ASABE Logo

Article Request Page ASABE Journal Article

Perspective: Closing the Regulatory Gap: Addressing Challenges for Autonomous Agricultural Equipment in California

Farzaneh Khorsandi1,*, Kent E. Pinkerton2, Minyoung Hong1

Published in Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health 30(4): 155-161 (doi: 10.13031/jash.16112). Copyright 2024 American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers.

1    Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering, University of California, Davis, California, USA.

2    Western Center for Agricultural Safety and Health, University of California, Davis, California, USA.

*    Correspondence: fkhorsandi@ucdavis.edu

The authors have paid for open access for this article. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial NoDerivatives 4.0 International License https://creative commons.org/licenses/by nc nd/4.0/

Submitted for review on 24 June 2024 as manuscript number JASH 16112; approved for publication as a Perspective Article by Associate Editor Dr. John Shutske and Community Editor Mr. Salah Issa of the Ergonomics, Safety, & Health Community of ASABE on 5 September 2024.

Citation: Khorsandi, F., Pinkerton, K. E., & Hong, M. (2024). Perspective: Closing the regulatory gap: Addressing challenges for autonomous agricultural equipment in California. J. Agric. Saf. Health, 30(4), 155-161. https://doi.org/10.13031/jash.16112

Highlights

Abstract.As of August 2024, California’s agricultural tractor safety regulations, developed over half a century ago, are still focused on classic tractors with human operators. These regulations are problematic when applied to autonomous equipment. Since agricultural equipment has advanced, producers have faced challenges in complying with existing regulations for autonomous machinery in California

A petition (No. 596) was submitted in December 2021 to the State of California Department of Industrial Relations and reviewed in March 2023. The petition requesting modification of the agricultural tractor's traditional regulation was recently submitted to the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board (OSHSB). The OSHSB denied both petitions. This article discusses more details related to California agricultural tractor safety regulations, the petition to modify the traditional regulations, discussions on OSHSB meetings regarding the petition, and several suggestions to resolve the current issue..

Keywords.Agricultural equipment, Autonomous, Regulation, Safety, Tractor

California is the leading agricultural state, producing a significant portion of the nation’s vegetables, fruits, and nuts (California Department of Food and Agriculture, 2023) but faces significant challenges due to the labor shortage and high labor costs (Martin, 2017; Shutske, 2023). Autonomy is an obvious solution to sustain California agriculture (Samtani et al., 2019). Current California tractor safety regulations, such as Section 3441 Title 8 (California Department of Industrial Relations (DIR), 1977), focused on classic tractors with human operators, and are challenging to apply to autonomous equipment. For example, several autonomous tractor designs (e.g., John Deere Autonomous Electric Tractor and Case IH Magnum Autonomous Tractor) lack a seat or space for an operator, making it impossible for them to meet current regulatory requirements. Since agricultural equipment has advanced significantly since Title 8 was established in the 1970's (California Department of Industrial Relations (DIR), 1977), producers have faced challenges trying to comply with existing regulations for autonomous machinery.

Considering the current situation with at least 47 manufacturers producing autonomous equipment and 31 models lacking an operator station, there is a need to modify existing regulations (Jurgens, 2023). Over 500 autonomous machines are currently in use, covering more than 1 million acres of farmland across 40 countries and accumulating over 350,000 operation hours (Jurgens, 2023).

The autonomous agricultural vehicle industry, especially electric ones, is rapidly growing, despite concerns about durability (Ghobadpour et al., 2022). But their adoption is driven by the potential for increased efficiency, reduced labor, and environmental benefits. Results of a study showed that autonomous agricultural equipment can significantly and positively impact the economy of arable farms by reducing production costs, especially on smaller farms. Automation allows smaller farms to remain profitable and decreases the need for economies of scale and reliance on government subsidies. Study results suggest that by lowering labor and equipment costs, autonomous agricultural vehicles can help smaller farms achieve international competitiveness while reducing environmental impacts (Lowenberg-DeBoer et al., 2021). Therefore, there is an urgent need to review and modify existing regulations.

A petition (No. 596) requesting modification of the current regulation (Section 3441 Title 8) (Penmetsa and Winters, 2021) was submitted to the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board (OSHSB). The seven-member board of OSHSB denied the petition by a 4 to 3 vote. The current California regulations related to agricultural tractor safety, including Section § 3441 Title 8 (California Department of Industrial Relations (DIR), 1977), Petition 596 (Penmetsa and Winters, 2021), and discussions from the OSHSB meeting (California Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board, 2023). The conclusions summarize several recommendations to resolve the regulatory gap, including establishing an advisory board and conducting a thorough autonomous systems risk assessment.

