内华达州明确无人驾驶汽车的合法性外文翻译资料

内华达州明确无人驾驶汽车的合法性

原文作者 Bryant Walker Smith 单位 南卡罗来纳大学法学院

摘要：内华达州通过议会法案主要明确了无人驾驶汽车的概念并规范了该类汽车在高速公路上的行驶。该法案提出无人驾驶汽车是不需要任何人工干预、可自动驾驶的汽车，与驾驶辅助系统具有本质区别。无人驾驶汽车在高速公路上的行驶规范包括无人驾驶汽车最低安全标准和特殊驾照规定。同时，该法案还规定了自动驾驶汽车认证机构的经营者必须通过申请得到DMV的特殊许可，才可以进行无人驾驶汽车合规审查并颁发合规证书；车主必须提交合规证明和保险范围证明副本才可以进行背书登记并获得特殊驾照。

关键词：无人驾驶汽车； 合规审查； 最低安全标准；特殊驾照背书

2011年，内华达州成为第一个针对无人驾驶汽车制定立法的州。主要的立法作为议会法案(AB)通过，定义了“无人驾驶汽车”的概念，并指示该州的机动车辆部门“授权通过自动驾驶汽车在内华达州境内的高速公路上行驶的法规”。这些规定包括“最低安全标准”和特别的“驾照背书”，除法律另有规定外，“在其限制下，必须承认不需要驾驶员来主动驾驶该类自动驾驶汽车”。这种说法表明，具有这种背书的驾照或多或少比普通驾照的使用范围更加广泛。

参议院单独通过的第140号立法法案(SB)规定，为了限制司机使用手机，“使用人工智能软件实现机动车自主驾驶，并经法律许可实现机动车自主驾驶的，视为未驾驶机动车。”(值得注意的是，美国车管所DMV的规定并没有将这一法律结论延伸到“手机”以外的范围。)

DMV的初步规定于2012年3月生效。在该规定中，DMV试图向有利害关系的人说明哪些情况不属于自动驾驶的范围。当前的自动并行停车及其相关系统需要某种类型的人工干预才能成功地操作车辆。而根据内华达州的定义，自动驾驶汽车不需要任何人工干预来操作车辆。这两个概念之间有一个明显的区别。

因此，DMV将“自动驾驶车辆”一词解释为排除具有安全系统或驾驶员辅助系统的车辆，此处的系统包括但不限于提供电子盲点辅助、避撞、紧急制动、停车辅助、自适应巡航控制、车道保持辅助、车道偏离警告、交通堵塞和排队辅助，车辆还应具有人工智能技术，使车辆在没有自然人主动控制或持续监测自然人的情况下执行所有机械驾驶操作

尽管有了这些额外的说明，但某些潜在的技术问题仍有可能让这个概念产生多种解释结果。事实上，其他州也可能会用不同的方式来解释类似的概念。

该规定还将自动驾驶汽车的“操作员”和“驾驶员”定义为“使自动驾驶汽车参与驾驶的人，无论此人在自动驾驶汽车自动行驶时是否在场”。这一决定减少了道路规则应用于自动驾驶车辆用户的不确定性，但并未完全消除该不确定性。

在理解该法规的其余部分时，重点在于区分（1）自动驾驶汽车的研发测试和（2）居民销售、运营这些汽车。虽然这两个问题在规定中均有提及，但测试还是使得该问题得到了更详细的处理。正如DMV在其信息声明中所解释的那样，“由于自动驾驶技术无法立即向公众开放，该部门将在完成本项目的测试后，直接实施合规设施认证和车辆登记计划要求。”

本条例规定的安全要求一般同时适用于测试车辆和运营类车辆。两者都必须有一个单独的数据记录器，“捕捉碰撞发生前至少30秒的动态”，并存储这些数据至“碰撞日期后3年”，同时具备“启动或脱离自动驾驶状态的开关”，“如果检测到技术故障则主动提醒操作员控制车辆”，“不会对任何其他安全功能产生不利影响并接受联邦监管。”此外，测试车辆必须“安全运行”。 运营车辆还必须“能够按照适用的交通法规进行操作”，“表明是否可以在有或没有操作员的情况下进行操作”，能够“安全地离开车辆，并在需要时停下来”，拥有自动驾驶的可视指示器，并“允许操作人员”(如果需要真人在场)“以多种方式控制自动驾驶汽车。”

想要测试车辆的人必须通过填写由DMV提供的相应申请表(目前可以在网上找到)来获得许可证，且持有该许可证一年以上，证明其车辆“在自动模式下合计行驶了至少1万英里”，并“在各种条件下行驶了一定里程，以此证明车辆在这些条件下的安全性。”车辆在符合这些条件后，还需展示驾驶技术以获得批准，并提供地理位置，提供担保或现金，提供DMV要求的其他信息，然后申请特殊车牌。DMV可以拒绝、暂停、撤销或不更新测试许可证。

