>> i don't think the united states has earned on that at all. my own approach, we talked about a little earlier, my own approach was to have intensive

>> look, i would say the following t structure still exists. he's not bound by it, but that doesn't mean he's not implementing at least on the issue of security cooperation. it goes on now. from israeli stand point, as far as i know, they transferring revenues they have collected and still have the designated areas of a, b and c. the structure still exists. you don't have an active peace process right now. what you have instead is something of a wave of terror violence. it isn't organized, it's being

carried by 15 and 25-year-olds. they portray and don't show stabbing but only the result. false narrative out there that israel is trying to do what exist in hebron, completely untree. you -- untrue. you have an agreement that we contributed to between the prime minister, the king of jordan which is going to put cameras that it is not being changed and i would like to see more done in that regard and explaining what

the squats quo is and repeating over and over and doing more to highlight this and getting king of dula as a way of trying to stop what is right now a kind of level of for -- terror that's taken a life of its own. because it's not organized, it's hard to bring it to an end, so first thing is first, your going to have have to find, find a way to calm things down. secondly, i would say, and you said at the end of your comment, anybody that thinks that binational state is a prescription except for what you're seeing right now, should look again in the mirror. there's no place in the middle east where there is more than one identity that's at peace and the kind of conflict you see are

terrible. the idea that one-state outcome is anything except a prescription for enduring war is and i -- illusion, if you're a believer in the relationship, jewish democratic state, i don't know how you produce a two-state outcome, i don't see the capacity to make decisions. that's why i say, i do think you are going to have to bring the arabs into this. you have to create a context and it has to require a change of reality on the ground. and so you start by creating

calm. i don't call it baby steps. for the last four years it has been a siren song, maybe three sides including our side has been able to restrain enthusiasm for this idea, one of the problems we face few people believe two-state outcome. have few palestinians believe where each side begins to take steps maybe in response to us that demonstrate, no, look, when we say we are for two states, prime minister of israel, for two states for two peoples. it would be good to see some actions that reflect that. for example, one way to show that he believes in two-state for two people, i'm not going to outside the blocks, i'm not

going to build on what is apa -- palestinian state. it would be nice at some point maybe actually to show that they would put israel in a map, that would be a nice thing or that they could, the idea that if you don't want to say jewish state, two states for two people because there is such a thing for jewish people. he explained why it seemed so hard the palestinians to acknowledge that the jews are people and are entitled to a state. one way to demonstrate is for each side to at least even if it's to us, take those actions that would do that. if you begin doing that, it's not going to transform things over night, but what it will do

is begins to create a basis to create a second look, and if we were guided by a strategy that's designed to transform the situation, so what isn't possible today can become possible tomorrow, that's the way we would approach things. >> any future peace agreement will be based on the structure, indeed, practical things that go on that continue today. the second point is -- i agree, fully with taking steps to reinforce a path to ultimate agreement. it is an important question to ask, why does it take the u.s. secretary of state to go to human if -- with respect to create a status quo, why is

that? that's an important conversation for us to have with both sides frankly. >> given the climate right now, even though there's a capacity communicate director, sometimes each side needs the excuse that the united states provides. right now what secretary kerry provided kind of an you umbrellr communication to take place. again, it's a reminder, we do have a roll to play but have to structure in a way that it has to succeed. >> thank you. yes, in front right here. >> i wanted to ask in light of, you know, debate of iran deal that occurred, what do you think is the best for the prime minister to strike and going to

iaea -- [inaudible] >> what matters is what he says and where he -- and not where he says it. the prime minister will take account. it shouldn't be a partisan issue. i hope he reaches out in a way that's unmistakable to democrats and republicans alike and emphasizing the nonpartisan nature. i would except that this meeting actually will go we. i think the prime minister has an interest in having it go well and the president has an interest in having it go well. do i think after the aftermath of this they are going to be the closest of friends, do i think the chemistry is going to be perfect, new york city they do have different world views, but i do think they recognize the points of conversion, the common

needs right now and both have an interest in elevating that at this point and, you know again, it comes back to think about those things that bind us and particularly on the issue that divided us on iran. you know, one of the things that we used to always say even when we were still in or points of disagreement, we knew our objectives were the same, the tactics might not always be the same, all right, a threshold has been crossed. there's an agreement that's going to be implemented. the question that is critical is how is it going to be implemented and is there a certainty in iran's mind that there's going to be a price. 15 years understanding when there are no longer limitations on the size of the program they can build, they understand that there are thresholds that if they cross it produced a price that they don't want to pay.

