Safe use of Automated Lane Keeping System: Call for Evidence
Introduction 
Thank you for your interest in our ‘Automated Lane Keeping System’ (ALKS) call for evidence. ALKS is traffic jam chauffeur technology designed to control the lateral and longitudinal movement of the vehicle for an extended period on motorways without further driver command. We are seeking views and evidence on the use of ALKS systems in Great Britain.

The closing date for the consultation is 27 October 2020.

Confidentiality and data protection

The Department for Transport (DfT) is consulting on the use of ALKS systems on GB motorways. ALKS is traffic jam chauffeur technology designed to control the lateral and longitudinal movement of the vehicle for an extended period without further driver command.

The call for evidence will close on 27 October 2020.

Your consultation response and the processing of personal data that it entails is necessary for the exercise of our functions as a government department. Any information you provide that allows individual people to be identified, including yourself, will be protected by data protection law and DfT will be the controller for this information.

DfT’s privacy policy has more information about your rights in relation to your personal data, how to complain and how to contact the Data Protection Officer. 

In this consultation we’re asking for: 
•	your name and email address, in case we need to ask you follow-up questions about your responses (you do not have to give us this personal information, but if you do provide it, we will use it only for the purpose of asking follow-up questions)	
•	whether you are representing an organisation and, if so, the name of that organisation, for identification, the location of that organisation plus the nature of the work of that organisation in order to understand how your work relates to vehicle Automated Lane Keeping Systems	
Additionally as an individual we are asking the country you live in to better understand the concerns and issues for each area.

We will not use your name or other personal details that could identify you when we report the results of the consultation. Your information will be kept securely and destroyed within 12 months after the closing date. Any information provided through the online questionnaire will be moved to our internal systems within 2 months of the end date.

Your information will be kept securely and destroyed within 12 months after the closing date. Any information provided through the online questionnaire will be moved to our internal systems within 2 months of the end date.
Your details 
1. Your (used for contact only): 

name?  	 	

email?  	 	

 
2. Are you responding: *

  	as an individual? (Go to Individual details)	
  	on behalf of an organisation? (Go to Organisation details)	
Organisation details 
 
3. Your organisations name is? 

 
4. Your organisations work is? 

  	Academics	
  	Vehicle manufacturer	
  	Disability groups	
  	Emergency services and police	
  	Legal	
  	Local government	
  	Highway authorities	
  	Local representative groups	
  	Public sector	
  	Research, consultancy and professional organisations	
  	Safety and road user groups	
  	Insurance	
  	Component supplier or technology developer	
  	Vehicle operator	
  	Another area:

	
 
5. Your organisation is in: [After responding go to Automated Lane Keeping System call for evidence]

  	England	
  	Wales	
  	Scotland	
  	Northern Ireland	
  	another country:

	
Individual details 
 
6. You live in: 

  	England	
  	Wales	
  	Scotland	
  	Northern Ireland	
  	another country:

	
Automated Lane Keeping System call for evidence 
 
The Automated Lane Keeping System (ALKS) is traffic jam chauffeur technology designed to control the lateral and longitudinal movement of the vehicle for an extended period without further driver command. At such times, the system is in primary control of the vehicle, and performs the driving task instead of the driver, at low speeds on motorways. 

We are consulting on the use of ALKS systems on GB motorways, including: 
•	an overview of ALKS	
•	ensuring the safe use of ALKS	
•	questions around fair delegation and residual responsibility	
•	questions around the performance of other activities	
•	the use of ALKS up to 70mph	
Our consultation questions should be answered after reading the full call for evidence document.

Data storage 
The regulation requires that ALKS vehicles are equipped with a Data Storage System for Automated Driving (DSSAD).  This will enable relevant authorities to inspect the status of the vehicle to assist in reviewing road traffic offences.  The DSSAD is required to record the following information with a date and timestamp: 
•	activation of ALKS	
•	deactivation of ALKS along with the cause	
•	transition demand issued by ALKS along with the cause	
•	reduction or suppression of driver input	
•	start of emergency manoeuvre	
•	end of emergency manoeuvre	
•	Event Data Recorder trigger input	
•	involved in a detected collision	
•	Minimum Risk Manoeuvre engaged by the system	
•	Severe ALKS failure	
•	Severe vehicle failure.	
Data availability is subject to the requirements of national law.

