Transcripts For CSPAN Transportation Officials Discuss Automation Technology 20240713

Critical audience for us representing a lot of researchers and thinking that goes into laying the foundation for a lot of advanced technologies. Attend tend to be a wonky or crowd, a lot of people who understand what we are saying and hearing from them helps inform what we are doing great we support this panel today and appreciate everyone and in the Human Trafficking panel earlier today. Human trafficking is a critical issue we all need to take action on now. Well will be talking about the secretarys top priority which will be fostering innovation. While ensuring the publics legitimate concerns over safety and security on the forefront. And the Deputy Assistant secretary for transportation policy. Ive been working on these for three years. At,ything we are looking and very excited about this conversation braden to my left is james owens. I will be in the innovation space its very active space. Ensureole is doing these are in our airspace and to ensure we keep that is innovative as possible. I am Deputy Assistant secretary for research and technology. The 1. 1ole i oversee billion worth of research and the different modes plus the 75 million in the University Transportation center. I also look at technologies such as gps and case satellites get knocked out and spectrum and connected vehicles and Automated Vehicles. We are all going to give you brief presentations to show your foundational background, everything thats going on in terms of policy initiatives, regulatory initiatives, laying the foundation for conversations and we will ask those questions and you should see a number of policy staff around the room with notecards. You will see these notecards. That will allow us to take questions from the audience can you can some questions at any time and bring them up to us. Is we do this because this partly being aired live on cspan so we need to take questions, not take statements. We are looking forward to this conversation. To start with how weve been handling these new and emerging technologies, you probably are aware the secretary announced the nontraditional and emerging Transportation Technology council in march of last year. We have been hard at work bringing in a lot of Research Initiatives we have underway but also looking at how do we address new types of technologies we have missed i was to handle. We did start focusing on the types of petitions we been receiving, but also making sure we are incorporating our Automated Vehicle work in that. Outreach initiatives and regulatory initiatives and the Research Initiatives making sure we use this to inform the other types of work we are doing and needless to say our friends at the faa are bringing a lot of Lessons Learned and were trying to figure out how to better use the modes to inform the work they are doing braden this a lot all of theforth, assets looking at these technologies. This is not supposed to be an exhaustive list. We may include a scooter working group. New things that may challenge some of the authorities we have, we have authorities the touch other agencies, this is a single point of contact for anything that has so they dont get answers from different ones. This is a good place for everyone to go. We just put out a request for comment and just closed on friday, we got 1300 views of that and 26 official responses from commenters challenging us in certain ways. Reading those, taking them in and understanding them and we will take the next steps from there. One of the things, a message you got from ces is the secretary attended so she could announce Automated Vehicles 4. 0, ensuring american vehicles and automation safety. The this is is it builds on approach for safety. We started with a cornerstone of safety which was automated driving systems 2. 0. This highlighted safety features important for automated developers. Making sure the public knows how they are creating these technologies. This solidify the cornerstone of safety. Year in 2018 at the end of 2018 we premiered Automated Vehicles 3. 0. This Lady Foundation for the entire department of transportation so we have one approach for how we engage these technologies. It further clarified some safety focuses. The federal, state role and where do we belong, where does the federal role of research as we work with these new technologies. One of the bits of feedback is well its what we expected. It should have been. Took put on a number of request for comment. They engage Transportation Community shouldve seen whats coming. Its been fantastic and we are putting this for Public Comment as well because we are better off hearing from everybody helping us tie it together. As we been engaging with our partners, we didnt really have a perfect idea of how money agencies were involved. My best guess is something around 15. If you dont know all 38 agencies involved, please go to but thinkingn. Of, through how can we better tie together all these pieces as we look for the future we want, we have billions of dollars being spent on these technologies. Tohave dozens of initiatives make sure we act early accurately understand whats expected of each Automated Vehicle manufacture. When it starts thinking through an systemwide effects. There are different initiatives underway that even i wasnt aware of. So we will put this for Public Comment. And should serve as a map for you all to look at the assets in place right now for you to look as an american innovator of the thes in place and utilize resources in place to lead. 36 states plus the district of columbia are already actively engaged in the testing of these technologies. Congress has weighed in on the types of initiatives they would like to see. The department has been heavily engaged. A massive amount of work roleway, this outlines the of federal activities but theres so much work to be done. It does we highlighted what our principles are the line with our authorities. You should see some of the same principles. The different tie authorities we dont ourselves have. You see things like privacy come back. Things around systemwide impacts coming in effect. The cybersecurity partnerships we have. And on the dod side all the work they are doing. Types of works they are doing. Or what happens when you make a vehicle a connected vehicle. One of the activities weve been using to inform ourselves and im talking about policies underway. Well have some of the partners talking but regulatory activities they have underway. Diana will be talking about research. I will focus on the policy activities. The first is with the 60 Million Congress provides to inform and engage the public on Automated Vehicle demonstration, we have put out grants that focus on safety, secondly on generating the type of data we need for the safe integration of technology and third, working with our state and local partners on the types of operations, bringing them in. That are working to explore what this can do and how to bring it into the system safely. Thats the criteria with which we judge these grants and weve got great results. Urban applications, tying together different pieces, working with the people. Those have good understanding these initiatives. Andus transit applications Automated Vehicle applications. We have some fantastic work and probably many of you worked on these themselves so thank you for doing a good job. We are very proud of these grants and are in the process of cranking them out. Going to read the activities. You more headlines to come. A lot of things we learn from the very successful president s drone integration highway program. Not only with how he processed it but how we will execute it. Things that are informing these activities. Improvements over time as we learned is an agency in the department. One of my favorite initiatives weve been talking through the secretary did a great job announcing enter focus is started to drive through. Triple the amount of on october 29, not only research and policy driven initiatives but also ringing the assets in the federal government, bringing the tying together these knots and researchers. So that we can use all the excitement. So people with disabilities, to ensure we are bringing the subject matter. That helps use technology for people with accessibility. And back home. On curb to curb and doortodoor. Deploying that in taking those Lessons Learned. With the Inclusive Design challenge. Thats putting out a challenge. Taking his centers that are developed, helping bring in this community of knowledgeable people with the actual engineers and decisionmakers of the innovation community. Together to work on these challenges as we are thinking proactively about the types of challenges people with all sorts whethersibility needs they be cognitive, visual, auditory, mobility challenges. Bringing them in so we can address concerns before because a problem down the road. It will hopefully alleviate a lot of future challenges. We want to take those Lessons Learned. One of the things you highlighted. It is we have to do a better job communicating what Natural Technology is. But its real capabilities are. People that are members of the public. This is understand that a level two vehicle. Once whats a Driver Assistance vehicle. Supposed to bet hands on the wheel but paying attention. There is not a truly selfdriving vehicle on the road today. Nothing available for sale today. We have lower levels of automation. We cannot let anything happening with those he conflated with actual selfdriving technology because not only does it ruin safety today and give people unrealistic expectations, but it takes away the public trust Agreement Technology the future. Sos important we simplify everyone understands what we mean and they are talking to the s. Gineers versus policy wonk we need to be able to reach the general public to so they know what the differences between Driver Assist and automated driving of functions driving functions. We have to make sure everyone understands so we cannot lose the public trust. This is something youve seen us work on. We work with some of our partners like Consumer Reports and aaa on their documents, we are very happy they talk to us beforehand and we had a lot of discussions with them so we are serves as and that starting point for more conversations and more work we need to be doing to produce these things for public consumption and reform ourselves and our partners in congress. We are all in this together. Working on her Automated Vehicle workforce. As we think proactively about the impact of these technologies, we need to make sure we are engaging in bringing in the community of people feel like they will be impacted. One of the main outreach initiatives weve been doing is Automated Vehicle workforce report and looking at the impacts of the trucking community. There is they are some of the ones who are likely bringing these technologies first. Wonderful engagement with partners you may not normally working with but weve been working with teamsters and uaw, bringing them in and having workshops with them first hand so we can understand their needs to make sure we are proactively thinking and addressing these thing. We brought in four agencies. Bartman of labor, health and Human Services and commerce. It in particular the impact will be. Lastly the Automated Vehicles comprehensive s the most we have to bricked the future and what our regulations will be. We have to predict what research we need to do and tile these together. Thats why its critical to put out av 4. 