>> it depends on what the prime minister said. this is a constructive conversation to be had here of shared goal. acquiring nuclear weapon. you have an agreement that's put in place with the support of virtually the entire international community, an implementation and accountability should be the topic of discussion. >> very professional. that's what the topics of discussion should be. please join me in thanking for fascinating discussion. [applause] >> books right outside. get them while they are here. [laughter] >> thank you, gentlemen, for being with us today. >> thank you. [inaudible conversations]

>> the senate on services committee takes a look at tus military strategy in the middle east today in hearing with defense secretary carter and joint chiefs of staff, that gets underway 9:00 a.m. eastern on c-span3. later in the day, state department and homeland security officials give an update on the syrian refugee crisis at a house foreign affairs committee hearing. that's also live on c-span3 starting at 2:00 o'clock eastern . >> i usually cover the house and

legislations going on and also other key events on capitol hill. we as a network committed to cover hearing gavel to gavel. we covered all the hearings on benghazi, house of representatives, next in the series that we covered. i got there at 7:00 o'clock in the morning. the crews were set up, they had put cameras in before and got in places very early in the morning for a morning show washington journal, so they could show what was going on in the hearing room even before anybody was getting there. i was starting to tweet out, thinks that were happening outside the room as well as inside the room. i was showing what the camera crews were doing and how the committee was setting up and how we made sure that we were as close as possible getting the key moment when she came into the building and then she went to a room across the hall with her team, with her aids and

staff, tv reporters, a lot of people i talked to said it was their first hearing. a historic moment, it was interesting to see and hear from them. i tweeted a picture at the end that shows secretary clinton talking to other members of the house, again, mainly democrats and she seemed very pleased and senator who appeared to be sweating at the time seemed happy to be leaving the room that the hearing concluded. i thought the most interesting things were conversations that didn't get caught on camera. i did mention one about chairman gowdy and mrs. clinton aid. we devote gavel-to-gavel coverage on the houseic and sene and the senate on c-span2.

when it comes time to those key hearings, we are there, we devote resources of cameras, putting it on television, radio and online and make sure that the viewers can completely understand without any commentary that entire event. this is one of the key events covering hearing with mrs. hillary clinton that i think a lot of people will remember from years on. >> right now senator healed hearing recently on whether auto safety and auto recall regulations should be overhauled. the head of national highway testified, this is two and a half hours. >> if everyone will take their seats, the committee will come to order and good morning. i want to welcome everyone to our hearing today on examining

ways to improve vehicle and roadway safety. i will recognize myself for five minutes for the purpose of an opening statement. certainly lives depend on the safety of cars, safety of trucks and on the roads themselves in the united states. and on the whole t data is good around the decrease in fat alties against miles driven, but the hearings over the last two years have certainly underlined the severity of problems that do exist and there's no room for going slow when it comes to safety and certainly cannot and will not be tolerated. it's incumbent on us, the highway administration, vehicle manufacturers and other in the automotive industry to ensure absolute compliance with motor vehicle safety and standards. lives depend on it.

it is our responsibility to revisit safety standards and processes that determine whether they provide sufficient protection to our nation's motorists. this past year, i think it has been clear to many of us on the committee and certainly clear to me that this is not always the case and that there is room for improvement. to that end, the discussion draft that we will examine today includes modifications to certain federal motor vehicle that will enhance safety practices against auto makers, national highway safety administration itself and provide more information to motorists and consumers about vehicle safety and fossor the development of new automotive technology that is will save lives. some of these modifications include updating how the national highway safety transportation publicizes and make recall information available to consumers.

