Governors are sent by Him to punish the evildoers and praise the virtuous (1 Peter 2:14).

     
Congressional Record2017/09/06Senate | House | Extensions

2017/09/06 > House > H6667 >     1 | Next Article

        

[Pages H6667-H6677]
From the Congressional Record Online through GPO




    SAFELY ENSURING LIVES FUTURE DEPLOYMENT AND RESEARCH IN VEHICLE 
                             EVOLUTION ACT

Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3388) to provide for information on highly automated driving systems to be made available to prospective buyers, as amended.

The Clerk read the title of the bill.

The text of the bill is as follows: H.R. 3388 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS. (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the “Safely Ensuring Lives Future Deployment and Research In Vehicle Evolution Act” or the “SELF DRIVE Act”. (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act is as follows: Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents. Sec. 2. Purpose. Sec. 3. NHTSA authority and State preemption for autonomous motor vehicles. Sec. 4. Updated or new motor vehicle safety standards for highly automated vehicles. Sec. 5. Cybersecurity of automated driving systems. Sec. 6. General exemptions. Sec. 7. Motor vehicle testing or evaluation. Sec. 8. Information on highly automated driving systems made available to prospective buyers. Sec. 9. Highly Automated Vehicle Advisory Council. Sec. 10. Rear seat occupant alert system. Sec. 11. Headlamps. Sec. 12. Privacy plan required for highly automated vehicles. Sec. 13. Definitions. SEC. 2. PURPOSE. The purpose of this Act is to memorialize the Federal role in ensuring the safety of highly automated vehicles as it relates to design, construction, and performance, by encouraging the testing and deployment of such vehicles. SEC. 3. NHTSA AUTHORITY AND STATE PREEMPTION FOR AUTONOMOUS MOTOR VEHICLES. Section 30103 of title 49, United States Code, is amended-- [[Page H6668]] (1) by amending subsection (b) to read as follows: “(b) Preemption.-- “(1) Highly automated vehicles.--No State or political subdivision of a State may maintain, enforce, prescribe, or continue in effect any law or regulation regarding the design, construction, or performance of highly automated vehicles, automated driving systems, or components of automated driving systems unless such law or regulation is identical to a standard prescribed under this chapter. “(2) Motor vehicle standard.--When a motor vehicle safety standard is in effect under this chapter, a State or political subdivision of a State may prescribe or continue in effect a standard applicable to the same aspect of performance of a motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment only if the standard is identical to the standard prescribed under this chapter. “(3) Rules of construction.-- “(A) In general.--Nothing in this subsection may be construed to prohibit a State or a political subdivision of a State from maintaining, enforcing, prescribing, or continuing in effect any law or regulation regarding registration, licensing, driving education and training, insurance, law enforcement, crash investigations, safety and emissions inspections, congestion management of vehicles on the street within a State or political subdivision of a State, or traffic unless the law or regulation is an unreasonable restriction on the design, construction, or performance of highly automated vehicles, automated driving systems, or components of automated driving systems. “(B) Motor vehicle dealers.--Nothing in this subsection may be construed to prohibit a State or political subdivision of a State from maintaining, enforcing, prescribing, or continuing in effect any law or regulation regarding the sale, distribution, repair, or service of highly automated vehicles, automated driving systems, or components of automated driving systems by a dealer, manufacturer, or distributor. “(C) Conformity with federal law.--Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to preempt, restrict, or limit a State or political subdivision of a State from acting in accordance with any other Federal law. “(4) Higher performance requirement.--However, the United States Government, a State, or a political subdivision of a State may prescribe a standard for a motor vehicle, motor vehicle equipment, highly automated vehicle, or automated driving system obtained for its own use that imposes a higher performance requirement than that required by the otherwise applicable standard under this chapter. “(5) State enforcement.--A State may enforce a standard that is identical to a standard prescribed under this chapter.”; and (2) by amending subsection (e) to read as follows: “(e) Common Law Liability.-- “(1) In general.--Compliance with a motor vehicle safety standard prescribed under this chapter does not exempt a person from liability at common law. “(2) Rule of construction.--Nothing in this section shall be construed to preempt common law claims.”. SEC. 4. UPDATED OR NEW MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS FOR HIGHLY AUTOMATED VEHICLES. (a) In General.--Chapter 301 of subtitle VI of title 49, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 30128 the following new section: “Sec. 30129. Updated or new motor vehicle safety standards for highly automated vehicles “(a) Safety Assessment Certification.-- “(1) Final rule.--Not later than 24 months after the date of the enactment of this section, the Secretary of Transportation shall issue a final rule requiring the submission of safety assessment certifications regarding how safety is being addressed by each entity developing a highly automated vehicle or an automated driving system. Such rule shall include-- “(A) a specification of which entities are required to submit such certifications; “(B) a clear description of the relevant test results, data, and other contents required to be submitted by such entity, in order to demonstrate that such entity's vehicles are likely to maintain safety, and function as intended and contain fail safe features, to be included in such certifications; and “(C) a specification of the circumstances under which such certifications are required to be updated or resubmitted. “(2) Interim requirement.--Until the final rule issued under paragraph (1) takes effect, safety assessment letters shall be submitted to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration as contemplated by the Federal Automated Vehicles Policy issued in September 2016, or any successor guidance issued on highly automated vehicles requiring a safety assessment letter. “(3) Periodic review and updating.--Not later than 5 years after the date on which the final rule is issued under paragraph (1), and not less frequently than every 5 years thereafter, the Secretary shall-- “(A) review such rule; and “(B) update such rule if the Secretary considers it necessary. “(4) Rules of construction.-- “(A) No conditions on deployment.--Nothing in this subsection may be construed to limit or affect the Secretary's authority under any other provision of law. The Secretary may not condition deployment or testing of highly automated vehicles on review of safety assessment certifications. “(B) No new authorities.--No new authorities are granted to the Secretary under this section other than the promulgation of the rule pursuant to paragraph (1). “(5) Review and research.--To accommodate the development and deployment of highly automated vehicles and to ensure the safety and security of highly automated vehicles and motor vehicles and others that will share the roads with highly automated vehicles, not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this section, the Secretary shall-- “(A) initiate or continue a review of the Federal motor vehicle safety standards in effect on such date of enactment; and “(B) initiate or continue research regarding new Federal motor vehicle safety standards. “(b) Rulemaking and Safety Priority Plan.-- “(1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this section, the Secretary shall make available to the public and submit to the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate a rulemaking and safety priority plan, as necessary to accommodate the development and deployment of highly automated vehicles and to ensure the safety and security of highly automated vehicles and motor vehicles and others that will share the roads with highly automated vehicles, to-- “(A) update the motor vehicle safety standards in effect on such date of enactment; “(B) issue new motor vehicle safety standards; and “(C) consider how objective ranges in performance standards could be used to test motor vehicle safety standards, which safety standards would be appropriate for such testing, and whether additional authority would facilitate such testing. “(2) Inclusion of priorities.-- “(A) Priorities.--The plan required by paragraph (1) shall detail the overall priorities of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration for the 5 years following the issuance of the plan, including both priorities with respect to highly automated vehicles and priorities with respect to other safety initiatives of the Administration, in order to meet the Nation's motor vehicle safety challenges. “(B) Identification of elements that may require standards.--For highly automated vehicles, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration should identify elements that may require performance standards including human machine interface, sensors, and actuators, and consider process and procedure standards for software and cybersecurity as necessary. “(3) Periodic updating.--The plan required by paragraph (1) shall be updated every 2 years, or more frequently if the Secretary considers it necessary. “(4) Rulemaking proceedings on updated or new motor vehicle safety standards.-- “(A) In general.--Not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of this section, the Secretary shall initiate the first rulemaking proceeding in accordance with the rulemaking and safety priority plan required by paragraph (1). “(B) Prioritization of subsequent proceedings.--The Secretary shall continue initiating rulemaking proceedings in accordance with such plan. The Secretary may change at any time those priorities to address matters the Secretary considers of greater priority. If the Secretary makes such a change, the Secretary shall complete an interim update of the priority plan, make such update available to the public, and submit such update to the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate.”. (b) Clerical Amendment.--The analysis for chapter 301 of subtitle VI of title 49, United States Code, is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 30128 the following new item: “30129. Updated or new motor vehicle safety standards for highly automated vehicles.”. SEC. 5. CYBERSECURITY OF AUTOMATED DRIVING SYSTEMS. (a) In General.--Chapter 301 of subtitle VI of title 49, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 30129 (as added by section 4) the following new section: “Sec. 30130. Cybersecurity of automated driving systems “(a) Cybersecurity Plan.--A manufacturer may not sell, offer for sale, introduce or deliver for introduction into commerce, or import into the United States, any highly automated vehicle, vehicle that performs partial driving automation, or automated driving system unless such manufacturer has developed a cybersecurity plan that includes the following: “(1) A written cybersecurity policy with respect to the practices of the manufacturer for detecting and responding to cyber attacks, unauthorized intrusions, and false and spurious messages or vehicle control commands. This policy shall include-- “(A) a process for identifying, assessing, and mitigating reasonably foreseeable vulnerabilities from cyber attacks or unauthorized intrusions, including false and spurious messages and malicious vehicle control commands; and “(B) a process for taking preventive and corrective action to mitigate against vulnerabilities in a highly automated vehicle or a vehicle that performs partial driving automation, including incident response plans, intrusion detection and prevention systems that safeguard key controls, systems, and procedures through testing or monitoring, and updates to such process based on changed circumstances. “(2) The identification of an officer or other individual of the manufacturer as the point of contact with responsibility for the management of cybersecurity. “(3) A process for limiting access to automated driving systems. [[Page H6669]] “(4) A process for employee training and supervision for implementation and maintenance of the policies and procedures required by this section, including controls on employee access to automated driving systems. “(b) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect 180 days after the date of enactment of this section.”. (b) Enforcement Authority.