被许可测试的人只能在其已获得批准的指定区域和条件下对其车辆进行测试。目前包括六个地理类别（州际公路、州公路、城市环境、复杂的城市环境、住宅道路和未铺砌的无标记道路）和五种环境类型（夜间驾驶、雨、雾、雪和风）；关于这些类别的更多细节提供于线上应用包中。除DMV明确规定以外，在公路测试期间，必须有至少两名在其居住州持有执照且受过培训的人员在场并持续积极监控车辆。此外，被许可方必须向DMV提供所有的碰撞情况及相关证据。

其余重要的监管规定只适用于运营车辆，而不适用于测试车辆。此外，销售规定只适用于该车辆在州内的销售，经营规定只适用于州内居民对该车辆的经营。

“在持有执照的汽车经销商出售自动驾驶汽车前”及“自动驾驶汽车登记前”，必须出示“合规证明”。前述合规证明不需要进行测试，它可以由自动驾驶汽车的制造商颁发，也可以由获得许可的“自动驾驶技术认证机构”颁发——如下所述，尽管通过文字并不能完全搞清楚这些规定如何适用于制造商。但需要发行公司证明所采用的自动驾驶技术符合相关的安全标准，并且在车主手册中“记载自动驾驶车辆的所有能力和限制”。

经营自动驾驶汽车认证机构的申请人必须填写相应的申请表（尚未提供），“提交DMV认为必要或相应的材料，以此证明申请人拥有检验自动驾驶汽车安全性能的必要知识和专业知识，包括但不限于自动驾驶汽车是否符合颁发合规证书的要求，”“提供50万美元的担保或现金保证，如有需要，使其机构设施可供检查”并“展示自动驾驶汽车认证方式”，同时提供财务信息。然后，申请成功的人可经营该认证机构，向自动驾驶汽车制造商或其他任何希望获得自动驾驶技术新车或二手车证书的人颁发合规证书。但值得注意的是，制造商也可以颁发自己的证书。DMV可以拒绝、暂停或吊销认证机构许可证。

持有内华达州驾照并“希望在该州自动驾驶该汽车”的人必须在驾照上获得“G”字样的背书登记。对于测试司机或州外的司机而言，则不需要这样的背书。申请人必须填写相应的DMV申请表格（尚未提供），“承认在任何时候都遵守交通法和其他法律的约束”，并“提供DMV认为必要的额外信息”。

要想在内华达州登记自动驾驶汽车，除法律另有规定外，其车主必须提交一份合规证明和保险范围证明的副本。注册后，DMV“将向车主发放牌照，表明该车辆为自动驾驶车辆。”

外文文献出处：网络与社会研究中心 著作《自动驾驶汽车在美国是合法的》第81-85页

附外文文献原文

Nevada Conditions the Legality of These Vehicles

November 1,2012

Authors:Bryant Walker Smith

In 2011, Nevada became the first state to enact legislation directed at automated vehicles. The primary legislation, passed as Assembly Bill (AB), defines “autonomous vehicle” and directs the statersquo;s Department of Motor Vehicles to “adopt regulations authorizing the operation of autonomous vehicles on highways within the State of Nevada.” These regulations are to include, inter alia, “minimum safety standards” and a special “driverrsquo;s license endorsement” that “must, in its restrictions or lack thereof, recognize the fact that a person is not required to actively drive an autonomous vehicle.” This language suggests that a driverrsquo;s license with such an endorsement could be more or less widely available than a normal license.

Separate legislation, passed as Senate Bill (SB) 140, provides that, for the purpose of the statersquo;s restrictions on the use of cell phones by drivers, “a person shall be deemed not to be operating a motor vehicle if the motor vehicle is driven autonomously through the use of artificial-intelligence software and the autonomous operation of the motor vehicle is authorized by law.” (Notably, the DMVrsquo;s regulation declines to extend this legal conclusion beyond the context of cell phones.)

The DMVrsquo;s initial regulation took effect in March 2012. In that regulation, the DMV sought to: provide more clarification to the stakeholders regarding what is not considered autonomous. Self parallel parking and other systems today require some type of human intervention to successfully operate the vehicle. The autonomous vehicle, per Nevadarsquo;s definition, does not require human intervention to operate the vehicle. There is a clear distinction between the two systems.

Accordingly, the DMV: will interpret the term “autonomous vehicle” to exclude a vehicle enabled with a safety system or driver assistance system, including, without limitation, a system to provide electronic blind spot assistance, crash avoidance, emergency braking, parking assistance, adaptive cruise control, lane keep assistance, lane departure warnings and traffic jam and queuing assistance, unless the vehicle is also enabled with artificial intelligence and technology that allows the vehicle to carry out all the mechanical operations of driving without the active control or continuous monitoring of a natural person

Despite this additional clarification, certain potential technologies could arguably fall on either side of this line. Indeed, other states could conceivably interpret similar language differently.