the discussion how coordinates to consumers as well. these changes are intended to improve overall recall awareness by providing drivers with more complete information about a safety recall and given them the means to take immediate action to get their vehicles fixed once the defect notice is received. the discussion draft also contains proposals intended to improve how the national highway safety administration collects and answers -- and analyzes and crash worthiness features that cowed provide additional protection to the public. the discussion draft extends their remedy and repair obligations under recalls and increases the time that they

must maintain safety records to facility -- facilitate of potential defects and safety incentives that encourage investment into next generation safety technologists. after a record year for recalls, the draft we will examine toddies cuss -- discusses roadway safety and restore confidence in american motorists so that the cars they drive are safe and the recall process works and auto makers and the national highway administration are capable of keeping pace with technology and complexity cars in the futures. i want to thank all the witnesses for their testimonies, i look forward for engaging and lively discussion on issues as we seek to improve auto safety and save more lives and ultimately benefit the driving

public. with that i will yield the balance of my time and recognize the ranking member of the committee. opening statement, please. >> thank you, mr. chairman. legislative effort to enhance auto safety and recall process. i think it is a mistake to hold a hearing without nongovernment data security witness. this draft legislation includes provisions related to privacy and data protection and it would benefit all of us to better understand the implication of those provisions. i would also like to mention that victims to have gm ignition switch failure are here today in the audience. it has been 20 months since the initial gm recall and you'd think this committee would have acted sooner as we see again today with the toyota recall of 6.5 million vehicles, safety issues aren't going away. as sponsor of legislation to achieve the goals this bill amendments to address, i'm happy we are finally having a legislative hearing,

unfortunately, i believe we are having it on the wrong bill. this discussion draft includes some ideas from hr1181, vehicle safety improvement act the bill i introduced with ranking member and five other members of the subcommittee in march. those include requirements and that every auto maker has a u.s. senior executive responsible for certifying the accuracy and completeness of all responses to request for information relating to safety investigations. i am glad those provisions are included but it would have been much better and useful for the majority to engage in bipartisan consultation during drafting of this bill as i have repeated asked rather than dumping the bill in the lapse. had the dialogue taken place the bill could have been address prior to hearing. the vehicle safety improvement

act include several provisions, none of which are included in this draft legislation. the vsia with more than double funding for vehicle safety programs, this bill provides no explicit additional funding for the agency, the vsia will increase quality and quantity of information shared by auto makers with nitza, the public and congress while there is a -- while there's a nod to those priorities in this draft legislation, there's little meaningful change in the status quo. the bill would require manufacturers to fix all recall vehicles free of charge rather than those that were purchased within the past ten years, the discussion draft would not under vsia, nitza would have authority to expedite recalls related to dangerous defects that would eliminate the regional recall

program and all subject of repair regardless of location and neither of the changes are part of discussion draft. beyond those missteps, the republican draft legislation takes steps in the wrong direction. to take one example, the bill would give auto makers a break from health-base carbon omission requirements for adding safety features that are readily available. it makes no sense that would give car makers a free pass to pollute beyond standards to maintain public health. this provision is a big win for volkswagens of the world but does nothing to benefit the public. it's about time we had a hearing on enhancing auto safety, the safety of american drivers, passengers and pedestrians should be above partisan politics. i urge my colleagues to engage in a bipartisan process that will yield a stronger and more

comprehensive bill. i'm anxious to participate in that kind of dialogue. we still have an opportunity to deal with that. unless there's someone else who would want some time, i yield back my time. >> thank you, gentlelady. >> thank you, mr. chairman. a car isn't just how you get around when you're from michigan, a fiber that connects our communities and economy and we take great pride in creativity, it is what has helped the industry become what it is today, a global leader in vehicle safety, comfort and superior driving experiences. over the last couple of years we have seen the vast of what the auto industry has to offer. it's no secret that i'm an optimist, michigan and the country, but unfortunately, we've also seen safety shortcomings an dishonesty.

i'm glad we are here today and to the industry to ensure that cars are as safe as possible. we are in the mist of exciting time, what was once science fiction is now becoming reality. the innovation is to be applauded not only because it will revolutionize driving but because it means but most importantly save lives. what we are going to review today is a starting point to achieve those ends. some pieces like having a corporate officer responsible for safety compliance certainly isn't new. it's also a good talk about forming a working group to address cybersecurity best

practices. invest in new safety technologies that will indeed save more lyes. it also include plans that will help modernize the work to ensure that the agency is fully capable of keeping pace with innovation and progress of the industry in the 21st century. this is a life saving endeavor. we have a on the of witnesses today, i also want to invite everyone with an interest to give us feedback on how we can improve the legislation. this committee is unwavering in commitment to ensure that the auto industry and the government are doing anything they can to make cars safer and protect the lives of driving public and their passengers, our work continues to improve safety for drivers and i yield the balance of my time to the vice chair of