0 so we outline what the goals are, what we are doing. You have the regulatory agenda out in public and you have all of these polity policy initiatives. How do we tie them together . How do we get from where we are today where we have a number of Research Initiatives and polity policy initiatives, how do we get from where we are too full and safe integration of Automated Vehicles into our system. Thats what this is. When we ask for comments on av 4. 0 we are starting to think about how we tie these together so we have comprehensive plans and its not to be right but we will try to get it as not wrong as possible. We cant predict the future but we will try. It is going to be fantastically interesting in my colleagues on , this is going to be something we will be working on of. E next number i am a was available to you, please feel free to reach out to me in the policy shop, we are at your service. We will be working together on this and we will be calling on you to make Public Comment on this document here. Nothing we do is not done without taking Public Comment and making sure we are looking around every corner at what the effects may be. So with that, i will turn it over to you, james. James its a pleasure to be here this afternoon. Being here. You all its an opportunity for us to talk to you and share whats going on in our agency. We believe very much in reaching out to the public and getting feedback. Ideally we can make the best decision possible or lease the decision in the light with the information. Is first and foremost a tsa is the first and foremost a safety agency. Everything is focused on perfecting our people on our roads. Inr it be the vehicles, bikes, on foot or other transportation. We are witnessing a revolution in technology that promises to make our cars safer than they have ever been. First lets start with the facts. Point 4 e saw a two decline in fatalities on our nations roadways, the second Consecutive Year of declines. Early incidents were 2019 suggest this trend is continuing. That is very good news. However, that is still lives onng to 36,560 our nations roads in 2019. Every fatalities a tragedy. Everyone means a family has lost their loved ones, friends and colleagues have lost a partner and we all lost the amazing potential that every life promises. Lose unacceptable that we so many lives on our nations road. We are focused on doing what we can do to save lives and bring those numbers down. Simply put, fatal crashes have two basic roots. Behavior and technology. We know most serious crashes are caused by human error and far too many lives are lost because of drug or alcohol impairment, driving without seatbelts, speeding, and driving while distracted. , Technology Hand has made new vehicles safer than before. Newer vehicles are safer vehicles. That thees indicate proportion of occupants who are seriously injured increases with a vehicles age. The newer the vehicle you are in, the safer you are in a crash. Newer vehicles are safer than before but we believe new technologies can and will make them even safer in the future. Not only do these technologies make them more crash worthy, you are more likely to survive when a crash does occur, but they are helping us avoid or mitigate crashes in the first place. Know, developers are investing billions of dollars in advanced technologies that are helping drivers avoid crashes or reduce the severity of crashes that do occur. Innovation is leading to growing levels of automation that can address some of the unsafe driving behaviors that cause most serious crashes. World inates leads the advanced vehicle technologies because innovators are able to develop safety enhancing technology here at home. Under the leadership of scheck is retary chao, ntsa including automated driving systems. Exercises careful oversight by closely communicating with developers, conducting research into emerging technologies and human factors. Investigating incidents and complaints and when necessary and appropriate, exercising out broad enforcement authority. , when theime is right technology is proven, our history shows we will adopt performance based standards. Many manufacturers are developing and rolling out new advanced Driver Assistance systems. Such as automatic emergency braking and lane keeping assist which can help drivers avoid crashing or reduce severity of crashes. We expect these and other developing technologies will help reduce fatalities on our roads, including vestry ends and other users. The early data on the efficacy of these technologies is quite promising. That thetical however public understands a vital fact about current technologies. All vehicles sold in america require a driver to be fully attentive and cognitively engaged in the driving task at all times. This is true even if the vehicle is equipped with any of the technologies that are currently on the market. While these technologies are improving and enhancing safety, they are not selfdriving. Misusing Driver Assistance systems by failing to maintain control of the vehicle at all times can result in serious and deadly crashes. Consumer education is an important tool for enhancing ensuring that these technologies are used in a way that enhances safety. In addition to Driver Assistance technologies, we are seeing significant investment in more advanced automated driving systems that might one day allow ,ehicles to drive themselves and thereby have the potential to greatly reduce the number of fatal crashes involving human error or poor choices. Technologies may enhance mobility for underserved communities and reduce congestion on our crowded highways. These are being developed today by many different innovators and ntsa is maintaining a close dialogue with developers to ensure our safety concerns, including concerns about cybersecurity, as well as the efficacy of these systems, are incorporated into the product process. Policy andas regulations will require updating. Currently, we are working on numerous regulatory initiatives relating to the future governance of ads technologies. In fact, right now, we are working on about 10 separate rulemakings with these advanced technologies. These some of these initiatives seek comment on requirements applied to certain ads equipped vehicles. Other initiatives address Test Procedure challenges that are introduced by some of these ads equipped vehicles. Existing federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, or fmvss, may present unintended and unnecessary future barriers for future ads vehicles without drivers, and we are working on several rule makings to address these issues. Historically, the fmvss have been based on a concept of a human driver operating the vehicle. With the introduction of ads, the driving tasks will increasingly shift from human to the driving systems or Automated Systems themselves. The agency is gathering information to support decisions about the potential adaptation of regulations to address unnecessary barriers to innovative designs while ensuring that these vehicles would have equivalent levels of safety and performance to systems and components covered by our existing Safety Standards. Its an important thing to emphasize. When we adopt new standards, as we evaluate these new technologie, our lodestar is to ensure that the new technologies that are being introduced have at least an equivalent level of safety to existing standards, and we all hope it will actually be significantly improved safety. Nhtsa issued an advanced notice of proposed rule making last year on existing Motor Vehicle, ads regulatory barriers, and we are right now reviewing those comments. Were also working on an nprn, on a rule that would address fmvss requirements in a high level of ads vehicles ensuring occupant protection in vehicles without conventional driver controls such as steering wheels. High level ads vehicles may also convey information to drivers in a novel fashion. The rule making team is currently drafting an anprn to amend the fmvss to address safety messaging including telltales, indicators and warnings in vehicles without conventional controls. Were also undertaking several actions to streamline the existing exemption process from regulatory requirements. By proposing improvements to the current exemption processes, we hope to facilitate testing and enhance safety oversight by allowing a wider variety of entities to request exemptions to operate nonconforming vehicles on public roads for purposes of research and demonstration. One such rule making under way would create a new exemption for domestic manufacturers to operate nonconforming vehicles. Thus helping to level the Playing Field with