The police have the powers to access this data under Section 19 of the Police & Criminal Evidence Act 1984 for incident investigation plus seize evidence from the vehicle.

7. Do you foresee any legal barriers to the police accessing data for incident investigation? 

  	Yes	
  	No (Go to Driver education)	
  	Don't know? (Go to Driver education)	
Barriers 
 
8. What, in your opinion, are those barriers? 

	
Driver education 
 
ALKS is designed to allow the driver to disengage from the driving task and therefore places requirements on drivers that are likely to be new to them. We are proposing that drivers are appropriately educated on: 
•	the abilities and limitations of the system	
•	their remaining responsibilities	

9. How do you think the driver should be: 

educated to understand the abilities and limitations of the system?  	 	

informed to understand the abilities and limitations of the system?  	 	

 
10. What role do you think manufacturers selling this system should play in providing this: 

education?  	 	

information?  	 	

 
11. What role do you think government and its agencies should play in providing this: 

education?  	 	

information?  	 	

Automated and Electric Vehicles Act 2018 
 
The Secretary of State has to take a decision as to whether to list a vehicle as an automated vehicle under the Automated and Electric Vehicle Act 2018 (AEVA). His decision is not discretionary, but will instead be a decision based on the facts and features of particular vehicles or vehicle types, when measured against the definition in AEVA. How the government interprets the terms "monitored" and "controlled", which are used in section 8 of AEVA, will inform the decisions to be made as to whether to list a vehicle or vehicle type. We wish to hear views on the proposed monitoring and control tests as the basis for deciding whether vehicle types that satisfy the ALKS regulation are within the definition of an automated vehicle under AEVA.

One option being considered is the proposal that the Secretary of State's list reference particular UNECE regulations, and that if the ALKS regulation was included then this would mean that any vehicle approved to the ALKS Regulation would be considered an AV.

12. Subject to the outcome of this call for evidence and subsequent consultation, would you have concerns about a scenario where any vehicle approved to the ALKS regulation would be automatically considered to be an automated vehicle under AEVA? 

  	Yes	
  	No (Go to Monitoring and control tests)	
  	Don't know? (Go to Monitoring and control tests)	
Automatic consideration 
 
13. Why? 

	
Monitoring and control tests 
 
In order to decide if a vehicle meets the definition of automation under AEVA we have developed the monitoring and control tests. 

The suggest criteria for these tests are: 
  
•	monitoring test:
- an individual does not need to monitor the vehicle if the vehicle can safely achieve the following without human monitoring: 
- comply with relevant road traffic rules
- avoid collisions which a competent and careful driver could avoid
- treat other road users with reasonable consideration 
- avoid putting itself in a position where it would be the cause of a collision
- recognise when it is operating outside of its operational design domain	
•	control test:
- a vehicle is not being ‘controlled’ by an individual if the individual controls none of the following 
- longitudinal dynamics (speed, acceleration, braking, gear selection) 
- lateral dynamics (steering)  	

14. Do you agree that the criteria in the monitoring and control tests provide a reasonable framework for testing compliance with the AEVA definition of automation? 

  	Yes	
  	No	
  	Don't know?	

Why?  

	
 
15. Do you agree with our preliminary assessment of how ALKS meets the criteria set out in Annex A? 

  	Yes	
  	No	
  	Don't know?	

Why?  

	
Compliance with road traffic rules: detection of enforcement authorities 
 
The ALKS regulation requires vehicles to comply with all relevant road traffic rules for the dynamic driving task (DDT) in the country of operation. In England, Wales and Scotland, road traffic rules are compiled as part of the Highway Code and in Northern Ireland as part of the Highway Code for Northern Ireland.

Vehicle A is ALKS-capable. It is proceeding along its lane in traffic. The automated mode is engaged and so the driver is not paying attention to the environment outside the vehicle. A police officer in a nearby vehicle has noticed that Vehicle A has a faulty brake light. The police officer pulls in behind Vehicle A and switches on his flashing blue lights.