the committee. >> thank you, mr. chairman, and i want to thank our witnesses for being here today and i thank you for the hearing, i think you've chosen the perfect day to do this hearing as we go back to the future and it is october 21st, 2015 and we all remember that movie and the significance of that date and here we are talking about interconnected cars. so perfect day to have discussion and i thank you for the draft that you have brought forward. my constituents are truly interested in this issue whether they work for toyota or gm or nissan or in the aftermarket auto parts industry with auto zone. everybody has an interest in what we are doing and here is the reason why, when you look at the steps that we are going to have a quarter billion

interconnected cars on the roadway by 2020. by 2020. and the significance of that as automobiles have become more computerized, it's important for us to look at these technological advances such as the vehicle to vehicle communication, there's a lot of curiosity about that. we look forward to getting some answers as to how this is going to work and i thank the gentleman from texas from initiating the conversation and yield back. >> chair, thanks, gentlelady yields back. five minutes for an opening statement, please. >> the title of today's hearing refers to vehicle and roadway safety but it's clear from the draft before us that safety is not the focus. instead of improving auto safety this draft weakness current, environmental and consumer protection. auto safety is the pressing

topic that deserves our upmost attention, 14% in the first six months of 2014, years after declining after traffic death. injuries are also up. medically consulted motor vehicle industry, medically related motor vehicle injuries grew and increases should concern everyone. earlier this year, ranking member introduced a vehicle safety improvement act of 2015 as starting point for bipartisan negotiations to legislation. our bill would make improvements to ensure that millions of drivers and passengers across the country are kept safe. it gets nitza the information, resources and authorities to protect consumers and our bill empowers consumers. instead of those safety measures, this draft would give

auto makers credits towards greenhouse emotions and crash avoidance and vehicle to vehicle, technologies and new cars even though there's no apparent link between technologies and revisions. manufacturers would get credits for things they are already doing. not only are manufacturers continuously touting cars including the latest crash avoidance technologies, nitsa has released technology. also secured commitment from several auto makers to include automatic and furthermore, avoid crash technologies that are prompt innocent safety rating from insurances for highway safety. auto makers have considerable incentive to add those features to car. in the wake of volkswagen scandal, i'm alarmed that congressman would consider, in fact, auto companies would

receive a pass on pollution communications deviolations will not prevent greenhouse devices. i'm also concerned about the privacy in this draft as more- high-tech vehicles, but including privacy, this draft gets auto makers liability protection for simply submitting a privacy policy or cybersecurity plan even if that plan provides no real protections for consumers and even if those policies are followed. because my time is limited, i want to process for a moment. i am disappointed by the union -- unilateral in drafting

legislation. but instead of pursuing of bipartisan approach, the majority decided to pursue behind closed doors. i'm troubled that the environmental protection agency could not find a way to attend today. regardless if the majority wants to open the clean air act, this bill must be subject of a hearing, which has the jurisdiction and expertise, mr. chairman, this fails to increase auto safety and harms the environment and relieves auto makers from responsibility regarding consumer data, this is a weak bill that i can't afford, yet, again, i can only express my hope that in the near future we can work together to make real progress to improve outo safety. i yield back. >> this concludes opening statements and the chair would like to remind pursuant to committee rules all opening

statements will be made part of the record. each panel of witnesses will have the opportunity to give an opening statement followed by a realm of questions. once we conclude with questions we will take a brief underscore brief recess to set up for the second panel. ..

nhtsa will continue to use every tool available in pursuit of public safety and in just the last 10 months the agency has done the following. strengthen our oversight and enforcement on vehicle safety, issuing a record civil penalties, and making innovative use of consent order to improve safety performance in the auto industry. secured first cybersecurity were led safety defect recall in automotive history amid unprecedented use of our a three to four measures to the most complex they to recall in american history involving takata airbag conflict. with embrace the call took solar technology innovations that can

save lives. it's a wedding proposal make a vehicle-to-vehicle technology. announcing our kids at automatic emergency braking to a new car assessment program and securing voluntary commitments from 10 major automakers to make the system standard equipment on new vehicles. we have answered the call of this committee and the american public to improve our own performance in identifying and addressing safety defects. and undertake additional improvements are screaming, investigation and analysis processes. these efforts underscored and it's his commitment to safety. whatever decision to this committee or the congress makes nhtsa will see to do all we can for safety within editable sorted and resource. and what help we can do even more. dot ended the session identified actions congress can take to strengthen its is state