imports. Finally, our other rule makings in process would identify future Regulatory Frameworks for adsequipped vehicles. Our ads safety principles rule making, which is currently in the draft stage, would discuss creation of a safety framework for objectively and transparently assessing and validating the success of each ads vehicle. Hope to facilitate testing and enhance safety oversight by allowing a wider variety of entities to request exemptions to operate nonconforming vehicles on public roads for purposes of research and were also crafting rule makings that would address specialized ads vehicles, like low speed shuttles, and also, occupantless ads vehicles like delivery vehicles. All new vehicles, including ads equipped vehicles, are subject to nhtsas broad and powerful safety defect authority. That means that defective vehicles and equipment must be recalled and repaired, when the manufacturer or the agency determines that vehicles are, that the vehicles or equipment present an unreasonable risk to safety. The agencys broad defect authority serves an important safety backstop to our standards. So long as a vehicle complies with our safety regulations, then Developers May Move ahead with new designs. But they will still be subject to nhtsas defect authority, if the vehicle or equipment presents an unreasonable risk to safety. As manufacturers develop and test advanced vehicle technologies, nhtsa will continue to engage in an ongoing dialogue with innovators is, to ensure that our safety concerns are incorporated into product development. And we will also remain vigilant to ensure that these Innovative Technologies do not pose an unreasonable risk to safety. As ever, the agency will not hesitate to use its enforcement authorities when it is necessary and appropriate to protect the safety of the traveling public. In closing, innovation is advancing rapidly in the automotive sector. And the development of these technologies promises to save lives and reduce injuries on our nations roads. Nhtsa will continue to engage stakeholders, as we draft Automated Vehicle policies, and regulations, that will continue to position the United States as the worlds leader in Automated Vehicle technology, while at the same time fulfilling nhtsas vital safety mission. Thank you very much. Thank you, james. And thank you to the audience for spending your afternoon with us on this panel. I too am very excited about the innovative activities occurring on my, in my segment. In fact, we are in the Unmanned Aircraft system, the largest and most rapidly growing segment in aviation. Many people liken it to the level of innovation and the level of change that we last saw in the introduction of jets into commercial aircraft, and so its a very exciting time to be alive, to be working on these things. Specifically we are seeing the entire aviation ecosystem filling in. So largely, the small uas, which are most notably in the news today, are filling in that last mile to last five miles. Were also seeing the emergence of urban air mobility, which is really filling in the last 30 to 300 miles, which will then meet commercial aviation and complete the whole aviation supply chain. So to give you roughly an idea of how quickly this segment of aviation is growing, we have about 6,000 commercial aviation aircraft registered today. We have 1. 6 million small ua. S registered, and that registration just began in 2015. So you can see in just a few years, weve greatly exceeded the number of commercial aviation aircraft. Weve also seen a rapid growth in a new form of pilot, and those are our remote pilot or remote pilot operators. These are now roughly 160,000 since we started registering those, as well. So this is a dramatic increase. And people have often ask me, well, why do we think that were seeing such a great change in aviation, that for roughly 100 years stayed very much the same . And i think theres two key come components here. One is these aircraft are much more affordable and we have really democratized the affordability to access aviation, commercial, excuse me, a private aircraft can cost several hundred thousand dollars up to many millions of dollars. The average person can go and buy a drone that has a very autonomous, very capable platform, for roughly the same price that they can take their family to a sporting event. So were seeing that really changed who can have access to aviation. The other thing that changed is that because these aircraft behave so differently, from traditional, particularly winged aviation, we are using parts of the air space that were never really utilized before. Roughly the air space that was used prior to the introduction of uas, was an airport, the approach and departure pads around the airport, and then the upper airspace that was used for transitioning long distances. Were now seeing these aircraft operate 400 feet and below routinely, in areas that manned aviation just really didnt go into, suburban communities, urban areas, and theyve really opened up the air space for use that wasnt really used in the past. So we have this very Thriving Market of commercial, we also have Public Safety, both fire and police are actively using these, as well as other rescue, and forestry, and other areas, and then a very strong recreational community. So all three of these are growing simultaneously. And where are we in terms of operations . I think that we have, through our small uas rule, called part 107, largely met the requirements of those who want to operate these aircraft within visual line of sight, and we see a tremendous number of people safely commercially operating these aircraft for missions like wedding photography, other photography around the house, doing Land Surveying on a small scale, and in and around structures, doing inspections. So those have been, those requirements have largely been satisfied. So whats left to do . The real economic and societal wedding photography, other lock that we are starting to unlock is beyond visual line of sight, and that really brings us to the very Innovative Program that secretary chao and President Trump initiated. The Integration Pilot Program. We, within, we the uas office, within the faa, really are the focal point for aviation innovation, and there are really three main functions we serve as lock that we are starting to a part of that. One, we are the front door, where we provide navigation throughout the bureaucracy that is the faa and help new operators learn how and where to contact us, and how to work within our existing regulatory framework, and then the second piece is we are the incubator. And thats really what the Integration Pilot Program is. A very specific Incubation Program that was designed to integrate aircraft into the air space in very innovative ways, and then also look at the community and societal integration as well. And ill come back to that point, because thats probably one of the Key Takeaways that an aviation policy person might not have originally stumbled upon. So we took, we also took a very different approach to how we started integrating these aircraft. A traditional manned aviation approach would be to see a problem, recognize the problem, and then engage in rule making, and start changing the rules so that you can solve the problem. We reversed that paradigm, and the ipp is really showing tremendous progress, by reversing this paradigm, by starting to approve very simple safe operations first, learning from those operations, and then building on those operations. And one of the things weve had to do is deconstruct our very, our, the word escapes me. Very specific . No, no. The requirements that are put on the vehicle operator, the vehicles themselves, the manuals . Prescriptive is the word i was looking for. A prescriptive rules structure. Specific was close. Specific was close. Thank you, for taking me down that road. But our prescriptive rule, weve had to look at them, and look at what was the real safety intent behind that rule, and then derive from that safety intent the ability to find a safe operation for the drones. Probably our best example of this is the current prescriptive the ability to find a safe rules for commercial aviation, require that the pilot have the manuels for the aircraft on board the aircraft. Now, we could certainly digitize all of the uas manuals, and we can certainly put that digital form of those manuals on the drone while it was flying around, but those manuals would not really be accessible to the pilot when he or she needed them. And thats what we learned from the deconstruction of this rule, was the real safety intent was to have the Information Available to the pilot. So were able to go back and reconstruct that, and say ok, how in the remote pilot situation do we make that available to them . We are in the third of three years for the Integration Pilot Program. We have nine of our ten original partners that are still doing very robust operations. It is progressing faster than i think we even predicted it would. And probably the best example of the pace of change that we are seeing comes from our ups flight forward authorization of their commercial, or on demand air carrier certificate. This time last year, january, last year, they were proposing flights, that could occur. In march, we started operating flights under our small uas rule, and by the end of september, we had figured out how to take that operation and turn it into a commercial air carrier. So for those of you who arent as familiar with aviation and its regulatory processes, a manned aviation air carrier with a known aircraft, typically takes about two years. So in the course of roughly nine to ten months, we started from concept to air carrier. And that really is a result of this very Innovative Program that the department and the office of science and technology have been so supportive of. So we continue to investigate the societal and the economic outcomes of this program. But probably the biggest piece that is coming out of this, and is really the Lesson Learned for future Unmanned Aircraft, urban air mobility, and i think all of