should be possible 2 European Parliament and Council directive 2006/126/EC of on driving licenses, the third Directive on Driving Licenses for these, often slow, vehicles, most of which are used in national traffic. has used the term “driver” throughout to denote a person who operates a vehicle. The term “driver” is discussed in greater detail below. “Automated vehicles” is used as a term to denote a motor vehicle that can be operated by an automatic driving system. “Automatic driving system” refers to a system that can control and operate a vehicle independently. “Automated driving” is used to denote when an automatic driving system can independently control and operate a vehicle. This function may be limited to certain roads (specified roads, motor- ways, etc.) or certain criteria (driving in traffic jams, touring, etc.). If a vehicle is designed such that it requires monitoring by and assis- tance from a driver to drive safely or handle certain situations while driving, this should not be regarded as automated driving. Instead, it is to be regarded as a vehicle with advanced driver aid technology. The term “operate” is not defined, but is used mostly in a general sense, i.e. not in any strict legal sense or according to practice as to who is operating the vehicle. For example, a vehicle may be operated by one driver (or more), or by an automatic driving system. Trials with automated driverless driving According to the Ordinance (2017:309) on autonomous vehicle trials, permits are required for trials with vehicles that are not ap- proved in any other way for driving on the road. To be granted a permit for automated vehicle trials, there is currently a requirement for a driver to be present. The provision stating that there must be a licensed driver in or outside the vehicle must be retained until further notice regarding trials involving cars, , buses, motorcycles and class I mopeds. Other automated vehicles covered by the ordinance, namely class II mopeds, tractors, road and all-terrain vehicles, it is proposed that the mandatory requirement to have a driver is deleted. This means that driverless vehicle trials of this type can be imple- mented, provided that other licensing requirements are met. We also propose an exception to the requirement for a licence for trials for the new class II automated public works vehicle type. Introduction of some automated vehicles The revised amendments for trials mean that certain slow, fully auto- mated vehicles can be used during trials or introduced as an initial option for testing fully automated vehicles on the roads. If a vehicle is designed such that it requires monitoring by and assistance from a driver to drive safely or handle certain situations while driving, this should not be regarded as automated driving. Instead, it is to be regarded as a vehicle with advanced driver aid technology. This is the case with many of the vehicles with auto- mated functions that have been announced by the industry. This proposal means that automated class II road may be driven on the roads without a licence, regardless of whether they have a driver. Authorisation will be introduced to allow the to decide on further rules on the operation of these vehicles on roads. Examples of automated class II road that may be intro- duced to the market include automated works vehicles for construc- tion and maintenance, such as gritters on cycle paths and slow goods vehicles that are defined as class II road . Remote control of tools for construction, maintenance, surveying, etc. is common at present. In the opinion of the committee, the development of tools that operate independently, perhaps along a preprogramed route, is not far away. Being able to use automated to grit cycle paths at night, for example, may offer major benefits. A new law relating to automated vehicles A new law relating to automated driving will be introduced. This law must have three subareas; one relating to the driver, one relating to penalties and one relating to data storage. New terms will be introduced to facilitate regulation and introduc- tion of automated driving. •Automated vehicle, which refers to a motor vehicle or a cycle (certain vehicles that are defined as cycles are motorized, such as electric wheelchairs or balance vehicles) which is operated en- tirely or partly by an automated driving system. •Automated driving is when a vehicle is operated by an automated driving system without needing a driver in or outside the vehicle. •Automatic driving system refers to a system that, when activated, can control the driving of the vehicle, including lateral and longi- tudinal control, and independently perform the dynamic driving task. •Automated class II road relate to class II road that are operated by a fully or partly automated driving system. •The term road user will be adjusted to include drivers who operate and control vehicles remotely, e.g. using a remote control, and who are not on the road. This term must therefore be defined to relate to “anyone travelling or otherwise present on a road or in a vehicle on a road or off-road, and anyone travelling off-road plus drivers of vehicles present on a road or off-road”. A driver is a human. A definition of the role of the driver will be introduced which means that a driver may be in or outside the vehicle, operate vehicles using a remote control and operate multiple vehicles simultaneously. Furthermore, a vehicle may have more than one driver. All road driving using vehicles with automated functions is already possible, provided that •there is a driver in or outside the vehicle, and •the vehicle is approved or has an exemption or other licence for road driving. A new term for “drivers” The technology for automated driving is currently not developed sufficiently to replace all the tasks of a driver in all respects. In the opinion of the committee, EU law does