commissioned in the grow america act sector talked about significant enhancements in its safety of force including imminent hazard authority similar to that element other safety regulator. criminal penalties for vehicle tracking. and significantly enhances civil penalty authority to provide meaningful deterrence against violations of the safety it. row america in 2016 budget request would provide significant lending to enhance our office of defects investigation into address emerging issues such as cybersecurity. these proposals are essential to enhance our safety mission. as i told your senate colleagues in june in my judgment failure to address gaps in our authority, personnel and resources are a known risk to safety. nhtsa has been able to spend it is our detailed technical analysis of that discussion of this draft legislative proposal that was released late last week.

i would like to thank the committee members and step further engagement with nhtsa et al. productive conversations can and will continue. even our initial examination has identified examples of significant concerns. i which is raise two general points. first there should not be a trade off between safety and public health. the american public expects vehicles that address both safety concerns and public health and environmental concerns. second, the automakers have ample incentive to deploy advanced safety technology. allies they can save and injuries that they can prevent. the discussion draft would require notice with state and motor vehicle agencies. state agencies are one potential touch point especially second or third owners of used vehicles. the cost to establish or maintain such a system are unknown and the technology is

not yet in place which is why grow america proposed a pilot program to work through these issues. under the draft proposal states that do not meet the requirement would be kicked out of the national driver register a com national driver register it, and a portal to over a decade to get 100% participation that identifies offenders and should commercial drivers have clean records. the committee's discussion that includes a focus on cybersecurity privacy and technology innovations. the current proposals met the opposite of their intended effect. by providing entities majority representation on committees to establish appropriate practices and standards and then enshrining those practices as de facto, the proposals could undermine nhtsa's effort to ensure safety. the public expects nhtsa, not industry, to set safety standards. the draft want to see proposal would require nhtsa jupiter certain recall notices in coordination with the

manufacturers and would prevent nhtsa for making them public until manufacturers have made available lives of vehicle identification numbers. this proposal would require nhtsa to withhold safety defect information from the public and give the manufacturers responsible for the defects control over the timeline and release of nhtsa and you should recall actions. this proposal weakens the agency's enforcement authority as a drug conflict with a congressional interest to increase the transparency of safety information. it would be hard to argue that the best response to recent inspecting auto safety is to erode nhtsa's ability to regulate and oversee safety. what is required is to strengthen or the to achieve its mission by working together to address gaps in our authority and resources the discussion of these and other issues is essential to our shared goal of greater safety. on america's roads but i think you look forward to your questions. >> the chair thanks the gentleman. ms. mithal, you are recognized for five minutes.

>> dr. burgess, ranking member schakowsky and members of the subcommittee i am maneesha mithal from the federal trade commission to i appreciate the opportunity to present the commission's testimony on the privacy and security related provisions of the discussion draft to provide greater transparency, accountability and safety authority for nhtsa. the ftc has served as a primary federal agency charged with protecting consumer privacy and security for the past 45 years. we have brought hundreds of privacy in cases targeting violations of federal trade commission act and other laws. in addition to enforcing a wide range of privacy and security laws the ftc educate consumers and businesses. most recently the ftc launched its start with security business education initiative that includes new guidance for businesses as well as a series of conferences across the country designed to educate small businesses on security. the next conference will take place on november 5 in austin, texas.

on the policy front we conducted a workshop on the internet of things where we hosted a panel on connected cars. we released a report on the workshop earlier this year. with this background we're pleased to offer our views on title iii of the discussion draft. we have serious concerns about the privacy, hacking and security provisions of title three. first as to privacy, we are concerned the safe harbor from ftc action is too broad. a manufacturer who submits the privacy policy that meet specific requirements that does not follow them may not be subject to any enforcement mechanisms. furthermore, even though the privacy policy is only required to describe protections for vehicle data collected by owners, collected from owners, renters and lessees the commission to be precluded from bringing a section of action based on any privacy related misrepresentation on manufacturers website, even if it is unrelated to the coal