these automated technologies, is Community Engagement and community acceptance. We have found that the more work we put into that early on, the quicker we get these safe operations not only up and running but we start seeing the real economic and societal benefits from these. The public has a lot of questions about these technologies. And if you dont engage the public, with a robust program, then they tend to make up their own answers, as to what you are doing or what you are not doing, and how it benefits them, or how it doesnt benefit them. And so i think for the small uas, and ill talk later about urban air mobility, the biggest Lesson Learned out of all of this work has not been the underlying technology, but its really been how do we engage the public and help them embrace these very Innovative Technologies . Weve seen in other countries where they didnt do as good of a job embracing the community, that that community was very quick in shutting down those operations, so thats a Real Advantage that weve seen here. So the ipp, or the integration and pilot program, as i mentioned, will terminate in october this year. There is one aspect of this that we will continue to work with our partners on, and that is unlocking the economic and societal benefits of the beyond vision line of sight through safe operations. And primarily this is ensuring that the aircraft continue to be air worthy, durable and reliable, and then also working to determine, detect and avoid, which in todays manned aviation system, a pilot prays a function called see and avoid, where the pilot is responsible for seeing other aircraft and avoiding them. Well, obviously, these drones do not have a pilot on board. And the Remote Sensing technology in terms of an extension of the human eyeball is really not particularly great at avoiding the other aircraft. And that, those, the technology of detect and avoid, and aircraft, reliability and durability, will be the things that we continue to work on with our partners. But we arent stopping there. You may have heard that we have issued another set of proposed rule making for what i think will probably be the most significant rule in the Drone Community that we will see in the next ten years, and that is Remote Identification. Remote identification is essentially a license tag, like you would have on your car, but an electronic version, and its associated with your drone. This technology is vitally important for ensuring that we can safely evolve the ecosystem around drones. It is also vitally important for our security partners, our defense partners, and local Public Safety officials. One of the great challenges with Drone Operations today is if someone is operating an aircraft outside of the conformance of the rules, it is very difficult to track them down to identify them and to find the operator. And Remote Identification will allow drones to see other drones in the air space, so that they can operate safely among each other, it will also allow Public Safety and defense officials to determine the identification of that drone, and the location of the operator. Now, the personally identifiable information will not be available to the public. You will only, you will have to have actual credentials to be able to get that, so Police Departments and aviation, safety inspectors and such, will have it, but others will not. I strongly encourage you, if youre interested in this area, to please go comment on the rule. On the Public Comment period, it will close on march 2nd, and itis absolutely important that we hear from you, on your ideas, about Remote Identification. And so with that, and hopefully you will comment very quickly, i want to close with some thoughts on the next very, very innovative piece of technology that we see emerging, and thats urban air mobility. As i mentioned, these are aircraft that fill that void from 30 miles to 300 miles, between the small drones and the commercial aircraft we know today. And probably the biggest question i get on this is, is this real . Are they really happening . Yes, this is more than just hype. This is more than just promotional videos. We have at least six aircraft well along in their type certification, which is the first step in introducing the new aircraft into operation. We are beginning to work on integrating them operationally, so the pilot requirements, the Airline Operating requirements, and then were also beginning to work on the air space integration as well. It will drive a far more multimodal approach than the small uas have in the past, and thats why working with the net counsel and others, were very excited in seeing how we bring all these technologies together. It is beth a cargo component and a human transportation component. Particularly for the human transportation component, most of the Business Models rely on taking people from some hub area, in an urban or suburban area, and transporting them across congested surface congestion, to another hub area, where you can then meet up with shortrange surface transportation. And one of the popular Ridesharing Companies is doing some business modeling right now with traditional helicopters, and on their application, you can connect with a ride sharing or even their scooters. So we think thats going to be a very important area over the next few years, and we see that as we solve the problems with small uas, and beyond visual line of site, well be turning more and more of our attention to these urban air mobility. And so to that end, we are continuing and starting to work on Community Engagement. This will be a particularly new challenge for us. Because with small uas, they dont require very large landing areas. They dont require much infrastructure to support them. Theyre largely batterypowered or the larger versions are either traditional fossil fuel or hybrid battery fossil fuel, but these urban air mobility, tend to be electric driven and have tremendous Power Requirements for recharging. There are problems that i should say, there are needs to solve certain problems, associated with getting people to and from these aircraft. The best example is they want to use space on top of existing buildings, as landing areas. And most elevators dont go to the roof. So they will have to redesign elevators to get passengers up to those areas. And to get them up there safely, and without interrupting other activities. So this is a brief overview of all of the very exciting and innovative things that are going on in aviation today. And i think it matches well with what were seeing emerge in the surface transportation areas, and the other areas of research. So again, thank you for your time and attention. And look forward to your questions. Great, and as you pass the clicker over to diana, i would note it is very interesting, work that council can do because these urban air mobility features need to take off and land somewhere, are they transit centers, are they parking decks . Which is the most to be needed to bring into this session and it is something we are actively thinking about because it is fun to think about. Diana . Thank you very much. I know its in the mid afternoon when everyone is having that postlunch dip, but this is a really important topic. And thank you so much for coming and listening. Today, i want to take the opportunity to talk to you about the safety that can come through connected vehicle technology. And Intelligent Transportation systems. I want to make sure that you can keep innovating. As james said, every year, america suffers more than 36,000 fatalities and 2. 7 Million Deaths on the roads. Well, two decades ago, in 1999, the federal communications commission, an independent agency, wisely set aside 75 megahertz of spectrum in the 5. 9 gigahertz band. This is a safety band. Spectrum air waves reserved for Transportation Safety. In anticipation of the future. Those days, in 1999, Transportation Safety was important enough, for the fcc to set aside spectrum air waves clear from any possible interference. Over the past 20 years, our department has been funding research, based on the existence of this band of spectrum. I have heard about much of your research. And i know that many of you are doing fascinating things. This research has helped the automotive industry, and state and local governments, to develop new technologies that rely on the safety band, uncluttered by interfering uses. These new technologies depend on Clear Wireless signals that can help cars avoid accidents in the smallest fraction of a second. Some examples of these technologies, changing red lights to green when an Emergency Vehicle is going through. Having a vehicle stop automatically if there is something ahead out of the line of sight. Having platooning trucks move down a Highway Safety without hitting anybody else. Theres a myriad of these technologies that are going to help safety and Intelligent Transportation systems reducing congestion and lowering emissions. From 2004 to 2012, the institute of electrical and Electronics Engineers worked on standardized Wireless Communications for vehicles. And by 2016, the society of automotive engineers completed standards governing performance requirements and Data Elements for devices that enabled vehicles to communicate with each other, using a technology called dsrc, dedicated short range communications. In 2017, Certified Technology enabled cars to communicate not only with other cars, but also with traffic signals, with cyclist, and with pedestrians. New technologies, including Autonomous Vehicles, will rely on the safety band if it is allow to continue. The new safety ban technologies are now being pilot tested and preparing for wide deployment. Toyota has announced its deploying in japan, volkswagen has announced it is going to deploy in europe. So these new technologies are rolling out in countries around the world. And in the United States. Here, you can see a map of existing deployments and more are coming. I had the pleasure of visiting many University Transportation centers, such as Virginia Tech, which has a whole track area to test Automated Vehicles, ohio