comparemela.com

Good morning. Before we begin, i certainly want to express our support for and thoughts and prayers for all the victims of the recent hurricanes and most recently, of course, in the state of florida and our colleague in the Ranking Member on this committee, senator nel. He and senator rubio are there today as they should be. And looking out for the needs of their constituents. So again, we certainly want to express our support, prayers for them and 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. 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 unfortunately unable to join us today. We put a lot of work into this effort to date. I look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues to introduce and pass bipartisan legislation. Given this committees broad jurisdiction over transportation, interstate comance and safety, were well able to address the emergence of this technology. Beginning last congress, we held two hearings and hosted a demonstration of this technology for committee hearings. Well take a closer look at the promise and implications of the technology for trucks and larger vehicles. Automated Vehicle Technology holds great promise to transform transportation in this country, expanding mobility, reducing traffic congestion. And increasing productivity among other benefits, but the most exciting aspect 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 potential to reduce these tragic numbers dramatically. Too many lives were lost on our roads, and i look forward to hearing from ms. Hersman 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 is important as we seek to improve safety. It also puts our economy on a level Playing Field as other countries around the world deploy automated freight trucks. Trucks traveled over 280 billion miles to travel 70 of goods by tonnagen our road ways. A study saw that could yield fuel savings between 6. 7 and 16 , lowering Consumer Prices and supporting job growth. Im 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 benefits of selfdriving tests. Uber, tesla, and other have invested in automated truck technology. Truck manufacturers like navistar are actively pursuing Automated Technologies in trucks. The chief of the Colorado State patrol has seen this technology firsthand. Last year, he participated in the test of auto, now ubers truck startup, which drove 120 miles on interstate 25 in colorado. As other countries devote significant attention and effort to stimulating innovation in this area, strong federal leadership will be necessary to maintain our position as Global Leader and insure these vehicles are tested and deployed safely. Just yesterday, secretary caiho has announced they have updated their policy. Im pleased to see action from the administration on this technology. D. O. T. s new guidance improved on similar guidance from the privious administration. Both cars and trucks, from light to heavy duty, under the same Regulatory Framework, and though their approaches differ, states who have passed legislation, cover all vehicles, cars, and str trucks. Without leaving out certain vehicle classes. Of course, its important to consider all of this new technology. Its crucial we hear about the impact on jobs and engage in a cleareyed discussion on how to best prepare for the future. Im glad mr. Hall was able to join us today. There were 3 million commercial drivers in the u. S. And theyre the backbone of the economy. Technological advancements have potential to affect them in very different ways. Including in positive ways. Technology should make a drivers life easier and safer, which in turn will improve the rest of our Transportation System and those who use it every day. Automation will bring many benefits and challenges, but theyre not tentirely new challenges. As former president johnson said, automation is not our energy. 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 the 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 a result of months of collaborative effort, countless meetings with stakeholders across the spectrum of interest and 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 century manufacturing jobs as well. The remainder of this month, well 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 while gathering feedback on the chairmans draft legislation, many stakeholders were clear that the prospect of selfdriving trucks raises a very different set of issues from selfdriving cars. And ultimately those same stake holders express serious concerns with including selfdriving trucks in this bill without a much more robust discussion and evaluation of their impact by industry, academia, 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 nhtsas Automated Vehicle policy. All of which were focused on highly automated lightweight passenger cars. Not trucks. And finally, i will note that the house recently passed its selfdriving vehicle legislation unanimously without the inclusion of selfdriving trucks weighing over 10,000 pounds. It is indisputable that the Trucking Industry is critically important to our economy and to the daytoday 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. What is the Trucking Industrys timeline for deployment of highly automated trucks . Will the industry deploy levels four or five automated trucks or 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 cybersecurity 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, im of the mind that highly automated trucks are not right 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 in the longterm, selfdriving trucks and buses are also intended to improve safety on our highways. This is certainly clear, but i question assertions that excluding selfdriving trucks, i question assertions that excluding selfdriving trucks from this particular bill will result in less safe roads and that they dont merit special 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 our witnesses for being here today and for helping start this very important conversation. I look forward to the testimony. Thank you, senator peters. Well move now to our panel. We want to thank you for being here and welcome you and look forward to hearing from you. We would ask if you can confine oral remarks to five minutes. 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 with colonel Scott Hernandez, who is chief of Colorado State patrol, from lakewood, colorado. Well move to troy clarke, chief executive officer of navistar. Ms. Deborah hersman, chief of the National Safety council, chris spear, officer of the American Trucking association, and mr. Ken hall, general secretary of the International Brotherhood of teamsters. If you would proceed. Good morning. Good morning, chairman thune, senator peters and members of the committee. 