Whilst an ALKS-capable vehicle will not be able to pull over if requested by the police officer, it may be able to issue a transition demand to the driver. If listed under AEVA (as an automated vehicle), the driver would not be responsible for responding to the signalling of the police vehicle, only to a transition demand.

However, there is no explicit requirement in the ALKS Regulation for the vehicle to possess rear-facing sensors. The vehicle may therefore struggle to 'know' to make a transition demand if it is being requested to stop by the police.

ALKS must also be able to respond to other signals from Police / Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency / Traffic Officers, which may include flashing amber lights, flashing red lights, or flashing headlamps. 

ALKS gives the driver 10 seconds to respond to a transition demand, after which it will slow to a stop in lane.

A transition demand is a procedure to transfer the control of the vehicle from the automated system to the human driver. 

16. How do you think ALKS will detect and respond to a police or other enforcement vehicle approaching from behind signalling for the vehicle to pull over? 

	

17. Do you think that 10 seconds is fast enough in the foreseeable circumstances to comply with the rules on responding to enforcement vehicles? 

  	Yes (Go to Compliance with road traffic rules: stopping after collisions)	
  	No	
  	Don't know? (Go to Compliance with road traffic rules: stopping after collisions)	
10 seconds insufficient 
 
18. Why? 

	
Compliance with road traffic rules: stopping after collisions 
 
The ALKS regulation requires vehicles to comply with all relevant road traffic rules for the dynamic driving task (DDT) in the country of operation. In England, Wales and Scotland, road traffic rules are compiled as part of the Highway Code and in Northern Ireland as part of the Highway Code for Northern Ireland.

Vehicle B is ALKS-capable. It is proceeding along in its lane in heavy traffic at low speed. Motorcyclist C is filtering between the lanes of traffic. As the traffic flow speeds up, Motorcyclist C is involved in a minor collision with by Vehicle B, which nevertheless causes her to lose balance and be knocked from her bike into the road.

Rule 286 requires a driver to stop if they involved in an incident. It says:

If you are involved in a collision which causes damage or injury to any other person, vehicle, animal or property, you MUST: 
•	stop	
•	give your own and the vehicle owner’s name and address, and the registration number of the vehicle, to anyone having reasonable grounds for requiring them	
•	if you do not give your name and address at the time of the collision, report it to the police as soon as reasonably practicable, and in any case within 24 hours.	
The ALKS regulation requires a vehicle to stop if a collision is detected. Where a vehicle is involved in "a detectable collision", the vehicle shall be brought to a standstill. However, the regulation sets no standards for collision detection systems. It is therefore not clear if the vehicle will stop after Motorcyclist C has been knocked from her bike.

As per The Highway Code, we are proposing it is necessary to stop after a collision, even if the collision is low-energy.

19. How will ALKS detect a minor or low-energy collision, in order to come to a stop and alert the driver? 

	
 
20. Do you foresee any risks should ALKS vehicles not stop for low-energy impacts? 

  	Yes	
  	No (Go to Compliance with road traffic rules: reading GB road signage)	
  	Don't know? (Go to Compliance with road traffic rules: reading GB road signage)	
Risks 
 
21. What are these risks? 

	
Compliance with road traffic rules: reading GB road signage 
 
The ALKS regulation requires vehicles to comply with all relevant road traffic rules for the dynamic driving task (DDT) in the country of operation. In England, Wales and Scotland, road traffic rules are compiled as part of the Highway Code and in Northern Ireland as part of the Highway Code for Northern Ireland.

Vehicle D is ALKS-capable. It is proceeding along its lane at low speed in heavy traffic. There has been an accident ahead. To manage traffic flow, a temporary speed limit has been set at 30 mph in Vehicle D's lane. This is communicated on a gantry sign above the road with the new speed limit inside a red ring. 

Rule 261 requires drivers to obey temporary speed limits. It says:

You MUST NOT exceed 70 mph (112 km/h), or the maximum speed limit permitted for your vehicle. If a lower speed limit is in force, either permanently or temporarily, at road works for example, you MUST NOT exceed the lower limit. On some motorways, mandatory motorway signals (which display the speed within a red ring) are used to vary the maximum speed limit to improve traffic flow.