state university, and i hope to, this year, to visit texas a m, the Transportation Technology center there. This morning, i met with henry yu, who is standing here, henry, can you please stand, i met with henry yu, who is standing here, who is here in the audience, and who is doing fascinating work at m city. So there is much work in Research Going on around the United States. And we want to keep this as it is. However, a new notice of proposed rule making by the fcc would take 45 megahertz of the spectrum, over half, and give it to unlicensed wifi. The remaining 30 megahertz would be divided into 20 megahertz from cv to x, a new technology, and 10 megahertz for dsrc, the proven technology. Of course the department of transportation is tech neutral. The technology that we see today is going to be different from the technology that we had have five years from now and ten years from now. But we want the technology to continue and continue to develop. While an action such as putting 20 megahertz for cv to x and taking away 45 megahertz for unlicensed wifi, might help people to add ever more internet and other communications services, it would jeopardize our research, and the schedule and the ability to leverage communications to vehicles to improve Traffic Safety, and increase travel efficiency. We cannot be sure that these billions of devices on the unlicensed wifi, wanting to use these air waves, will not interfere with Traffic Safety. And will not delay deployment of vehicle and Safety Systems that interfere, contributing to car accidents. Our Research Shows that unlicensed wifi in the lower 45 megahertz of the band is going to harm reliability in the upper 30 that is left for Traffic Safety. In fact, the 10 megahertz of dsrc that is right next to the 45 that would be used for unlicensed wifi, would be practically unusable. The faa, and jay is here with the faa, would never allow unlicensed devices to operate in faa bands for radar and communications that protect the safety of hundreds of thousands of air travelers at any time. The safety of hundreds of millions of automotive, of automotive passengers, should be no less important. The integrity of the safety band should be preserved. If the safety band remains closed to unlicensed devices, these devices can simply be used in other bands, where Public Safety is at risk. There is plenty of spectrum, as you can see, you can see a tiny slice of the 5. 9 band. And the federal government and taxpayers do not benefit by opening up this tiny slice to unlicensed devices, where unlicensed wifi could go elsewhere. Theres no need, i can see many of you taking a photograph of this, this slide, and many others, are on our web site, at d. O. T. We have a whole web site devoted to the safety band. In the audience, theres michelle janet, michelle, i dont know if you would like to stand up, who would direct you to all of the resources that we have, and many other informative papers on the subject. We admit and acknowledge that unlicensed devices are, and the wifi thats associated with them, are extraordinarily unlicensed devices are, and the valuable to the american consumer. All americans use these unlicensed devices every day, and the demand for free wifi. In fact, the demand for free anything is unlimited. But there are two important differences between unlicensed devices and automotive safety. First, wifi and other unlicensed devices operate in many different bands already, and as i mentioned, they can operate in others. There will be no fewer unlicensed devices or applications if the safety band remains offlimits to unlicensed devices inches contrast, there no other possible dedicated band for Traffic Safety, if the safety band is taken away, and given to or shared with unlicensed devices. The fcc is not going to allocate any more spectrum for Traffic Safety. Second, communications between transportation vehicles and equipment cannot tolerate interference and delays. In the complex fastpaced world of modern traffic, fractions of seconds are the difference between getting safely home for dinner, or the trauma of an devices and automotive safety. Accident. Now, other countries such as china and europe, have set aside their own safety bans in the 5. 9 band. Many of you are working on sbrochlts that will make moving people and freight faster, safer, and cleaner and more efficient. Canada and mexico have set aside 7 a 75 megahertz on the same band. It would be tragic if drivers in mexico were protected but when they drive to the United States, they are no longer protected, because the connectivity didnt work. Similarly, with canada. Also, given that we have a Global Market in automobiles, it would be tragic if we could import cars from germany, japan, elsewhere, and their safety would work in their own countries but their Safety Devices would not work in ours. That is not fair to the American Public. We talk a lot about stakeholders in the past, our main stake holder is the American Public. Well, the original commitment of airways for Transportation Safety was and still is a prudent decision. Preserving this capability is important for the United States to remain the worlds leader in transportation automation. The fscc will soon put its notice of proposed rule making in the federal register. All five commissioners voted in favor of taking away part of the safety ban in december. This notice of proposed rule making will be open for comments for 30 day, and then reply comments for 60 days. This will give the traveling public Emergency Responders and all of you researchers, and us, the department of transportation, the opportunity to comment on the proposal. Well, thank you very much for listening. And now, all of us are available to take your questions. Yes. One thing i will point out is that if you have enjoyed this part of the discussion, on vehicle to everything technology, tomorrow james owens and diana will be on the its America Panel at 9 30 in the fairagat north room in mezzanine three. This is a very Important Corporation that we want to continue. So please, we hope to see you there. I also want to say that the secretary of transportation elaine chao will be in this room, on sense at 12 45 after the chairmans lunch and of course, we always make sure that she has plenty of good interesting things and analyses to work that were excited about so if you want to be here to see those in person, we think that is a great idea. We think you will enjoy it. Were very excited about her comments. And i was going to start with a lighter question, but i think the thing that i would like to touch back on is something that has come up, obviously the department of transportation is investing in connected vehicle deployments. Using technology that exists today. Not only through our build grants, intragran, advanced Traffic Congestion innovation through technological deployment grants but also our connected vehicle pilot program, so not only are we testing and proving out this technology, and getting Realtime Data back from places as farfetched as wyoming, new york and tampa, but we can use this technology, it sounds like a good thing when you talk about signal phase and timing, Controlling Traffic lights and all that, but what weve seen in some of the research that has come to my attention recently is that it can make a big impact for First Responders so i dont know, james, or diana, if you wanted to talk about that at all. I think that is a question for james. Thanks, finch. Thanks, diana. So yes, as many of you know, one of nhtsas big stake holder, after the American People are First Responders. We work very closely with ex ms around the country, and of course we partner with state and local Law Enforcement on many matters, related to highway Traffic Safety. And of course, at the end of the day, ems is a trit cal part of our Highway Safety infrastructure. If you are in a serious crash, times is of the essence, you need to get to medical attention, get to a hospital as quickly as possible, that happens because of ems services. So one of the things weve learned in discussing matters of technology, matters with First Responders, is that there is unfortunately a very high rate of crashes involving Emergency Response vehicles. Probably not surprising, if you think about it, because our Emergency Responders, our First Responders, theyre the ones called upon to drive very fast, to get to an incident, or to get to a hospital, and often, navigating different traffic, different weather, and difficult terrain. So there are roughly 700,000 Emergency Response vehicles in the United States. We estimate that there are about 46,000 crashes involving Emergency Response vehicles every year. So if you think about that, thats about 6 or so, of Emergency Response vehicles are involved in a crash every year. Out of those 46,000 crashes, about 17,000 serious injuries occur, and last year, or i should say 2018, we believe we lost nearly 150 people, as a result of these crashes. So these, this is a serious issue and we believe that technology can be a part of the solution. A technology where an Emergency Responder can, right now, if you think about, Emergency Responders rely on two mode, two methods of alerting drives around them that they are coming. Lights and sirens. Vehicle technology, vehicle connected technology, v to X Communications can provide a third and much broader pattern of alerting drivers and infrastructure that an Emergency Response vehicle will be coming through a location soon. Moreover, we do have unfortunately a number of crashes involving two Emergency Response vehicles that hit each other, often coming into an intersection, responding to the same or sometimes different incidents. Technology like this, on vehicle to Vehicle Communications technology, could help prevent those accidents, those crashes from occurring. We think that this is something that is, that can be worked on today, we know that the Technology Developers are out there, and are eager to work with our First Responders. We know that First Responders are eager and interested in this possibility. Were certainly looking to do