This is just over two hours. Good morning. Before we begin, i want to express our support for and thoughts and prayers for all the victims of the recent hushrricas and most recently in florida and our colleague in the Ranking Member on this committee, senator nelson. He and senator rubio are there today as they should be, and looking out for the needs of their constituents and so again, we certainly want to express our support, prayers for them and for the people of florida as they deal with a horrific storm and its aftermath. This committee has been working for some time in a bipartisan fashion to address the advancement of Autonomous Vehicles. And i especially want to thank senator peters for partnering with me in this effort. I also appreciate the contributions of Ranking Member nelson who as i said, is unable to join us today. We put a lot of work into this effort to kate and i look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues to introduce and pass bipartisan legislation. Given this committees broad jurisdiction over transportation interstate commerce and Vehicle Safety we are well positioned to oversee and address the emergence of this transformative technology. Beginning last congress weve held two hearings and hosted a demonstration of this technology for committee members. Todays hearing will take a closer look at the promise and implications of the technology for trucks and larger vehicles. Automated Vehicle Technology holtds great promise to transform transportation in this country, spanning mobility, reducing traffic con jess chuge increasing productivity. But the most exciting aspect of this advancement is the potential to save thousands of lives every year on our nations highways. In 2015 more than 35,000 people died in major vehicle crashes in the United States. With more than 90 of those deaths attributable to human error, Automated Vehicles have the potential to reduce these tragic numbers dramatically. Too many lives are lost on our roads and i look forward to hearing from miss hertzman about how Automated Vehicles including trucks can help reduce this number. Trucks share our roads, deliver our goods and keep our economy moving, including trucks in the conversation about Automated Vehicles is important. It also puts our economy on a level Playing Field as other countries around the world deploy automated freight trucks. In 2015 trucks traveled over 280 billion miles to carry over 70 of the goods by tonnage often our roadways. 2017 Energy Information study projected that fuel savings could be yielded and improve our competitiveness and support job growth. I am glad that mr. Spear has joined us today to speak to the impacts of trucking on our economy and the role of automated trucks in the future of transportation innovation. Testing and development is already ongoing as companies in the u. S. Have increasingly explored the potential benefit of automated trucks. Companies like hubert, tesla, google and bart, starski and others have invested in automated truck technology. Truck manufacturers actively pursuing Automated Technology in trucks. Colonel Scott Hernandez, chief of the Colorado State patrol who joins us today, has seen this Technology First hand. Last year he participated in ubers truck startup which drove 120 miles. Strong federal leadership will be necessary to maintain our position as Global Leader and ensure that these vehicles are tested and deployed safely. Just yesterday secretary ciao announced policy guidance on Automated Vehicles. Im pleased to see action from the administration on this technology. Dots new guidance takes the same position regarding the inclusion of all Motor Vehicles, both cars and trucks from light to heavy duty under the same Regulatory Framework. Throw the approach differs, states that passed legislation, cover all Motor Vehicles, cars and trucks and recognize a need to address automated Motor Vehicles without leaving out certain vehicle classes. Of course its important to consider all impacts of this new technology. Its crucial that we hear about the potential impact on jobs and engage in a cleareyed discussion about how to best prepare for the future so im glad that mr. Hall is able to join us today. Over 3 million commercial drivers in the u. S. And they are the back bone of the economy. Technological advancements have the potential to affect them in very different ways including in positive ways. Technology should make a drivers life easier and safer and improve the rest of our Transportation System and those who use it every day. Automation will bring benefits and challenges but theyre not entirely new challenges. As former president johnson said during his term, and i quote, automation is not our enemy. Automation can be the ally of our prosperity if we will just look ahead, if we will understand what is to come and if we will set our course wisely after proper planning for the future. End quote. Im glad were continuing that discussion today. I look forward to hearing from all of our witnesses as we move forward with legislation to address Automated Vehicles and i want to turn to senator peters for his opening statement. Thank you, mr. Chairman, and thank you for calling this very important hearing. As the chairman mentioned, im in this seat today because senator nelson is back home in his great state of florida helping to begin the very long recovery effort after the devastating Hurricane Irma and certainly our thoughts and prayers are with senator nelson as well as with all of the people of the state of florida. As the chairman mentioned, last friday he and i released a discussion draft of our selfdriving car legislation which is the result of months of collaborative effort, countless meetings with stakeholders across the spectrum of effort and further bipartisan work from senator nelson. I want to thank chairman thune and his staff for the many long hours and effort that have gone into this bipartisan draft. This legislation will provide the first ever changes in federal law targeted at ushering in a new era of mobility and transportation innovation. The bill will facilitate the Safe Development and adoption of selfdriving cars, reduce existing regulatory barriers and establish a new Regulatory Framework to support this innovation Going Forward. Importantly, it will also ensure that the United States leads the International Race to deploy these new technologies. We must develop and build them here in our country, creating a new 21st septembcentury manufac jobs. For the remainder of this month we will work diligently to resolve and finalize the outstanding issues in this draft legislation, including the topic of todays hearing. Whether highly automated trucks and buses should be part of this particular legislation or addressed in some future piece of legislation. I will note that while gathering feedback on chairman thunes and my draft legislation, many stakeholders were clear that the prospect of selfdriving trucks raises a very different set of issues from selfdriving cars. Ultimately those same stakeholders expressed serious concerns with including selfdriving trucks in this bill without a much more robust discussion and evaluation of their impact by industry, act dame ya and government. I will also note that our draft legislation was informed by two Commerce Committee hearings in march of 2016 and june of 2017 and two iterations of knits sas federal vehicle policy, all of which were focused on highly automated, lightweight Passenger Cars, not trucks. Finally, i will note that the house recently passed its selfdriving vehicle legislation anonymously without the inclusion of selfdriving trucks weighing over 10,001 pounds. It is indispute anchor thable weighing over 10,001 pounds. It is indispute anchor thab tha Trucking Industry is important to our economy and day to day Consumer Needs delivering more than 10 billion tons of freight per year and employing more than 3 million americans as Truck Drivers. The same can be said of the bus industry which provides important Transportation Options for Many Americans and creates thousands of jobs. Major changes to these industries brought on by high levels of automation will have major impact on jobs, transportation, and the economy, not to mention roadway safety. And we need to make sure that when we do establish a Regulatory Framework for selfdriving trucks, we get it right, after having considered all of the implications. For example, we need to be able to answer some fundamental questions. For example, what is the Trucking Industrys timeline for deployment of highly automated trucks. Will the industry deploy levels four or five automated trucks or will it stick to lower levels of automation. What specific federal motor Vehicle Safety standards will highly automated trucks need exemptions from. Do the unique characteristics of the Trucking Industry require additional safeguards for highly automated trucks, particularly for safety and Cyber Security issues. How will changes to the Vehicle Safety standards impact operations and enforcement. And should we be considering those impacts now. What are the job impacts of highly automated trucks and what are the industrys plans for retaining or reassigning the drivers who are in danger of losing their jobs. But in our discussions to date we have not gotten as clear of an understanding on issues related to selfdriving trucks as we have during our countless discussions on selfdriving cars. As a result, i am of the mind that highly automated trucks are not ripe for inclusion in this bill. Before i close, i want to be clear that improving safety on our highways is critically important to me. It is one of the reasons why advancing selfdriving car legislation is so important to me as well. But i also recognize that in the long term selfdriving trucks and buses are also intended to improve safety on our highways. This is certainly clear, but i question assertions that excluding selfdriving cars trucks, excuse me, i question that assertions that excluding selfdriving trucks from this particular bill will result in less safe roads and that they dont merit considerations Going Forward. We cannot allow such premature conclusions to stand in this committees way of talking specifics and getting the answers we need to have a more complete understanding of the safety, workforce and policy implications of highly automated trucks. Again, i want to thank all of our witnesses for being here today and for helping start this very important conversation, and i look forward to the testimony. Thank you, senator peters. Well move now to our panel and we want to thank you all for being here and welcome you and look forward, obviously, to hearing from you. We would ask if you can to confine your oral remarks as close to five minutes as possible. Your entire statement will be included as part of the record, but it will maximize the opportunity for members of the committee to ask questions. Well start on my left and your right with colonel Scott Hernandez, chief of Colorado State patrol from lakewood, colorado. Well move then to mr. Troy clark, chief executive officer of naff astar. Debra hertzman, the president of the National Safety council, and mr. Ken hall who is the general secretary treasurer of the International Brotherhood of teamsters. Colonel hernandez if you would proceed. Absolutely. Thank you for holding this important hearing and for inviting me here today to discuss the role Automated Vehicles will play in the future and how they may improve safety on our nations highways. My name is Scott Hernandez and im the colonel of the Colorado State patrol and im honored to lead 1200 members whose primary goal is to save lives on our highways. This year 410 people have been killed on colorado roadways, a staggering number. We are committed to reducing the number of People Killed eventually to zero. The Enforcement Community is excited about the potential improvements to roadway safety that are possible with the deployment of Autonomous Vehicles. Our commitment is to reduce crashes, injuries and fatalities op our nations highways, and we know Automated Technology has already saved lives through the elimination of human error such as distracted driving and many other unsafe driving habits. I am also a member of the commercial Vehicle Safety alliance. Cvsa which every state is a member works to improve commercial motor Vehicle Safety and uniformity by bringing truck and bus regulatory safety and enforcement agencies together with industry representatives to solve highway Transportation Safety problems. Recognizing the tremendous potential benefits cvsa has been a supporter of regulation and policies that encourage the deployment of Safety Technologies to improve safety either through preventing crashes or mitigating the severity of crashes. Autonomous vehicles are the natural next progression in Vehicle Safety technology and Enforcement Community stands ready to assist in making sure that these technologies are deployed as seamlessly and as effectively as possible. In the late summer of 2016, auto approached the state of colorado expressing interest in conducting an intra state delivery in an Autonomous Vehicle with consideration to the fact that there are no laws or regulations prohibiting Autonomous Vehicles to include this scenario in colorado, we chose to partner with auto to ensure safety remained paramount. We also understood the potential for government and enforcement to learn from the process in order to participate in reasonable regulations in the future. During the Early Morning hours of october 20th, 2016, an autonomous commercial vehicle delivered a product traveling 120 miles from ft. Collins, colorado to Colorado Springs