| State | Status | State Law |
|---|---|---|
| Wyoming | 🟨 | - |
| Explanation of State Law | Failed Legislation | Testing |
| - | (1) WY S 7 Relates to motor vehicles, provides for the regulation, registration and licensing of vehicles equipped with an automated driving system, provides for liability for the operation of vehicles equipped with automated driving systems, provides definitions, authorizes a fee, creates an account, requires rulemaking. (2) WY H 226 Relates to motor vehicles, provides for the operation of automated motor vehicles and the use of automated driving systems on highways as specified, defines terms, makes conforming amendments, requires rulemaking, provides for effective dates. | (1) Automated Shuttle Pilot at Yellowstone (souce) |
| Testing Requirements | Oversight Department | Infrastructure Developments |
| - | None, but there is a WYDOT Autonomous Vehicle Working Group (source); USDOT also selected WY for the Connected Vehicle Pilot (but not autonomous). (source) | None specific to CAV. |
| Crashes/Safety Incidents | Liability/Insurance Requirements | |
| - | - |
Wisconsin
| State | Status | State Law |
|---|---|---|
| Wisconsin | 🟨 | (1) WI S 695 |
| Explanation of State Law | Failed Legislation | Testing |
| (1) Revises provisions relating to distances between motor vehicles, makes technical corrections. | (1) WI A 824 - Relates to distances between motor vehicles. [But addressed by later passed legislature] | (1) Driverless shuttle at UW-Madison (source) |
| Testing Requirements | Oversight Department | Infrastructure Developments |
| - | - | No developments, but they are testing infrastructure technologies. (source) |
| Crashes/Safety Incidents | Liability/Insurance Requirements | |
| - | "At this time, no particular insurance statute has been identified as a barrier to the testing and deployment of CAVs. However, there may be areas needing clarification in the future." (source) |
West Virginia
| State | Status | State Law |
|---|---|---|
| West Virginia | 🟥 | (1) WV H 2760 |
| Explanation of State Law | Failed Legislation | Testing |
| (1) Classifies activity of manufacturing autonomous motor vehicles as a high tech manufacturing business, allowing eligible high technology manufacturing business taxpayers a tax credit. | (1) WV H 2881 - Establishes minimum safety standards for the design of any robot operated in the state. (2) WV H 2910 - Defines CAVs and allows their operation. | - |
| Testing Requirements | Oversight Department | Infrastructure Developments |
| - | - | - |
| Crashes/Safety Incidents | Liability/Insurance Requirements | |
| - | - |
Washington D.C.
| State | Status | State Law |
|---|---|---|
| Washington D.C. | 🟨 | (1) DC B 134 (2021) (2) DC B 232 (2020) (3) DC B 248 (2020) |
| Explanation of State Law | Failed Legislation | Testing |
| (1) Pending. Amends the Autonomous Vehicle Act of 2012 to modernize the framework for autonomous vehicles operating within the District of Columbia. (2) Pending. (Amendment) Amends the Autonomous Vehicles Act to establish an Autonomous Vehicles Testing Program to be administered by the District Department of Transportation, authorizes the Department to issue permits for the testing of autonomous vehicles on public roadways in the District, authorizes the Department to suspend or revoke permits, authorizes the Department to restrict testing under certain conditions. (3) Pending. (Amendment) Amends the Autonomous Vehicle Act to modernize the framework for autonomous vehicles operating within the District of Columbia. | - | (1) Ford testing (source) |
| Testing Requirements | Oversight Department | Infrastructure Developments |
| Requires licensed operator in vehicle. (source) | None, but there's an AV Working Group | - |
| Crashes/Safety Incidents | Liability/Insurance Requirements | |
| - | "The AV testing entity shall have the ability to respond to a judgment for damages, personal injury, death, or property damage from the operation of an autonomous vehicle on public roadways in the amount of $5 million" (source) |
Washington
| State | Status | State Law |
|---|---|---|
| Washington | 🟩 | (1) SSB 5460 (2021) (2) ESHB 1457 (2021) (3) ESHB 2676 (2020) (4) SHB 2970 (2018) (5) WA S 5460 (2021) |
| Explanation of State Law | Failed Legislation | Testing |
| (1) Relating to implementing recommendations of the autonomous vehicle work group; amending RCW 46.92.010 and 46.37.480; amending 2020 c 182 s 4 (uncodified); and providing an effective date. (2) Relating to facilitating the coordinated installation of broadband along state highways; amending RCW 43.330.532, 43.330.534, 43.330.538, 47.52.001, and 47.44.010; adding a new section to chapter 47.44 RCW; and creating new sections. (3) Relating to establishing minimum requirements for the testing of autonomous vehicles; adding a new section to chapter 46.30 RCW; adding a new chapter to Title 46 RCW; and providing an effective date (4) Relating to the establishment of an autonomous vehicle work group; adding a new section to chapter 47.01 RCW; creating a new section; and providing an expiration date. (5) Implements recommendations of the autonomous vehicle work group, defines autonomous, removes a provision that prevents a person from driving a vehicle equipped with certain video screens that are visible to the