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 colonel of the state patrol and 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 a deployment of Autonomous Vehicles. Our commitment is to reduce crashes, injuries and fatalities on 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. Im also a member of the commercial Vehicle Safety alliance. Cvsa, which every state is a member, works to improve 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 potential benefits, cvsa has been a supporter of regulation and policies that encourage the deployment of Safety Technologies proven through the independent research 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 intstate delivery an Autonomous Vehicle. With consideration to the fact that there are no laws or regulations prohibiting the operation of 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 fort collins, colorado, to Colorado Springs, in a level four autonomous demonstration. Soon after entering southbound i25 from the fort collins port of industry, 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 the federal Autonomous Vehicle policy and californias Autonomous Vehicle laws and rules as guidance. Preevent testing was monitored for consistency and achievement through specific safety performance gates, ranging from offroad testing to extensive onroad testing. The truck was inspected and deemed to be without a violation cvsa certified safety inspectors and the company underwent a safety audit to make sure it had appropriate level of Safety Management practices in place to safely operate in commerce. The state patrol and department of transportation received weekly briefings on performance and safety testing protocols including testing of plans for risk and fallback. Protocols including testing of snare know plans for risk and fallback. In an effort to ensure the demonstration was completed in a safe manner for all involved, the state patrol he is courted the Autonomous Vehicle in a similar park as a motorcade or rolling special event consistently monitoring safety protocols and situational assessment. While we will still need to work toward total solutions, the Colorado State patrol made progress towards understanding the preparedive of other governmental agencies understanding Autonomous Vehicle crash investigations, understanding why Cyber Security will be essential as this technology progresses, understanding how the Vehicle Systems work and how to begin advancing the process of standardized inspection procedures, understanding the development of a unique Regulatory Framework and how to better partner with all stakeholders. 24 demonstration i will straighted 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 make it clear that it is time to begin planning in earnest for the deployment of semiand fully you a mated cmvs. As this Committee Moves forward with legislation setting the National Framework to guide Autonomous Vehicles we believe that consideration must be given to cmv 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 the purpose of these questions is not to slow innovation or create roadblocks to the technology. The Enforcement Community ross recognizes the safety benefits and welcome 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 cmv 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 the Enforcement Community. I appreciate this opportunity to participate in this timely discussion on the future of you a mated commercial vehicles. Thank you very much. Thank you cole hernandez. Mr. Clark . Good morning chairman, senator peters. Mike. Good morning chairman thune, senator peters and member of the committee im honored to be here to discuss Autonomous Technology applications in commercial trucks. I am troy clark. I currently serve as the chairman, president , and chief executive officer of and a halfi Star Incorporated the manufacturer of trucks, ic school buses, diesel engines and we have over 12,000 employees worldwide. If i may i would first like to provide a quick overview of our industry. There are four major commercial truck manufacturers in our country. Ours is a small highly Competitive Industry which expects to create a small fraction of vehicles this year in comparison to the car market. We provide vehicles to independent drivers operating only one truck. We build trucks and buses via mass customization, each one tailored to meet the specific needs of a particular customer. Reliable and cost 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 they are up and running. Given all this, our customers invest significantly in the latest Safety Technology to protect their valuable Capital Asset as well as their most important human capital, the driver. This explains why Market Penetration rates for technologies like electronic stability control, radar following, cruise control, cameras for object detection, lane depart your systems and Collision Mitigation systems have been increasing every year. We call these advanced Driver Assistance systems, they offer Quantum Leaps of safety, productivity, and environmental benefits. Many of them also serve as the Building Blocks to greater automation. And a halfi star sees Autonomous Technology as an extension of the safety Technology Already in place and believe these greater levels of self kriving technology which help eliminate human error, which cuts for 94 of all vehicle accidents. Before we arrive at the future our customers tell me they have much more immediate needs. They already have driverless trucks. Thats because they have trouble recruiting and retaining drivers. As truck makers we dont hire trained drivers, our customers do. But as we continue to develop the technologies that could lead to Autonomous Vehicles we will make much of that to provide todays drivers with greater ease of use, comfort, safety, prokttivity, and efficiency. Factors i believe will attract more people to this important and noble profession. Personally, i believe drivers will become more like air lane pilots more highly skilled than they are today. They will develop more facets for optimized Vehicle Safety. The driver may be sitting in his drivers seat monitoring the Autonomous Technology is not being created in a vacuum. Our system is developing vehicle to Vehicle Systems to allow cars and trucks to one another. As federal regulations are being complemented we want to make sure Passenger Vehicles are following similar safety and Design Standards for optimal compatibility on the highway. Otherwise vehicles equipped with v to v Technology May not be able to communicate effectively and could create blind spots that could create inadvertent hazards. When we test on the road, we have to match the conditions our customers face so we test trucks in many different states and climtsz. 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 of the advanced driving technologies now. Providing clarity on the legislative and regulatory front will allow us truck manufacturers to design and validate systems that meet the needs of our customers while minimally disrupting the industry. Advanced autonomous drivers will come to our industry. Large scale displacement of drivers is not like toe to happen, especially in the short and medium term. We believe these will increase productivity and lower cost as well as lead to efficient use of the existing infrastructure. In the commercial industry we have proven that regulations and technology can Work Together to advance the interests of all stakeholders. The time for these discussion is now and i applaud the committee on holding this hearing so we can begin discussing this issue. I welcome any questions at the right time. Thank you mr. Clark. Ms. Isman. Welcome back to this committee. Thank you. Thank you chairman thune, Ranking Member peters, and emin of the committee. As president and ceo of the naeft Safety Council i strive every day to realize our mission of eliminating preventable 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 first called on putting advanced technology in commercial vehicles back in 1995. And it was an issue that is on their most wanted list today. Today we have certainly gone beyond the level two technology this they had hoped for and envisioned back in 1995 and are talking about fully you a mated vehicles. I know that you all have read all of our testimony. There is 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 note a good thing when you walk in the door from a trip. And i said what happened to my car . He took me out in the garage and he showed me. In this picture up here on the screen is my car. 