Section § 3441, Title 8 section (b)

Section § 3441 outlines the operation of agricultural equipment, focusing on ensuring the safety of employees involved in the operation, maintenance, and servicing of such equipment (California Department of Industrial Relations (DIR), 1977). While the section does not explicitly mention autonomous vehicle safety, some of the outlined safe work practices and operating rules can apply to autonomous agriculture equipment. Petition 596 focused specifically on the modification of section (b):

(b) All self-propelled equipment shall, when under its own power and in motion, have an operator stationed at the vehicular controls.

Petition 596 (Monarch Tractor)

This petition (Penmetsa and Winters, 2021) is an effort to update outdated regulations in Title 8, Section 3441(b) (California Department of Industrial Relations (DIR), 1977) related to the operation of agricultural tractors to reflect advancements in autonomous machinery. The current regulation in Section 3441(b) does not keep up with the rapid technological advancements in the field, leading to ambiguity and confusion in the industry (Penmetsa and Winters, 2021). The petition noted the differences between the old furrow-guided tractors and modern autonomous tractors equipped with sensors, computers, and advanced artificial intelligence (Penmetsa and Winters, 2021). Based on the petition, accommodating these updates in regulation, the agricultural industry can potentially benefit from safer working conditions (Belforte et al., 2006), reducing injuries and fatalities in tractor rollover incidents and worker exposure to dangerous chemicals (Penmetsa and Winters, 2021).

Petition 596 advocates for granting a temporary experimental variance (TEV) to Monarch Tractor. Developed collaboratively with the Division of Occupational Safety and Health of DIR, the TEV granted Monarch Tractors the ability to operate autonomous electric tractors for demonstrational and validation purposes. This variance includes enhanced safety guidelines, such as limits on tractor speed, maintaining a 7-foot clearance around the tractor, manufacturer-provided digital training, posted signs (“Driver Optional Vehicle in Use” visible from 50 feet), perception systems for detecting obstacles, and application of ISO 18497 (ISO, 2018) recommendations aimed at maximizing farmworker protections and public safety (Penmetsa and Winters, 2021).

OSHSB Meeting

The OSHSB meeting on March 16, 2023, discussed petition (No. 596) and a number of issues related to the safety of autonomous tractors (California Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board, 2023). The meeting covered a range of topics, including system connectivity, hacker attackers, signal loss, ensuring transparency in data sharing, Monarch's TEV, and a potential advisory committee to oversee the topic. This section includes only the discussion in the OSHSB meeting and does not include the author's opinion.

System Connectivity, Hacker Attackers, and Signal Loss

In the OSHSB meeting, manufacturer representatives reported using authentication systems to impede malicious cyber-attacks. Some held "white hacker" discussions to identify potential vulnerabilities in their systems (California Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board, 2023). White hackers are ethical hackers who use their skills to find and fix security vulnerabilities in computer systems.

The meeting participants raised safety concerns about the lack of reliable and secure signals on farms. Additionally, some systems shut down immediately when the signal is lost. For instance, operators could potentially restart the system, assuming a signal loss when, in reality, it is a safety issue. A remote operator would further worsen the situation due to a lack of physical presence at the site. One manufacturer raised the countermeasure that critical systems are local to the machine and do not require connectivity.

In addition, a discussion on an existing benchmark for a vulnerability rate did not reach a formal consensus. However, it prompted further dialogue regarding autonomous machinery in other industries, such as aerospace and defense. A counterargument was raised that airplanes must have pilots, while autonomous tractors are not, making them more vulnerable to attacks.

Ensuring Transparency in Data Sharing:

Another question was related to how manufacturers can ensure transparency in sharing data collected during safety tests and normal operation. Representatives from the manufacturer suggested that an advisory committee should define how data should be shared. Then, manufacturers' representatives should share data with the advisory committee for analysis and making the necessary amendments.