driver. | (1) WA H 2470 - Addresses the automated operation of vehicles. (2) WA S 6659 - Establishes minimum requirements for the testing of autonomous vehicles. [Covered by later successful bill] (3) WA H 2131 - Regulates CAVs. (4) WA H 2971 - Concerns the development of a report by the governor's autonomous vehicle work group concerning the testing of autonomous commercial motor vehicles on public roadways in the state. (5) WA HCR 4414 - Establishes a joint select committee on autonomous vehicle technology policy. [Covered by later successful bill] | Self-certified companies: BMW of North America, LLC; NVIDIA Corporation; Waymo LLC; May Mobility, Navya Inc.; TORC Robotics; Dooblai LLC; Simple Solutions. Testing occurring in Kirkland and Bellevue. (1) NVIDIA testing in Redmond (source) (2) Waymo testing in Kirkland (source) |
| Testing Requirements | Oversight Department | Infrastructure Developments |
| Self-certification: Testing with human operators present Only a trained employee, contractor, or other person authorized by the company developing the autonomous technology can operate or monitor the vehicles. Vehicles must be monitored, and an operator must have the ability to direct the vehicle’s movement if assistance is required. Anyone operating an autonomous vehicle needs a valid U.S. driver license. Proof of insurance is required by RCW 46.30.020. Testing without human operators present Vehicles must be equipped with an automated driving system that performs all driving tasks on a part or full-time basis within their operational design limits. Vehicles must also be able to make it to a safe condition in the event of a system failure. Vehicles must comply with Washington state motor vehicle laws relevant to the vehicle’s operational design limits. Proof of insurance is required by RCW 46.30.020. (source) | WSDOL | - |
| Crashes/Safety Incidents | Liability/Insurance Requirements | |
| Tesla on autopilot crashed into WASP in Snohomish County. (source) | Requires $5,000,000 insurance (source) |
Virginia
| State | Status | State Law |
|---|---|---|
| Virginia | 🟨 | (1) VA H 1800 (2021) |
| Explanation of State Law | Failed Legislation | Testing |
| (1) The Director of the Office of Innovation shall actively identify and engage connected and autonomous vehicle stakeholders in the Commonwealth in order to most effectively maximize the return on investment from participation in the MTI Conference for the operation of unmanned systems throughout Virginia. Up to $10,000,000 shall be transferred to Item 447 for a connected infrastructure redevelopment demonstration program within and adjacent to the Virginia Tech campus in the City of Falls Church. | - | (1) LM Industries Group Inc. testing in Arlington (source) (2) Automated shuttle testing at Virginia Tech (source) (3) 70 miles of highways and streets already used as test bed for AVs. (source) |
| Testing Requirements | Oversight Department | Infrastructure Developments |
| - | VDOT | 10,000,000 towards infrastructure development. |
| Crashes/Safety Incidents | Liability/Insurance Requirements | |
| - | Same requirements as for non-CAV vehicles. |
Vermont
| State | Status | State Law |
|---|---|---|
| Vermont | 🟨 | (1) VT S 149 (2020) (2) VT H 494 (2018) |
| Explanation of State Law | Failed Legislation | Testing |
| (1) Establishes an automated vehicle testing program (2) The Secretary shall convene a meeting of public and private stakeholders with expertise related to automated vehicles. | - | - |
| Testing Requirements | Oversight Department | Infrastructure Developments |
| Lots of requirements, authorization from municipalities and different types of insurance. (source) | VTRANS | - |
| Crashes/Safety Incidents | Liability/Insurance Requirements | |
| - | 1) Workers Compensation 2) General Liability and Property Damage: With respect to all operations performed under this Permit, the Applicant shall carry general liability insurance having all major divisions of coverage including, but not limited to: Premises ‐ Operations, Products and Completed Operations, Personal Injury Liability, Contractual Liability The policy shall be on an occurrence form and limits shall not be less than: $1,000,000 Each Occurrence $2,000,000 General Aggregate $1,000,000 Products/Completed Operations Aggregate $1,000,000 Personal & Advertising Injury If the performance of this agreement involves construction then a “per project” aggregate endorsement shall be required. In addition completed operations coverage shall be required to be carried for three years post project completion. 3) Automotive Liability: The Applicant shall carry automotive liability insurance covering all motor vehicles, including hired and non‐owned coverage, used in connection with the Agreement. Limits of coverage shall not be less than $5,000,000 combined single limit and shall include the MCS‐90 endorsement. 4) Umbrella or Excess Liability: The Applicant shall carry umbrella or excess liability insurance covering over the underlying general and automotive liability policies. Coverage shall be on an occurrence form and limits shall not be less than $1,000,000 per occurrence/$5,000,000 general aggregate unless higher limits are required by the State of Vermont. Vermont Automated Vehicle Testing Permit Guidance October 15, 2020 VTrans Policy, Planning and Research 5) Additional Insured. The General Liability, Auto Liability, Property Damage, and Umbrella/Excess coverages required for performance of this Agreement shall include the State of Vermont and its agencies, departments, officers and employees, and officers and employees of municipalities that have pre‐approved testing, as Additional Insureds. Additional insured coverage shall be primary and non‐contributory with any other insurance and self‐insurance and shall include a waiver of subrogation in favor of the State of Vermont. (source) |