You MUST NOT exceed this speed limit.

The ALKS regulation sets detailed requirements that the vehicle shall be verified to have a forward detection range of 46 meters and a lateral detection range of the full width of the lanes immediately to the left and right of the vehicle. The technical service is required to verify these detection ranges. However, there is no requirement to verify the vehicle’s ability to sense upwards, so as to detect information on a gantry. 

The ALKS regulation requires that the activated system "shall comply with traffic rules relating to the DDT in the country of operation."

22. How will manufacturers ensure that ALKS vehicles deployed in the UK are able to recognise signage located above the road that may be unique to the GB? 

	

Registration of automated vehicles 
 
On first vehicle registration in the DVLA database, subject to the compliance with AEVA, the vehicle will be registered as an automated vehicle, but the vehicle’s ability to comply with the ALKS Regulation may change over its lifetime. 

However, we understand that manufacturers may offer automation as a subscription or as an option for a customer to choose at the point of purchase. If a vehicle were registered as an AV on the DVLA database - because it is listed on the Secretary of State's list - but the registered keeper had chosen not to purchase the 'AV package', it would nonetheless appear on the DVLA database as an AV.

23. Do manufacturers intend to offer automation as an optional package for customers at the point of purchase? 

  	Yes	
  	No	
  	Don't know?	

Comments:  

	
 
24. Do you have concerns about vehicles that are registered as AVs on the DVLA database but the keeper has chosen to have the functionality disabled so they are not capable of operating as an AV? 

  	Yes	
  	No (Go to Coming to a stop in lane)	
  	Don't know? (Go to Coming to a stop in lane)	
Registration of AVs 
 
25. What are they? 

	
Coming to a stop in lane 
 
A vehicle may come to a stop in lane due to perceiving a danger which requires an emergency manoeuvre of this nature. However, another potential reason for such behaviour is where the vehicle is performing a Minimum Risk Manoeuvre.
 
As discussed in Part 2 of the call for evidence, ALKS performs the Minimum Risk Manoeuvre (MRM) under the following circumstances:

•	the driver fails to respond to a transition demand	
•	in the event of a severe vehicle/system failure	
The MRM causes the vehicle to stop in a ‘live’ lane of traffic on the motorway. This is currently unlawful under Regulation 7 of the Motorway Traffic (England & Wales) Regulations 1982, and Regulation 6 of the Motorway Traffic (Scotland) Regulations 1995. Regulation 7 states that is an offence for a driver of a vehicle to "stop or remain at rest on a carriageway". It provides for various exceptions to the offence, including "where it is necessary for a vehicle" to be "stopped on a motorway...

a. by reason of a breakdown or mechanical defect or lack of fuel, oil or water, required for the vehicle; or
b. by reason of any accident, illness or other emergency..."

Regulation 6 of the Motorway Traffic (Scotland) Regulations 1995 makes a similar statement.

If the vehicle comes to an unjustified stop in lane where no emergency or genuine mechanical defect was present, it seems unfair to hold the driver criminally responsible where the apparent cause of the problem has not prompted any transition demand.  

Government therefore proposes an amendment to both of the Motorway Traffic Regulations, adding a further exception where ALKS has come to an unexpected stop in lane.

It would be for the courts to decide how long would be unacceptable for a driver to allow the vehicle to remain at rest if they had allowed the vehicle to come to a stop and were not incapacitated.

26. Do you agree that it is appropriate to exempt the driver from prosecution – if the vehicle comes to an unjustified stop when ALKS is engaged – by creating a further exception in the Motorway Traffic Regulations? 

  	Yes (Go to Relying on the system)	
  	No	
  	Don't know? (Go to Relying on the system)	
Against amending the Motorway Traffic Regulations 
 
27. Why? 

	
Relying on the system 
 
Currently, drivers are responsible for maintaining sufficient attention on the driving task to ensure safety.  Indeed, Rule 150 of the Highway Code warns the driver of distraction and to not rely on driver assistance systems. It says:

"There is a danger of driver distraction being caused by in-vehicle systems such as satellite navigation systems, congestion warning systems, PCs, multi-media, etc. You MUST exercise proper control of your vehicle at all times. Do not rely on driver assistance systems such as motorway assist, lane departure warnings, or remote control parking. They are available to assist but you should not reduce your concentration levels. Do not be distracted by maps or screen-based information (such as navigation or vehicle management systems) while driving or riding. If necessary find a safe place to stop.