data. second, as to hacking, section 302 of the discussion that would prohibit unauthorized access to vehicle data systems. security researchers have uncovered security vulnerabilities and connected cars are accessing such systems. responsible researchers often content companies to inform them of these vulnerabilities so that companies can voluntarily make their cars safer. by prohibiting such act is even for research purposes this provision would likely discourage such research to the detriment of consumers privacy, security and safety. finally, as to security the bill creates an advisory council to develop best practices. manufacturers that implement these practices will have a safe harbor under section five. however, the current draft may not result in best practices robust enough to protect consumers for several reasons. first, at least 50% of council membership must consist of representatives of automobile

manufacturers. any best practices approved will be by a simple majority of members. manufacturers alone could decide what best practices would be adopted. second, the discussion draft contained eight areas that they may but not must cover. and disrespect the draft does not create a minimum standard of best practices. third, there's no requirement to update practices in light of emerging risks in technology. fourth, by creating a clear and convincing evidence standard for disapproving best practices, the bill gives nhtsa too little discretion and would likely result in the approval of plans that may meet the bare minimum best practices on paper but are in practice to a properly tailored to for siebel evolving threats. finally, it is so broad that it would immunize manufacturers from liability but as the deceptive statements. for example, false claims on the manufacturers website about its use of firewalls or other security features would not be

actionable. in some the commission understand the desire to provide businesses with certainty and incentives in the form of safe harbors to implement best practices. however, disagree provision of the discussion draft would allow manufacturers to receive substantial liability protections in exchange for potentially week best practices instituted by a council that they control. the proposed legislation could weaken the security and privacy protection that consumers have today. thank you for the opportunity to testify. we look forward to continue to work with the subcommittee, congress and our partners at nhtsa on this critical issue. >> the gentlelady yield specter the chair thanks the gentlelady. i thank you both for your testimony. we will move to the question and answer portion of the hearing, and to begin i will recognize myself for five minutes. ms. mithal, let me ask you to

clarify because i don't think we'll senwas in the written stat that ahead of able to me last night. you mentioned that you would be one of your start with security business education initiatives in austin, texas, is that correct speak with that's correct. >> what was the date? >> november 5. >> very well. for the benefit of our c-span audience i just wanted to repeat that because although my congressional district is a little north of austin, it obviously affects come will affect people in my state. dr. rosekind, thank you for being here. thank you for always been very generous with your time and very forthcoming whenever there are questions. thank you for opening up the doors of nhtsa to committee members to come and visit with you and see the good work that you and the men and women who are employed there, the good work you are doing. i do have a copy of the inspector general audit report,

and i'm sure you're familiar with it. this was issued in june of this year. can you take just a moment and go through which recommendations have been implemented? >> certainly. and just as context i'll be clear that one of the things we did was actually commit to building all 17 recommendations within a year, which the inspector general major understood that's never done, to make that commitment, and we gave a schedule that i mentioned that because the person has been completed two weeks ahead of schedule and we're on schedule for all the other 16 at this point. >> very well. can you briefly describe the operations for the council of vehicle electronics from vehicle software and emerging technologies, that that council this thing set up at nhtsa? >> the current -- just trying to

clarify. >> is there a council for vehicle electronics at nhtsa? >> we have an office. in fact, and just try to get my bearings here. so in 2015 actually come and we can send it to you, we published knits and vehicle cybersecurity. what they did was talk but what we've been doing in this arena. it actually describes how over the last few years starting in 2012 we reorganize our offices to the specific office at that address is that with specific people look at the cybersecurity issues related to electronic controlled vehicles spirit is there a separate office for vehicle soccer? >> that is in that. we have seven people. >> and believes that office or that council? >> right now the associate administrator is the technical lead on that.

>> that includes the center for emerging technologies at nhtsa? >> correct. >> is there a mission statement that has been published for the office or that council speak with i don't know if there's a specific mission statement for the office, but all of that would be in the 2015 knits and vehicle cybersecurity that we will send you. >> if you were to give us a thumbnail of what the mission of the office is, could you do the? >> sure. in 2012 i think this was trying to look ahead. what's been interesting for me is endorsing this is an issue now. nhtsa has been on this at least three years starting with the structural change to the agency that would have focus people look at this. they are looking at policy, testing, research, and having continual interactions with the industry to make sure up on what about the latest things or people are thinking about.