in a level four autonomous demonstration. Soon after entering southbound i25 from the ft. Collins port of entry, the driver placed the vehicle in autonomous mode and retreated to the space behind and between the driver passenger seat. The commercial vehicle traveled southbound on i25 for over 120 miles until the driver took over the controls and exited the interstate towards the terminal. The demonstration highlighted the future possibilities and use of autonomous commercial vehicles. The Colorado State patrol and Colorado Department of transportation took extensive measures to reduce the risk associated with this demonstration. We used knits sas federal Autonomous Vehicle policy and californias Autonomous Vehicle laws and rules as guidance. Preevent testing was monitored for consistency and achievement through specifically safety performance gates ranging from offroad testing to extensive onroad testing. The truck was inspected and seemed to be without a violation by certified safety inspectors and the company underwent a safety audit to ensure it had an properly level of Safety Management practices in place to safely operate in commerce. The state patrol and department of transportation received detailed weekly briefings on performance through required safety and testing protocols including testing of scenario plans for risk and fallback. In an effort to ensure the demonstration was complete in a safe manner for all involved, the state patrol escorted the Autonomous Vehicle in a similar fashion as a motorcade or rolling event. While we will still need to work toward total solutions, the Colorado State patrol made progress towards understanding the perspective of other governmental agencies, understanding Autonomous Vehicle crash investigations, understanding why Cyber Security will be essential as this technology prosgresses, how the vehicles work and how to begin the process of standardized inspection procedures, understanding the development of a unique Regulatory Framework and how to better partner with all stakeholders. This demonstration illustrated the probability that autonomous commercial Motor Vehicles when operated during the right location, time and situation could reduce crash risk and Traffic Congestion. Additionally, the demonstration has provided Important Information and experience to the Colorado State patrol and our partners responsible for establishing the necessary legal and Regulatory Framework for the testing and implementation of Autonomous Vehicle technologies. Clearly, technological advances in the past have saved lives and clearly technology will continue to save lives in the future. Our experience in colorado makes it clear that its time to begin planning in ernest for the deployment of semi and fully automated cmbs. As the Committee Moves forward with legislation setting the National Framework to guide the deployment of Autonomous Vehicles, we believe that consideration must be given to cmb industry. We all have many questions that need to be addressed as we work toward deployment of these technologies. Many questions need to be answered before Autonomous Vehicles can be allowed to enter the driving population. I want to stress, that is the purpose of these questions, is not that that the purpose of these questions is not to slow innovation or create roadblocks to the technology. The Enforcement Community recognizes the safety benefits and welcome the change any changes that improves roadway safety. However, we must ensure that inspectors, investigators and industry understand the role of this technology and how it will impact cmb enforcement programs. We strongly encourage you to consider all facets of this issue, including what to do once the vehicles are on the roads. Doing so will help avoid uncertainty for the motor carrier industry and Enforcement Community. I appreciate this opportunity to participate in this timely discussion on the future of automated commercial vehicles. Thank you very much. Thank you, colonel hernandez. Mr. Clark. Good morning, chairman thune, senator peters. There we go. Good morning members of the committee. I am honored to be here this morning to discuss an important topic in our industry, Autonomous Technology applications in commercial trucks. I am troy clark and i serve as the chairman, president and chief executive officer of naff star incorporated, manufacturer of trucks, school buses, diesel engines and military vehicles. Were headquartered in lyle, illinois, just outside of chicago and has over 12,000 employees worldwide. If i may, id first like to provide a quick overview of our industry. There are four major commercial truck manufacturers in our country today. Ours is a small highly Competitive Industry which expects to produce 325,000 vehicles this year, a small fraction compared to the Passenger Car and light truck market. Our customers range from large fleets like j. B. Hunt and penske with thousands of vehicles to independent drivers operating only one truck. We build trucks and buses via mass customization. Each one taylored to meet the specific needs of a customer. Reliability and upfront costs all impact purchase decisions. A new truck ranges in price from 60,000 to 150,000. In other words, they represent major capital investments, and they only generate revenue for our customers when theyre up and running. Given all of this, our customers invest significantly in the latest Safety Technology to protect their valuable capital ass asset, as well as their most important human capital, the driver. This explains why Market Penetration rates for technology is like electronic stability control, radar following, cruise control, cameras for object detection, lane Departure Warning systems and collision systems have been increasing every year. We call this advanced Driver Assistant systems and they offer Quantum Leaps of safety, productivity and environmental benefits. Many of them also serve as the Building Blocks to greater automation. Naff star sees Autonomous Technology as an extension of safety Technology Already in place and we believe that these greater levels of selfdriving technology will help reduce human error which accounts for approximately 94 of all Motor Vehicle accidents. Before we arrive at the future, however, our customers tell me that they have much more immediate needs. They already have driverless trucks, but thats because they have trouble recruiting and retaining drivers. As truck makers, we dont hire trained drivers. Our customers do. As we continue to develop the technologies that could lead to Autonomous Vehicles, we will make much of that available to provide todays drivers with greater ease of use, comfort, safety, productivity and efficiency, factors that i believe will attract more people to this important and noble profession. Personally, i believe drivers will become more like Airline Pilots, even more highly trained and skilled than they are today. They will be employed to manage multiple vehicle assets for optimized safety and efficiency. For example, an Autonomous Vehicle may be deployed on the highway while the driver is managing controls and ensuring the safe and secure operation of the trucks under their care. Autonomous technology is not being created in a vacuum. Our industry is developing vehicle to vehicle or v to v systems to allow cars and trucks to talk to one another. As federal regulations are being drafted and implemented, we want to ensure that passenger and commercial vehicles are following similar safety and Design Standards for optimal compatibility on the highway. Otherwise, Passenger Cars equipped with v to vtech nolg may not be able to communicate effectively with large commercial vehicles and could create blind spots in the Transportation Network that could create inadvertent hazards. Ours is an industry of business to business transactions, development and validation cycles are long and penetration and adoption rates take more time than in the Light Vehicle industry. When we test on the road we have to match the conditions our customers face, so we test trucks in many different states and climates. Trucks cross multiple state lines daily and sometimes traverse the same state multiple times in one day. Its important for our industry to participate in the creation under the advanced driving technologies now. Providing clarity on the legislative and regulatory front will allow us truck manufacturers to Design Systems that meet the future needs of our customers while minimally disrupting the industry. Advanced driving and autonomous technologies will come to our industry. Large scale displacement of drivers is not likely to happen, especially in the short and median term. We believe these technologies will improve safety, productivity and lower costs as well as lead to more efficient use of the existing infrastructure. In the commercial vehicle industry, we have proven that regulations and technology can Work Together to advance the interests of all stakeholders. The time for these discussions is now and i applaud the committee on holding this hearing so we can begin the dialogue on this issue. I welcome any questions at the right time. Thank you, mr. Clark. Ms. Hertzman. Welcome back to this committee. Thank you. Thank you, chairman thune, Ranking Member peters and members of the committee. As president and ceo of the National Safety council i drive every day to realize our mission of eliminating preventible deaths, and we believe that all vehicle crash fatalities are preventable. Yet today over 100 people die on our roadways every day in our vehicles and in crashes involving our vehicles, all vehicles. We can help reduce these statistics with technology. In 2004 i had the privilege to serve as a member and then chairman of the national Transportation Safety board. During my ten years there, i saw too many commercial Motor Vehicle crashes that could have been prevented, and they could have been prevented by advanced technology. The ntsb called on putting technology in commercial vehicles back in 1995 and its an issue on their most wanted list today. Today weve certainly gone beyond the level two technology that they had hoped for and envisioned back in 1995 and are talking about fully Automated Vehicles. I know that you all have read all of our testimony. Theres a lot of facts and figures in my long written testimony so id like to actually take my time with you this morning to share a personal story. Last year i came home from a trip and my 10yearold son met me at the door and he said, mommy, did you see your car . Thats not a good thing when you walk in the door from a trip. I said what happened to my car . And he took me out in the garage and he showed me. This picture up here on the screen is my car. And yes, its ironic, the license plate says be safer on it. My husband was coming home to our house on a lower speed roadway and he was rearended by another vehicle as he slowed to allow an Emergency Vehicle to turn into the firehouse in front of him. Being a former investigator, my first questions to my husband were, what happened, what was going on, what was the situation, what were the circumstances, what was the driver doing. Unfortunately, he didnt have a lot of good answers for me. He told me the gentleman was a little bit older and that there was a dog in the car. For the next couple of days i spent kind of my time thinking what happened, how did this happen, could it have been prevented, did it involve distracti distraction, did it involve fatigue, could it have been prevented. About three weeks later i came home and my husband was in a pretty somber mood and he told me he had received a call from the insurance adjuster who was managing our claim. And the insurance adjuster had just called the gentleman who was the driver of the jeep liberty who had hit our car. Mr. Norton had called his house and his son answered the phone and when he asked to speak to mr. Norton his son said that he had been killed in a crash. The insurance adjuster said i thought there were no injuries in the crash, and he said my dad was killed on friday. And because we knew the information about the driver, we went to google like many of us do when were trying to find something out. We found that mr. Norton had been in an intersection crash and his jeep liberty just shortly before and this picture up on the screen was the picture that was in the newspaper. Again, the same questions started to run through my head, what happened, how did this happen, who was at fault, could this have been prevented, did it have something to do with what happened three weeks before. As a safety professional who has spent decades working on how to prevent transportation events and incidents, i realized that while its important for us to understand why something happened, whats most important is to understand how we can prevent these things from occurring again. We have the ability to prevent these fatalities that occur on our roads every day. 100 people every day. Mr. Norton was a father, a member of a community, probably a church community. He had an extended network. That happens 100 times every day, and we can do more. We can do better. We can address this issue and we can save lives. If we are going to get to zero, we have to do it by looking at all of the fatalities and all of the things that we can do to prevent them. This conversation here today begins that discussion. Thank you. Thank you, ms. Hersman. Mr. Spear. Thank you, chairman thune, senator peters, members of the committee for the opportunity to testify today. Debbies testimony really captures the importance of this issue well. Shes a great contribution to the safety story. The American TruckingAssociations Federation has more than 30,000 Member Companies spanning all parts of the Trucking Industry from every size, type and class of motor carrier operation to truck makers, tech companies, as well as insurers. That Diverse Membership is important for discussions like this one where the Trucking Industrys key role in our economy neemeets rapidly develog technology. There are more than 7 Million People maemployed in the trucki industry, including 3. 