As the driver, you are still responsible for the vehicle if you use a driver assistance system (like motorway assist). This is also the case if you use a hand-held remote control parking app or device. You MUST have full control over these systems at all times."

Should ALKS comply with the definition of automation under AEVA, it will be the first automated driving system which is not classified as a driver assistance system. The expectation will be that the driver can rely on ALKS to carry out the driving task in certain circumstances. Similarly, ALKS or an infotainment system would not distract from the driving task, as this is being performed by ALKS, and may actually maintain the driver’s attention. See Part 5 for a further discussion.

Government therefore proposes a change to Rule 150 to enable a driver to rely on ALKS as an automated vehicle.

28. Do you agree that amending Rule 150 is sufficient to clarify that the driver may rely on the ALKS? 

  	Yes (Go to Responding to a transition demand)	
  	No	
  	Don't know? (Go to Responding to a transition demand)	
Disagree amending rule 150 sufficient 
 
29. Why? 

	

Responding to a transition demand 
 
Whilst it is important that drivers are able to safely and fairly delegate the dynamic driving task (DDT) to the system when it is engaged, this does not mean that they delegate all responsibility.

In fact, where the system is not designed to deal with a situation it encounters (e.g., exiting its ODD), or where the driver is found to be unavailable, the vehicle will issue a transition demand, and if the driver fails to take control in response, it will perform a minimum risk manoeuvre involving a stop in lane according to the ALKS Regulation.

Government is concerned that without some rules on use, the ALKS Minimum Risk Manoeuvre (MRM) may not allow a vehicle to avoid being the cause of a collision. For example, as a result of the driver failing to resume control on request by the vehicle, the vehicle comes to a stop in a live lane (an unexpected behaviour for other drivers), and is rear-ended by another vehicle. To mitigate against this concern, the driver should be incentivised to resume control in response to a transition demand. Should the driver fail to respond to the transition demand – and is not incapacitated – the Motorway Traffic Regulations would still apply, with the driver being potentially guilty of this offence. We propose to limit the scope of the exemption from the Motorway Traffic Regulations so that it covers only unjustified stops while the system is activated.  This approach ensures that the MRM becomes a fail-safe which brings the vehicle to a stop only in rare cases where a driver is genuinely unable to take over the driving task, or in case of severe system failure.

Subject to the outcome of this consultation, the government proposes to limit the scope of the exemption from the Motorway Traffic Regulations to cover only unjustified stops while the system is activated, so that the driver is incentivised to resume control in response to a transition demand.

30. Do you agree that not changing the Motorway Traffic Regulations, except for unjustified stops, ensures the driver is suitably incentivised to take back control when requested? 

  	Yes (Go to Responding to a transition demand)	
  	No	
  	Don't know? (Go to Responding to a transition demand)	
Driver is not suitably incentivised 
 
31. Why? 

	

Responding to a transition demand 
 
Government also proposes a change to The Highway Code to further clarify the driver’s residual responsibility to respond to a transition demand.

32. Do you agree that The Highway Code should be changed so that drivers of ALKS must be alert to a transition demand? 

  	Yes (Go to Stopping in lane)	
  	No	
  	Don't know? (Go to Stopping in lane)	
Against changing The Highway Code 
 
33. Why? 

	
Stopping in lane 
 
34. Do you think that amending The Highway Code is sufficient to communicate to drivers their responsibility? 

  	Yes	
  	No	
  	Don't know?	

Why?  

	

Performing other activities 
 
If compliant with the definition of automation under AEVA, ALKS might present the opportunity, for the first time ever in the UK, to enable the driver to perform activities other than driving when the ADS is engaged.

It is important however, that the performance of any activities other than driving do not preclude the driver's ability to respond to a transition demand – and take over the dynamic driving task within ten seconds as required by the system.