what we can to partner with our First Response community, and ensure that theyre as safe as possible, because what theyre doing, is theyre putting their lives on the line, to protect the rest of us. So the least we can do is do what we can to protect them while they do their jobs. So this is something that were excited about. We think that the technology is there, or getting there. We think that the time is right, and we really want to work with our community, both the technology community, and the First Response community, to ensure that this connection can be made, and these technologies can start being deployed. That of course, assumes that there will be sufficient spectrum and other Resources Available for the technology to work properly. So american heroes are getting hurt and killed responding to American People, who are trying to keep them safe and there is something we can do about it. It seems like something we should double down on. Right, it is not just american heroes, it is for example, a car that might be in the path, something might be, talking about accessibility, who might not hear the siren, who is in the way, who might get struck by the fire engine or the am bulance. So it is the American Public as well as the heroes. Absolutely. If i can, i have one more thing which is to note that one of the challenges that our ads developers have is the question, how do ads communicate with First Responders . Thats maybe the toughest question that a lot of our developers get. And a lot of them are developing, you know, complex technologies, to interpret a siren or interpret the lights, and to take action accordingly. But it doesnt take, you know, it doesnt take a lot of thought to think that well, actually, if there is a technology, a Communications Technology that is already working, then that is one possible avenue in which ads technologies could be integrated with the First Response community. And Virginia Tech has even enabled technology that connects a motorcycle with vehicles and with infrastructure, so motorcycles, where, you know, crashes tend to be more common, they would be able, and motorcycles would be able to get a notice in the helmet that if he is trying to change lanes, theres a vehicle there, or theres a stopped vehicle ahead or maybe if he is going too fast. So this is fascinating technology. I saw this Motorcycle Helmet when i visited Virginia Tech. So lets continue talking about safety. But looking at how different modes, and faa and nhtsa in particular can address it and when Congress Gave them power, obviously the idea is these are airplanes theyre up there, someone else that is trained very carefully should be operating the whole thing, we want the federal government to be in charge of everything from that pilot, who can be that pilot, how theyre trained, who can maintain that vehicle, what vehicle can be in there, and what you do this, who can maintain it, everything, congress provided that authority to the faa and the faa has overriding authority on all of that, from the moment a vehicle leaves the ground, to when it leaves our air space. With space launch and reentry. They have all of that control. The regulatory structure reflect that. Nhtsa focuses on vehicle safety. So when Congress Gave nhtsa power, they focused on what authorities they needed and they really focused on new specifications for new vehicles and vehicles are something you can touch and sit in the front yard and you dont want to go to the federal government to try to get them to change the speed limit in your neighborhood. It is fundamentally a local issue. How people move about in the local transportation system. They are fundamentally handled differently. But we see a commonality with prioritizing safety, with faa technologies an drone technologies. Can you tell me a little bit more about how you deal with these authorities and what they mean in terms of the rule makings we have seen coming out from a drone point of view and from advanced traffic points of view . Advanced vehicles points of view. Sure. So ill start. As you pointed out, finch, the federal government has the authority to regulate the air space from the blade of grass all the way up to outer space, within our political boundaries, and also air space delegated to us under the Civil Aviation authority. And the big advantage we have in terms of aviation regulation is that we get to look at the entire ecosystem. And one of the big things we see changing is that, and im sure this is changing as well on surface and probably a very different challenge for you, what was done by an airplane, what was done by a pilot, what was done by an air traffic controller, those boundaries and those allocations with Unmanned Systems are dramatically changing. For example, in the drone world, a pilot is not navigating in that airplane. That aircraft is typically navigating itself. On an autonomous flight. We determine, is that aircraft navigation of sufficient performance to meet the requirements safely of that flight. But now, i no longer have to train that operator, that pilot, in the same level of navigation and skill. I dont have to test them to that. But thats been a challenge for our us, is those changing boundaries and as we move into unmanned traffic management, and move away from Traditional Air traffic control, were going to see those boundaries between what an air trafficker did controller did to provide separation, and prevent conflicts between aircraft, is now largely going to be incorporated in the technology on the aircraft. So we have the advantage of the whole ecosystem, but in our world, because the allocations among the three principles, the aircraft, the operator, and the air traffic control, are all changing, we have to be very mindful, but having that ability to look at the whole ecosystem, allows us to set a target level of safety overall, and then work within those allocations. Thanks. Well, nhtsa, nhtsas environment is very different. But as jay mentioned, i think in some respect, the technology, the Technology Challenges that were receiving are, the Technology Challenges and opportunities that were seeing i think are starting to overlap, in some very interesting respects. I mean to start off with the basics, i believe jay mentioned theres some 60some thousand aircraft in the nation, and 6,000 commercial aircraft. And 1. 6 million drones. And 1. 6 million drones. There are more registered vehicles in the United States than there are licensed drivers. So you know, were talking about 250 million plus vehicles in the United States. At many different ages. Unfortunately, our fleet is the oldest it has ever been. Almost 12 years old is the average vehicle on our roads today. And that creates a very different regulatory challenge. We, the faa, and ive had the opportunity in the past here at d. O. T. , to work closely with jay and others at faa. Faa certainly puts a lot of very good work into evaluating new aircraft designs, from the getgo, and its very hard work, its very time intensive work. But we have about 400 models that are being sold in the United States, every year, and more than 50 new models, that are refreshes or entirely new models being introduced every year. So it is a very different challenge in terms of the quantity, in terms of how the regulations have to work. Traditionally, unlike the faa, nhtsa and the operation of the vehicle, is governed by the state and local governments. And of course, the equipment is what we regulate. But what is starting to change is theknow, the challenge that faa, think, has with drones is beyond visual line of sight, which requires an aircraft to monitor its environments and operate in a safe manner. The surface i think the its safe to say the surface transportation environment is more challenging than the aviation environment. Your speeds are not as high. Your distances are much closer. You have many more objects you can potentially hit. So, thats i know our Innovative Developers are encountering those challenges right now, and that is something that were all going to overcome together. Its going to be a very interesting challenge to see how this comes together, but we rely on, you know, our Safety Standards. We establish standards, typically when we have established standards, these equipment, these standards, are already in the fleet because it takes us a long time. When ntsa establishes a safety standard, we have to make sure that the standard is objective. It means it has to be we have to have a prerepeatable test metric so anybody around the country, around the world, can run our test metric and determine whether they are in compliance with our performance standards. So that takes time. It takes a lot of research. It takes a lot of effort and takes many years to get it right. We cant change our rules over, you know, willynilly overnight, so we take the care to get it right the first time. But we have the comfort in knowing that if something is out there, whether or not it complies with our standards, if it proves in practice to present an unreasonable risk to safety, thats where defect authority will kick in, and we exercise that authority when we have to and when appropriate and necessary. Its a very large part of what nhtsa does. Its a very important part of what nhtsa does because our defect authority plugs into our standards. That is to say our defect authority is what means that we dont have to issue standards prematurely because we can fall back on our defect standards to ensure that that if something is unsafe, we can ensure that its recalled from the market and repaired. And no longer presents an unreasonable risk to the traveling public. And we dont have to wait for something to happen, right . Thats one of the things outlined in av 4. 