5 million Truck Drivers. 1 in 16 jobs in the u. S. Are trucking related, where Truck Driving jobs are the top job in 29 states. Truck drivers who ata is celebrated this week as part of National Truck driver appreciation week moved more than 70 of our nations freight tonnage. They help deliver products to communities in every corner of the country every day. Stores, factories, schools, hospitals, and as youre seeing today, theyre on the front lines of disaster response, delivering supplies to help people in texas and florida live and rebuild after two historic storms. Those same drivers, we believe, will be a part of our industry for the long haul. While some people use the terms autonomous and driverless interchangeabl interchangeable, we believe theyll still have an Important Role for drivers. Just as pilots play a key role in our Airline Industry, Truck Drivers will do the same on the ground by leveraging the benefits of Automated Technology while navigating the city scapes and handling the customer pickups and deliveries. The Trucking Industry spends over 9 billion annually on safety including technology enhancements. To help ensure that drivers and passengers of all vehicles make it safely to their destination. The technology were discussing today is the next step in the evolution of the types of Safety Technology the Trucking Industry is already investing in. This technology is becoming more robust in both commercial and Passenger Vehicles. To fully maximize the safety of other benefits of automated driving technology, it makes sense to provide protection and incentives for innovation in commercial vehicles, not just Passenger Vehicles. This includes federal regulations to make sure that they do not im procepede inters commerce so that new technology can be developed and tested both in commercial and noncommercial vehicles. We are at a critical moment in the development of Autonomous Technology. There are many questions to be answered, including those about Cyber Security, about the impact on trucking operations and how vehicles will interact with one another as well as infrastructure. What is clear is that those questions should be answered for commercial and Passenger Vehicles at the same time. As you draft legislation intended to address many of these questions, id respectfully ask that the committee consider the following points. First, ensure that the federal government has the Sole Authority to regulate automated Vehicle Technology. As an industry that routinely crosses state lines, the rules of the road must be the same across the country in order to maintain a free flow of goods. Our industry cannot be subject to a patch work of conflicting state rules. We service the entire country and the Trucking Industry needs uniform rules to effectively do that. Second, we believe federal agencies and state governments must commit to supporting innovation for both commercial and Passenger Vehicles using existing regulatory exemptions to allow manufacturers and Technology Companies to test and develop new systems. Third, federal agencies must coordinate their own missions with respect to Automated Vehicles. We believe the benefits of Automated Vehicles would be greatly enhanced, for instance, by Vehicle Connectivity using the 5. 9 gig ahurts safety spectrum. The use of this Communications Channel for vehicle to vehicle and vehicle to Infrastructure Systems will fully unlock the potential of Automated Vehicles to improve safety, reduce Traffic Congestion and decrease emissions. We encourage the federal Communications Commission to preserve all seven channels of 5. 9 gig ahurts spectrum for safety and to take no action that could harm the initiatives the department of transportation is pursuing with this spectrum. Finally, we urge the federal government to consider the existing slate of federal motor carrier safety regulations and how they might be impacted by increased automation, as well as how regulations can accommodate this new technology and improve safety, productivity and the environment. This should include the impact of Automated Vehicle use on csa scores, liability and insurance regulations, speed limiters and hours of service rules. This isnt to say these regulations should be changed. The dot should first determine how a more automated environment will impact the industry it regulates in order to minimize disruption and confusion as this Technology Becomes more robust and widely available. This concludes my testimony. Chairman thune, senator peters, members of the committee, i thank you again for the opportunity to testify on this important subject and look forward to questions. Thank you, mr. Spear. Mr. Hall. Chairman thune, senator peters, members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today on an issue that is of vital importance to American Workers. Im the general secretary treasurer of the Teamsters Union, the nations largest Transportation Union representing workers in almost every Transportation Industry. Teamsters members could be delivering anything from bakery goods to concrete, palletized material to your latest online package, or getting you to work on time and safely transporting your kids to school. While nearly 600,000 of our 1. 4 million members turn a key in a truck to start their work day, the issues that we will be discussing today dont just impact those who drive vehicles for a living. The future includes partial and fully Autonomous Vehicles could also change the nature of work for those in nearly every part of the Transportation Industry in our country. Planning for the future and incorporating new technologies into our members daily lives is not new to me or my union. In addition to my duties as general secretary treasurer for over 20 years, i also served as director of the unions Package Division and in this position i ran the teamsters daily interactions with u. P. S. Under the single largest collective Bargaining Agreement in america. The issue facing the teamsters who work for ups or tied to the incorporation of new technology. The Logistics Industry as a whole has changed over time and teamsters have been in the thick of it. We ha we have strived to ensure that workers are guarantees a right to avoid harassment and feel safe on the job. New technologies can exist in an environment where workers are still taken care of, but it takes strong and aggressive action from those workers to make sure that happens. Selfdriving vehicles have the potential to change the Transportation Industry as we know it. That can be for the better or for the worse, depending on the actions of this committee, workers and others guiding their implementation on our roads. It is incumbent on the members of this committee to make sure that workers are not left behind in this process. It is essential that American Workers or not treated as guinea pigs that could put their lives at risk. The issues are fundamental different and potentially more clam tuss than those passing Passenger Cars and warrant careful consideration. The consequences for getting this wrong could be deadly both for workers and other drivers on the roads. The public discussion in congress on Autonomous Vehicles has tended to focus on the impact of small personal cars on our daily lives, increasing mobility for the disabled and alleviating congestion in our cities. These are all important topics. Taking a cookie cutter approach in dealing with those issues and applying it to heavy vehicles is reckless. For instance, i have yet to hear a serious discussion about how we will make sure an 80,000pound automated truck will be able to maneuver around a warehouse or drop yard and not injure the countless workers also occupying that same space. Or how we would make sure that the rules governing the drivers training requirements would be updated. And we havent gotten to the largest issue of them all, the potential impact on the livelihoods and wages of millions of constituents. These issues should be considered carefully and deliberately at the outset of this discussion, not after the fact. For all the discussion here about the potential benefits that may accompany this technology, i urge you to consider these possibilities with a healthy dose of realism. When you hear manufacturers tell you that a list of strong safety metrics will translate to effortless deploit on the roads, i urge you to call the other issues that this committee has worked on this year. This committee has spearheaded investigations into volkswagen knowingly cheating its customers out of emission benefits, the airbag manufacturer, takata knowingly sold defective air bags, Market Forces did not convince these companies not to cheat and push the envelope past what was safe. That same mentality is a constant factor in the trucking space where margins are consistently tight and competition is fierce. The fear of many transportation workers is strong action and guidance from this committee and others, a new generation of Autonomous Vehicles will provide limitless opportunity for the same pattern of reckless behavior. Theres so many impacts to consider. Unchecked, this new technology could open up our citizens to having their privacy breached. Issues such as worker harassment and tracking would be intertwined with collective Bargaining Agreements and workplace policies. I driver would have to think about having his rig hacked and used as the next weapon in a nice or barcelona style attack and millions of americans can have their paychecks decreased because half their job has been automated away and their employer thinks they can get away with no longer paying them the wage they once did. I look forward to working with the committee to ensure the priorities, concerns of working families remain at the center of this debate. In all aspects of automation, but especially when were considering commercial Motor Vehicles, it is more important to get it done correctly rather than just get done quickly. Thank you, and i look forward to your questions. Thank you, mr. Hall. And thanks again to all of you for your testimony. Well have an opportunity to have members of the committee ask some questions and ill start with colonel hernandez. Based on your years of experience, do you think that autonomous Vehicle Technology can advance safety for trucks . Absolutely. I think that as weve heard, it already has in many ways. Witnessing what happened on october 20th of last year, it was clear that there are some advantages, and a couple of those that i probably didnt capture in my initial testimony was that the hours, and the demonstration was at night when theres reduced traffic. And so that was both for safety concerns and will be for safety concerns in the future. So just the timing possibilities. And it was, like i said, i level four demonstration. What that meant was that there was still a driver there to get that vehicle on the highway and into the terminal area, so that driver was involved in that process. Without a doubt, i believe that theres some advantages. I think the key is that were all at the table to discuss with them to discuss this together through the process and make sure that commercial vehicles are not left out. I think that the fact that theyve already demonstrated this puts us behind and i think that it shouldnt be left further behind in the process. Ms. Hersman, the crashes that you highlight in your testimony are horrible and yet could have been prevented or mitigated with crash avoidance technology, and you mentioned that we cannot continue to do things the same way. Since trucks are involved in some of the most jarring examples that you cited, would you say accelerating deployment of Automated Vehicle automated trucks should provide significant safety benefits . Yes. With proper testing and controls, i think this is the game changer when it comes to highway fatalities. Advanced technology can solve many problems that we struggled with for decades, and i think its important to have the conversations and the issues that youve outlined in your bill, whether its data sharing, testing protocols, engagement of all of the right stakeholders, these are all things we need to begin to discuss. Thanks. Mr. Clark, is there any reason to think that when it comes to Automated Vehicles that federal Safety Standards governing core automated technologies, things like sensors and radar should be fundamentally different for trucks and cars and developed at different speeds . The fact of the matter is that the basic Sensor Technology and some of that type of components that you put on the truck is very similar to what is in cars. However, our heavy vehicles are much different than cars. They weigh more. They take longer to stop. They have high centers of gravity. In fact, one of the reasons why we need to advance at the rate we are is because of the fact that some of the solutions that allow the heavy vehicle to perform in a similar manner to a Light Vehicle have yet to be engineered. We need the data from reallife, inhands use by Real Customers to understand what the proper validation process and practices will be or what the engineering problems are that we need to solve. We see no reason why commercial trucks should move forward in this area at a different speed or under a different timetable than Light Vehicles. Mr. Spear, this appears to be an instance in which many Trucking Companies and manufacturers are actually pushing for more federal regulation of the industry. Could you explain the reasons why you think more leadership from the federal government will accelerate the safety benefits of this new technology. I wouldnt say that its more regulation but at least one standard, one seamless federal standard, and that comes from federal leadership. So we would push and advocate heavily for that as opposed to 50 different state regulatory regimes. Were interstate commerce. We move the economy. 