Due to the reduced demand on driver attention, there is a risk that the driver will become so distracted as to be unable to respond to a transition request. ALKS includes driver availability and attentiveness monitoring to assist in managing this risk, and it can be argued that allowing the driver to perform other activities may help manage alertness by avoiding higher risk outcomes such as the driver falling asleep.

However, it is not clear to what degree performing other activities may hamper the driver’s ability to respond to a transition demand. We seek views on whether ALKS can still be used safely if the driver performs other activities, and what these activities might be.

35. Do you think the driver should be allowed to perform other activities when ALKS is activated if they must only be ready to respond to a transition demand, with particular reference to any implications for road safety? 

  	Yes (Go to Safe activities)	
  	No	
  	Don't know? (Go to Performing other activities)	

Against other activities 
 
36. Why? [After completion go to Performing other activities]

	

Safe activities 
 
37. What other activities do you think are safe when ALKS is activated? 

	

Performing other activities 
 
It is possible that ALKS may not be found compliant with the definition of an automated vehicle under AEVA following legislative and The Highway Code changes. This may be because the driver is still required to monitor the vehicle for some specific circumstances.

38. Do you think that the driver should be allowed to undertake other activities if ALKS is not listed under AEVA? 

  	Yes (Go to Activities)	
  	No	
  	Don't know? (Go to The infotainment system)	

Against activities 
 
39. Why? [After completion go to The infotainment system)

	

Activities 
 
40. What activities could they safely perform? 

	
The infotainment system 
 
One example of an activity other than driving that may be desirable for drivers to perform, is the use of a vehicle's in-built infotainment system.

This system is already present in many vehicles today, usually taking the form of a central display panel on the dashboard through which the driver can check information relevant to the driving task, such as satellite navigation and system performance.

Government understands that manufacturers wish to enable the driver to perform activities other than driving through the infotainment system.

This could include activities like watching a film, checking emails or SMS, or accessing other audio, video or written content. A driver would also be able to tether their mobile phone to the system as is possible today.

Importantly, the system is required to cut out in the event of a transition demand. In this way, activities performed through the infotainment system should not preclude responding to a transition demand.

Regulation 109 of the Construction & Use Regulations 1986 prohibits a person from driving, or causing or permitting a vehicle to be driven on the road:

"if the driver is in such a position as to be able to see, whether directly or by reflection, a television receiving apparatus or other cinematographic apparatus used to display anything other than information—

(a) about the state of the vehicle or its equipment;
(b) about the location of the vehicle and the road on which it is located;
(c) to assist the driver to see the road adjacent to the vehicle; or
(d) to assist the driver to reach his destination."

For a driver of an ALKS vehicle to be able to use the infotainment system as anticipated – for activities other than driving – it would be necessary to add an exception to Regulation 109.

41. Do you agree that an exception should be added to enable the use of the infotainment system for activities other than driving? 

  	Yes (Go to The infotainment system)	
  	No	
  	Don't know? (Go to The infotainment system)	
Against on-board infotainment system activities 
 
42. Why? 

	
The infotainment system 
 
43. Are there any activities you consider unsafe to perform through the infotainment system? 

  	Yes	
  	No (Go to Use of ALKS up to 70mph)	
  	Don't know? (Go to Use of ALKS up to 70mph)	
Other unsafe activities 
 
44. What are they? 

	

Use of ALKS up to 70mph 
 
The primary purpose of this call for evidence is to seek views on how government intends to ensure the safe use of vehicles with automated systems that meet the requirements of the ALKS regulation.

We will have new flexibilities next year having left the European Union transition period and becoming an independent nation at the UNECE. This includes flexibilities in determining what we require for new vehicles in Great Britain. The ALKS Regulation defines requirements for operation up to 60 km/h (37mph) and we understand that some manufacturers may already have capability for higher speed operation.

The UK may set additional requirements on ALKS that operate up to 70 mph, but these must not conflict with the existing requirements in the ALKS Regulation.

The government is considering allowing ALKS to operate at speeds up to 70 mph, provided the manufacturer declares that the system has the capability to do so safely and in compliance with other technical requirements of the ALKS Regulation not affected by this higher maximum speed.

45. Do you agree with this approach? 

  	Yes	
  	No	
  	Don't know?	

Why?  

	
Final comments 
 
46. Any other comments?