--Section 30165(a)(1) of title 49, United States Code, is amended by inserting “30130,” after “30127,”. (c) Clerical Amendment.--The analysis for chapter 301 of subtitle VI of title 49, United States Code, is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 30129 (as added by section 4) the following new item: “30130. Cybersecurity of automated driving systems.”. SEC. 6. GENERAL EXEMPTIONS. Section 30113 of title 49, United States Code, is amended-- (1) in subsection (b)(3)(B)-- (A) in clause (iii), by striking “; or” and inserting a semicolon; (B) in clause (iv), by striking the period at the end and inserting “; or”; and (C) by adding at the end the following: “(v) the exemption would make easier the development or field evaluation of-- “(I) a feature of a highly automated vehicle providing a safety level at least equal to the safety level of the standard for which exemption is sought; or “(II) a highly automated vehicle providing an overall safety level at least equal to the overall safety level of nonexempt vehicles.”; (2) in subsection (c), by adding at the end the following: “(5) if the application is made under subsection (b)(3)(B)(v) of this section-- “(A) such development, testing, and other data necessary to demonstrate that the motor vehicle is a highly automated vehicle; and “(B) a detailed analysis that includes supporting test data, including both on-road and validation and testing data showing (as applicable) that-- “(i) the safety level of the feature at least equals the safety level of the standard for which exemption is sought; or “(ii) the vehicle provides an overall safety level at least equal to the overall safety level of nonexempt vehicles.”; (3) in subsection (d), by striking “A manufacturer is eligible” and all that follows and inserting the following: “(1) Eligibility under subsection (b)(3)(B)(i).--A manufacturer is eligible for an exemption under subsection (b)(3)(B)(i) of this section (including an exemption under subsection (b)(3)(B)(i) relating to a bumper standard referred to in subsection (b)(1)) only if the Secretary determines that the manufacturer's total motor vehicle production in the most recent year of production is not more than 10,000. “(2) Eligibility under subsection (b)(3)(B)(iii).--A manufacturer is eligible for an exemption under subsection (b)(3)(B)(iii) of this section only if the Secretary determines the exemption is for not more than 2,500 vehicles to be sold in the United States in any 12-month period. “(3) Eligibility under subsection (b)(3)(B)(ii), (iv), or (v).--A manufacturer is eligible for an exemption under subsection (b)(3)(B)(ii), (iv), or (v) of this section only if the Secretary determines the exemption is for not more than 100,000 vehicles per manufacturer to be sold, leased, or otherwise introduced into commerce in the United States in any 12-month period. “(4) Limitation on number of vehicles exempted.--All exemptions granted to a manufacturer under subsections (b)(3)(B)(i) through (v) shall not exceed a total of (i) 25,000 vehicles manufactured within the first 12-month period, (ii) 50,000 vehicles manufactured within the second 12-month period, (iii) 100,000 vehicles manufactured within the third 12-month period, and, (iv) 100,000 vehicles manufactured within the fourth 12-month period. Any renewals under subsections (b)(3)(B)(i) through (v) shall not exceed a total of 100,000 vehicles manufactured within a 12-month period.”; (4) in subsection (e), by striking “An exemption or renewal” and all that follows and inserting the following: “(1) Exemption under subsection (b)(3)(B)(i).--An exemption or renewal under subsection (b)(3)(B)(i) of this section may be granted for not more than 3 years. “(2) Exemption under subsection (b)(3)(B)(iii).--An exemption or renewal under subsection (b)(3)(B)(iii) this section may be granted for not more than 2 years. “(3) Exemption under subsection (b)(3)(B)(ii), (iv), or (v).--An exemption or renewal under subsection (b)(3)(B)(ii), (iv), or (v) of this section may be granted for not more than 4 years.”; and (5) by adding at the end the following: “(i) Limitation on Certain Exemptions.--No exemption from crashworthiness standards of motor vehicle safety standards shall be granted under subsection (b)(3)(B)(v) until the Secretary issues the safety assessment certification rule pursuant to section 30129(a) and the rulemaking and safety priority plan pursuant to section 30129(b) and one year has passed from the date by which the Secretary has issued both such rule and such plan. This subsection shall not apply to exemptions from occupant protection standards if the exemption is for a vehicle that will not carry its operator or passengers. This subsection shall not apply to exemptions from crashworthiness standards if the exemption sought is for a standard addressing the steering control system and it is for a vehicle that-- “(1) will not have a steering control system; “(2) provides impact protection to an occupant in the front left seat at a level at least equal to the level provided in nonexempt vehicles; and “(3) provides a safety level at least equal to the safety level of the standard for which the exemption is sought. “(j) Reporting Requirement.--A manufacturer granted an exemption under subsection (b)(3)(B)(ii), (iv), or (v), shall provide information about all crashes of which it has actual knowledge involving such exempted vehicles, regardless of whether a claim is submitted to the manufacturer, in accordance with part 579 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations. “(k) Process and Analysis.-- “(1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this subsection, the Secretary of Transportation shall publish in the Federal Register a notice that details the process and analysis used for the consideration of exemption or renewal applications under subsection (b)(3)(B)(v). “(2) Periodic review and updating.--The notice required by paragraph (1) shall be reviewed every 5 years and updated if the Secretary considers it necessary. “(l) Exemption Database.-- “(1) In general.--The Secretary shall establish a publicly available and searchable electronic database of each motor vehicle for which an exemption from motor vehicle safety standards prescribed under this chapter or a bumper standard prescribed under chapter 325 has been granted. “(2) Vehicle identification number.--The database established under paragraph (1) shall be searchable by Vehicle Identification Number and shall include no information identifying the vehicle owner.”. SEC. 7. MOTOR VEHICLE TESTING OR EVALUATION. Section 30112(b)(10) of title 49, United States Code, is amended-- (1) by striking “that prior to the date of enactment of this paragraph”; (2) in subparagraph (A), by striking “motor vehicles into the United States that are certified” and inserting “into the United States motor vehicles that are certified, or motor vehicle equipment utilized in a motor vehicle that is certified,”; (3) in subparagraph (C), by striking the period at the end and inserting “; or”; (4) by redesignating subparagraphs (A) through (C) as clauses (i) through (iii), respectively, and moving their margins 2 ems to the right; (5) by striking “evaluation by a manufacturer that agrees not to sell or offer for sale” and inserting the following: “evaluation by-- “(A) a manufacturer that agrees not to sell or lease or offer for sale or lease”; and (6) by adding at the end the following: “(B) a manufacturer of highly automated vehicles, automated driving systems, or components of automated driving systems that agrees not to sell or lease or offer for sale or lease the highly automated vehicles, automated driving systems, or components of automated driving systems at the conclusion of the testing or evaluation and-- “(i) has submitted to the Secretary-- “(I) the name of the individual, partnership, corporation, or institution of higher education and a point of contact; “(II) the residence address of the individual, partnership, corporation, or institution of higher education and State of incorporation if applicable; “(III) a description of each type of motor vehicle used during development of highly automated vehicles, automated driving systems, or components of automated driving systems manufactured by the individual, partnership, corporation, or institution of higher education; and “(IV) proof of insurance for any State in which the individual, partnership, corporation, or institution of higher education intends to test or evaluate highly automated vehicles; and “(ii) if applicable, has identified an agent for service of process in accordance with part 551 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations.”. SEC. 8. INFORMATION ON HIGHLY AUTOMATED DRIVING SYSTEMS MADE AVAILABLE TO PROSPECTIVE BUYERS. (a) Research.--Not later than 3 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall complete research to determine the most effective method and terminology for informing consumers for each highly automated vehicle or a vehicle that performs partial driving automation about the capabilities and limitations of that vehicle. The Secretary shall determine whether such information is based upon or includes the terminology as defined by SAE International in Recommended Practice Report J3016 (published September 2016) or whether such description should include alternative terminology. (b) Rulemaking.--After the completion of the study required under subsection (a), the Secretary shall initiate a rulemaking proceeding to require manufacturers to inform consumers of the capabilities and limitations of a vehicle's driving automation system or feature for any highly automated vehicle or any vehicle that performs partial driving automation. SEC. 9. HIGHLY AUTOMATED VEHICLE ADVISORY COUNCIL. (a) Establishment.--Subject to the availability of appropriations, not later than 6 months after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall establish in the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration a Highly Automated Vehicle Advisory Council (hereinafter referred to as the “Council”). (b) Membership.--Members of the Council shall include a diverse group representative of business, academia and independent researchers, State and local authorities, safety and consumer advocates, engineers, labor organizations, environmental experts, a representative of the [[Page H6670]] National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, and other members determined to be appropriate by the Secretary. Any subcommittee of the Council shall be composed of not less than 15 and not more than 30 members appointed by the Secretary. (c) Terms.--Members of the Council shall be appointed by the Secretary of Transportation and shall serve for a term of three years. (d) Vacancies.--Any vacancy occurring in the membership of the Council shall be filled in the same manner as the original appointment for the position being vacated. The vacancy shall not affect the power of the remaining members to execute the duties of the Council. (e) Duties and Subcommittees.--The Council may form subcommittees as needed to undertake information gathering activities, develop technical advice, and present best practices or recommendations to the Secretary regarding-- (1) advancing mobility access for the disabled community with respect to the deployment of automated driving systems to identify impediments to their use and ensure an awareness of the needs of the disabled community as these vehicles are being designed for distribution in commerce; (2) mobility access for senior citizens and populations underserved by traditional public transportation services and educational outreach efforts with respect to the testing and distribution of highly automated vehicles in commerce; (3) cybersecurity for the testing, deployment, and updating of automated driving systems with respect to supply chain risk management, interactions with Information Sharing and Analysis Centers and Information Sharing and Analysis Organizations, and a framework for identifying and implementing recalls of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment; (4) the development of a framework that allows manufacturers of highly automated vehicles to share with each other and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration relevant, situational information related to any testing or deployment event on public streets resulting or that reasonably could have resulted in damage to the vehicle or any occupant thereof and validation of such vehicles in a manner that does not risk public disclosure of such information or disclosure of confidential business information; (5) labor and employment issues that may be affected by the deployment of highly automated vehicles; (6) the environmental impacts of the deployment of highly automated vehicles, and the development and deployment of alternative fuel infrastructure alongside the development and deployment of highly automated vehicles; (7) protection of consumer privacy and security of information collected by highly automated vehicles; (8) cabin safety for highly automated vehicle passengers, and how automated driving systems may impact collision vectors, overall crashworthiness, and the use and placement of airbags, seatbelts, anchor belts, head restraints, and other protective features in the cabin; (9) the testing and deployment of highly automated vehicles and automated driving systems in areas that are rural, remote, mountainous, insular, or unmapped to evaluate operational limitations caused by natural geographical or man-made features, or adverse weather conditions, and to enhance the safety and reliability of highly automated vehicles and automated driving systems used in such areas with such features or conditions; and (10) independent verification and validation procedures for highly automated vehicles that may be useful to safeguard motor vehicle safety. (f) Report to Congress.