70 of the freight was in your opening remarks. Thats no small figure. We cross state lines every day. Its a reality that our drivers face every day, and compliance with multiple state regimes would be very disruptive to the economy, to these companies, and i think it would be a jobs issue over time if were not able to move freight in a productive way, in a safe way, and obviously in a profitable way. So having one seamless standard at the federal level is what we would advocate. Its certainly a much better approach in our view than a patch work of state laws, conflicting state laws. Thank you. Senator peters. Thank you, mr. Chairman. And thank you to each of our witnesses for outstanding testimony here today as we begin this very important discussion about trucks and autonomy. Mr. Hall, i couldnt agree with you more that we need to get this right. Theres a great deal of potential in this technology. We have to do it right and we have to be thoughtful about it. Thats certainly why we have spent so much time on this issue related to automobiles. As i mentioned in my opening comments, hours and hours of conversations with all stakeholde stakeholders. Its been a very comprehensive program as we focused on automobiles, but as everyone has said, trucks are different than automobiles. One of those differences deals with the employment impact which i think you stated very clearly and i think, mr. Spear, you mentioned its the top job in over 20 states. So folks who we represent in our communities could potentially have a Significant Impact and one that we have to think very carefully about, the impact that its going to have on our communities in our state. Mr. Spear, in your testimony, you said that the ata believes that the driver will retain an Important Role in trucking even in Automated Vehicles, if i may paraphrase, or i think thats in your written testimony. I think we all can agree that we dont want to see large scale job losses, but i didnt see in your testimony any data, studies, best practices or Business Plans that address how a Company Operating today is prepared to address driver displacement. Mr. Clarke mentioned that drivers would still have a role in platooning as an example of how a driver would be in that business model. But even that means a displacement of drivers. If youre platooning trucks, that means you have several driving together and normally you have each of those drivers in the front and now you may have one driver in front of a platoon. My question to you, mr. Spear, and certainly mr. Clarke as well, what are you doing internally to prepare for possible driver displacement as a result of highly automated trucks . Quite frankly, we dont view it as a displacement issue because we dont believe level five, no Steering Wheel, no pedals, is imminent. Were really focused on Driver Assist technologies, not driverless. If thats acceptable in this committee, then were really talking about how do we enable drivers to be safer, their equipment more environmentally friendly. These are good for drivers as well. We would like them to be less fatigued, better rested. If technology can play a role in that, thats good for the entire motoring public. In terms of driver displacement, we already have a 50,000Driver Shortage as it stands. If that trend continues, it will be double in five years. We have to hire 960,000 employees over the next decade into this industry. So were pushing hard to bring more talent into the industry. Thats what our fleets are preparing for, not for displacement. To the degree that it is Driver Assist technology, we welcome that. Ways that we can measure better productivity and safety, lower emissions, less congestion, those are all the things that we would be very interested in and thats why we feel trucks need to be part of this legislation. Driverless, level five, thats decades away. Its just not even in the scope of our fleets vision at this point, but i think level two and three are. With that, i think Driver Assist is much more reasonable and why were not concerned about displacement at this time. You say that Driverless Technology for trucks is decades away, and yet for automobiles its just a few years away. Why the difference . I think i would agree with my colleague, mr. Hall. Hes struggling to find an argument where you are going to have a driverless truck navigate in a scenario where its going to do a dropoff or a pickup. We wouldnt argue with that because we think the driver is still going to be in the seat. Its really the long haul where youre going to see a lot of value come from Driver Assist technology, level two and three. So we dont believe that thats going to be a threat. We think drivers are going to play an intricate role in the city scapes, the pickups, the deliveries. In terms of the long haul where you can see efficiencies to lowering fuel burn, lowering emissions, Better Safety by having conductivity between trucks, cars, infrastructure, those are all good things that are going to really improve safety in our opinion. We dont look at it as a threat. Certainly not in the near term. Mr. Hall, you obviously have a different perspective. Ill let you have an opportunity to hear a little bit more about your perspective after mr. Spears testimony. Well, i was certainly happy to hear his testimony, but we look at this as first of all, let me be clear. Our union has always been willing to talk about new technology. If you look at the work places that we represent, they look very similar to warehousing and all these different aspects of industries that we represent. Theyre much different than they were when i began as a teamster. But there is a very much of a difference here when were talking about having an 80,000pound vehicle barrelling down the road. We are not opposed to looking at some of the changes that we have heard here. But to have a tractortrailer going down a road without a driver which is what i believe is coming, then i think there is lots of reasons why we should be concerned about that and not the least of which is Cyber Security. No matter what technology you put into these trucks, weve seen already in areas around the world where large trucks have been used to essentially attack the citizens of those particular areas. So thats one of the things that i think we have a lot of work to do before we can go to this before we can advance with the larger trucks. Thank you. Thank you, senator peters. Senator wicker. Mr. Spear, what do you say to that cyber threat argument that mr. Hall raised . I think its a serious issue and i think the Auto Industry and the Trucking Industry are very committed to ensuring theres nobody out there that wants their equipment to be compromised. So i think putting together very strong protocols in concert with federal policies, we work very regularly not only with dot and knits sa but also at dhs, i would agree with mr. Hall. I dont think you want a tank truck thats driverless in an isis world. That is not something were advocating, so going back to the earlier discussion about driver displacement, that is not something that we believe is in the foreseeable future. But where we can use technology to enhance the safety and the productivity of the fleets and the driver, were all in on that. Just as we guard against Cyber Threats with airlines and in other aspects of our economy, we can answer that question with the trucking question, is that your position . Yeah, i think so. We work very closely with dhs, fbi, volti. Weve been working with dod with testing. Now with the Auto Industry, the information sharing advisory committee, they are now accepting our companies to be a par participant in that realm. Now youre going to have comparing best practices to make sure theres a regimeleseamless protocol. Let me get to another topic. Mr. Spear and mr. Hall, do we do you agree that we do have an impending truck Driver Shortage . Is that your position, mr. Smear, and is that your position, mr. Hall . It is. It is. Mr. Spear, it seems to me based on your testimony that actually going to a level two or three really youre saying thats really not going to be an answer to the trucker shortage because were still going to were still going to need basically the same number of Truck Drivers, is that correct . Its not a clearly defined answer. However, i like to use the analogy of generational gaps. I can usually fix a lot of things on my phone and laptop but its easier to hand them to my kids and get it done a heck of a lot quicker than i can. What we would like to see in terms of the new generation of drivers and technicians is to speak to that generation. This technology does that. To make trucking cool, to make trucking attractive, tech savvy in this generation i think is a good fit and i think were us r ushering in a lot of new talent thats going to be able to really cope with this technology and make it work to the benefit of society. So we believe in that and may be more indirect but we think that that is an attractive element in terms of bringing new talent into our industry. I see. So we can add to the workforce. Let me ask you about your statement on the 5. 9 gig ga hurts safety spectrum. If we dont get that and we dont get the exclusive use of that as your testimony advocates, what would that mean . I think it would be a huge setback. We do work closely with the National Safety council on this issue and feel that having connectivity between cars, trucks and infrastructure is, in my opinion, the secret sauce because now you dont have cars cutting off trucks. In twothirds of the accidents that involve trucks are caused by Passenger Vehicles, driver behavior, speeding, texting. Connectivity plays a key role as that becomes more of a problem, eliminating congestion. These are huge issues that gain from connectivity through that 5. 9. If we dont have that, youre simply going to be working off of other applications, bluetooth for instance. We look a lot at platooning in our industry. Trucks trailing trucks. Thats done basically on a bluetooth platform. Im not saying thats a bad platform to work from, but a much more robust and safer platform would certainly be a 5. 9 and preserving that for safety would be something that we would advocate. Thank you. Mr. Clarke, we have information in our committee brief about advances in our competitor countries in this regard, germany, United Kingdom, south korea, even china are working hard at this. Whos ahead of whom in this area, and what can we learn from the experiences of the other countries, and if you can, touch on the connectivity issue that mr. Spear touched on. Yes, thank you, senator. On the connectivity issue, would endorse comments of mr. Spear. Connected vehicles see much further than any driver. Connected vehicles can be prepared to avoid circumstances and certainly engage the driver in ways that are not possible today, seeing miles ahead to weather, road conditions, congestion, other type of circumstances. It is the secret sauce, and i think its really one of the keys to unlocking the potential of this technology. How are our global competitors doing . In some of the trade journals you may have read, this is the space race of our industry basically. There are a number of technologies that are coming together and very interestingly a number of those Technology Leads come out of the United States. The Sensor Technology, the Ai Machine Learning Technology thats necessary to take advantage of this, the very sophisticated digital three dimensional maps that are running in the background and supporting this software, these are all areas where we have the edge. Were ahead of germany, United Kingdom and south korea and china . In the basic and thats a good thing. It is. What we need to do is to continue to press forward with the integration of these into real platforms, putting them into real service so we can collect the data to allow us to do the analytics to bring forward the right type of regulations and applications. Thank you. Thank you, senator wicker. I would agree, i think, in terms of the transformative effects and impact this technology, the closest thing in recent memory would be the internet. I think this is going to transform the way we do things and i would concur the statement made by truckers. My state cannot find enough drivers. There is a real shortage out there. So thank you, senator wicker. Next up is senator young. Thank you, chairman. I really enjoyed this conversation. Its very important to my home state of indiana where we have a robust Logistics Industry and a very serious shortage of Truck Drivers to keep that industry going. I think we might have a big part of the solution being presented today. So in 2015 there are over 35,000 lives taken for one reason or another on our nations highways. Over 800 of those fatalities were on highways in my home state of indiana. Knits sas estimate that as many as 94 of crashes can be attributed to human driver error. You can see the potential this brings in terms of lives saved, so another big benefit to hoosiers. Thats not the complete story. Avs could change the lives of individuals who today rely on friends, family and