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 fire house in front of him. Being a former investigatesor, 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 there was a dog in the car. For the next couple of days, i spent, my time thinkingu what happened . How did this what happen . Could it have been prevented . Did it involve distraction . Did it involve if a feeg . Could it have been prevented. 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 is managing our claim. And the insures adjuster had just called the gentleman who was the driver of the jeep liberty who had hit her car. Mr. Norton called his house and his son answered the call. When he asked to speak to mr. Norton, his son said he had been killed in a crash. And the adjuster said i thought already no injuries in this crash. He said my dad was killed on friday. Because we knew the information on the driver. We found that mr. Norton had been in an intersection crash in his jeep liberty just shortly before. This picture up on the screen is the picked that was in the newspaper. Again, the same question starts started to run through my head. What happened . How did this happen . Who have at fault . Did could it have been prevented . Did it have something to happen with what happened three weeks before . As a safety professional who spent decades working on how to prevent transportation events and incidents, i realized while its important for us to understand why something happened what is 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. He was 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. Mr. Spear . Thank you chairman thune, senator peters, members of the committee for the opportunity to testify today. I think debbys testimony really captures the importance of this issue well. While shes a great contribution to the safety story, the American Trucking Associations 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 meets rapidly developing technology. There are more than 7 Million People employed in the Trucking Industry. And in truckingrelated jobs in the u. S. , including 3. 5 million Truck Drivers. One 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 celebrating this week as part of National Truck driver appreciation week move 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 you are seeing today, they are on the front lines of disaster response, delivering supplies to help the people of 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 interchangeably, ata believes the world of you a mated vehicles will still have an Important Role for the 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 you a malted technology while navigating the city escapes and handling the customer pick ups 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 we are 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 you a mated driving technologyics makes sense to provide protections and insentives for technology and innovation in Passenger Vehicles not just commercial vehicles. This includes making sure that state and federal regulations do not it also includes exemptions so that new technology can be tested and developed in dmeshl and noncommercial vehicles. We are at 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 you a mated 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 patchwork 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 you a mated vehicles. We believe the benefits of you a mated vehicles would be greatly enhanced ins for instance by Vehicle Connectivity using the 5. 9 giga hertz safety spectrum. The use of this communication channel for vehicle to Vehicle Systems will fully unlock the potential of you a mated vehicles to improve safety, reduce traffic congestion, and decrease emissions. We encourage the federal Communications Commission to preserve all seven channels of 5. 9 giga hertz 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 you a mated 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. But d. O. T. Should first determine how a more you a maded environment will impact the industry it regulates in order to minimize disruption and confusion as this sec following becomes more robust and widely available. This concludes my testimony. Chairman, senator, members of the committee i thank you again for the tune to testify on this important subject and look forward to questions. Thank you mr. Spear. Mr. Hall . Chairman thune, senator peters, members of committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today on an issue that is a vital importance to American Workers. Im the general secretary treasure of the Teamsters Union representing workers in almost every Transportation Industry. Teamsters members could be delivering anything from bakery goods to concrete, palettized material the your latest on line package or getting you to work on time and safely trt transporting your kids to school. While many of our members turn a key in a truck to start their workday the issues we will be discussing today dont just impact those who drive vehicles for a living. A future that 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 your members daily live is not new to me or to my union. In addition to my duties as general secretary treasurer for over 20 years i also served ads director of the unions package direction and i ran with daily negotiations with ups. The issues facing the 250,000 teamsters who work for ups are inextricably tied to the incorporation of new technology. The Logistics Industry as a whole has changed extraordinarily over time and teamsters have been in the thick of it. We have strived to balance countless piece of of new technology into the workplace and ensuring workers feel no harass mountain and feel safe on the job. My job has shown me new technologies can exist in a environment where workers are still taken care of but it takes strong and aggressive action from those workers to make sure it happens. Self driving vehicles have the potential to change the Transportation Industries as we know it. It can be for the better for the worse depending on the action of this Committee Workers and others takiguiding those on our roads. It is incumbent to make sure workers are not left behind in this process. It is essential American Workers are not treated as guinea pigs for unproven technologies. The issues facing autonomous commercial trucks are fundamentally different and potentially more calamitous than those facing passenger cars and warrant their own careful consideration. The consequencer for getting this wrong could be deadly 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 in