0, we have our authorities where nhtsa jumps in if it impacts safety but the ftc has their authorities if its miscommunicating what something can do, they could be perceived as trying to encourage more sales. Also the s. E. C. , if its something that impacts stocks, youll see this entire government approach watching these technologies and if we take on this approach with making sure we all understand who can do what, how they should be talking about these technologies, then you have the federal government and the private soektector working together to hold each other accountable for what the technologies can do and cannot do. Thats the ecosystem were trying to cultivate. One of the things i wanted to touch on, we also as we look to update the regulations, we have very prescriptive requirements from the past that are working to update piece by piece and it is very arduous work to make sure we update that, and we also have some of that with nhtsa, Different Levels and extents, but the idea of what you would do if you could start from scratch, whether its safety principles you highlighted that are already on our regulatory agenda or creating new categories for delivery vehicles, for other types of operations, how do you approach that challenge and how do you make sure youre bringing in the research on the front end that can help generate the types of insights that we need to make sure were creating the Performance Measurements and requirements that last . While also allowing for technological change. Absolutely. Well, thats an easy question. So, i mean, the challenge we have, of course, is because our standards have to be objective and repeatable standards, we need to have empirical evidence and that puts our Research Group front and center and our Research Group does a tremendous amount of great work, but the end of the day, what we dont know, we dont know. Right . So for something where were talking about more traditional vehicle equipment issues, such as crash worthiness, those are standards we know how to create right now through hardwon experience. You know, nhtsa was created long after the Auto Industry had been in place and in large part because of some serious safety issues that had arisen in the marketplace. So we know what were looking for when it comes to crash worthiness. When it comes to behavioral issue issues, thats new ground for us and that is something were very carefully researching and were very carefully learning from in a dialogue, learning from developers, to learn what theyre doing, how theyre going about this. Because this is behavior is behavior of a vehicle, that is an operational behavior of a vehicle, is more traditionally something that a state dmv would regulate. Can you do a right on red, drive above 45 miles an hour on this boulevard . And so thats something that now now, you know, its as it comes into the realm of equipment making those decisions, that starts to create an area where we have to do a lot of work and a lot of research to make sure we get it right. We cant get it wrong. So when were working on if if when were working on new areas, green field areas such as vehicle behavior, we step back and we want to make sure that we establish the right principles first. Start at the very basic foundation. What are the kind the basic issues, basic principles of what a vehicle should do in order to be safe. Then we will work from there into more more detailed, more granular level to determine what specific issues if may arise in the future. Right now, our focus has to be on what is it that we would hope that all developers would, bear in mind, the loadstars, to speak, of their development, so we can ensure that those vehicles are behaveing, operating in a way that is consistent with Motor Vehicle safety. Really interesting you say that, james, about the need to have empirical evidence because all the empirical evidence, all the deployments i was showing you on the safety ban, on the map, they are all dsrc, yet the fcc in its discussions in necessary december had 20 megahurts per cd to x which d. O. T. Is in the process of testing but is still an unproved technology. Only ten megahertz to dsrc. Its right to have the empirical evidence to sign up that people are going to be relying on for their safety. I would add while we use slightly different language, we follow roughly very close the same methodologies. So we, too, start with the fundamental principles of safety. There are two risks or hazards that we look to mitigate in all cases. Each one of our safety cases comes down to these two things. One of these two things or sometimes both. That is, people and property on the ground and protecting that. Of course, no one wants something falling out of the sky in any reason. And second, protecting air what we call the air risk or two aircraft colliding together. All of our safety cases, and i think youre right, its far more complex on the ground because there are far more opportunities for different interactions. All of our safety cases boil down to, in some form, those two principles. And then we go back and say, how are we mitigating it . We do have the advantage of being able to control behavior and have for years. We call it operations. You call it behavior. Its the same exact thing. How will this vehicle be operated . How do you know its safe . And i think the role for us in the Research Area in these green fields, the challenge in these very innovative fields is that green field i dont know what i dont know challenge. You almost need a few operations to sort of prime the research pump to tell you, here are some fundamental things that are different about this vehicle versus other vehicles weve seen in the past. Or fundamentally this is a different operation which then helps us identify from that, we can start identifying what is the gap between the performance standards, the scientific body of knowledge we have against those standards, the empirical standards, and the need to operate this vehicle safely . And to be able to test that someone can operate it safely. Quhooil while you call it the defect, everyone who runs an airline, has the regulatory responsibility to trk thatack that data, provide it back to us. When there are incidents, vents, of course, of a certain magnitude it goes to the ntsb. We have routine Data Collection own data gathering we use to continuously improve operational safety. So very different words but the exact same principles. I think were at a little bit of an addvantage because weve had this comprehensive framework for at least 70 years. I know the faa, you have a closecall program. Yep. The bureau of transportation statistics, we have a closecall program where people can anonymously report problems so that we can see what problems are inherent in what different areas and do something to solve them. We have something for the washington metropolitan transit authority. We have another program for pipeline safety. I think were all interested in better ways to improve date to for safety throughout. Stay tuned. More to discuss there for sure. We should have gotten a number of questions by cards. If we can bring them up, if you have final ones, we have little bit of time left but the question ill ask before we get this is dianas. Ostr helps manage over a billion dollars in research, this is a research crowd, how do you manage that type those types of investments ensuring we get the federal role right using the utcs and how does that plug into something any of these gentlemen can use in an actual rulemaking . The 1. 1 billion is the research in the individual modes and the secretary has a responsibility to go through all the research and she has assigned me that task and make sure it does not duplicate and it is not and its worthwhile research. And the secretary always says personnel is policy. I have a staffer called aaron wolf whos putting in place Performance Management software to make it easier to track all these digitfferent projects of the Research Done in the modes then theres the emergency transportation center. Their research which is about 75 million a year and we have grants to look at specific topics such as congestion management or infrastructure, those are the two latest grants for utcs that we just gave out this past year. The university of south florida is setting up a center which they call nicer, National Institute for congestion research. And Washington State university is looking for ways to maintain deteriorating infrastructure. These are two very, very important projects. Were very, very happy that congress has allocated us for 5 million for new information University Transportation we will put out requests for proposals in a variety of subjects this year to get more proposals to have more utcs. We are grateful to congress for giving us that opportunity. If you questions here and we only have 13 minutes so we will be available to have these conversations afterwards. Will be whattion does 20 20 look like for your office . This first when i have is safety focused. We have voluntary Safety Standards, not mandatory. How does it insure safety in Autonomous Vehicles . Volunteer Safety Standards it is not a Safety Management system such as what the faa uses in a number of circumstances. Opportunity for the developer to articulate their safety case. I think that is what we encounter when we are behind the scenes discussions with innovators is how they are articulating the safety case and how they make it into their Product Design cycle. Voluntary Safety Assessment is something thats an opportunity for the developers to publicize the efforts they are taking to promote safety and increase transparency with the traveling public so that we can all observe what they are saying they are doing and that helps create a marketplace of ideas among developers about best practices and what more they can do. Be a is more for us to convenient authority. We encourage developers to publish them and engage us in the public on the efforts they are taking to ensure that the technologies they are designing and testing are going to be safety positive. Safe asl be just as vehicles that exist, hopefully and hopefully safer than that. Rulemakings, we are paying close attention to ensure that our regulations being updated ensure at least the level of safety we have today and improvements which is in toe but we are using this share information among each other and Industry Partners but we are trying to encourage and enable the voluntary