others to drive themselves around to drive them around our communities. You think of the blind, disabled, elderly and others who could have a far greater quality of life when avs allow them to become more independent. Also more integrated into the day to day lives of our communities. The National Council on disability noted in a previous hearing that we held that Automated Vehicles hold great promise to advance social inclusion by offering people withdisabilities independent mobility to get to schools, jobs and all places that americans go each day. To get to the point where avs can provide such a societal benefit, congress would have to allow the technology to advance for both vehicles below 10,000 pounds and most likely for vehicles above 10,000 pounds. Im afraid if we bifurcate the regulatory environments well delay these lifesaving and lifechanging benefits that Av Technology can bring to all americans. Mr. Spear, regarding the threat of a. I. Or automation becoming net job losses for our economy, you predicted that truckers would be more like Airline Pilots. Thats sort of a compelling thought. I think it offers promise to our future Truck Drivers or operators to work in a profession where they earn more wages at least as you styled it. Could you expand on that . Because i think the popular perception is that when you get on in a commercial airline, the pilot is controlling the plane the entire time and thats we know thats not the case. So what would the role of the trucker be as we look into the future . I think it would be similar. I know this plays off of mr. Halls testimony because we share that concern. What many people dont see is the pickups, the deliveries and the navigating of the city scapes and there is complex maneuvering with this equipment that takes a lot of talent behind the wheel to make that happen and with all of the variables theyre dealing with, theyre not automated and theyre not level five. Unless we will remove all human error from all vehicles on the road you will need drivers handling 80,000 pound vehicles in our opinion, a very similar concept to Airline Pilots and the takeoffs and the taxiways and the landings, theyre all handled by the pilot in control. Its really the long haul and where that automatic pilot comes on, where you see some of the values of the Technology Take over. The pilot is always there and can take over if conditions arise, and the same stands true for drivers and trucks. I havent heard the Airline Industry discuss eliminating pilots and going fully automated. And they could right now, i dont want to put in a plug for my former employer, but working with honeywell for eight years. Those cockpits and the automation can take off, fly and land all on their own. Over the years i would say weve had an increase in the number of pilots, and so our Airline Industry used to involve more pilot sort of intervention along the way. I would also indicate we saw an increase at least for a period of time in membership and their unions, as well. So thats notable what is can you discuss platooning because im not entirely sure what the role of the operator would be in the platooning process. The platooning would involve a concept where a driver would be in the lead truck and that pursuant trucks would follow without a driver, but up to two or three trailer trucks would follow a lead driver and that would be connected and thats being tested through Bluetooth Technology and thats why we feel a 59 would be a much better platform to connect vehicles because then you can include connecting cars and so the accident that mr. Hertz put up on the slide there, if you have trucks talk to one another this minimizes risk. As you think about the future of trucking and one where we might attract more people into the labor market. Thank you so much. Thank you, senator young. Senator blumenthal . Thanks, mr. Chairman and thank you, senator peters for your work on legislation that raises some of the issues that bring us here today. I think we need rules and regulations in this area, rules that guarantee safety. I was deeply disappointed by the guidance issued yesterday by nhtsa which struck me as anemic. In effect, a giveaway to the industry and it could result in lives lost unless we had enforceable regulations that protect the traveling public and not just the folks who may be behind the wheel, but also passengers in vehicles out on the roads today and driving continues to be one of the deadliest activities as you observed ms. Hertzman and thank you for your work in this area. The reason that framework issued concerned me so is that it depends on voluntary selfassessments by the industry as opposed to mandatory rules. It was termed by one report and quote, even less burdensome than the voluntary one under the Obama Administration and the net effect would be to leave enforcement virtually toothless. So i am putting to you the question all of the witnesses here today, isnt it necessary to have mandatory rules and regulations enforce the by department of transportation or some enforcer to protect the traveling public . I think its absolutely true. Weve seen too many examples of and thats one of our concerns is whether or not there will be the kind of oversight thats necessary to protect the american public. We have seen too many cases where, for example, in the case of volkswagen where everyone assumed they were doing the right thing and while its a different issue, it is still the same issue that the company is allowed to produce vehicles whether it is automobiles or in particular when its 80,000 pound rigs then there must be oversight and its premature to think that these commercial vehicles should be included at this time. That is not to say that and i am hopeful that youll protect the drivers job, but were certainly open to talking about anything that improves safety, but i am concerned where the driver was killed and we just saw a report yesterday about where uber spent lots of money in the city of pittsburgh and making sure they measured down to the sent meter and every street in the city and yet one of the vehicles went down a oneway street. On a oneway street, maybe theres a way to control it. Weve got to be weve got to have more thought and not that theres going to be a time as i listened here and agreed with my colleague, i understand that we are going to see some changes, but there has to be a lot more work done. Does anyone on the panel think that the nhtsa guidance offers an adequate basis to go forward . I would say, senator, that its an end all issue aance of guidance. Its hardly a robust first step, would you agree . I would say it is a first step. Will be more robust. We are going to and the only reason were having this discussion today is because innovation is driving the outcome and not regulation. The rules are as important as the technology, would you agree . I agree. I ng its getting the federal government on a Good Foundation to where it has great understanding of visibility and in my testimony we advocate a federal role. And the rules have to be enforceable. And it should be enforced and i think thats the direction were going and thats whyy believe trucks need to be part of it. The rules have to keep pace with the technology, correct . I think eventually they will, but yes, youre correct. The eventually part is what concerns me because in the meantime there will be a lot more deaths and injuries if the rules and enforce ability of those rules fail to keep place, correct . I also think the same is true if you get the rules wrong. I think excluding the commercial industry would be a big detriment to safety. I think inclusivity and getting this right from the start, we all share the road, and i think having a federal role, Sole Authority that deals with all motors on the road and commercial passenger would be the best approach. But relying on voluntary selfassessments and foregoing public oversight is a statement that would discredit the goal that we share of making Technology Available to as many people as possible and increasing the safety through the use of technology. I think that revisiting this guidance is something that has to be done and will be done. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator blumenthal. Senator lee . Thank you very much. Thanks to all of you who have joined us today as witnesses. As we consider the issue of Autonomous Vehicles its becoming more clear that the future of American Transportation is inextricably intertwined with the advent of Automated Technology, and i think its therefore, really important that we think about this issue a lot and we move forward with an eye toward advancing and an eye to be developed and automation is inevitable and i think it would be neither wise nor appropriate nor necessary for congress to stifle the advancement of this technology at issue in this debate is not whether congress should restrict or block or slow down the development of this technology, but its rather how congress can best establish a Regulatory Framework and one that encourages and facilitates the development of lifesaving technology. Technology that will make the American People safer and more productive. The research and development of autonomous commercial vehicles is critical to this type of innovation, and i should therefore, be included in any legislation that we put forward this month. According to the u. S. Department of labors bureau of bureau of labor statistics, truck and transportation occupations account for more workrelated fatalities than perhaps any other profession, and its my understanding that 8 or 7 of truckrelated collisions are caused by human error and not because people who are driving them are bad. They are to the contrary, well trained and everything, but human beings make mistakes and human error can inevitably lead to fatalities. So i have a question. Ill start with mr. Harrisman. Given that trucks are involved in a disproportionate share of fatal vehicle crashes, wouldnt automated trucking Technology Make sense and have the potential to have kind of an outsized benefit for american drivers . Yes. Technology has the potential to be the game changer when it comes to reducing fatalities. Rearend collisions are a great example. Three times more fatal if youre involved in a rearend collision with a truck, with a commercial vehicle than a Passenger Car. We can all understand the physics of that. Automatic emergency braking and vehicle to Vehicle Technology can help with that. Automated vehicles are an extension of those technologies. In light of that fact, why would it make sense to put it on two different tracks and one that would facilitate and promote in the case of Passenger Vehicles, but not in the area of commercial vehicles . We dont think it does make sense because in situations where we have put Passenger Cars on a fast track and we havent addressed commercial vehicles and electronic stability control is a good example after there were some issues with rollovers involving ford explorers, bridgestone, firestone tires this required that stability control be mandated on Passenger Vehicles and that occurred in the 2012 model year. Were looking at not having that on commercial vehicles for many more years. That doesnt make sense. We need a level of safety for everyone on the roadways. Colonel hernandez. The Autonomous Vehicle legislation is clearly limited to addressing vehicle Design Standards that would be administered by nhtsa. This as theyve always done for both cars and for cmvs. I realize theres a lot of interest and debate over the ultimate operations of autonomous cmvs, but the current bills simply dont address that and theyre assuring everyones safety during rnd. That being said, colonel, would there be any reason to delay the fundamental safety framework for automated cmv design . No. Not at all. I think that we saw a live example in colorado where it jumped out in front, and it would be a lot better for us and the Enforcement Committee to be united and, head of it as it relates to commercial Motor Vehicles. We have many questions that are the same in the Enforcement Community such as how to investigate a crash and the advantage for us to understand how these technologies work and work with the industry to learn how to better and reasonably regulate and enforce laws and well have a much better advantage than separating the two, in my opinion. Sounds like a considerable Public Safety game. Thank you, sir. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator lee. I would point out that those who think that the nhtsa guidance isnt Strong Enough and that would argue to me for why we ought to have all of these covered by the legislation. Senator markey . Thank you, mr. Chairman. For all of the witnesses, just please answer yes or no. Do you believe that this committee as it actively works on legislation to promote the deployment of Autonomous Vehicles that we should also create policies to help those works americans who will lose their jobs because of these emergi emerging technologies . Colonel hernandez . Yes, i believe that should be considered. Yes. Yes. No. Yes. Except that hopefully well have a situation where were not going to lose jobs. As ive listened to various speakers talk about here today. Theres always disruption. When they invented the talkies all of the piano players and the silent movie theaters lost their jobs. Time moves on and you have to make sure that you have a plan in place to ensure that that kind of protection is there. These vehicles are obviously already computers on wheels and they will continue to accelerate in that direction and as the Technology Deploys and obviously, there are going to be vast opportunities for Cyber Threats to be launched against these vehicles and there will be computers for all intents and purposes. Mr. Hall, do you believe that we should proactively develop robust mandatory regulations so that these vehicles are protected against Cyber Attacks as they are moving down the streets of our country . I absolutely do. Thats one of the biggest concerns that i have as i said earlier. The Teamsters Union has worked with companies and industries around all over this country to make companies more competitive, but in this case and particularly the case of the cybersecurity, its terrifying for me to think that weve got tractor trailers rolling down the road that can be hacked and to say that they cant be in todays world and thats one of the things that i think there has to be more information and more studies that were not going have that issue because no one thought we would have the credit card issue weve had in the past week where millions of peoples information has been has been or become public. We didnt think i agree with you 100 . We were warned about all these things. Equifax didnt know it could happen and the Auto Industry didnt know that these vehicles can be hacked. Its all there, and i think i agree with you, mr. Hall. Do you agree with that . We need mandatory, robust protections that are built in as rules of the road Going Forward . I think thats where were headed as we just got done discussing with senator blumenthal. Its the First Step Towards something much more robust. This legislation that you are now considering is a remarkable, significant step toward formalizing the federal role, so i think thats exactly where were headed, and we know this is reality and its not just cars and trucks across the board. I appreciate it, and thats why ive introduced the legislation and the spy car act that directs nhtsa to establish cybersecurity protections for all vehicles and ive introduced senator blumenthal and others and i think we should be considering that at the same time when were talking about this new era unfolding and finally on the issue of privacy since there are computers on wheels there will be a vast amount of information on all american as theyll be gathered as they are moving around this country, do you think that we should be ensuring that this information that is gathered by other companies and by others by all of our individual habits and where we go, what we do and all of the information that can be gathered as these computers are being used and they should be able to be reused and resold as information without the permission of the family . Colonel hernandez . You know, i really dont know that im qualified to answer that question. Perhaps that information may be out there with cell phones and others, but i think thats something that perhaps do you have whether or not we should be providing privacy protections to make sure that that information is protected . I think theres no question that we continue to see. Were talking about protecting peoples privacy involves a lot of things including getting involved in the when you talk about someones personal lives and youre talking about personal finances and youre talking about issues that weve seen recently and theyre major problems that we have to protect against. Thank you, senator. Thank you to the witnesses today. Colonel hernandez, welcome to the committee. I know youve served Colorado State patrol for 30 years and were grateful for your service and leadership. Colonel hernandez, i dont know if you marked the calendar yet or not, but february 19th is an important day in colorado. Its president s day and its a monday and its also a great ski weekend. Monday night, you know what happens. Everybody is coming back to the airport and the front range. How many new tunnels through the eisenhower tunnel do you think it would take for us to adequately provide capacity for the number of vehicles that wed see. You would have to answer that. Do you see autonomous Vehicle Technology as a way to manage traffic through those choke points like that president s day ski traffic through the eisenhower tunnel . I believe that it may be the only way to manage that type of traffic. I want to commend some of the toughest things that weve seen over the past years. Trooper don hugh was killed on i25 by a vehicle that didnt move over when he was assisting another crash on the side of the road and vehicle to Vehicle Technology and Autonomous Vehicle and that would be used to assist in this type of of a situation perhaps to avoid that type of accident. Could it be used that way . Absolutely, the technology is able to do that, and i believe that in that case, very hard on the agency and hard on me. Im hard on the family and it could have been avoided, and i think that through this technology, it absolutely could have been avoided because there is a prior crash, and so often, these are secondary crashes and so often that takes the lives of many people is the secondary crash, and i think thats one of the huge advantages to this type of technology both in cars and commercial vehicles. So i think one of the challenges we have is not just whether we get there if we get let and its how we do it in a way that manages safety and its in a way that answers the uncertain question, and one out of every three job numbers colorado is a Truck Driving job. We have a lot of Truck Drivers there and we have a lot of them there and one of them came up to me and said do you see Colorado Springs in the opening comments . I said yeah. Wasnt it great . A gentleman ive known my entire life said yeah, what will happen to me . Hes a truck driver. As policymakers we have to figure out how were going to be able to answer that question . Because the answer wont be whether there are fewer ons and fewer opportunities. And with the innovations weve been able to achieve in this country well have progress, innovation and more jobs than weve ever had before and we have to figure out how to say that in a way thats helping people see that, understand that and know that theyre going to be okay because until i can answer that question, there will be an uncertainty and it will be an unsettling part of peoples lives and family and we need help in being able to answer the question and were going to create more jobs as a result. The secondary impacts will be phenomenal and how do we articulate to an uncertain american populous Going Forward. Im excited about the future that we have here. Mr. Spear, one of the questions i have, is yesterday i had a hearing with the National Renewable laboratory in denver and some of the other Laboratory Systems around the country and we talked about the 11. Million miles that theyve been able to help work them to provide them and how do we get the information we need having the National Assets and others to move forward on a system of Autonomous Vehicles and the Safety Information that we need to make this work. I alluded to your testimony and i used fcc as a primary examel and its not just d. O. T. And nhtsa. Its sec and dhs on cyber and its also epa on emissions and there are benefactor agencies on the federal level that really need to be more squarely at the table on this. Labs included. We work a lot with dod not just on cyber, but lodgistecs and testing. There are a lot of good things that can be done on a military basis so states and localities were a proving ground. So we dont discriminate between either one of them, but we welcome everybody at the table because i think the more inclusivity that you have, the more robust this platforms going to be and easier to understand not only from a legislative point of view, but from a regulatory point of view. So i think the inclusivity of the labs and the agencies and not just d. O. T. Need to be squarely on the table and drive the outcome and if the legislation could speak to that, that would be a good thing. Thank you very much for all of your time and testimony today. Colonel hernandez, thuz. Thank you, senator gardner. Thank you, mr. Chairman and thank you to the panelists. Its a very engaging, important discussion today. Mr. Spear, let me start with you and make sure i understand what im hearing today is that you would be comfortable if we passed federal legislation that on only went to a level two authority. In other words, it limited any type of future technology for specifically to driverassisted Technology Level 2 and we didnt open the door to a level 5, a Driverless Technology for commercial trucks, is that correct . Senator, let me stipulate that im not suggesting the committee earmark it at level 2 ore 3 and thats the reality where we see things for the foreseeable future and Driver Assist and not level five driverless. So if thats acceptable, that reality and that to us is not a threat not only to driver displace displacement, but its a catalyst for productivity and levels two and three is where we see the technology for the foreseeable future. If the legislation speaks to that, thats a decision you all make, but we just dont believe displacement and level five, no Steering Wheel and no pedals is in the foreseeable future. So thats kind of the world and the perspective that were approaching this. So if we were to limit it to level two and level three because you dont see that in the foreseeable future as driverless and we want to make sure were addressing that worker displacement and also the cybersecurity issues that we all have concerns about and understanding it as well as addressing the safety on the roads, you would be comfortable with the federal legislation. Absolutely. Would you be comfortable with it when it comes to commercial trucks when it comes to driverassisted technology and understanding the evolution of that driverassisted technology for commercial trucks . I would be happy to see that type of limitation on it, but by the same token, i also think that we have to address the many safety concerns before we make any of these changes. And so when you talk about the many safety concerns that is including the worker safety concerns as well as the discussion weve had today, correct . Correct. Okay. So. Let me just say, this is an important discussion and for all of us the challenge will be how we balance the emergence of this new technology that mr. Spear, you said, is happening. There is a demand for it and it is going to happen whether we are part of this discussion or not, and then how we balance that with Worker Protections and worker placement because the last thing i cant speak for all of my colleague, but i would imagine the worker displacement. It would harm our workers and harm our jobs and thats not what were trying to do here. So there has to be a balance that we find and thats what im hoping everybody will come to the table and help us at a federal level find that balance to Work Together to have not only the ability to embrace this new technology and address the worker displacement to make sure that does not happen. So do you think theres an ability to Work Together to do that, mr. Hall and mr. Spear . Absolutely. I think theres an ability to do that. Thank you. Thank you. And so the reason why i am really excited and interested in this space is because there was a lot of work that is happening in nevada as you all know with this new technology both for Autonomous Vehicles as well as for driverassisted trucks. I think it is the future and we need to embrace it and we need to put those guardrails in place for protections that weve all talked about today. I know just in nevada, the Regional Transportation Committee of the county right now is currently testing and taking data on autonomous bus that will move many of my constituents back and forth throughout the region, and anyone thats followed this issue thiknows that Autonomous Vehicles relies on technology and connectivity. Thats why i am excited to be able to be introducing legislation to promote smart cities and communities. My bill will ensure that the federal government provides the seed money for Public Private partnerships to implement innovative Transportation Systems in cities and Rural Communities throughout the country. My colleague, senator is, i believe, the sponsor on this. Im very excited to work with him. That is the future and the Internet Connectivity of thing, and i want to make sure were in that space with innovation. I think we can address the security issues, mr. Herselfman that weve talked about and the safety on the roads and mr. Hernandez, as well, but at the same time make sure were training the workforce for the future. Were involving them in the discussion when were talking about the new technology, so thank you for the conversations today, i really appreciate it. Thank you, mr. Senator cortes masto. Senator masthoff. Thank you. The reason youre experiencing some redundance in the questions is that 50 of the members of the committee are the environment and public works committee. So we find ourselves having to go back and forth and its very difficult. The question that was asked and let me first of all say how much we enjoy the citizens in my city of tulsa. Ive been in your operation many times and its a great benefit to us, and i appreciate your presence and all of the contributions youve made to our local communities very much. When you were asked by senator wicker some things i think are kind of interesting, that is where are we . It is a difficult question to answer. He only asked you and not the rest of you, but the rest of you, theres an assumption by the American People that were always number one. Were always the first there, and i know i served as Ranking Member of the Senate Arms Services commit. We know there are other things that were not really always number one, but in this, this