--The recommendations of the Council shall also be reported to the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate. (g) Federal Advisory Committee Act.--The establishment and operation of the Council and any subcommittees of the Council shall conform to the requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.). (h) Technical Assistance.--On request of the Council, the Secretary shall provide such technical assistance to the Council as the Secretary determines to be necessary to carry out the Council's duties. (i) Detail of Federal Employees.--On the request of the Council, the Secretary may detail, with or without reimbursement, any of the personnel of the Department of Transportation to the Council to assist the Council in carrying out its duties. Any detail shall not interrupt or otherwise affect the civil service status or privileges of the Federal employee. (j) Payment and Expenses.--Members of the Council shall serve without pay, except travel and per diem will be paid each member for meetings called by the Secretary. (k) Termination.--The Council and any subcommittees of the Council shall terminate 6 years after the date of enactment of this Act. SEC. 10. REAR SEAT OCCUPANT ALERT SYSTEM. (a) In General.--Chapter 301 of subtitle VI of title 49, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 30130 (as added by section 5) the following new section: “Sec. 30131. Rear seat occupant alert system “(a) Rulemaking Required.--Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this section, the Secretary shall issue a final rule requiring all new passenger motor vehicles weighing less than 10,000 pounds gross vehicle weight to be equipped with an alarm system to alert the operator to check rear designated seating positions after the vehicle motor or engine is deactivated by the operator. “(b) Phase-in.--The rule issued pursuant to subsection (a) shall require full compliance with the rule beginning on September 1st of the calendar year that begins 2 years after the date on which the final rule is issued. “(c) Definitions.--For purposes of this section-- “(1) the term `passenger motor vehicle' has the meaning given that term in section 32101; and “(2) the term `rear designated seating position' means any designated seating position that is rearward of the front seat.”. (b) Clerical Amendment.--The analysis for chapter 301 of subtitle VI of title 49, United States Code, is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 30130 (as added by section 5) the following new item: “30131. Rear seat occupant alert system.”. SEC. 11. HEADLAMPS. (a) Safety Research Initiative.--Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall complete research into the development of updated motor vehicle safety standards or performance requirements for motor vehicle headlamps that would improve the performance of headlamps and improve overall safety. (b) Rulemaking or Report.-- (1) Rulemaking.--After the completion of the research required by subsection (a), the Secretary shall initiate a rulemaking proceeding to revise the motor vehicle safety standards regarding headlamps if the Secretary determines that a revision of the standards meets the requirements and considerations set forth in subsections (a) and (b) of section 30111 of title 49, United States Code. (2) Report.--If the Secretary determines that a revision to the standard described in paragraph (1) does not meet the requirements and considerations set forth in such subsections, the Secretary shall submit a report describing the reasons for not revising the standard to the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate. SEC. 12. PRIVACY PLAN REQUIRED FOR HIGHLY AUTOMATED VEHICLES. (a) Privacy Plan.--A manufacturer may not sell, offer for sale, introduce or deliver for introduction in interstate commerce, or import into the United States, any highly automated vehicle, vehicle that performs partial driving automation, or automated driving system unless the manufacturer has developed a privacy plan that includes the following: (1) A written privacy plan with respect to the collection, use, sharing, and storage of information about vehicle owners or occupants collected by a highly automated vehicle, vehicle that performs partial driving automation, or automated driving system. Such policy shall include the following: (A) The practices of the manufacturer with respect to the way that information about vehicle owners or occupants is collected, used, shared, or stored. (B) The practices of the manufacturer with respect to the choices offered to vehicle owners or occupants regarding the collection, use, sharing, and storage of such information. (C) The practices of the manufacturer with respect to the data minimization, de-identification, and retention of information about vehicle owners or occupants. (D) The practices of the manufacturer with respect to extending its privacy plan to the entities it shares such information with. (2) A method for providing notice to vehicle owners or occupants about the privacy policy. (3) If information about vehicle owners or occupants is altered or combined so that the information can no longer reasonably be linked to the highly automated vehicle, vehicle that performs partial driving automation, or automated driving system from which the information is retrieved, the vehicle owner, or occupants, the manufacturer is not required to include the process or practices regarding that information in the privacy policy. (4) If information about an occupant is anonymized or encrypted the manufacturer is not required to include the process or practices regarding that information in the privacy policy. (b) Study.--The Federal Trade Commission shall conduct a study and submit a report to the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate on the highly automated vehicle marketplace, including an examination of the following issues: (1) Which entities in the ecosystem have access to vehicle owner or occupant data. (2) Which entities in the highly automated vehicle marketplace have privacy plans. (3) What are the terms and disclosures made in such privacy plans, including regarding the collection, use, sharing, and storage of vehicle owner or occupant data. (4) What disclosures are made to consumers about such privacy plans. (5) What methods are available to enable deletion of information about vehicle owners or occupants from any data storage system within the vehicle (other than a system that is critical to the safety or operation of the vehicle) before the vehicle is sold, leased, or rented, or otherwise occupied by a new owner or occupant. (c) Federal Trade Commission Enforcement.--A violation of subsection (a) shall be treated as a an unfair or deceptive act or practice within the meaning of section 5(a)(1) of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 45(a)(1)). The Federal Trade Commission shall enforce this section in the same manner, by the same means, and with the same jurisdiction, powers, and duties as though all applicable terms and provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act were incorporated into and made a part of this Act. (d) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect 180 days after the date of enactment of [[Page H6671]] this section and shall only apply to highly automated vehicles, vehicles that perform partial driving automation, or automated driving systems first introduced after the effective date of this section. SEC. 13. DEFINITIONS. (a) Amendments to Title 49, United States Code.--Section 30102 of title 49, United States Code, is amended-- (1) in subsection (a)-- (A) by redesignating paragraphs (1) through (13) as paragraphs (2), (3), (4), (5), (8), (9), (10), (11), (12), (13), (15), (16), and (17), respectively; (B) by inserting before paragraph (2) (as so redesignated) the following: “(1) `automated driving system' means the hardware and software that are collectively capable of performing the entire dynamic driving task on a sustained basis, regardless of whether such system is limited to a specific operational design domain.”; (C) by inserting after paragraph (5) (as so redesignated) the following: “(6) `dynamic driving task' means all of the real time operational and tactical functions required to operate a vehicle in on-road traffic, excluding the strategic functions such as trip scheduling and selection of destinations and waypoints, and including-- “(A) lateral vehicle motion control via steering; “(B) longitudinal vehicle motion control via acceleration and deceleration; “(C) monitoring the driving environment via object and event detection, recognition, classification, and response preparation; “(D) object and event response execution; “(E) maneuver planning; and “(F) enhancing conspicuity via lighting, signaling, and gesturing. “(7) `highly automated vehicle'-- “(A) means a motor vehicle equipped with an automated driving system; and “(B) does not include a commercial motor vehicle (as defined in section 31101).”; (D) by inserting after paragraph (13) (as so redesignated) the following: “(14) `operational design domain' means the specific conditions under which a given driving automation system or feature thereof is designed to function.”; and (E) by adding at the end the following: “(18) `vehicle that performs partial driving automation' does not include a commercial motor vehicle (as defined in section 31101).”; and (2) by adding at the end the following: “(c) Revisions to Certain Definitions.-- “(1) If SAE International (or its successor organization) revises the definition of any of the terms defined in paragraph (1), (6), or (14) of subsection (a) in Recommended Practice Report J3016, it shall notify the Secretary of the revision. The Secretary shall publish a notice in the Federal Register to inform the public of the new definition unless, within 90 days after receiving notice of the new definition and after opening a period for public comment on the new definition, the Secretary notifies SAE International (or its successor organization) that the Secretary has determined that the new definition does not meet the need for motor vehicle safety, or is otherwise inconsistent with the purposes of this chapter. If the Secretary so notifies SAE International (or its successor organization), the existing definition in subsection (a) shall remain in effect. “(2) If the Secretary does not reject a definition revised by SAE International (or its successor organization) as described in paragraph (1), the Secretary shall promptly make any conforming amendments to the regulations and standards of the Secretary that are necessary. The revised definition shall apply for purposes of this chapter. The requirements of section 553 of title 5 shall not apply to the making of any such conforming amendments. “(3) Pursuant to section 553 of title 5, the Secretary may update any of the definitions in paragraph (1), (6), or (14) of subsection (a) if the Secretary determines that materially changed circumstances regarding highly automated vehicles have impacted motor vehicle safety such that the definitions need to be updated to reflect such circumstances.”. (b) Definitions in This Act.--As used in this Act-- (1) the term “automated driving system” has the meaning given such term in subsection (a) of section 30102 of title 49, United States Code, subject to any revisions made to the definition of such term pursuant to subsection (c) of such section; (2) the term “highly automated vehicle” has the meaning given such term in subsection (a) of section 30102 of title 49, United States Code, not subject to any revision under subsection (c) of such section; and (3) the term “vehicle that performs partial driving automation” has the meaning given such term in subsection (a) of section 30102 of title 49, United States Code, not subject to any revision under subsection (c) of such section.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Latta) and the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky) each will control 20 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio. General Leave

Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous material in the Record.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Ohio?

There was no objection.

Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Walden), who is the chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, and I would like to thank him for all the work he has done on this bill.

Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle who have put enormous work into that, all the members of the committee, and especially Mr. Latta for his great leadership.

Today marks a really important milestone in the pursuit to make our roadways safer and support American leadership in self-driving innovation. So the SELF DRIVE Act, H.R. 3388, is something we can all support.

Simply put, the rapidly advancing technology behind highly autonomous vehicles is stunning. I speak from some experience because a few months ago I got the opportunity to ride in a self-driving car with engineers and experienced a vehicle perform without any need for human intervention.

Though we can look to a future that fulfills the promise of these innovations, we cannot ignore the current troubling trend in the number of lives that are lost on our roadways in America. Given the latest roadway fatality numbers, this technology is especially needed today.

Almost 40,000 people lost their lives on our roads last year. That represents another yearly increase in traffic-related fatalities. In my own State of Oregon, traffic fatalities were the highest they have seen in 14 years--up 20 percent from the prior year.

Statistics tell us 94 percent of accidents relate to human behavior. During our morning commute into work, just look around. We see folks on their phones in the cars next to us doing other things. While the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration can't write a safety standard to make us all perfect drivers, it can work to avoid lifesaving technologies to avoid collisions. That is part of what this bipartisan legislation will put in place.

This bill is also about ensuring America stays a global leader in the development of self-driving technology. After all, the auto industry is responsible for more than 7 million American jobs nationwide and drives more than $900 billion into the economy each year. We want to see these numbers grow, we want this innovation to occur here, and we want to bring greater traffic safety to our roadways.

Additionally, self-driving cars hold the promise of better access to transportation for our Nation's 47 million senior citizens, 27 million Americans with severe disabilities, and the many communities across the country underserved by public transportation.

For Americans to enjoy all these benefits, we needed to put together a framework that is national and will drive it, and that is what this bill does.

