By John Q. Hosedrinker 
During a traffic stop in San Bruno last September, police officers observed a Waymo autonomous vehicle execute an improper U-turn. Upon initiating a stop, officers were unable to issue a citation as there was no human driver present. The department subsequently contacted Waymo regarding the incident, referring to it as a “glitch.”
Read the original article here
It’s quite astonishing to learn that for some time, driverless cars in California, despite their advanced technology, have been operating without a clear mechanism for traffic violations. This situation has understandably led to questions and frustrations, prompting a significant shift in how these autonomous vehicles (AVs) will be regulated. The key development is that California is finally poised to begin ticketing driverless cars that violate traffic laws, a move that aims to bring accountability to the burgeoning field of self-driving technology.
Previously, when a driverless car, like those operated by Waymo or tested by companies such as Tesla, committed a traffic infraction, the system was often at a loss. The traditional process of issuing a ticket relies on identifying a human driver. Without one present, police were in a quandary. Reports emerged of these AVs making illegal U-turns directly in front of police vehicles or even getting stalled in busy intersections during a significant blackout, exacerbating already difficult traffic conditions. These incidents highlighted a critical loophole: while the companies developing these vehicles are ultimately liable, the immediate enforcement mechanism was missing.
This legislative lag created a scenario where driverless cars seemed to be operating in a bit of a gray area, prompting concerns about public safety and the fairness of the system. The question on many people’s minds was, and understandably so, “Why weren’t they being ticketed already?” The idea that a sophisticated piece of technology could seemingly flout traffic laws without consequence felt inherently wrong. There was a sentiment that these were not mere accidents but programmatic errors that should be addressed directly.
Now, California’s Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) is stepping in with new regulations designed to close this gap. Starting July 1st, police will have the ability to issue a “notice of AV noncompliance” directly to the manufacturer of the autonomous vehicle. This is a substantial change, moving away from the ambiguity of how to penalize a vehicle without a traditional driver. It’s about establishing a clear process for holding the companies responsible when their AVs fail to adhere to traffic regulations.
These new rules are part of a larger 2024 law that aims to impose more stringent regulations on AV technology. The DMV is touting these as “the most comprehensive AV regulations in the nation,” and this ticketing mechanism is a cornerstone of that effort. The intention behind ticketing, as it is with human drivers, is to serve as a deterrent. The hope is that by imposing penalties directly on the companies, there will be a stronger incentive to ensure their vehicles are programmed to consistently follow traffic laws.
The specifics of how this will play out are crucial. While the immediate impact might seem like simply adding to a company’s operating costs, the long-term implications could be far greater. For companies like Waymo, the ability to operate within cities is contingent on their adherence to regulations. The threat of losing that operating agreement, which could be a much more significant financial blow than individual tickets, is a powerful lever. The new regulations also stipulate that these companies must respond to calls from police and emergency officials within a strict timeframe and face penalties if their vehicles encroach on active emergency zones, further emphasizing the commitment to public safety.
Of course, some might argue that the fines for large tech companies might be seen as just another cost of doing business, and that these costs could eventually be passed on to consumers through increased fares. There’s also the valid point that human drivers are often not ticketed sufficiently for their violations, leading to a feeling of inequity. However, the introduction of this new system for driverless cars represents a concrete step towards accountability that was previously lacking.
The core issue has always been how to fit this new technology into existing legal frameworks. You can’t exactly ask an autonomous vehicle to pull over and present a license and registration. The legal liability was always with the company, but the practical application of ticketing was the hurdle. This new system seems to have finally addressed that practical challenge, creating a defined process for serving notices of noncompliance directly to the manufacturers. It’s a recognition that as technology advances, our laws and enforcement mechanisms must evolve alongside it to ensure safety and order on our roads. This move signifies California’s intention to not just be a hub for AV development, but also a leader in ensuring that this development happens responsibly and with public safety as a paramount concern.