is something thats new, and id kind of like to know if its appropriate to ask each one of you kind of where are you now and weve heard of germany, japan and china and other countries that are advancing. Where are we in the mix right now . Youve answered that, mr. Clark, and the rest of you. When it comes to fatalities were trailing the rest of the industrialized countries have made more progress in the last two decades no. Im talking about this Technology Subject to this meeting today where we are. So the other countries have made more progress and some of that has been because they have embraced technology. So things like automatic emergency braking not required here on trucks looking at that in europe. So they have that in europe. When we look at automated enforcement. Again, other countries are embracing these technologies at a more rapid clip than the United States. Anybody else . Any thoughts on that . That explains the european, and id like to know because we get asked these questions. What are other countries doing . We get benchmarks and we think the moving grounds at the local and state level in the United States is a bit more advanced and i think thats in large part to the environment that were seeing multiple states and communities stepping up to attract innovators to their state and city so i think smart cities were mentioned, as well and were creating those environments where technology can be tested in a safe way and thats a good thing and those investments will accelerate the adoption of the technology. Thats fine. I understand that. Now when senator markey asked a question it was presumed that this mass exodus of jobs in america and its a difficult question for you to answer yes or no to. Id like a comment from each of you because ive heard from this committee that there are some arguments that we are going to be employing more people and getting into other technology, but how do you see us . When this washes out will we have the massive declines that we assumed and the question that was asked you, would you comment to that . I think i struggled just with that straightforward question just because i start thinking about the number of lives that we lost on our roadways and our highways and how to reduce that, and then just that im not the subject Matter Expert on that and the key point and primarily driven by our goal to get to zero and what that will look like. I will tell you from a Law Enforcement perspective, ive been involved for 30 years. Like the senator said, and every time we get more technology it seems it definitely seems to take more people than less to manage those technology systems. Any other currents on that . I would say the type of Job Description that were going to see in the next 20 years for drivers and technicians is arguably going to make these employees more marketable. Theyre going to be better skilled. Theyre going to be better trained and employers will be investing a lot more in their capabilities to make certain that this equipment is up and running and done in a safe way so were already facing a shortage. Thats the reason i answered no to that is because we simply dont believe this is a displacement issue. From your perspective, the last thing i wanted to ask is do you believe the heavy truck should be included in the drafting of the legislation . Absolutely, senator. Does anyone not believe that that wanted to speak out on that issue . I dont believe that this should be a part of this current legislation and i dont want to oversimplify this, but all of the discussion has been about Passenger Vehicles and we have to recognize that there is a vast difference between a 400,000 pound car and an 80,000 pound vehicle. You made that point. The other of you mostly agree with mr. Spear . All right. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator inhofe. Thanks to you and senator peters for all your work on this issue, and thank you to the panelists for being here today. There is no doubt that Automated Vehicles have tremendous potential to save lives and reduce the nearly 4,000 deaths caused by large truck accidents each year and the over 30,000 annual vehicle fatalities on our nations highways, but whats less clear to me and i think what youre hearing some questions about is how we can guard against potential harms of this technology from in and out of state actors who are looking to harm us. I dont want to trade one set of harms for another and i tell you i spent some of my time visiting summer camps in New Hampshire and i was visiting one a couple of weeks ago for a group of adolescents and they wanted to know what a senator does, and i talked about the work about this committee and said that this committee had jurisdiction for automotive vehicles and described what the future technology looks like and within seconds there were kids 13 and 14 years old saying do you know how easy it would be to hack those . Since theyre the Digital Natives among us i tend to listen to young people when they talk to us about technology. So i am very concerned that were all assuming that there will be levels of cybersecurity built into this technology when to senator markeys point, that sometimes we think about cybersecurity after the harm is done and given the lives at stake and the potential of out of state actors who want to use vehicles now for a different purpose, i am very concerned that we get the cybersecurity right at the front end and not wait for something bad to happen. We also know there are Critical Thinking components to operating a vehicle that im not sure translate to automated machinery just yet which is why were seeing the Different Levels of automatic asi automation described in this legislation, but to all of you, if trucks are added to this bill what more could be done beyond the bill to guard against security risks of automation . Im not a cybersecurity expert, but i would say it makeses a lot more sense to me to make sure that its incorporated so that the Autonomous Vehicles are secure and a commercial vehicle. Thank you, mr. Clark . Senator, great question and great topic. This whole issue is an immediate issue and it is an issue now in our industry both as well as my competitors in the industry currently have some number of connected vehicles, probably in the neighborhood of 40 of vehicles that are on the road today and are connected telematichly and we do different things. We offer services, we provide updates to some of the control software, so this is an immediate need for us today. I would say the recognition energizes us to Work Together like few things weve ever seen. We will want go to market nor test without the proper safeguards. We welcome the oversight of the regulatory bodies in that particular space. We would say it is a rapidly changing area. We dont believe that the right thing is to mandate the technology, but certainly we stand ready and willing to participate in the regulatory process to provide the right safeguards. Well, and because my time is running low, would it make sense to have a set of standards that everybody had to meet in place . I think thats what weir trying to work toward even without legislation and the commercial sector as well as the automotive isac which was up and running for a couple of years now and developing protocols that were seamless across both autos and commercial vehicles and i think it speaks to why trucks are being part of this legislation is important so that you get that seamless protocol. I would say there were earlier questions about the voluntary nature of whats going on now. This is exactly why this body needs to get involved. If we dont like whats happening out there its because people dont feel they have the authority or the direction and i think its really important for you all to set at least some of those high bars. Set that floor and say where you want folks to go. They can figure out how to do it, but we dont have anything now and so it is a bit of the wild west out there and there needs to be a sheriff and i think the opportunity to do that is through having these conversations and the legislation and want putting it off. Thank you. Would the chairs indulgence, mr. Hall, quickly . I think there needs to be regulations and i think there needs to be strong regulation because while there are Reputable Companies including people that are represented here today there are bad actors out there and weve repeated lead seen that with the volkswagen scandal. If that happens with cybersecurity, we have got a huge problem and the thing that i see is perhaps as they say in west virginia, we have to make sure were not getting the cart before the horse. We need to ensure the stability and safety of that ez vehicles before we start rolling them out and approving legislation before we put them on the road. Thank you, mr. Chair and ill put together questions. Thanks. Thank you, mr. Chairman and thank you for the hearing and i havent been in the entire time and you have a great panel because you have two west virginians on the panel. So i know were in good hands and i recently returned from a trip to israel and when the question was asked what countries are really at the cutting edge, they talked a lot in israel about selfdriving and Automated Vehicles and they have a very small, very flat country, as well, but i think theyre reall really working on the technologies there. I have a question and it may be that im off on how these things work so mr. Clark, this is directioned at you and we live in a state that has spotty connectivity even on our main arteries through even our wireless and our interstates, cuts in and out, and i have some concerns that if we move forward on this or as the technology moves forward, how much the connectivity in all of the different areas plays in being able to run this efficiently and safely . Could you speak to that, please . Yeah. Thank you, senator, for the question. The basic Autonomous Vehicle is to drive in an autonomous way. It does not have to be a connected vehicle and it operates with a detailed 3d map and its looking and comparing using cameras and lie detectors and making constant comparisons to whats in its memory and looking for things that arent there and making decisions, are those objects moving or are those objects fixed and what decisions should be taken and not the least of which i think i dont understand im just going to pull over and so even in a nonconnected environment, the vehicles can operate autonomously. Their safety advocacy is significantly enhanced when they do operate in a connected fashion and either connected to other vehicles or connected to portions of the infrastructure or in many cases for the testing purposes connected back us to so that we can collect the data that can be used by regulators and analyzed for future purposes. You mentioned in your previous question that 40 of your trucks were kecked telematichly when you say telematichly . I would like you to think that the truck itself has the cell phone and every couple of seconds its sending us the condition of the systems on the vehicle. So through the wireless . Yes. Okay. Thank you. Mr. Hall, on the concerns about the workforce impacts. Obviously, west virginia, we have a lot of Truck Drivers and its a great occupation. I notice that as we look at the Different Levels in the i dont know, level one to level four, theres somebody in the car thats being or in the truck, but i started thinking, so why is mr. Hall worried about if youre going to have a teamster in the truck anyway. Do you envision that its a lower paying and lower type drive that doesnt have maybe the same beginning salary that someone of the teamsters might have . Is that a concern . Except in urban situations there is someone in the vehicle . Thats obviously one of my concerns. I mean, first yes. We dont want to the see just, its been mentioned here that we still have pilots and airplanes even though theyre very much automated and certainly its a concern of ours because people make a good living doing that, but also our concern is the safety of the drivers as well as the general public in saying that it shouldnt be and we dont believe that you should just include 80,000pound trucks without further study. I mean, i dont think you can say that because weve been talking about automobileses that it makes sense. Its no more than i bought my grandson a bb gun, but i dont think that means i should give him a highpowered rifle because hes learned to shoot a bb gun. We need to make sure that were taking the time to look at some of the aspects that are so much different about trucks than they are automobiles, but you are right. One of my concerns is that there be regulation so that we dont have those bad actors. Most of the companies we deal with are up front and do the right thing. We dont want bad actors who are putting people on the road and considering the lowest cost at the risk of safety for the general public. Okay. Its hard to imagine living in the terrain that we live in that an Autonomous Vehicle, and i am not getting into an Autonomous Vehicle to go to my house, i can tell you that. Its a pretty windy road. So there are lots of areas where this is not going to work. Lets just take i81. I dont know what the percentage of truck traffic is on that piece of highway is, but its enormous. How do you see this technology evolving in terms it of safety on a very crowded highway like that thats pretty high speed. Thats a great example, because thats exactly the kind of corridor where this technology can work the best. Very predictable, repeatable, youve got good coverage and youve mapped it out and its not unknown and those are the kinds of spaces where i think vehicles can talk to each other. Its