The regulation also defines the “operator” and “driver” of an autonomous vehicle as “the person who causes the autonomous vehicle to engage, regardless of whether the person is physically present in the vehicle while it is engaged.” This determination reduces, but does n

剩余内容已隐藏，支付完成后下载完整资料

Nevada Conditions the Legality of These Vehicles

November 1,2012

Authors:Bryant Walker Smith

In 2011, Nevada became the first state to enact legislation directed at automated vehicles. The primary legislation, passed as Assembly Bill (AB), defines “autonomous vehicle” and directs the statersquo;s Department of Motor Vehicles to “adopt regulations authorizing the operation of autonomous vehicles on highways within the State of Nevada.” These regulations are to include, inter alia, “minimum safety standards” and a special “driverrsquo;s license endorsement” that “must, in its restrictions or lack thereof, recognize the fact that a person is not required to actively drive an autonomous vehicle.” This language suggests that a driverrsquo;s license with such an endorsement could be more or less widely available than a normal license.

Separate legislation, passed as Senate Bill (SB) 140, provides that, for the purpose of the statersquo;s restrictions on the use of cell phones by drivers, “a person shall be deemed not to be operating a motor vehicle if the motor vehicle is driven autonomously through the use of artificial-intelligence software and the autonomous operation of the motor vehicle is authorized by law.” (Notably, the DMVrsquo;s regulation declines to extend this legal conclusion beyond the context of cell phones.)

The DMVrsquo;s initial regulation took effect in March 2012. In that regulation, the DMV sought to: provide more clarification to the stakeholders regarding what is not considered autonomous. Self parallel parking and other systems today require some type of human intervention to successfully operate the vehicle. The autonomous vehicle, per Nevadarsquo;s definition, does not require human intervention to operate the vehicle. There is a clear distinction between the two systems.

Accordingly, the DMV: will interpret the term “autonomous vehicle” to exclude a vehicle enabled with a safety system or driver assistance system, including, without limitation, a system to provide electronic blind spot assistance, crash avoidance, emergency braking, parking assistance, adaptive cruise control, lane keep assistance, lane departure warnings and traffic jam and queuing assistance, unless the vehicle is also enabled with artificial intelligence and technology that allows the vehicle to carry out all the mechanical operations of driving without the active control or continuous monitoring of a natural person

Despite this additional clarification, certain potential technologies could arguably fall on either side of this line. Indeed, other states could conceivably interpret similar language differently.

The regulation also defines the “operator” and “driver” of an autonomous vehicle as “the person who causes the autonomous vehicle to engage, regardless of whether the person is physically present in the vehicle while it is engaged.” This determination reduces, but does not eliminate, uncertainty regarding the application of rules of the road to the automated vehiclersquo;s user.

In understanding the remaining portions of the regulation, it is important to distinguish between (1) the testing of autonomous vehicles for research and development and (2) the sale and consumer operation of these vehicles by state residents. Although both are addressed in the regulation, testing receives more detailed treatment. As the DMV explains in its informational statement, “since the autonomous technology will not be available to the public immediately, the Department will be implementing the certification of compliance facilities and vehicle registration program requirements directly after completing the testing phase of this project.”

The safety requirements specified by the regulation generally apply to both test vehicles and consumer vehicles. Both must have a separate data recorder that “captures sensor data for at least 30 seconds before a collision occurs” and stores that data “for 3 years after the date of the collision,” have a “switch to engage and disengage the autonomous vehicle,” “safely alert the operator to take control hellip; if a technology failure is detected,” and “not adversely affect any other safety features hellip; subject to federal regulation.” In addition, a test vehicle must be “safe to operate.” A consumer vehicle must additionally be “capable of being operated in compliance with the applicable traffic laws,” “indicate whether it may be operated with or without the physical presence of an operator,” be able to “safely move out of traffic and come to a stop” as required, have a visual indicator that it is operating autonomously, and “allow the operator,” should the physical presence of one be required, “to take control of the autonomous vehicle in multiple manners.”

A person that wishes to test a vehicle must obtain a one-year license by completing the appropriate DMV form (currently available online), affirming that the vehicle meets the relevant safety requirements above, showing insurance coverage, proving that its vehicles “have been driven by the applicant for a combined minimum of not less than 10,000 miles in autonomous mode” and “in various conditions for a number of miles that demonstrates the safety of the hellip; vehicles in those conditions,” demonstrating the technology for approval, proposing geographic locations and establishing the capability of its vehicles in those conditions, providing a surety bond or cash, providing other information required by the DMV, and applying for special license plates. The DMV may deny, suspend, revoke, or not renew a testing license.

A testing licensee may only test its vehicles in the general areas and conditions for which it has received approval. These currently include six geographic categories (interstate highways, state highways, urban environments, complex urban environments, residential roads, and unpaved unmarked roads) and five environmental types (night driving, rain, fog, snowice, and wind); more d

剩余内容已隐藏，支付完成后下载完整资料

资料编号：[596682]，资料为PDF文档或Word文档，PDF文档可免费转换为Word