our daily lives, increasing molt for the disabled and alleviating congestion in our cities. These are all important topics. But taking a cookie cutter approach and applying it to commercial vehicles is dangerous. For instance or how we would make sure that rules governing the drivers training requirements would be updated the moment one of those new vehicles are put on the road. And the potential impact on the livelihood of millions 6 your constituents. She is issues could be considered deliberately at the outset this discussion, not after the fact. For all the discussion here about the benefits that may accompany this technology i urge you to consider these possibilities with a healthy dose of realism. When you hear that safety metrics will translate into effortless deployment on the roads i urge you to recall some others that the committee worked on this year. This committee has spearheaded investigations into volkswagen knowingly cheating its customers out of emission benefits. The air bag manufacturer takata knowingly sold defective air bag that claimed the lives of american citizens. Market forces did not convince these markets not to compete and push the envelope past what was safe. That same mentality is a constant factor in a trucking space where margins are consistently tight and competition is fierce. The fear of many transportation workers is that absent 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. There are so many impacts to consider, unchecked this new technology to on up our citizens to having thb privacy breached and personal data sold. Tracking would be intertwined with existing collective bargaining agreements and workplace policies. A truck driver will have to worry about having his rig hacked and hughes vehicle used as the next weapon in a nice or barcelona type attack. And employers may pay lower wages. I applaud you for having meeting with the teamsters voice at the table i look forward to working with the committee to ensure that working families remain at the center of this debate in all aspects of automation, especially when we are considering commercial Motor Vehicles it is more important than get it done correctly rather than just get it 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. 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. But 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 the demonstration was at night when there was 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, a level 4 demonstration. And what that meant was is that there was still a driver there to get that vehicle onto the highway and then into the terminal area. So that driver was involved in that process. But without a doubt, i believe that there is some advantages. I think the key is is that we are 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 they have already demonstrated this puts us behind, and i think that it shouldnt be left further behind in the process. Okay. Thank you. Ms. Irsman, the crashes you highlight in your testimony are horrible and could have been mitigated with advanced technology. Since trucks are involved in some of the most jarring examples that you cited would say that accelerated deployment of the automated trucks should provide improved safety . Yes. With the correct controls i think has the game changer. Advanced technology can solve many problems we have struggled with for decades. I think its important to have the conversations and the issues you have outlined in the bills. Data sharing, testing protocols,an gaugement of all of the right stakeholders, these are all things we need to begin to discuss. Good, thanks. Mr. Clark, is there any reason to think that when it comes to you a maded vehicles that federal Safety Standards governing core you a mated Technology Things like sensors and radar should be fundamentally different for trucks and cars and develop at different speeds. The fact of the matter is that the basic Sensor Technology and some of that type of componentry which you put on the truck is very similar to what is in cars. However our heavy vehicles are different. They weigh more, they take locker 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 to allow the heavy vehicle to perform in a similar mandatory a Light Vehicle have yet to be engineered. We need the data from real life in hands use by Real Customers to understand what the proper validation processes and practices will be, or what the engineering problems are that we need to solve. We me no reason why commercial trucks should move forward in this area at a different speed or under a different timetable than Light Vehicles. Mr. Spehr, this appears to be in an instance in which many Trucking Companies and manufacturers are actually pushing for more federal regulation of the industry. Can you explain the reasons why you think more leadership from the federal government will accelerate the benefits of this new technology . I wouldnt say its one regulation but at least one standard. Seamless federal standard. That comes from federal leadership. We would push and advocate heavily for that as opposed to 50 state regimes. We are interstate commerce 70 . Thats no small figure. We cross state lines every day. It is 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 we are not able to move freight in a productive way n a safe way, and obviously in a profitable way. So having one seamless standard at the federal level is what we would advocate. And its certainly a much better approach in our view than a patchwork of state laws, conflicting state laws. Thank you. Senator peters . Thank you mr. Chairman. Thank you to etch auto 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, that there is a great deal of potential in this technology. We have to do it right. We have to be thoughtful about it. Thats certainly why we have spn so much time on this issue related to automobiles as i mentioned in my opening comments, hours and hours of conversations with all 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. Mr. Spehr you mentioned its the top job in over 20 states. So folks who we represent in our communities, it 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 and our state. Mr. Spehr, in your testimony you said that the ata believes that the driver will retain an Important Role, even in you a maded vehicles. If i may paraphrase. I think thats in our written. The i think we can all agree that he auto 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 preparing to address driver displacement. I know mr. Clark mentioned that drivers would still have a role in platooning as an example of how a driver would be in that business model. Even that means a displacement of drivers. If you are platooning trucks that means you have several trucks driving together. Normally you would have each of these trucks with a driver in front and now you just have one driver in front of a platoon. There are differences. My question mr. Spehr and mr. Clark as well, what are you doing internally to prepare for possible driver displacement as a result of highly you a mated trucks . Quite frankly, we dont view it as a displacement issue because we dont believe level 5, no Steering Wheel, no pedal is imminent. What we are really focused on is Driver Assist technologies, not driverless. If thats acceptable in this committee then we are really talking about how do we enable drivers to be safer, more productive, their equipment for environmentally friendly, less congestion. These are all measurable concerns that our fleets will invest in and 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 50,000 Driver Shortage as it stands, if that trend continues it will be double in five years. We have to hire 960,000 employ yoes over the next decade into this industry. So we are pushing hard the 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, and ways that we can measure better productivity and safety, lower emission, less congestion, those are all things that we would be very interested in and thats why we feel trucks need to be part of this legislation. Driverless, level 5, thats decades away. Its 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 we are not concerned about displacement at this time. You say that Driverless Technology for trucks is decades away. Yet for automobiles its just a few years away. Why the difference . 