a very controlled environment. Youve got widely spaced lanes and you have shoulders where people can pull over. That environment i think is probably one of the spaces where were talking about using Technology Like this first. It could control speeds. Im sure if you drive on 81, there are some speed racers on that road in addition to being in truckaly the alley, traffic d safety is the first and most important thing. Thank you, mr. Chair. Senator duckworth . Thank you, mr. Chairman. I would like to quickly recognize our two illinois natives. Good panel. Miss herzman and mr. Clark. I think the captain Sully Sullenberger and the miracle on the hudson is the importance of having a human being decisionmaker at the controls of any type of large vehicle. With the level of 3, 4 and 5 technologies i think we face a truly Game Changing opportunity in associated challenges, as well. In my own lifetime theres been more technologies to improve the mobility and independence for individuals with disabilities than Autonomous Vehicles. For those with impair ams and for those who are unable to drive to be actually to leave their homes and gain mobility. Clearly the potential to reduce the fatalities is also truly exciting. I do know that we should expect growing pains and unintended consequences. What id like to focus my discussion on is on how Autonomous Vehicles would challenge our existing transportation infrastructure and what that means for our local municipalities and states. And also the future of labor. So mr. Clark, what existing and future infrastructure consideration should manufacturers take into account when designing vehicles at level three and above . Thats a great question and it reflects the understanding that commercial vehicles operate in a system or an environment that includes the infrastructure and things not just the highways and entrance and exits and toll plazas and where can the vehicle pull over. Whats exciting about this opportunity is that we can concurrently discover as were validating the technologies, those Cost Effective methods, and what will ultimately be some infrastructure needs as the point has been made, Autonomous Vehicles and even the most sophisticated of everything are probably just not suited to some roads in america or some circumstances, but they are suited for other places. You can talk about Vehicle Infrastructure where the road itself in its condition it talk to the vehicle for incidents that are miles and miles in advance and last, but not least, look, these technologies you would only think of deploying these technologies in a place where the vehicle always has available the ability to pull itself over and stop which kind of dictates its riding in the righthand lane and we have to reassess the capacity of the particular thoroughfare because all of the trucks would be in traffic and speed controlled and it always needs the ability to pull itself off or in the case of platooning which we talked about, d cell lanes on freeways and they need to be extended and the vehicles could pull over and still leave room for Passenger Vehicles to navigate their way off the highway, as well and last, but not least another simple example would be the vehicle needs to be driven once it gets off the highway and perhaps at that point in time there will be the need for marshalling areas and the ability to pull the vehicle over very close to an entrance or an exit, to make the right inspections and to create the right certifications so we know the vehicle is capable of performing the next challenge, so to speak, in its task. So the opportunity to bring this technology in a very controlled manner for the purpose of developing data that will fuel regulations and Infrastructure Research is the exact opportunity we look forward to, and i think i speak for our entire industry. Thank you. Its important to talk about the point beyond getting off of the interstate and off of the major roadways, as well. Because in many municipalities, the roads to cities and towns into Industrial Areas are 1960s and 1970s era are very narrow and theres nothing to replace a human being to negotiate with those and miss hear zman, everyone agrees that the av potential is enormous and from the safety perspective, can you speak to the infrastructure challenge for states and municipalities in terms of accommodating future av technologies . On this issue its important for states and municipalities and oversight agencies and licensing agencies all of them need to have a seat at the table. When we look at whats happening now its happening in controlled environments and they need to be notified of testing thats going on in their states and they know how to respond and there may also be changes in design that we need to do Going Forward. We talked about v to i, vehicle to Vehicle Infrastructure. We have a lot of great crossings in illinois. Thats a great opportunity to kind of connect industries and how do we keep from having grade crossing fatalities . Likewise, weve seen pedestrian and cyclist fatalities going up significantly and how do we ensure that were thinking about all road users and were talking about trucks and cars today, but theres a lot of other fatalities that occur on our roadways and states and municipalities have to be at the table whether were talking about lane markings and how we have systems that interact with each other or about the rules of the road that we set. No ones really talked about consumer education. One of the Biggest Challenges that we have is how do people understand how these vehicles are behaving whether its a large truck or whether its a car . Really important to bring people in the loop and i think the state and local leaders have a role in that. Thank you. I yield back, mr. Chairman. I wanted to ask mr. Clark, obviously and were moving more from an efficiency perspective and i know pat carr in our state was awarded in one of the d. O. E. For developing more fuelefficient engines and how do you see these two things working together in the challenges we face on competitiveness of moving u. S. Products and keeping costs down . How is increasing fuel efficiency in automation going hand in hand . Senator, thank you so much. Boy, i couldnt have asked for a better setup. All of the major truck manufacturers in america participated in the d. O. E. Super Truck Program, and aa program itself the super Truck Program was managed in an outstanding way that created the very technologies that were putting on our vehicles today to improve not only their efficiency in operation and how clean they are in the environment, but it really gave us a test bed to test many of these connected technologies and many of the, well, for instance, many of the technologies that are the basis of Autonomous Vehicles Going Forward. With the super Truck Program we had the successful experience with mitigation and avoidance that in the middle of the program we decided to put it on the brandnew tractor called the lt and we made it standard. So Collision Mitigation is standard. You can delete the option if you so choose, but surprising to us, the take rate on that has been 35 , and in fact, those vehicles who are equipped with mitigation and collisionstyle braking, it woulding is 24 reduction in those types of accidents and the very accidents it was intended to avoid. So it does it did give us confidence to move forward with that technology and a test platform where we could do it outside of the commercial venue and i would highlight that the super trucks were all tested on highways and so we were able to test it with multiple customer environments all across the United States and again, it gave us the rapid validation and feedback that let us do something really good, not just commercially for us, but we this is ours is a highly regulated Business Environment aimed at safety efficiency and basically Clean Products and the environment. There are no Better Safety regulators in the world. We have historically worked together to not only bring products to the market that improve safety, reduce operating costs but create a cleaner environment. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you senator cantwell, senator peters. We have another round here. Appreciate your indulgence and thank you to our witnesses here today. The advocates for highway and ought so safety have expressed concerns to my office about including trucks in this legislation. And they recommended several days to congress, fm, csa can insure safety of highly automated truckess. So they have a little different perspective or at least are raising a number of important issues. Certainly welcome your thoughts on some of the issues they have raised. The advocates for highway and autosafety believe those that do not comply with federal motor Vehicle Safety standards should not be subject to exemptions. Would you agree with that . Are you talking about for testing environments . I think that if we have very specific geo fenced testing environments we want to think about what were tetsing, what equipment were testing but if theyre operating out on the road with the public they need to be subjected to the same standards as other vehicles out there. I guess thats an agreement. Yeah. But i would say certainly when we look at test environments, we talked about a situation where we had a unique test and they created specific parameters around it. We have to sometimes put technologies and systems out there if were testing them to understand what its like in the real world. Its important not to say we wouldnt want to allow anything but we have to have major controls around those things. Fair enough. Have you considered what would be an appropriate number of exemptions for highway trucks Going Forward . You could think about a pro rata share based on the number of vehicles out there, passenger verses commercial vehicles. Certainly its in the purview of the committee to put it out there. What were talking about in terms of fully Automated Vehicles, were not seeing those numbers now. Current law allows 2500. Would that be sufficient for trucks and i guess my understanding is theres about 300,000 produced verses 17 million automobiles. Im not sure 2500 is the right number. I might defer to some of my colleagues with respect to putting vehicles out on the roads but i think its important for this committee to engage in this issue and set some guidelines and some escalation for how that could occur in a thoughtful way. Because right now there are none. Right. Youre allowed 2500 under current but if we change that we obviously need thoughtful consideration of that and get data and evidence to determine that. I appreciate that answer. The advocates for highway and auto safety believe they must have a driver with a valid commercial drivers lice nsz in the vehicle at all times and advocating to issue a stand frrd driver engagement. Do they have recommendations for insuring an operators behind the wheel . Youre asking me about other folks recommendations. I can share with you what some of them are. Depending on the level of automation. The issueue goes to. I know were talking about displacement on advanced technology. There are endorsements for the licensed whether its air bus. I think its important for us to think through technology as we advance how do we train and qualify people for advanced technology because the systems are going to be complex and its going to require a different set of skills. I think youre ahead of it because the advocates raised concern about driver training. Insure theyve been properly trained. And if need be take over the control of the highly automated truck. They believe it includes a minimum number of hours around the vehicle. Thats something we need think stloou. I think as laung as human beings are engaged, we have to make sure we do it safely. I know everyones talking about levels two, three, four, five but i would pause it that one of the most dangerous environmentess are when the human being and the vehicle are sharing control and how we handle those hand offs and how we structure the notifications, the warnings and the train rg very important. This is where weve seen in the aviation mode confusion, over reliance on automation. These are important conversations to have even about levels 2 and 3 before we get to 4 and 5. The barriers should be required additional operating authority. Operating Authority Motor Carrier safety. With respect to vehicle standar standards. In this world out there everybodys got to come along and identify what that means. Its clear we need to do a whole lot more stuff. Thanks senator peters. The great conversation and discussion and i think its shed a lot of light on important issues as we try to shape our bill and senator peters, nelson and others on the kmicommittee trying to craft a bill that does enable the technology to move forward and with maximum emphasis on safety and so were trying to figure out how to thread the needle. I would argue it makes sense not to have two Safety Standards out there. One for trucks and one for automobile sas and as we think about these things we want to had had insure and thats a point we continue to talk about in terms of the final bill that we end up filing. So we got draft out there. We welcome your thoughts and your imput and certainly the testimony this morning has been very, very helpful in that regard and i would simply say for members of the committee who have records, to submit those and if we can have you respond in a time period, it would be appreciated and well make all of that part of the hearing records. With that this hearings adjourned. I call this to order. For the last several monthess i along with Ranking Member and colleagues on thi