>> ms. mithal, let me ask you. does the ftc currently cordoning with nhtsa on data privacy and security? >> we do, yes. for example, we've had several meetings with nhtsa staff. we also comment on the report on vehicle-to-vehicle can make haitians last year. >> let me just take a minute, dr. rosekind. this may not be entirely within your area, but you're a with another subcommittee held a hearing on the volkswagen a mission problem and the defeat device. do you know what is, what are the standard allowable night's oxide emissions under current epa guidelines for we were told in the other subcommittee 20-40% more than allowable. can you give me a figure in grams or leaders or what is allowable under nitrous oxide emission? >> i can make sure we send you a

technical report so i could give you a specific number. >> that would be great. i would also like information as to what that was in calendar year 2000, just as a reference point. would that be possible? >> you bet. >> i will yield back and recognize the ranking member five minutes for questions. >> i would actually like the victims or the families of the gm switch fear delays raise their hands us a window where you, you are. i want to thank you very much for coming today. i know this is of great interest to you. i have a question for dr. rosekind. so this draft would require nhtsa to coordinate with auto manufacturers before publishing notice of any vehicle defect or noncompliance. i'm concerned about how this would affect nhtsa's ability to independently determine that a recall is necessary to notify the public if the affected manufacturer disagrees. it seems as though and manufacture could obstruct the

notification process at least temporarily by failing to submit the affect of vehicle identification numbers. so let me ask you, dr. rosekind, how would requiring a nhtsa to coordinate with manufacturers before publishing a notice of the defect present a risk to issue recalls when necessary? >> and i would like to have is actually from two angles. one is what you were highlighting, his addresses in its initiated actions, why that's important. many other recalls better on issued by the automakers. they identify something, they move forward. nhtsa initiate a recall because they deny the need to do that and we've had of the action. that concern is at least partly drafted basically that timeline and control of that would be basically under the control of the person who created the defect. i think the other partly has to do with holding the safety information. this committee, we heard you. it's frustrating to put the

information out of not have a supply of parts ready, et cetera. i can't imagine any of those knowing that we'd safety effective information holding it back and having somebody loses their life didn't defect when we have information. that's been part of what we've done from the beginning is make sure people get to make that choice, not the government, that if they have that information they get to choose what they like to do it including park the car or get a rental or do whatever else. one has to do with the control and taiwan, the manufacture. but the other i think is for us to think about the potential delay in providing information which clearly we would rather do as soon as we have it. >> thank you. it's clear the ability to quickly in situations in which a vehicle defect poses a serious public safety risk, perhaps even the life of someone essential, but nhtsa currently has no authority to take emergency action. that's why in the legislation

mr. pallone and i have introduced to vehicle safety improvement act, clint imminent hazard authority which gives the administration the ability to step in and issue a recall in cases where defects substantially increases the likelihood of serious injury or death. so how would this imminent hazard authority be helpful to nhtsa internet its mission to reduce death from injuries and economic loss resulting from motor vehicle crashes? >> thank you for identifying. we do want to go from withholding information. we think we need to be in the other direction which is what you highlighted. there's a gap. other safety regulars have the. emmett township would have allowed us to get the takata airbags off years before and that authority which others only have is not currently available to nhtsa. >> some of my colleagues have noted today traffic deaths rose by 14% in the first six months

of 2015. injuries have risen by 30% since 2014. i'm concerned is a draft that would put more strain on nhtsa and is already overstretched resources without improving safety. according to one estimate the number of vehicles on u.s. roads grew by nearly 4 million vehicles in 2013 to 2014. nhtsa's budget has been relatively flat over the past few years, appropriations for fiscal year 2016 continue that trend. coming in more than $70 million short of nhtsa's request. do you believe stagnant funding for nhtsa has made it harder for the registration to do its job of keeping unsafe vehicles off the road? >> there's no question the last time i appear before you make a comment give us more resources, we will give your safety. the equation is straightforward if you give us the requirements at the same resources, you will get less safety.