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 it is a going to do a drop off or a pick up. We wouldnt argue with that. Because we think the driver is still going to be in the seat. Its really the long haul where you are going to see a lot of the value come from Driver Assist technology, level two and three. We dont believe that thats going to be a threat. We think drivers are going to play an intricate role in the city escapes, the pick ups, the deliveries. In terms of the long haul where you can see efficiencies to lowering fuel burn,ologue emissions, Better Safety by having connectivity between cars trucks and infrastructure. Those are things that are really going to 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. I would like to have an opportunity to hear a little bit more about your perspective mr. Spehr ace testimony. Im 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 workplaces that we represent, they look very unsimilar to warehousing and all these other different aspects of industries that we represent. They are much different than we were when i began as a teamster. But there is a very much of a difference here when we are talking about having an 80,000 pound 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 tractor trailer 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. I mean we no matter what technology you put into these trucks we have seen already in areas around the world where large trucks have been used to essentially attack the citizens of those particular areas. And 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. Spehr, what do you say to that cyber threat argument that mr. Hall raised . I think it is a serious issue and i think the Auto Industry and Trucking Industry are ensured to committing there is nobody out there that wants thb equipment to be compromised. So i think putting together very strong protocols in concert with federal policies, we work very regularly not only with d. O. T. And nhtsa, but also with dhs. I agree with mr. Hall, i dont think you want a tank truck thats driverless in an isis world. That is not something that we are advocating. 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, you know, the safety and the productivity of the fleets and the driver, we are 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 a trucking question is that your position . Yeah, i think so. We work very closely with dhs, fbi, volleypy. We have been working with d. O. D. On testing. Trucks have been integral parts of testing protocols. Now the committee is accepting our industry in that realm. Now you are going to have the car industry and the Trucking Industry comparing best practice to make sure there is a seamless protocol. Let me get on to another topic. Mr. Spehr and mr. Hall, do you agree that we do have an impending truck Driver Shortage . Is that your position, mr. Spehr . Is that your position mr. Hall. It is. It is, yes. Mr. Spehr, it would it seems to me based on your testimony that, actually, going to a level two or three really, you are saying thats really not going to be an answer to the trucker shortage because we are 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 thing on my phone and laptop, but its easier to hand them to my kids. They can get it done 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. And to make trucking cool, to make trucking attractive, tech savvy n this generation, i think is a good fit. And i think we are 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. It may be more indirect but we think that is an attractive element in terms of bringing new talent into our industry long term. I see, so we can add to the work force. Let me ask you about your statement on 5. 9 giga hertz safety spectrum. If we dont get that, and we dont get the exclusive use of that as your testimony advocates, what will that mean . I think it would be a huge setback. Im more bullish on this issue than others. 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 cause sauce because now you dont have cars cutting off trucks. Two thirds of the accidents that involve trucks are caused bypass injury vehicles, driver behavior, speeding, texting. Connectivity plays a key role as that becomes you know more of a problem, eliminating congestion. These are huge issues that gain from connectivity through that 5. 9. If we dont have that, you are simplying go be to work off of other applications, blue tooth, for instance. We look a lot a platooning in our industry. Trucks trailing trucks. Thats done basically on a blue tooth platform. Auto im not saying thats a bad platform to work from. But a 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. Clark 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. Who is ahead of whom in this area . What can we learn from the experiences of the other countries . And if you can touch on the connectivity issue that mr. Spehr touched on. Yes, thank you senator. Actually on the connectivity issue would endorse comments of mr. Spehr. Look, connected vehicles see much further than any driver, connected drivers 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 types of circumstances. It is the secret sauce and i think is really one of the keys to unlocking the potential of this technology. How are our global competitors doing . This is, in some of the trade journals you may have read, this is the space race of our industry, basically. There is a number of technologies that are coming together. And very interestingly, a number of those Technology Leads come out of the United States. And you know, the Sensor Technology, the a. I. And Machine Learning technology thats necessary to take advantage of this. The very sophisticated digital three dimensional lied ar maps that are running in the back round and supporting this software, these are all areas where we have the edge. We are ahead of germany, United Kingdom and south korea and china . The basic in this regard. Yes, sir, in the basic. And thats a good thing. It is. What we need to do is 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 the an ittics to bring forward the right applications and regulations. Thank you. Thank you senator wicker. I would agree i think in terms of the transformative impacts and effects of this technology, the closest thing would