Utah
| State | Status | State Law |
|---|---|---|
| Utah | 🟨 | - |
| Explanation of State Law | Failed Legislation | Testing |
| - | (1) UT H 257: Autonomous Vehicles Task Force (2) UT H 371: Autonomous Vehicle Amendments (3) UT H 414: Autonomous Vehicles for Hire (4) UT H 31: Unaccompanied Minors in Autonomous Vehicles | - |
| Testing Requirements | Oversight Department | Infrastructure Developments |
| - | - | - |
| Crashes/Safety Incidents | Liability/Insurance Requirements | |
| - | - |
Texas
| State | Status | State Law |
|---|---|---|
| Texas | 🟩 | (1) TX S 1308 (2021) The Sep of Transportation and the Texas A&M Transportation Institute are to conduct a study on the benefits of automated vehicles, impact of using automated vehicles. This report is to be submitted to the state governor by 1/1/2023. Version: Enacted (2) TX H 3026 (2021) “An automated motor vehicle that is designed to be operated exclusively by the automated driving system for all trips is not subject to motor vehicle equipment laws or regulations of this state that relate to or support motor vehicle operation by a human driver.” Version: Enacted (3) TX H 1791 (2017) “An operator of a vehicle equipped with a connected braking system that is following another vehicle equipped with that system may be assisted by the system to maintain an assured clear distance or sufficient space as required by this section.” Version: Enacted (4) 2017 TX S 2205 (2017) Automated Motor Vehicles- Definitions, Vehicle Testing, Insurance and Liability. Version: Enacted. |
| Explanation of State Law | Failed Legislation | Testing |
| - | (1) TX H 113 (2019) “Relates to the registration, operation, and inspection of automated motor vehicles.” (2) TX H 119 (2019) “Relates to liability for and reporting of accidents involving certain motor vehicles.” (3) TX H 568 (2019) “Relates to the regulation of automated neighborhood electric vehicles.” (4) TX H 1135 (2019) “Relates to the operation of public transit vehicles equipped with connected braking systems.” (5) TX H 1720 (2019) “Relates to a study on the benefits of using certain motor vehicle technologies to alleviate traffic congestion at certain ports of entry in this state.” (6) TX H 2219 (2019) “Relates to the operation of public transit vehicles equipped with connected braking systems.” (7) TX H 4243 (2019) “Relates to the terminology used to describe transportation related accidents.“ (8) TX H 3475 (2017) “Relates to the operation of automated motor vehicles on highways in this state.” (9) TX H 4018 (2017) “Relates to the operation of automated motor vehicles on highways in this state for research and testing purposes.” | - |
| Testing Requirements | Oversight Department | Infrastructure Developments |
| - | - | - |
| Crashes/Safety Incidents | Liability/Insurance Requirements | |
| - | - |
Tennessee
| State | Status | State Law |
|---|---|---|
| Tennessee | 🟩 | (1) 2017 TN S 151 (2017) “Relates to motor vehicles, authorizes the operation of autonomous vehicles on the public roads of this state.” Version: Enacted. (2) 2017 TN S 676 (2017) “Relates to motor vehicles, authorizes a person to operate a platoon on the streets and highways of this state after the person provides notification to the Department of Transportation and the Department of Safety.” Version: Enacted. |
| Explanation of State Law | Failed Legislation | Testing |
| - | (1) TN H 14 (2018) “Requires the department to establish a three-year program in which local governments can have regulatory and warning road signs replaced by the department if such signs do not comply with federal retro-reflectivity standards.” (2) TN S 37 (2018) “Relates to Department of Transportation, requires the department to establish a three-year program in which local governments can have regulatory and warning road signs replaced by the department if such signs do not comply with federal retro-reflectivity standards.” (3) TN H 381 (2018) “Relates to motor vehicles, authorizes the operation of autonomous vehicles on the public roads of this state.” (4) TN H 751 (2018) “Relates to motor vehicles, authorizes a person to operate a platoon on the streets and highways of this state after the person provides notification to the department of transportation and the department of safety.” (5) TN S 1072 (2018) “Relates to Motor Vehicles, authorizes autonomous vehicles to operate in the state without a human driver under certain conditions.” (6) TN H 1131 (2018) “Relates to Motor Vehicles, authorizes autonomous vehicles to operate in the state without a human driver under certain conditions.” | - |
| Testing Requirements | Oversight Department | Infrastructure Developments |
| - | - | - |
| Crashes/Safety Incidents | Liability/Insurance Requirements | |
| - | - |