I want to commend Mr. Latta, Ms. Schakowsky, Mr. Upton, Mrs. Dingell, and my friend, Frank Pallone, the ranking member on the committee, for all their great work on this legislation. We can be proud of the product the Energy and Commerce Committee has brought to the floor.

Mr. Speaker, I urge people to support H.R. 3388.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the bipartisan approach to autonomous vehicles reflected in the SELF DRIVE Act. As ranking member of the Digital Commerce and Consumer Protection Subcommittee, I have been so pleased to be able to work with Chairman Latta to reach agreements on the legislation before the House today. It is not the bill I think that either one of us would have written on our own, but it does reflect a bipartisan agreement that we reached after months of negotiation, and I appreciate that very much.

Autonomous vehicles have great potential to improve safety on our roads by reducing accidents caused by human error, which most accidents are. My goal throughout this process has been to make sure that this technology is deployed safely and that we also advance existing safety technologies.

The SELF DRIVE Act lays out a framework for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, NHTSA, [[Page H6672]] to promote safe adoption of AVs. Mandatory safety assessment certifications will ensure that NHTSA receives the data that it needs to evaluate safety as autonomous vehicles appear on our roads. Within a year of enactment, NHTSA will lay out a priority plan for what new safety standards need to be written and which existing standards must be updated. In addition, the bill requires manufacturers to write cybersecurity and consumer privacy plans as they develop AV technology.

The legislation allows for exemptions to existing vehicle safety standards. For example, there may be some vehicles that really don't need a steering wheel. It is hard to imagine now. But we ensure that NHTSA explains its process for granting any safety exemptions. The maximum number of exemptions per automobile will scale up incrementally.

To receive an exemption, a manufacturer must show equivalent safety, a manufacturer must report crashes involving exempted vehicles, and exempted vehicles must be listed in a public database.

This bill also has safety improvements that go beyond autonomous vehicles. NHTSA will work to improve the performance of headlamps. In 2 years, NHTSA will issue a rule requiring an alert system to warn drivers if a child or pet is left in the backseat. Already this year, 37 children have died from heatstroke after being left in hot cars. This hot cars provision, which Congressman Tim Ryan, Congressman Peter King, and I introduced as a standalone bill, will save lives.

A broad range of stakeholders have been involved and will be involved in the future of self-driving workers. That is why we set up an advisory council which will include industry, academics, labor, State and local government, consumer advocates, and environmental experts.

As self-driving cars are developed, we must examine critical issues. Will seniors and people with disabilities share in the benefits of autonomous vehicles? Ensuring accessibility may require further policy changes. We also need to grapple with the disruption self-driving cars may cause in employment. Even though this legislation generally excludes commercial vehicles--and additional clarity may be needed-- self-driving cars may displace workers who make their livelihoods behind the wheel.

Once the House passes this bill, I look forward to working with stakeholders and our Senate colleagues to send consensus legislation to the President's desk. I believe we could go further to improve consumer safety and strengthen protections to put consumers in control of their data. We must also keep working to refine the Federal, State, and local roles in ensuring safe roads and protecting access to courts when necessary.

Mr. Speaker, today's vote is the next step in that process. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the SELF DRIVE Act, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, first, let me just thank the gentlewoman from Illinois, the ranking member on the subcommittee, for her hard work on the legislation. I really appreciate it.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in support of H.R. 3388, the SELF DRIVE Act, which we advanced out of the Energy and Commerce Committee on a unanimous, bipartisan vote of 54-0 in July. This compromise legislation aims to improve consumer safety by reducing traffic-related fatalities and injuries, clarify the Federal and State roles, and stimulate job growth and economic opportunities.

Many of you have heard these roadway safety statistics, but they again bear repeating. Each year, approximately 6 million Americans are involved in car accidents resulting in nearly 2 million injuries. Ninety-four percent of the accidents are attributed to human errors or decisions. In 2016 approximately 40,000 people lost their lives on U.S. highways. Sadly, in my home State of Ohio, traffic deaths have been on the rise over the last few years.

We have an opportunity today to support and promote the safe testing and deploying of this life-saving technology. U.S. companies are investing major resources in the research and development of this technology and should not be held up by regulatory barriers that were created when self-driving cars were science fiction. We must act, and we must act now.

The SELF DRIVE Act establishes a streamlined path for the testing, development, and deployment of self-driving cars in the United States. While this technology is currently being tested in certain parts of the country, there are limits to who can test and what technology can be used in cars today. Federal motor vehicle safety standards need to be updated because self-driving cars may not have the traditional steering wheels and brake pedals that all cars have today.

Additionally, this legislation maximizes opportunities for research and development here in the United States to create jobs and grow economic opportunities so that the United States can remain a global leader in this industry. With this legislation, innovation can flourish without the heavy hand of government.

Finally, this legislation will enhance the ability of our senior citizens, the disability community, and individuals in underserved communities enjoy more mobility and live more independently.

This legislation is the first of its kind, focused on the car of the future that is more of a supercomputer on wheels. This issue started with our good friend and colleague, Dr. Burgess, who held the first disrupter series hearing on self-driving cars last Congress.

Again, we would also not be where we are today if it weren't for the leadership of Chairperson Walden and the great working relationship and cooperation of Ranking Member Pallone, Ranking Member Schakowsky, and Ranking Member Dingell, as well as our many cosponsors. I appreciate their comments, suggestions, and input.

We have held multiple hearings, technology showcases, and real-life demonstrations for our committee's members to learn about the opportunities and challenges presented by self-driving cars.

I also want to acknowledge the stakeholders who have been willing to work with us. The automotive industry is a competitive and vibrant marketplace and touches every congressional district in the country. {time} 1130

In the process of drafting and marking up this legislation, we had over 300 meetings with automakers, tech companies, suppliers, trade associations, the disability community, senior State transportation leaders, and, last but not least, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

Safety should and always will be our number one priority. We have said and will continue to say: Safety first, safety last, safety always. I truly believe this bill will make a real difference for everyday Americans.

In closing, I want to thank our great staff for their hard work late nights and weekends to get us where we are to this historic vote.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone), the ranking member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, and I thank him for his support.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3388, the SELF DRIVE Act.

I want to start by thanking Chairmen Walden and Latta, Ranking Member Schakowsky, and the other members of the Energy and Commerce Committee for all their work to reach a bipartisan agreement on this bill.

Self-driving cars have the potential in the future to reduce deaths and injuries from car crashes, particularly those that result from driver distraction. This bill allows for testing and deployment of self-driving cars to help the United States reach that potential sooner.

This legislation also includes important provisions that ensure safety is the top priority as self-driving cars are developed. For example, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration will be required to issue rules and new safety standards for highly automated vehicles.

The auto industry will be required to submit safety assessment certifications that detail how their vehicles [[Page H6673]] are tested and function on the road. We also insist that any manufacturer entering this market must have cybersecurity and privacy practices in place before their cars are sold.

Self-driving cars will not come all at once. Human drivers will be on the roads for the foreseeable future. So this bill also contains legislative initiatives geared toward protecting drivers and passengers, including requirements to ensure kids are not forgotten in hot cars and that all new cars have the latest technology in their headlamps.

It also ensures NHTSA is able to consider whether a car functions as intended, not just whether it meets a specific standard. We also encourage NHTSA to come up with a plan on how it can alter testing using ranges so that cars cannot be built just to meet a particular test.

This bill is not perfect. It is a bipartisan compromise and a product of what we can accomplish when we work together. As this bill moves to the Senate, I remain committed to continuing bipartisan efforts to address any issues and to ensure that safety is not compromised.

I want to thank, again, all of the key leaders on both the Democratic and Republican side for making this happen today.

Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton), chairman of the Energy Subcommittee on the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this bill, H.R. 3388, the SELF DRIVE Act. This legislation and technology is, indeed, going to play a very important role in improving motor vehicle safety and addressing the rising number of traffic-related fatalities.

As the birthplace of the automobile industry, my home State of Michigan is a well-known home to innovative suppliers and manufacturers that make our cars and trucks safer, more efficient, and, yes, more affordable. It is also a nexus of engineering and research talent, which makes it perfect for the development of the next phase of vehicular mobility: autonomous vehicles. It is here.