>> this draft calls on the nhtsa to conduct at least eight new reports and studies without providing any additional funding. would you expect that additional reports and studies to require a diversion of resources from other nhtsa programs? >> absolutely. we need the technical and other resources to produce these reports. >> thank you. i yield back. >> gentlelady yield's back. that chair recognizes the vice chair of the subcommittee, mr. lance, five minutes for questions, please. >> thank you, mr. chairman. did morning to you both. the state motor vehicle agency in new jersey has contacted me, and i think this is a concern of various state agencies. there is a section of directing motor vehicle agencies to notify drivers of open recalls on other vehicles when they are renewing registration. in new jersey that's once a year, and i presume that true.

in other states as well. there is some concern at the state level that this would put an undue burden on the various states. i understand the benefit of increasing notification and recall remedy rates, and we all pay for that. however, i do share some of the concerns of the agency in new jersey. could you please, dr. rosekind, comment on the feasibility of your agencies coordinating with state agencies to ensure they are able to have the information necessary to inform drivers of open recalls on vehicles within their states? >> you just use the word, which was feasibility. nhtsa held a retooling recall the event is how to increase to 100%. automakers have been researching to understand not just a recalls, how'd w how do we get . but you get on the concern. nobody knows the cost, nobody

knows the procedures to use of the mps to get this information out. it's a great concept. they are super touch point to get the people. that's why go america is just a was for a pilot study to figure it out and make sure it would be effective. >> and i presume a pilot study would be with one or several of the various jurisdictions. and is there anticipation as to how that pilot study would occur, dr. rosekind speak with someone that is outlined in grow america act it involves two states. just the things i mentioned, they got the technology, procedures, the cost. you do a pilot and a couple of studies which if you do how you would steal it for the whole country. doesn't work that way or not. >> is a typical in the states that vehicle registration is once a year, or are there multi-year registrations in some of the states? >> i believe its annual.

if there's an exception i can find that out for you. >> thank you very much. under the legislation automakers will be required to take reasonable steps to ensure that other entities adhere to the automakers privacy policies. the automakers privacy policies as applied to automakers would not be subject to ftc jurisdiction. what about the privacy policies of other end to these that would potentially have to adhere to the automakers privacy policies? i request any comments you might have on the. >> it appears from a read of the bill that the safe harbor from ftc action would apply to the manufacturers. so i would believe would still have the authority to go after other entities under section five of the ftc act. >> i yield back the balance of my time. >> the chair thanks the gentleman. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new jersey. >> thank you, mr. chairman.

high-tech vehicle safety technologies are expected to save thousands of lives per year once they are in broad use. nhtsa report estimates two types of dtv technology alone could prevent more than 300,000 crashes. i'm concerned however that in spite of the benefits of these technologies title title v of s bill is the obstacles try to put vehicle safety instead of environmental safety. section 502 and 503 would change greenhouse gas emissions and fuel economy credits for manufacturers installing advanced safety technology in v2v in new cars. particularly in light of the shocking admission fraud scandal surrounding volkswagen onboard an opportunity for automakers to avoid complying with governmental regulations. let me start, dr. rosekind, i didn't nhtsa is working with auto manufacturers on including advanced safety technology in more vehicles, correct? >> yes. if i could just come to i could just, two things. when his secretary foxes assess took silver in think it is a new

life-saving technology. the vehicle-to-vehicle proposed rule for 2016 will get out at the end of this year. and yes, i think we need to acknowledge and manufactures made a commitment to make automatic emergency braking standard in all their vehicles. that was without mandates. >> the proposed rule you mentioned would require all manufacturers to make their vehicles the v2v enabled? >> correct. >> and you said that by the end of the? >> proposal would beat out by the end of the year. >> use of manufactures are doing these advanced technologies in their cars. are the others in such as revising in tap that you're considering to get these technologies deployed to all cars and not just the luxury cars speak with her are three tools. rulemaking is one of them. into camp, the new car assessment program which is under review right now, more to talk about that in the near future. i'm highlighting these and auto manufacturers who came together on basically what the insurance

institute for highway safety and nhtsa to do this on their own. these are three different tools, and ugly have been pushing collaboration and the opportunity to expedite and expand the safety beyond amendments so we get the rulemaking. >> so again the dv requirement that v2v be installed in a vehicle is in the pipeline, and you said the insurance institute for highway safety requires the vehicle-to-vehicle be equipped with certain advanced safety technology to qualify for top safety ratings, is that correct? >> that's correct spin you said you worked with iit just to get certain commitments for manufacturers. >> correct. we announced automatic emergency brake is being added to end cap. they are further changes that are coming soon. >> i think most consumers alike of a car that is both fuel efficient and safe. that makes sense. do you support giving