be the internet. I think this is going to transform the way we do things. Anecdotally, Trucking Companies in my state cannot find enough drivers. There is a real shortage out there. Thank you senator wicker. Next up is senator eon. Thank you chairman. I enjoyed this conversation. Its important the my home state of indiana where we have a robust Logistics Industry and very serious shortage of Truck Drivers to keep that industry going. So i think we might have a big part of the solution being presented today. So in 2015, there were 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. Nhtsas estimate that as many as 94 of crashes can be attributed to human driver error so you can see the potential avas bring in terms of lives saved. But it can change the lives of individuals who rely on friends, family and others to drive them around our communities. You think of a blind and disabled, the elderly and others who could have a far greater quality of life when avas 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 bring social inclusion by offering independent mobility to get to schools, jobs and all places that americans go each day. To get to the point where av right side can provide such a societal benefit congress will 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 by fur kate the Regulatory Environment for small and large vehicles we are going to delay the life saving and life changing benefits that Av Technology can bring to all americans. Mr. Spehr, regarding the threat of a. I. Or automation becoming net job losses for our economy, you have predicted that truckers will 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 add more value or earn higher wages and so forth at least as you have styled it. Could you expand on that because i think the popular perception is that when you get on 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 very similar. I know this plays a little bit off of mr. Halls testimony, too, because we share that concern. What many people dont see are the pickups the deliveries, the navigating of the city escapes. There is some complex maneuvering with this equipment that takes a lot of tal on the behind the wheel to make that happen. With all the variables they are dealing with, they are not automated. They are not level five. Unless we are going to remove all human error from all vehicles on the road you are going to need drivers in the seat handling 80,000 pound vehicles in our opinion. Similar concept to airline pilots, the takeoffs, the taxiways, the landings. They are 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 that Technology Take over. The pilot is always there, can take over if conditions arise that warrant that. Same stands true for drivers in 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, you all fly. There are pilots in the cockpit. Right. Those cockpits, the automation that in these planes can take off, fly, and land all on their own. And over the years i would say we have had an increase in the number of pilots. 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 in their unions as well. So thats notable. What is could you discuss platooning . Im not entirely sure what the role of the operator would be in the platooning process. Well, the platooning would involve a concept where a driver would be in the lead truck. And that pursuant trucks would follow, possibly without a driver, eventually, but up to two, three trailer trucks would follow the lead driver and they would be connected. Right now thats being tested through blue tooth technology. Its why we feel the 5. 9 would be a better platform to connected vehicles because then you can include connecting cars. So the accident that ms. Hersman put up on the slide there if you have cars and trucks talking to one another you start to mitigate risk. This strikes me as meaningful work 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 bloomenthal. Thanks mr. Chairman and senator peters and others for your work on the legislation that raises some of the issues that bring us here today. I think we need rules and regulations in this area. Rules that will guarantee safety. I was daeply disappointed deputily disappointed by the guidance issued yesterday by nhtsa which struck me as anemic in fact, a giveaway to the industry. And it could result in lives lost unless we have enforceable rules and regulations that protect the traveling public, 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. Hersman, and thank you for all your good work in this area. The reason if framework issued yesterday concerned me so greatly is it depends on voluntary self assess mountain by the industry as opposed to mandatory rules. It was termed by one report even less burdensome, quote, even less burdensome than the voluntary one issued under the obama administration. And the net effect would be to leave enforcement virtually togeth toothless. So i am putting to you the question to all of the witnesses here today, isnt it necessary to have mandatory mutuals and regulations enforced by the government, by the department of transportation or some enforcer, to protect the traveling public . I think its absolutely true. There has to be weve seen too many examples of and thats one of our concerns is whether or not there is going to be the kind of oversight thats necessary to protect the american public. I mean, we have seen too many cases where for example, in the case of volkswagen where everyone assumed they were doing the right thing. While it is a different issue with emissions it is still the same issue that if a company is allowed to produce vehicles, whether it is automobiles or in particular when its 80,000pound rigs, then there must be oversight. Thats why i think its premature to think that these commercial vehicles should be included at this time. That is not the say that and you know, i want to i am hopeful that we are all willing to guarantee that we are going to protect all those drivers jobs but we are certainly open to talking about anything that improves safety. But i am concerned when i know about the issues that have happened where the driver was killed, that we just saw a report yesterday about. When uber spent lots of money in the city of pittsburgh and making sure that they measured down to the centimeter every street in that city but yet one of the vehicles went the wrong way down a oneway street. That is you know, on a oneway street, maybe theres a way to control that. We have got to be weve got to have more thought. Not that theres not going to be a time, as i have listened here and agreed with some of my colleagues here, i have i understand that we are going to see some changes. But there has to be a lot more work done. Does anyone on this panel think that the nhtsa gadance offers an adequate basis to go forward . I wouldnt say i wouldnt say, senator, that its an end all. You know issue offence of guidance. I think we are heading down the path where you are going to have that framework. Its hardly a robust first step. Would you agree . I would say that it is a first step and thats better than nothing. But it ought to be a lot more robust. It will be a lot more. We will have a framework. We are moving in that direction. At the same time the only reason we are having this discussion is innovation is driving this outcome not