In 2015, more than 35,000 folks lost their lives on U.S. highways. Early estimates indicate that number may have increased to more than 40,000 last year. In Michigan, there were 1,064 traffic facilities, a 7 percent increase over the previous year. NHTSA has found that 94 percent of these fatalities are related to human error.

This legislation on autonomous vehicles, which includes the PAVE Act, authored by myself and my good friend from Michigan, Debbie Dingell, will go a long way to taking human error out of driving and making roads safer for every American.

Forget about “The Jetsons.” It is over. The future of the automobile is here, and this bill will give the automotive industry the tools it needs to completely revolutionize how we are going to get around for generations to come.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Matsui), a member of the Digital Commerce and Consumer Protection Subcommittee and a major contributor to this legislation.

Ms. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the SELF DRIVE Act. With this legislation, we have the opportunity to unlock autonomous vehicle innovation and help improve the quality of life for millions.

Today, so many of our neighbors, friends, and family face mobility challenges. Many seniors and people with disabilities are not able to use a car to do errands, go to doctor appointments, and visit loved ones. For millions of people who travel our roads, this technology has the potential to prevent accidents and save lives. That is why we must act to put policies in place that allow AVs to be tested and deployed, with an emphasis on consumer protections.

In my home district of Sacramento and across California, we recognize the promise of AV technology and are developing a pathway for its safe testing and deployment. Sacramento's ATOS lab aims to foster a public- private consortium of government agencies and AV companies by leveraging Sacramento's 5G network, an ideal location. The legislation we are considering today allows California to continue to lead, while protecting roadway safety.

With the SELF DRIVE Act, we are preserving the important AV deployment work happening at the State level and also creating the foundation for a strong Federal framework to build on our progress and protect drivers and pedestrians.

I am also pleased that this bill contains language on legislation I introduced, the MORE Act, which ensures technology companies, auto manufacturers, and new market entrants are on a level playing field for testing AVs.

Just as the development of the personal computer has revolutionized our daily lives, so, too, will the employment of autonomous vehicle technology.

This legislation, which passed the Energy and Commerce Committee unanimously, puts us on a path towards innovation that, up until recently, seemed unimaginable. I look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle as we work together to move this legislation forward.

Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess), chairman of the Health Subcommittee on the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, the country has stood, first, in awe of the power that was unleashed on the Texas-Louisiana coast, and then in admiration of constituents up and down the Texas and Louisiana coast as they face this difficulty and work together to get through it.

This bill today is also a product of people working together. Through at least two sessions of Congress we have now come with self-driving vehicle legislation that is going to change our economy.

This bill will allow developers room to grow, while making certain that the technology is safe for consumers. This act will create jobs and ensure that we remain the global leader in innovation. Most importantly, the self-driving vehicle legislation has the ability to save lives.

Throughout my life, I have seen the lifesaving effects of advancements in vehicle technology, starting with the seat belt, to the air bag, to antilock brakes. Self-driving vehicles are the next step in this trajectory.

The Energy and Commerce Committee has dedicated a lot to this technology and its ability to save lives, and, certainly, the last term of Congress, the Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade Subcommittee that Mr. Latta now chairs. I am proud to see the product of our work come to the floor.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Eshoo), a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Illinois for yielding and for her leadership and work on the great Energy and Commerce Committee in the House.

My congressional district is home to the engineers, innovators, and developers who are pioneering the technologies that are transitioning us to a driverless world. That is why I support H.R. 3388, and it is my hope that the regulatory framework established by this bill is going to ensure that the United States of America is the leader in the world's next great revolution in transportation. I believe that we are, that we will be, and that this bill boosts the effort.

Throughout committee consideration of this bill, I stressed the need for bipartisanship on this issue so that the American people would have confidence in the steps that we were taking. And so it is. It is, I think, in the spirit of the original Federal automotive safety standards that passed Congress nearly unanimously in 1966.

This bill was improved significantly in the committee, and the final bill, very importantly, preserves the role that States have played to regulate matters such as vehicle registration, licensing, insurance, and liability, while, at the Federal level, ensuring that manufacturers submit safety certifications to NHTSA, placing the agency on the path toward issuing full safety standards for autonomous vehicles.

The bill also includes my language to require a study of the environmental impacts of autonomous vehicles, as well as the intersection between autonomous and electric vehicles. The AV [[Page H6674]] revolution is happening on top of the ongoing electrification revolution, and I think the AV advisory council can provide important insight to Congress, States, and localities about how to support growing these fleets.

For all these reasons and more, Mr. Speaker, I urge all House Members to support H.R. 3388. I think it deserves unanimous support, as it did in our committee, and that this will be good for America and keep us in a leadership position on the all-important issues that are established by this bill.

Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Harper), vice chairman of the Digital Commerce and Consumer Protection Subcommittee of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Mr. HARPER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3388, the SELF DRIVE Act.

The bipartisan bill we are considering today is vital not only to all Americans, but especially individuals with disabilities.

My wife, Sidney, and I have an adult son, Livingston, who has special needs. He wants to go everywhere. He has a job Monday through Friday, but he can't drive, so he is dependent on his family and friends to get him around. In the disability community, the lack of transportation is the number one obstacle to employment and security in society.

I previously introduced the Disability Mobility Advisory Council Act, which creates a forum for individuals with disabilities to work with manufacturers, suppliers, and regulators to identify impediments and ways in which the needs of this community can best be met by self- driving car technology. I appreciate the chairman including the general intent of my bill in the SELF DRIVE Act.

Self-driving vehicles can open the door for the disability community to access new job markets and opportunities and to have an even more active role in our society.

I urge support of this bill.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. Dingell), a member of the Digital Commerce and Consumer Protection Subcommittee and someone who has put in a lot of time and effort on this legislation.

Mrs. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky, for yielding and for her leadership on making this happen, as well as thanking Chairman Latta, Chairman Walden, Ranking Member Pallone, and my good friend Fred Upton from Michigan.

The hard work here has gotten us to the point where we are today. The SELF DRIVE Act is going to improve our economy and save lives on the road.

Passing this bill today means we are one step closer to signing a responsible framework for the deployment of highly automated vehicles into law. It means we are going to improve mobility for seniors and people with disabilities, reduce congestion on the road, improve energy consumption, and, as everyone has said, actually improve safety on the road. {time} 1145

More than 35,000 people died on our roadways. And as you heard Mr. Upton say, we are hearing 40,000 self-driving cars has the promise to save lives when 90 percent of those are by human error, but only if we get it right. And that is why it is so important that we study these issues and do this the right way.

Our legislation ensures that safety is at the forefront by requiring manufacturers to submit safety assessment certifications before one self-driving vehicle hits the road. It also requires that manufacturers, for the very first time, submit a plan for how we will address both cybersecurity and data privacy. It is moving the needle forward on safety while providing a reactive and flexible framework for the regulation of self-driving cars.

Today we are one step closer to reshaping American innovation for generations to come. We cannot let this opportunity slip by us. It is essential to ensure the future of American innovation because this is fundamentally an issue of American competitiveness.

Automated vehicles are going to be developed, whether we want it or not, and it is a question about whether we are going to remain in the driver's seat and not secede it to China or India or Western Europe.

The SELF DRIVE Act steers us in the right direction on these important issues.

Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Lance).

Mr. LANCE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the SELF DRIVE Act. This groundbreaking work of the Energy and Commerce Committee is the first major step toward establishing a clear legal and regulatory framework for autonomous vehicle deployment.

Self-driving cars are going to transform many aspects of American life and our economy. Autonomous vehicle technology will spur job creation while increasing productivity, accessibility, and safety for consumers across the country.

The potential benefits are tremendous. Those with limited mobility will have new transportation options, and self-driving cars can reverse the rising trend of distracted and impaired drivers, road accidents, and highway fatalities. Autonomous vehicles can help turn the tide.

Innovators are waiting to jump into this exciting new market. We need to be their partners in this 21st century groundbreaking achievement.

