Who’s responsible when a driverless vehicle is in a crash? Answer still unclear | TribLIVE.com
Regional

Who’s responsible when a driverless vehicle is in a crash? Answer still unclear

Nicole C. Brambila
1540907_web1_aurora-innovation
Aurora Innovation puts a Lincoln equipped with its self-driving technology on display during an open house at its Pittsburgh office in June 2018. Aurora Innovation puts a Lincoln equipped with its self-driving technology on display during an open house at its Pittsburgh office in June 2018.

Who is liable when an autonomous vehicle is involved in a car crash?

It’s a question yet to be answered, and one the Governors Highway Safety Association broached in a recently released white paper the association will present at its annual meeting Aug. 26 in Anaheim, Calif.

“Finding fault and liability can be tricky when no driver is involved,” said Russ Martin, director of Policy and Government Relations for the Governors Highway Safety Association in Washington, D.C.

Martin added, “It’s its own legalistic can of worms. It’s definitely a hot topic in the insurance industry.”

With four companies and Carnegie Mellon University testing driverless vehicles in Allegheny County, autonomous driving is an issue likely to impact drivers in the region before the wider driving public that does not live areas where the technology is being tested.

Unlike the majority of opinion polls showing American drivers leery of the technology, Pittsburghers are far more comfortable with driverless vehicles.

Because the average age of vehicles on the road in 2018 was 12 years, industry experts now say that there is likely to be a mix of automobiles on the road from those with no autonomous features to driverless. It’s this mix that ensures traffic safety will be a continued challenge.

“The experts agree autonomous vehicles have tended to promise to reduce crashes and prevent injuries,” Martin said. “It may not be a silver bullet for highway safety.”

The white paper summarizes an interdisciplinary panel meeting the past spring.

Among the recommendations:

• Develop safety messages to educate the public about the range of automation, which includes driver assistance features such as lane-departure warnings to full self-driving vehicles.

• Continue the national focus on traffic safety challenges: impaired and distracted driving, speeding and sharing the road with pedestrians and bicyclists.

• Develop uniform policies and training for police and first responders about responding to and investigating crashes involving autonomous vehicles.

“While AVs will change our lives in many ways, they raise important highway safety issues,” said Ryan Gammelgard, State Farm counsel. “This report is a key piece to helping make sure we all work together to ensure the technology works as advertised.”

Ryan Tarkowski, Pennsylvania State Police spokesman, agreed, saying the liability issue is on the agency’s radar.

“Yes, this is an issue that the Pennsylvania State Police is aware of and is actively working to address,” Tarkowski said. “As the technology surrounding highly automated vehicles evolves, the department continues to work with our law enforcement partners, lawmakers, PennDOT, vehicle manufacturers and other stakeholders to address associated legal and safety issues.”

Officials with the Pittsburgh Bureau of Police did not respond to requests for comment, and Chief Deputy Kevin Kraus with the Allegheny County Sheriff’s Office declined to comment.

Representatives for Uber Advance Technology Group and Aurora did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

The Governors Highway Safety Association is a nonprofit organization that represents state highway safety offices and provides leadership for improving traffic safety and influencing national policy.

Click here, to read the full report.

Nicole C. Brambila is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Nicole at 724-226-7704, [email protected] or via Twitter .

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.