regulations. But the rules are as important as the technology, would you agree. I agree. And i think its getting the federal government on a Good Foundation to where it has great understanding and visibility where this technology is going to take us. You know, in my testimony we advocate a federal role, full authority. And the rules have to be enforceable. Absolutely. And they should be enforced. And i think thats the direction we are going and thats why we believe trucks need to be part of it. But the rules have to keep pace with the technology, correct. I think eventually they will, but yes you are 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 enforceability of those rules fail to keep pace. Correct . And i also think the same is true if you get the rules wrong. I think excludeing the commercial industry would be a very big detriment to safety. I think include sift and getting this right from the start we all share the road. And i think having a federal role, Sole Authority overseeing it, not a patchwork of state laws that deals with all motors on the road, motorists on the road, commercial or passenger, would be the best approach. But relying on voluntary is assessments . And foregoing public oversight and enforcement, i think, is a mistake that would discredit the goal that we share of making Technology Available and accessible to as many people as possible and increasing safety through the use of technology. I think that revisiting this guidance is something that has to be done. And i hope it will be done. Thank you mr. Chairman. Thank you senator bloomenthal. Senator lee. Thank you very much mr. Chairman. Thanks to all of you who have joined us today as witnesses. As we consider the issue of Autonomous Vehicles this month its becoming more and more clear that the future of American Transportation is inextricably intertwined with theed a vent of Automated Technology. And i think its therefore really important that we think about this issue a lot and we moved forward with it with an eye toward advancing it and allowing it to be developed. 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, one that encourages and facilitates the development of life saving technology, technology that will make the American People safer and more productive. The research and development of autonomous commercial Motor Vehicles is, i think, critical to this type of innovation. And should therefore be included in any legislation that we put forward this month. Now, according to the u. S. Department of labors bureau of labor statistics, trucking transportation occupations account for more workrelated fatalities than perhaps any other profession. And its my understanding that 87 of truck collisions are caused by human error, 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. I have a question. Ill start with ms. Hersman. Given that trucks are involved in a disproportionate share of fatal vehicle crashes, wouldnt you a maded 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 that game changer when it comes to reducing fatalities. Theres Technology Available today that we see can do this. Rearend collisions are a great example. Three times more fatal if you are 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, vehicle to Vehicle Technology can help with that. Automated vehicles are an extension of some of those technologies. In light of that fact, why would it make sense to put them on two different tracks one in which we facilitate and promote and allow for the development n the case of Passenger Vehicles, but not in the area of commercial vehicles . We dont think it does make sense because in situation where is we have put passenger cars on a fast track and havent addressed commercial vehicles electron stability control is a issue. After there were roll over issues involving ford explorers, stability control was mandated on Passenger Vehicles. That occurred in the 2012 model year. We are looking at not having that on commercial vehicles for many more years. That doesnt make sense. We need one level of safety for everyone who is on the roadways. Colonel hernandez, the houses Autonomous Vehicle legislation is clearly limited to addressing vehicle Design Standards that will be administered by nhtsa, just as they have always done for both cars and for cmvs. I realize theres a lot of interest and didnt over the ultimate operations of autonomous cmvs but the current bills simply dont address that. And they are assuring everyones safety during r and d. That being said, colonel, would there be any reason to delay the fundamental safety framework for you a 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 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. I think the guidance may by deficient. 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 Auto 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 there 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 20 jobs in 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 options 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 logistic 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, thank you. Thank you, senator gardner. Thank you, mr. Chairman and thank you to the panelists. Its a very engaging, important discussion today. Mr. Spears, 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 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 or 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 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. 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 colleagues, 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 Commission 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 knows 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 integrative Transportation Systems in cities and Rural Communities throughout the country. My colleague, the 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. Herlsman 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 inhofe . 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 three 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 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 telematically, 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 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 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 intended to drive in a very 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 connected telematically. 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 . It looks as though herks except in urban situations, theres 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 automobiles 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 truck alley, theres a lot of people moving quickly. Traffic flow, management, but 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 herzman, 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 would suggest 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 think for the drivers, as well. Its kind of hand in glove, right . Yes. And huge wins in the marketplace because the customer wants a more fuelefficient plane, and driving down the costs also gives you a more competitive advantage when youre out there marketing cost and moving product. Yes, senator. This is a you know, ours is a highly regulated Business Environment you know that is aimed at safety, efficiency and basically Clean Products and the environment. There are no Better Safety regulators in the world than t nitsa. We have worked together to bring products to the market that improves safety, and creates a cleaner environment. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you. Senator peters . Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you for allowing me to have another round here. I appreciate your indulgeance. Thank you to our witnesses here today. The advocates for highway and auto safety have expressed concerns to my office about including trucks in this legislation and they recommended several ways the d. O. T. , nhtsa and are raising important issues. I welcome your thoughts on some of the issues that they have raised. The advocates for highway and auto safety believe automated trucks that do not comply with Motor Vehicle standards should not be subject to exemptions, would you agree with that . Are you talking about for testing environments . I think if we have specific geo fenced testing environments, we want to think about how what were testing, what equipment theyre testing. I think its operating out on the road with the public they need to be subjected to the same standards as other vehicles out there. Sounds like youre in agreement with that stance . Yep. I would say certainly when we look at test environments, i mean, we talked about a situation where we had a unique test and they created specific parameters around it. So id say 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 i think we have to have major controls around those things. Fair enough. Have you considered what would be an appropriate number of exemptions for highly automated trucks Going Forward . I think that its possible. I know the committee has a number in their bill. You could think about a pro rata share based on the number of vehicles that are out there, Passenger Vehicles versus commercial vehicles. In the purview of the committee to put that out there. Were talking about fully Automated Vehicles, were not seeing those numbers now. Under current law, current law allows 2,500. Would 2,500 be sufficient for trucks . I guess my understanding is theres 300,000 produced in the country versus 17 million automobiles . 2,500 sufficient . Im not sure that 2,500 is the right number. I might defer to some of my colleagues who have more real experience with respect to putting vehicles out on the roads. 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. Right now, there are none. Right. Realize 2,500 are current. If we change that we obviously need some thoughtful consideration of that and get some data and evidence to determine that. I appreciate that answer. The advocates for highway and auto safety believe automated trucks must have a operator with valid commercial drivers license while in the vehicle at all times and are advaocating a standard for driver engagement. Does the National Safety council have obligations to insure an operator is behind the wheel . I would say youre asking me about other folks recommendations. I can share with you some of our recommendations. Is that one of your recommendations . For us we do feel, depending on the level of automation, there absolutely needs to be a qualified driver behind the wheel. One of the things we havent talked about that this issue goes to that the advocates are raising is i know we talked about displacement and Training Programs, but what we really need to talk about are Training Programs Going Forward. Making sure there are opportunities for people to be qualified on advanced technologies. I held a commercial drivers license. There are endorsements, whether its air brakes, school bus, passenger endorsements. 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. Thats my next question, i think youre ahead of it. The advocates raised questions about driver training. They believe that drivers operating a truck must have an additional endorsement to insure theyve been properly train today monitor and understand the design domain of the vehicle and if need be take over control. They believe it should include a minimum number of hours behind the wheel. That sounds like the direction youre going to and its something we need to think through. I absolutely think as long as human beings are engaged we have to make sure we do it safely. I know everyone is talking about levels 2, 3, 4, 5 but i would posit that one of the most dangerous environments is when a human being and vehicle is sharing control. How we handle the handoffs and how we structure the notifications, the warnings, and the training are very important. This is where weve seen in the aviation industry, mode confusion. Over reliance on automation. These are really important conversations for us to have, even about levels 2 and 3 before we get to 4 and 5. Its going to be a very messy environment. We need to talk about those things. Yeah, absolutely. I agree. Just one final point, mr. Chairman, they are also suggesting Motor Carriers should be required to apply for additional operating authority. As the National Safety council, have you considered that issue . I think its important that they apply for operating authority as theyre required to do so today. I think its really important for the federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration to identify what that means. And they need to be part of the conversation with respect to vehicle standards, that nhtsa is responsible for. I think as were seeing its a new world out there. Everyone has to come along and identify what that means. Right. I appreciate those answers. Its clear we need to do a whole lot more thinking about this. I appreciate your response, thank you. Thank you senator peters, thanks to our panel today. Its been great conversation and discussion. And i think its shed a lot of light on important issues as were we try and shape our bill. Weve been working, as i said, senator peters and i, senator nelson and others on the committee for some time in trying to craft a bill that really does enable the technology to move forward and with maximum emphasize on safety. And so were trying to figure out how to thread that needle. I would argue it makes sense not to have two Safety Standards out there. One for trucks and one for automobiles. And that as we think about these things, we want to have make sure were providing the safest environment for all motorists on the highways. But thats a point we continue to talk about in terms of the final bill we end up filing. Got a draft out there, i know many of you have looked at it and we welcome your thoughts and input and certainly the testimony this morning and the responses to our questions have been helpful in that regard. I would simply say for members of the committee who have questions for the record to submit those. If we could all of you respond within a twoweek time period, it would be appreciated and well make all that part of the hearing record. Thank you again for being there. With that, this hearing is adjourned. In about 15 minutes, the democratic policy and Communications Committee holds a hearing on president trumps Election Commission and concerns over potential privacy violations and voter suppression. That starts live at 3 00 eastern re

© 2024 Vimarsana

comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.