I thank Chairman Latta and Ranking Member Schakowsky for leading this bipartisan effort through the U.S. House. Let's drive into the future. I urge a “yes” vote.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I am now pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from the great State of New York (Ms. Clarke), a member of our subcommittee.

Ms. CLARKE of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise to support H.R. 3388, the SELF DRIVE Act. As you may know, autonomous vehicles are the wave of the future, and they are here now.

As innovative technology for these vehicles develop, our Nation's transportation system will be transformed, decreasing the number of traffic collisions, enhancing mobility for the elderly, disabled, and poor, and lowering fuel consumption.

My constituents in the Ninth Congressional District of New York will benefit greatly from autonomous vehicles, which will allow for smarter, faster, and more fuel-efficient travel.

I am pleased that proper cybersecurity protections are included in the legislation. As you may know, cybersecurity protections for self- driving vehicles is of great interest, particularly in today's environment, to ensure that these vehicles not only meet technological challenges, but there is a plan in place to meet public safety standards and prevent and tackle potential hacks and/or terrorism.

I am so pleased that H.R. 3407, the legislation I introduced with Congressman Adam Kinzinger is included in H.R. 3388. The cybersecurity portion of the bill requires manufacturers to develop a written cybersecurity policy. Within the cybersecurity policy, manufacturers would address the following: one, a process for identifying, assessing, and mitigating reasonable foreseeable vulnerabilities from cyber attacks or unauthorized intrusions; and two, a process for taking preventive and corrective action to mitigate against these vulnerabilities, including incident response plans, intrusion detection, and prevention systems that safeguard key controls, systems, and procedures through testing and/or monitoring.

This legislation requires companies to develop a more comprehensive cybersecurity plan, which can mitigate, correct, intersect, and identify imminent threats. Fostering consumer confidence will include ensuring an established system built to protect sensitive information in our technological age. I am pleased to be a Member of this committee.

Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis).

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the SELF DRIVE Act, which will improve transportation safety, stimulate economic growth, and ensure we are embracing the full potential of technological advances in the automotive industry with respect to autonomous vehicles.

I am especially proud that my bill, the ACCESS Act, has been included in this important legislative package, which ensures that self-driving cars are [[Page H6675]] developed with seniors and the underserved in mind.

Approximately 20 percent of Floridians are over the age of 65, and many struggle with simple tasks most of us take for granted, such as getting to work, going to the doctor, taking a trip to the grocery store or across town to visit family.

Self-driving cars hold the power to safely put seniors and our constituents back in the driver's seat of their lives, providing them with greater independence and mobility. I urge all my colleagues to support the passage of this very important bill.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. McNerney), my colleague on the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Mr. McNERNEY. Mr. Speaker, this has been a bipartisan effort. It has been good. We made some progress. I want to say a few things, though.

I am proud to be a cosponsor of the SELF DRIVE Act. This legislation puts us on a path towards safely deploying autonomous vehicles. I am glad to see that it has strong bipartisan support.

Autonomous vehicles offer many benefits, including tremendous lifesaving potential. Approximately 40,000 people are killed on our highways every year in deadly automobile accidents. About 3,600 of those accidents took place in my home State of California.

AVs can also transform mobility for millions of people who otherwise face difficulty driving, such as seniors and those with disabilities, including 3.8 million veterans in our country living with service- connected disabilities. That is more than 17 percent of veterans in this country.

AVs can help connect underserved communities, as well as reduce traffic congestion on our roads, and increase our Nation's productivity and competitiveness in the global economy.

While I am glad that we are taking these steps for this legislation today, our work cannot stop here. As the technology evolves, we must ensure that the benefits are being maximized for consumers. This means making sure that the vehicles are safely and appropriately tested, that strong consumer privacy and cybersecurity protections are in place, and that we are fully preparing Americans for the new employment opportunities that this industry will create.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, may I ask how much time I have remaining?

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from Illinois has 3\1/2\ minutes remaining. The gentleman from Ohio has 7\1/2\ minutes remaining.

Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Bucshon).

Mr. BUCSHON. Mr. Speaker, self-driving cars, once a providence of science fiction, are quickly becoming a reality. Self-driving vehicle technology has the potential to increase access to transportation in our rural communities, freedom for those unable to drive today, and improved safety for thousands of Hoosiers and other citizens across the country.

Furthermore, development of this innovative technology maintains America's technological leadership in the world and presents new economic opportunities for our citizens.

The SELF DRIVE Act creates a regulatory framework to allow for self- driving vehicle technology to continue moving forward while also ensuring consumers are protected.

I ask my colleagues to join me today and vote in favor of this bipartisan package.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the Congressman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to join my colleagues on the floor of the House dealing with autonomous vehicles. I think this is one of the most important issues that nobody is really focused on. I wish it were not on the suspension calendar and we had a chance to spend several hours discussing it here.

What you have done is forge a bipartisan coalition to be able to leapfrog going forward, to be able to not just focus on safety, but how autonomous vehicles have the opportunity to reshape the American landscape dealing with recovering right-of-way and being able to have new economic opportunities.

But this must be done right. The fact that “Driver” is the number 1 category of employment for men without a college education, means there could be some problems here. If we don't do it right, we can actually increase congestion rather than decrease it.

But I think you have established the framework to allow us to go forward, to be able to capitalize on this innovation, to be able to accelerate American leadership and avoid the problem we had with drones where the FAA was not really capable of dealing with drones which were more like flying cell phones than dealing with jets. You are trying to lay a foundation that I think is going to help us avoid that problem, and it is going to pay dividends for years to come.

Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Mullin).

Mr. MULLIN. Mr. Speaker, the House today will vote on an important piece of Federal legislation regarding self-driving vehicles that many on this body on both sides of the aisle have worked on.

This legislation promises to make roads safer by reducing traffic- related fatalities and unlock new economic opportunities and jobs in the U.S. It is also vital in our efforts to promote innovation.

Industry is driving the development of self-driving vehicles, but in certain situations, companies building and testing the car of the future may need some flexibility or certainty.

With this legislation, I hope the research, development, and testing that is unleashed will stimulate additional knowledge and innovation for passenger motor safety.

We, as the government, need to make sure that safety is first and foremost in our consideration. Passing this legislation will help get lifesaving technology to the public, perhaps preventing deaths in the not-so-near future.

I strongly support this bipartisan legislation, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson), the ranking member of the Science, Space, and Technology Committee.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the majority and minority of the Energy and Commerce Committee for bringing this unanimous legislation to the floor on self-driving vehicles, which are revolutionizing the way we conceptualize travel.

Self-driving cars have the potential to lower our infrastructure and mobility costs, enhance safety on our roads, and enhance mobility in our cities.

However, like any complex technology, self-driving cars pose new challenges for the regulatory landscape and our labor markets. That is why I am pleased to support H.R. 3388, the SELF DRIVE Act, which seeks to foster innovation in this space while offering protection for consumers.

The SELF DRIVE Act is one of the many important bills that will need to be considered by Congress in order to define Federal and State regulatory roles, provide the U.S. Department of Transportation the tools it needs to update safety standards, and ensure that the American people are not left behind as we transition to a 21st century workforce. Particularly, I am pleased to see that H.R. 3388 allows the creation of the Highly Automated Vehicle Advisory Council.

Mr. Speaker, self-driving vehicles are revolutionizing the way that we conceptualize travel. Self-driving cars have the potential to lower our infrastructure and mobility costs, enhance safety on our roads, and enhance mobility within our cities. However, like any complex technology, self-driving cars pose new challenges for the regulatory landscape and our labor markets. That is why I am pleased to support H.R. 3388--the SELF DRIVE Act, which seeks to foster innovation in this space while offering protection for consumers.