gathering of these Industry Partners with safety coalitions on the Standard Development organizations. And exciting standards being developed today based on the past. Its very important to have transparency so that consumers know what they are buying like when they buy a car, they know they are paying a certain amount more and they get an automatic brake system or a backup camera so there are different gradations of safety and they can spend money on these different technologies. Bringing all this together, i think we are seeing a rich outcome of many industry artan is rushing to prove safety and rushing to figure out better ways to do it and to set standards for it. Think ofle, did you this . How did you resolve it . These are routine checks that the industry can develop and we work with them so we have a hollow stick approach to safety a holistic approach to safety. We want the best technology so that the world will gravitate around our approach safety which has been our message all along. The second question is for you talking about the exemption process described by federal statutes. If you look to change that policy, do you need to go through congress . Vehicle way automatic manufacturers are using that technology today. Provides uste latitude and we will exercise that latitude in a way we believe maximizes safety and accommodates appropriate innovation. Instance, there is a cap of 2500 vehicles that can be exempted and thats something we cannot change as a regulatory matter. Thats something for congress to decide. On the other hand, we can streamline the process. I think this administration is interested in streamlining the processes and focus on the things that matter and reduce the unnecessary paperwork and time delay. Lets get to the substance as quickly as we can. For us, the exemptions process is primarily about safety equivalency, how do we determine whether the proposed new design meetvehicle which does not our Safety Standards which we established over the years, how do we determine that has at least an equivalent level of safety . Area where the two modes are overlapping in terms of the opportunities and challenges that innovation present. Back at what is the intent, the safety intent of the standard . Level, how isal the safety case being resolved in the proposed petition for an exemption . Its something that takes time. Our first view and we are learning our process. Anything, over time, the learning curve will probably move faster but right now, we want to exercise appropriate care and caution to ensure that and uppprove a vehicle to 2500 vehicles, if they can enter the stream of commerce. We want to make sure that consumers and other entities where we get into one of these vehicles, we want to make sure that you are just as safe in that vehicle as if you or i were in any other vehicle. The benefit challenge right now is that our focus on the Research Side is really on the fundamentals what is the being resolved in the standard and how are we resolving that in this petition . My last question i will highlight a point that not only are we talking to congress and testify before congress but when we talk about the bill that was passed by the house on the one being considered by the Senate Commerce committee, we are paying attention to what they are looking for and what their understanding of their own authorities are. The former administrator is over at the Commerce Committee today so we are working closely with our partners in congress to make sure we are all thinking the same way. Thats something i feel comfortable with. Your final question what does your 2020 look like . I will start. Busy and ims very very grateful for that. It looks like we are closing out our Integration Pilot Program and finishing what we started there. Preparing for one of the next set of challenges in terms sightond visual line of and getting operations up and running. I would say the third component is preparing for the integration of urban air mobility. Our 2020 very exciting. I didnt talk about this before but we are putting in place a backup system for satellite based gps. The satellite gets knocked out by an electromagnetic storm or military action in them then the Navigation System on your car will continue working. We put out a request for proposal and we got 20 different technologies and we are testing at our center on cape cod and by may, we will have the results of these tests. We will decide what is the best technology. The process will be finished by august and we Hope Congress will fund what ever is picked. This is the most important thing we are doing in the office of research and technology. It has Just National security implications. The second important question is will we be able to protect the 5. 9 band for Traffic Safety. Be openent period will and we hope, in the end, the entire 75 megahertz will be kept for Traffic Safety so that the traveling public can be safe and we will have more Intelligent Transportation systems and lower congestion and lower emissions. We are also excited about our new center for highly Automated Systems excellence. Its a new center for excellence thats being run by the office of research and technology. It will be a resource to all the different modes. Its for automation safety. We are very much looking forward to setting it up and working with our team in boston which has the highest level of Transportation Research in the country. Those of the three things on our list and i didnt even repeat what i said before about the new University Transportation centers that we are enthusiastic about. Its hard to follow that one. This is an exciting year and i think there are many opportunities this year. On the innovation space, weve 10 rulemakings going on now. I hope we will have published by this time next year, i hope we will have published several npr ms and maybe a final rule or two. Something ihis, havent talked about much today is incap. We announced a few months ago that we are taking a fresh look at this and we believe it is a tremendous opportunity to advance safety in ways that are not regulatory. It taps into Market Forces which are way more powerful than any regulation. Consumers value safety, automakers know consumers value safety, when the Safety Standards, the five safety ratings, when those are updated, automakers will change their manufacturing process. That will lead to safer vehicles, more crashworthiness, more advanced Safety Technology will be incorporated. Way toly, we will find a act best we can and future proof it so we dont have to reset the grades every two years. The a difficult process and team showed me the roadmap to completing this and i cant imagine how many publications are involved. Its an arduous process but its deliberative and exciting. Our team is really excited and its one of the few things that the active administrator gets tooems, and the Safety Advocates call and say they are excited about it so its nice to bring everyone in on it. s 50th anniversary this year. Weike to tell my team that have a long way to go, over 36,000 for tallies fatalities is unacceptable. Whenook back 50 years ago we were first formed coming out of federal highways and they were more than 50,000 fatalities on the roads. At that time, more americans were being killed on the roads then were killed in vietnam. Abouttality rate today is one quarter of what it was 50 years ago. Correctly,hat math thats well over 100,000 fatalities we would be experiencing every year if we still had that same rate. True that more americans are being killed on the road than work killed in vietnam . Its still falling behind but in perspective, america was a smaller country than it was 50 years ago. You want to step back and remind yourself of everything weve done. Its state Highway Safety departments, our First Responder developerss the because new cars are safer, its the consumer advocates like m. A make Impaired Driving socially unacceptable. It was pretty common 50 years ago for people to drive under the influence and it wasnt taken seriously and now its taken more seriously and we have brought the numbers down. We have a long way to go and we have come a long way as well. Only some of error technologies is coming up but we are also excited about things like the dads program which can detect alcohol on a drivers breath. 10 years from now, im convinced that we will look back and say we effectively have put driving under the influence to an end. Of technology is tremendous but there is still a lot of research and work to do on that but we are getting closer. Program closely on that and thats an opportunity to save 10,000 lives per year. Its an exciting year at nitsa and we will do some events and plug into different communities and remind everybody not just about safety but all the great things we have accomplished as a nation over the last 50 years on our roadways. I am excited about the work we will be doing together. The efforts the council is taking as we approach new Transportation Technology and taking the lessons we learn and shaping the future and the comprehensive plan where we tied together the Research Policy and rulemaking initiatives. The thing i am most excited about is in this room on wednesday at 12 45 p. M. After the chairmans lunch, secretary elaine chao will be speaking and providing a great number of discussions and talking points and we hope to see you all there. Please join me in thanking my fellow analysts and thank you all for being here. [applause] [video clip] [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2020] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] live tuesday on the cspan networks, the u. S. Has returns for general speeches at 10 00 a. M. Eastern and at noon, members take up legislative business, focused on protections for older workers. On cspan two, the Senate Returns for work on peter gaynors nomination to be the next fema administrator. On cspan3 at 10 a. M. , the House Foreign Affairs committee looks at the situation in iran and the actions by the administration. And it 2 00 p. M. , the House Homeland Security subcommittee examines