Public-data methodology report

Austin Autonomous Vehicle Incident & Public Data Report

A source-first framework for understanding Austin robotaxi and autonomous-vehicle incident information without treating raw report counts as safety rankings.

Analysis framework updated September 22, 2026. Source data can change after this date.

Do not read raw incident totals as a safety ranking

A larger raw count can reflect more vehicles, more miles, different operating areas, different reporting awareness, or better telemetry and data access. Without comparable exposure measures such as autonomous vehicle miles, trips, fleet size and operating conditions, raw counts alone do not establish that one operator or system is safer than another.

City of Austin documented incidents

Austin says its dashboard is compiled from City departments and Austin 3-1-1 service requests and is updated by staff weekly. The City also cautions that reports are not validated, reflect only occurrences reported directly to the City, may not capture every event, and exclude reports posted only to social media.

Austin AV source

NHTSA ADS crash reporting

NHTSA's Standing General Order requires covered manufacturers and operators to report certain crashes involving automated driving systems. NHTSA warns that reporting and telemetry capabilities differ, reports may be duplicated or updated, and the data are not normalized for vehicles, miles traveled or operating domain.

NHTSA Standing General Order data

Why the two datasets should remain separate

Different collection systems. Austin records reports reaching City channels; NHTSA receives reports under a federal reporting order from covered entities.

Different definitions and triggers. A City-reported AV concern is not automatically equivalent to a federally reportable ADS crash.

Different completeness limitations. Neither source should be described as a complete census of every Austin AV event.

No fault conclusion. Inclusion in either source does not by itself establish which person, company or system caused an incident.

TSC methodology for future AV data analysis

State the exact source, download or access date and reporting period.
Keep Austin City reports, NHTSA ADS reports and other datasets separately identified.
Define inclusion and exclusion criteria before publishing a count.
Check for revisions, duplicate reports and changing report identifiers where the source permits.
Never convert raw operator counts into a safety ranking without comparable exposure denominators.
Separate incident reporting from legal responsibility, insurance coverage and injury severity.
Publish limitations beside the findings rather than hiding them in a footnote.

For consumers documenting an incident

Public datasets are useful for research, but an individual's records are different. TSC's free checklist helps organize trip information, vehicle identifiers, operator communications, incident numbers, insurance documents and potentially relevant automated-system records.

Open the AV checklist Austin AV guide

This tool produces a preliminary, non-binding estimate based on the information you provide and general personal-injury valuation methods. It is not legal advice, not a guarantee of any outcome, and not a substitute for review by a licensed attorney. Actual settlements and verdicts vary widely based on evidence, jurisdiction, insurance coverage, and many other factors. Texas Settlement Calculator is not a law firm and does not practice law; use of this tool does not create an attorney-client relationship.