The SELF DRIVE Act is one of many important bills that will need to be considered by Congress in order to define federal and state regulatory roles, provide the U.S. Department of Transportation the tools it needs to update safety standards, and ensure that the American people are not left behind as we transition to a 21st Century workforce. In particular, I am pleased to see that H.R. 3388 allows for the creation of a Highly Automated Vehicle Advisory Council, which can properly consider the labor and employment issues that may be affected by the deployment of highly automated vehicles. [[Page H6676]]

I have been working on separate legislation to create a new retraining program for workers who are displaced from their jobs due to the adoption of autonomous vehicle technology. I am very grateful for Representative Joe Barton and Representative Bob Latta's staff for working with my office to craft and refine that legislation. I believe that we are getting closer to a final product, which will ultimately recognize the inevitable changes to the labor market that this country will experience in the face of automated technologies.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to support H.R. 3388. I know that members of the Energy & Commerce Committee have worked tirelessly to bring this measure to the floor after hundreds of meetings with relevant stakeholders. I encourage my colleagues to support this bill and look forward to working cooperatively with members on other bills that will address other aspects of self-driving vehicles and the ramifications that will have on our economy and our country. {time} 1200

Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Mimi Walters).

Mrs. MIMI WALTERS of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3388, the SELF DRIVE Act, which will help advance the deployment of self-driving vehicles by allowing testing of this life- changing technology.

Back home in Orange County, long commutes and congestion are a way of life. Sadly, traffic accidents, often fatal, are also a daily occurrence in my district and across the country.

Some predict self-driving vehicles could save 300,000 lives each decade. In Orange County alone, the deployment of this technology could save the lives of 150 people every year.

I am especially proud that a piece of legislation I drafted, the MORE Act, is included in the SELF DRIVE Act. The MORE Act will help advance self-driving vehicle technology because it allows new entrants to the automobile industry, such as tech and ride-hailing companies, to test this lifesaving technology on public roads.

The SELF-DRIVE Act has the potential to make our roads safer, alleviate congestion, and improve mobility for seniors and individuals with disabilities.

I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan), the sponsor and my partner on the HOT CARS Act, included in this legislation.

Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I also thank the chairman from Bowling Green, Ohio, home of the Harvard of the Midwest, Bowling Green State University, and Ranking Member Schakowsky for including the language, as she said, for the HOT CARS Act.

We lose about 37 children a year who accidentally get left in the backseat of a car when a parent or grandparent accidentally forgets that they are there, they change their routine, and 37 kids a year pass away. It is one of the most tragic circumstances we have to deal with in this country. Ms. Schakowsky and I, along with Peter King from New York, have championed this bill. I just want to say thank you for including it in here.

These cars get hot fast, up to 125 degrees. This allows the companies now to put sensors in there. When we leave our keys in the car or when we leave our lights on, we get a ding or a bell. Now we will know if someone is in the backseat. There will be an alert that the car companies will put into the cars to allow us to recognize and prevent 37 deaths a year.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for working in a bipartisan way, and thank Ranking Member Schakowsky for her leadership. She has been championing this a long time, and I appreciate it.

Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Costello).

Mr. COSTELLO of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the SELF DRIVE Act. With over 127,000 vehicle crashes in Pennsylvania in 2015, advances in deploying self-driving technology are critical to helping make our roads safer.

Importantly, self-driving cars can also increase mobility for seniors and individuals with disabilities and can reduce carbon emissions.

As with many innovations, we must recognize the importance of safety, including cybersecurity vulnerabilities, when it comes to self-driving cars.

Provisions of my cybersecurity legislation, which were included as part of the bill we are voting on today, directs the Secretary of Transportation to create a Federal advisory council on cybersecurity. The council will be responsible for gathering information and providing advice related to the cybersecurity of self-driving vehicles, and it will ensure both public and private sector stakeholders are communicating about cybersecurity concerns before they become a crisis.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Walden, Chairman Latta, and staff for their work to bring this bill to the floor.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, in closing, let me just say some thank yous. I thank the chairman of our subcommittee, Chairman Latta, for his great work. I also thank Chairman Walden, and, of course, all of the staff on his side of the aisle for their work to help us reach this bipartisan agreement. I especially want to thank them for the inclusion of the HOT CARS legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Ranking Member Pallone on our side and also thank Michelle Ash, Lisa Goldman, Caroline Paris-Behr, and my staff, Matt Hayward, for their great work on the subcommittee on this legislation.

We will continue working together to send consensus legislation. I appreciate the opportunity to work with Chairman Latta and to get this to the floor today as a suspension bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, again, I thank the gentlewoman, the ranking member on the subcommittee, for all of her hard work on this legislation. Again, we wouldn't be here without the bipartisanship that we had on this piece of legislation.

Also, again, I want to thank our staff. There were a lot of weekends and nights that they put in to make sure that we got this bill to where we are today.

But, again, as has been mentioned today, we have been talking about what this legislation is going to do. We have been looking at safety, cybersecurity, privacy, making sure that some folks in the community right now who aren't able to get out, some of our senior population, and those with disabilities, have the ability to be able to get around to go to jobs and go to the grocery store.

The legislation has been a culmination of a lot of work over two sessions. Again, I want to thank Dr. Burgess for his hard work that he did in the last Congress as the chairman of the subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3388, the SELF DRIVE Act. Connected and automated vehicles are a rapidly evolving technology that are novel today, but will be a reality tomorrow. This legislation will provide the auto industry, consumers, and policymakers with the certainty they need to advance automated vehicle technology. Automated vehicles have the potential to increase safety, improve mobility, and decrease congestion while improving the efficiency of our transportation network.

As the co-chairman of the Congressional Unmanned Systems Caucus and an engineer, I have for the past three years been convening automated vehicle stakeholders to discuss the policy issues related to the development and deployment of these new technologies. In addition, I authored the Future TRIP Act during the 114th Congress. Key provisions of that bill, including the establishment of a regional transportation center to study automated vehicles were passed into law in the FAST Act. It is imperative that we maintain the United States' manufacturing.

I commend my colleagues on the Energy and Commerce Committee for their bipartisan work on this important legislation. The SELF DRIVE Act includes language will promote industry growth by preventing a potentially stifling patchwork of differing local regulations. By asserting the authority of the federal government to regulate these vehicles and corresponding safety standards, the Committee has struck the right balance by allowing states to retain their traditional roles in driver licensing, insurance, and vehicle registration in a way that does not impede innovation. In addition, I am pleased that the bill enables the Department of Transportation to review the vehicle systems through the Safety Assessment Letter process. [[Page H6677]]

Automated vehicles are highly complex, and present a number of equally complex policy considerations. While this bill is a significant step forward in defining the federal government's role in this emerging technology, I believe there is more work to be done with respect to ensuring that NHTSA has appropriate resources to carry out the federal role in oversight and regulation, and to ensuring the privacy of consumers' data. Data sharing between government and industry holds the possibility of improving safety operations and performance, but must be a collaborative partnership, and must protect consumers' personally identifiable data.

For that reason, I have an amendment that has been made in order to the Fiscal Year 2018 Transportation, Housing, and Urban Development appropriations bill, that we will consider later today. The amendment will provide the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration with an additional $9 million for the Salaries and Expenses account. These funds will enable the agency to expand its workforce, define new testing protocols as the technology emerges, and better partner with industry and state and local governments to conduct adequate oversight.

In addition, I continue to have concerns about the collection, use, and privacy of consumers' data. A recent report issued at the direction of myself and my colleague, Congresswoman Comstock, the Government Accountability Office found while nearly all of the major auto manufacturers now offer vehicles with connected technologies, NHTSA has not clearly defined its roles and responsibilities as they relate to the privacy of vehicle data, making it difficult for NHTSA to coordinate with other federal agencies to effectively oversee these emerging technologies.

We still have important issues to consider, including insurance, cyber-security, and data sharing. I look forward to continuing to collaborate with my colleagues to examine this evolving industry, and defining the federal government's role in promoting industry while protecting the public. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Latta) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 3388, as amended.

The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.

The title of the bill was amended so as to read: “A bill to amend title 49, United States Code, regarding the authority of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration over highly automated vehicles, to provide safety measures for such vehicles, and for other purposes.”.

A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. ____________________



Back to Top | Next Article | Source: Congress.gov

Legislative BranchLive Floor Updates, Congressional Record

     


Members, Committees

Live: House, Senate, All

Votes: House, Senate

Record: Daily, Weekly

Prayer, News