ROAT Regulatory Brief · Issue 001 ·
New rules and shared testbeds for automated vehicles
Welcome to the first regular issue of ROAT Regulatory Brief. Singapore is preparing a dedicated law for automated vehicles, Europe’s cross-border testbed initiative now brings together 22 countries, and cities are joining forces on automated public transport. These developments share a practical question: what needs to be in place before a vehicle becomes a transport service? Here is my selection from the past few weeks.
01 · Lead story · Singapore
Singapore prepares a dedicated AV Act
Singapore plans to extend its road sandbox for automated vehicles until the end of 2028 and introduce a dedicated AV Act in approximately a year. The transport ministry outlined the plans at the second reading of the Land Transport and Related Matters (No. 2) Bill on 7 October. The extension is intended to let ongoing deployments continue while the new framework is prepared.
A separate sandbox for robots on public paths is planned for early 2027. The proposed routes distinguish public-authority testbeds, a lighter regime for lower-risk devices within specified limits, and standard authorisation involving testing on a closed course and in the intended environment. The ministry also emphasised insurance, incident management, cybersecurity and privacy. These are announced plans, not confirmation that the new regimes are in force.
ROAT perspective. The important connection is between the proposed service, its operating environment and the evidence needed for permission. A robot sharing a narrow path with pedestrians raises different questions from a vehicle on a road. Singapore offers a useful comparison of how those differences can shape the approval route.
02 · European cooperation
Cross-border testbeds now bring together 22 countries
Slovakia, Portugal and Norway joined the Joint Declaration of Intent on cross-border automated-vehicle testbeds on 29 September. Following Spain’s earlier signature, 22 countries are now involved. The initiative supports cooperation on testing and approval, while decisions about deployment on public roads remain with national authorities.
The declaration does not grant a cross-border operating permit. Its practical value will depend on how authorities share assessments and identify which findings can be used elsewhere. For a project preparing trials in several countries, this could make the conditions behind a test result as important as the result itself.
03 · Public transport
Cities start shaping demand for automated transport
PACT for Europe was launched in Paris on 7 October. Coordinated by the European Metropolitan Transport Authorities association, EMTA, the initiative brings together ten pilot territories to combine public demand, exchange experience and integrate automation into public-transport planning.
For cities, the starting point is the service they need: the route, passengers, accessibility and response when something goes wrong. Those choices should inform procurement and the legal arrangements for operation. PACT is a cooperation initiative rather than new legislation, but it brings the people commissioning transport into a discussion often centred on vehicles.
04 · European Union
Technical inspections move towards another trilogue
The next milestone for the EU roadworthiness reform is a second trilogue planned for 20 October. A Council agenda dated 15 October lists that timetable. The proposal, 2025/0097(COD), concerns periodic vehicle inspections and roadside inspections of commercial vehicles. Negotiations are continuing.
For automated transport, the relevant part of the Commission’s original proposal is the inspection of electronic safety systems and the integrity of safety-related software. These ideas are not yet a confirmed final text. They raise a practical issue beyond initial type approval: what information will inspectors need to assess a vehicle whose software may have changed during its service life?
Council · next negotiating milestone Commission · what the proposal covers
05 · UNECE
Remote support and safety evidence on the ADS agenda
The document register for the automated driving systems (ADS) working group’s Sydney session, 6–9 October, points to several subjects worth following: remote support, mitigated risk conditions, user readiness and safety performance indicators. It also lists work on end-to-end driving systems, US guidance and planning for 2027.
The relevance is practical. When does a remote person merely support the system, and when do they take over driving? What can a safety indicator actually tell an authority about a service in operation? These are questions for closer analysis, not conclusions from the meeting. For this update, the official register and document titles were checked. The attachments remained unavailable, so no detailed proposal or adopted change is reported.
06 · Slovakia
Draft decree on the operation of fully automated vehicles
Act No. 248/2026 Coll. was promulgated on 9 October and takes effect on 1 December 2026. It extends the Slovak framework for fully automated vehicle operation, including licensing, human roles and records. Parliamentary print 1329 now belongs to the legislative history. The promulgated Act is the legal reference.
The implementing draft LP/2026/500 adds detail on testing reports, control centres, technical oversight and operational safety reporting. It proposes a maximum of ten vehicles monitored simultaneously by one operator and commencement on 1 December. Both remain proposals. The Act’s prohibition on overseeing another vehicle during direct remote driving is a separate rule.
ROAT perspective. My main question remains how the licensing decision connects to evaluated public-road trials and clear acceptance criteria. The detailed ROAT analysis explains why a more extensive testing report does not, by itself, settle that question.
Act No. 248/2026 Coll. Draft decree Read the full ROAT analysis
07 · From approval practice · Background
A test report needs a decision to support
Two existing guidance sources help explain a recurring distinction. The Dutch RDW’s August announcement of Guideline No. 030 concerns designation of technical services to assess ADS under Regulation (EU) 2022/1426. Sweden’s guidance addresses permission to conduct trials on public roads and the evidence needed to manage their risks.
They answer different questions: who is competent to assess a system, and whether a particular trial may proceed. A project needs to identify which decision its evidence supports. These are background sources, not new October rules. The detailed RDW information package is available on request and was not reviewed for this issue.
Thank you for reading. Which of these developments matters most in your work? I would welcome your experience or a source worth sharing. Jozef Andraško