not yet permit vehicles without drivers, at least insofar as requirements are in place for specific driving licenses in accordance with EU regulations. There- fore, the requirement for drivers in vehicles where licensing is regu- lated in accordance with the provisions of the Directive on Driving Licenses should be retained. The main rule in the proposal is therefore that a vehicle must have a driver while being driven automatically. However, there are major opportunities for trials and the introduction of advanced automatic functions due to the national interpretation of the term “driver” that is being introduced. The term “driver” proposes a definition of the term “driver” on the basis of current Swedish practice, among other things. According to the proposal, a driver is a human. A driver may operate one or more vehicles simultaneously. A driver may be in or outside the vehicle, which means that a vehicle may be operated by remote control (operated remotely), when the driver is either in the immediate vicinity of the vehicle or at a distance from it, if this can be deemed safe during a risk analysis. The interpretation means that convoy trials with a driver in the first vehicle, but not in the following ve- hicles, are possible. Furthermore, this interpretation paves the way for rearranging of vehicles where a driver operates or controls multi- ple vehicles simultaneously, e.g. when parking or otherwise moving vehicles. This also paves the way for other trials where a driver can control vehicles from a location other than a driver’s seat. This does of course assume that this can be done safely in accordance with the other conditions and rules laid down for trials or other road driving. Professional traffic and the term “driver” The regulations on professional freight and passenger transport are largely harmonised within the EU. The investigation will submit no proposals on these elements, but assumes that will work to encourage the devising of joint rules within the EU that promote development of innovations and new market solutions relating to professional traffic. Among other things, this relates to the develop- ment of rules on driving and rest times in the case of automated driving. The national interpretation of the term “driver” that is proposed means that relatively far-reaching automated vehicle trials are pos- sible, and that – for example – convoy trials with a driver in the first vehicle only who is operating the entire convoy will be possible when the technology has made sufficient progress and this is deemed to be sufficiently safe. It will also be possible to test and introduce other far-reaching automated driving functions, such as remote con- trol and rearranging of vehicles and automated docking in loading bays or parking spaces. New distribution of responsibilities According to the proposal, there should normally be one driver for one automated vehicle even when this is operated automatically (i.e. when there is no need for any human to take over or provide guaran- tees). However, this is a kind of “engineered driving” with limited obligations and responsibilities. During automated driving, such a driver must meet the applicable requirements for the vehicle in ques- tion regarding licensing (driving license and any professional authorization), sobriety and other requirements to be able to maintain a basic ability to perform the tasks for which the driver is responsible as specified below. This is no less important for vehicles that assume that a driver will take over driving at any time or in certain situations. The following is proposed for automated driving: 1.The driver is responsible for a)meeting driver requirements for the vehicle in question (the right licensing, sobriety, etc.), b)taking over driving when the vehicle requests during auto- mated driving that the driver should take over or intervene, provided that the vehicle is designed in a which ren- ders it incapable of resolving the situation independently, and c)performing the tasks for which the driver is already respon- sible at present and that an automatic driving system cannot take over and perform. These tasks will remain in place with unamended regulations. This may include ensuring that child- ren under 15 have the right protective equipment (such as seat- belts), ensuring that the vehicle is loaded correctly or meeting certain obligations following an accident. d)During manual driving, communication equipment must not be used in a that affects driving in a harmful way. During automated driving, the driver has no tasks to perform regarding the dynamic driving. Therefore, during automated driving drivers may spend time doing other things such as using mobile phones or other distracting tasks. The provision stating that a driver must not use a handheld mobile phone or other communication equipment, which came into force on 1 February 2018, will therefore be adapted so that it is not applicable during automated driving. 2.The owner’s responsibility a)in the case of vehicles that have no driver, the owner must stand responsible for ensuring that the vehicle is operated in accord- ance with applicable road traffic provisions during automated driving. b)even if there is a driver, the owner must take responsibility for ensuring compliance with road traffic rules during automated driving. A penalty will be introduced to replace the fines that may be imposed on drivers when breaching road traffic rules. Certain options for adjusting penalties under certain circum- stances on which the infringement is based (crime, illness, effect) will be introduced. c)a vehicle that is capable during automated driving of handling all situations arising without the help of a driver must be able to stop in a safe if the situation cannot be handled by the driving system in any other way. 3.Responsibilities of manufacturers and product officers