Monarch's Temporary Experimental Variance (TEV)

The Monarch Tractors' Temporary Experimental Variance (TEV) was a contract between the Division of Occupational Safety and Health of DIR. Monarch Tractor runs autonomous tractors on agricultural fields, given close DIR monitoring, extensive data collection, and explicit conditions, such as prohibiting tractors from operating within the immediate human vicinity. During the meeting (California Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board, 2023), the data reported from Monarch Tractors to the Division encompassed the total distance traveled, total hours of operation, collision avoidance instances, total accidents, and near-misses (California Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board, 2023). 

The other concern was that the TEV did not explicitly include an exit strategy. It either expires in 2027 or regulators modify the regulation, Section 3441 Title 8 (California Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board, 2023).

An advisory committee of academia, growers, manufacturers, and labor groups was recommended to discuss appropriate safety regulations for autonomous tractors and the current concerns about TEV (California Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board, 2023). Hence, the DIR Board Staff suggested that several topics be considered in the advisory committee for enhancing the safety of autonomous tractors (California Department of Industrial Relations, 2022), including:

  1. Means for alerting employees and others about the presence of autonomous agricultural equipment in operation 
  2. Means for stopping the operation of the equipment in an emergency, including requirements for the redundancy of such systems
  3. Benchmark requirements for detecting objects and employees in the path of travel 
  4. Requirements for the start and restart of machines in autonomous operation 
  5. Requirements for testing and maintenance of the sensors and alarms used to protect employees
  6. Means to ensure the autonomous vehicle does not leave the desired work area or field
  7. Requirements for operation and supervision of the equipment
  8. Precautions necessary to prevent unauthorized interference or use of the equipment (California Department of Industrial Relations, 2022).

Petition 596 Decision

Upon evaluating Petition 596 alongside the assessments from the OSHSB staff and Cal/OSHA, the Board decided to deny it (California Department of Industrial Relations, 2022). However, the Board instructed its staff to monitor the temporary experimental variance granted to the petitioner, Monarch Tractors, and request periodic updates from Cal/OSHA on its progression and conclusions (California Department of Industrial Relations, 2022).

Cal/OSHA's stated that the technology is still relatively new, while the current dataset is inadequate/limited to conclude that autonomous tractors provide equivalent safety to human-operated tractors (California Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board, 2023).

Previously, the Association of Equipment Manufacturers (AEM) proposed another petition (No. 571) to modify Section § 3441, Title 8 section (b). The petition (No. 571) was also denied in 2019. Cal/OSHA found a lack of empirical studies on the safety of such equipment (Department of Industrial Relations, 2019).

Future Pathways

One solution for such a concern is to bring the industry, academia, workers' representatives, and government to the table and get their feedback about possible ways to resolve such an issue. The workshop titled "Emerging Technology in Agriculture: Keeping Health and Safety at the Forefront," hosted by the University of California, Davis, Western Center for Agricultural Health and Safety (WCHAS) on May 11, 2023, focused on the safety considerations of new agricultural technologies.

Over 40 participants from various sectors, including academia, industry, government, and advocacy groups, were invited and participated in this event. The workshop featured presentations from a diverse range of experts, including academics, representatives from agricultural technology companies, officials from the California Department of Pesticide Regulation, and regulatory professionals from Cal/OSHA. Discussions covered the benefits and challenges of robotics, drones, and autonomous vehicles, with a focus on the need to balance technological advancement with farmworker safety in California. The results of the discussions are presented as a part of the conclusion section.

Conclusion

The authors suggest that if Petition 596 were approved, the TEV would provide a pathway for updating Section 3441(b) to allow driver-optional tractors to operate without a human operator under strict safety guidelines.

As of August 2024, considering the current conflict between industry needs and Cal/OSHA regulations, along with the unsuccessful attempts of the industry to resolve the issue, several suggestions might help to resolve the issue. The suggestions below are collected based on the conversations in the WCAHS workshop and the author's opinions:

  1. Develop an advisory group composed of experts from various fields, including robotics, agriculture, safety, farmers, industry representatives, and regulations, to provide insights and recommendations on the safe implementation of autonomous agricultural equipment.
  1. Develop a test station to evaluate the safe performance of autonomous agricultural vehicles, identify potential safety issues, and assess the effectiveness of the proposed regulations.
  2. Considering the current use of autonomous vehicles on farms, a comprehensive study should be conducted to collect and analyze current incidents and near misses and identify the most significant hazards of autonomous vehicles.
  3. A thorough risk assessment should be conducted for each vehicle to identify all potential hazards associated with the use of autonomous agricultural equipment, similar to Nnaji et al. (2021). This report is a comprehensive report on the “Protocol for Assessing Human Robot Interaction Safety Risks.” This assessment should consider various scenarios, including equipment malfunction, human intervention, environmental factors, and unexpected situations.
  4. In the absence of existing domestic regulations, consulting with international organizations such as Grain Producers Australia (2021) and regulatory bodies can provide guidance on global best practices and standards in the field of autonomous technology.
  5. Drawing on experiences from industries such as mining, construction, or automotive, which also deal with autonomous technology, can provide valuable insights into managing safety and regulatory challenges. This is particularly important given the unique challenges of the agricultural industry.
  6. Developing and implementing proper training and certification for personnel working with robotic equipment: Ensuring that employees working with, or around agricultural robots are adequately trained in the equipment's safe operation, maintenance, and servicing.

Acknowledgments

Open Access was supported by the SAFER AG project supported by the intramural research program of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Institute of Food and Agriculture, proposal # 2022-07106 / accession # 1029426. The findings and conclusions in this publication have not been formally disseminated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and should not be construed to represent any agency determination or policy.

References

Belforte, G., Deboli, R., Gay, P., Piccarolo, P., & Aimonino, D. R. (2006). Robot design and testing for greenhouse applications. Biosyst. Eng., 95(3), 309-321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2006.07.004

California Department of Food and Agriculture. (2023). California Agricultural Statistics Review 2022-2023. Retrieved from https://www.cdfa.ca.gov/Statistics/PDFs/2022-2023_california_agricultural_statistics_review.pdf

California Department of Industrial Relations (DIR). (1977). Operation of Agricultural Equipment, § 3441 Title 8. DIR. Retrieved from https://www.dir.ca.gov/title8/3441.html

California Department of Industrial Relations (DIR). (2022). Proposed petition decision of the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board (Petition File No. 596). Retrieved from https://www.dir.ca.gov/oshsb/documents/petition-596-adopteddecision.pdf

California Department of Industrial Relations. (2019). Proposed Petition Decision of The Occupational Safety And Health Standards Board (Petition File No. 571). Retrieved from https://www.dir.ca.gov/oshsb/documents/petition-571-propdecision.pdf

California Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board. (2023). OSHSB Board meeting March 16, 2023. Retrieved from https://videobookcase.org/oshsb/2023-03-16/

Ghobadpour, A., Monsalve, G., Cardenas, A., & Mousazadeh, H. (2022). Off-road electric vehicles and autonomous robots in agricultural sector: Trends, challenges, and opportunities. Vehicles, 4(3), 843-864. https://doi.org/10.3390/vehicles4030047

Grain Producers Australia. (2021). Code of practice: Agricultural mobile field machinery with autonomous functions in Australia. Retrieved from https://www.grainproducers.com.au/_files/ugd/cce1a6_7291560d4c624980bb5ebf119560342b.pdf

Jurgens, J. (2023). Public Comment on Petition 596 (Autonomous Agricultural Machinery Safety). San Diego, CA: Association of Equipment Manufacturers.

Lowenberg-DeBoer, J., Franklin, K., Behrendt, K., & Godwin, R. (2021). Economics of autonomous equipment for arable farms. Precis. Agric., 22, 1992-2006. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11119-021-09822-x

Martin, P. (2017). The race in the fields: Imports, machines and migrants. California Agriculture, 72(2), 100-101.

Nnaji, C., Gambatese, J., & Okpala, I. (2021). Protocol for assessing human robot interaction safety risks. CPWR - The Center for Construction Research and Training.

Penmetsa, P., & Winters, J. (2021). Petition File No. 596: Title 8, General Industry Safety Orders, Section 3441(b). California Department of Industrial Relations (DIR), Occupational Safety & Health Standards Board. Retrieved from https://www.dir.ca.gov/oshsb/petition-596.html

Samtani, J. B., Rom, C. R., Friedrich, H., Fennimore, S. A., Finn, C. E., Petran, A.,... Bergefurd, B. (2019). The status and future of the strawberry industry in the United States. HortTechnology, 29(1), 11-24. https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTTECH04135-18

Shutske, J. M. (2023). Agricultural automation & autonomy: Safety and risk assessment must be at the forefront. J. Agromed., 28(1), 5-10. https://doi.org/10.1080/1059924X.2022.2147625