white house and the issues important to them. we'll feature betty ford. >> the equal rights amendment when ratified will not be an instant solution to women's problems. it will not alter the fabric of the constitution or force women away from their families. it will help knock down those restrictions that have locked women in to the old stereotypes of behavior and opportunity. >> exploring the american story, watch "american history tv," saturday on c-span 2. and find a full schedule on your program guide. or watch online, any time at c-span.org/history. a house transportation subcommittee held a hearing on the use of automated vehicles. lawmakers heard from state official, union representatives and safety advocates.

they answered questions about several topics including safety concerns, environmental impact and infrastructure needs. >> good morning and welcome to the subcommittee on highways and transits hearing on the future

of automated vehicles known as avs. i must say i'm particularly interested in this hearing fascinated because it gets us well beyond roads and bridges. today we will kmm examine the effects of the adoption and deployment of avs on roadway safety, infrastructure, and the commercial driving workforce. we will also consider this committee's role and responsibility overseeing av deployment to ensure that the highest possible safety standards are met and that all americans have access to high quality family wage transportation jobs. automatic vehicles are on the cusp of transforming our transportation system. avs including commercial trucks and buss are those in which at

least some aspect of safety critical control function occurs without direct driver input. some can themselves perform all driving tasks and monitor their driving environment. this technology presents both opportunities and threats. nationwide, we are experience ing a startling rise in fatalities among drivers and other road users. avs have the potential to drastically reduce deaths on our roadways by reducing traffic crashes caused by human behavior. still safety benefits must be carefully weighed against risks. , especially when deployed commercial and passenger carrying avs. we have seen disastrous consequences when automation

technology is deployed haphazardly. to maximum the impact of avs, we must ensure these technologies are held to the highest possible safety standards. such standards must consider the safety of all road users when to act with avs including pedestrians and cyclists and those who scoot and use wheelchairs, which is especially critical in urban areas like my own district of columbia. avs must be integrated into a system in a manner that respects america's commercial driving workforce. avs could significantly improve working conditions for commercial drivers and increase on the job safety, but eliminating the need for a human driver could also result in a widespread job displacement if the needs of workers are not

prioritized. employer transparency, comprehensive regulations and oversight of deployment will be required to create and preserve high-quality family wage jobs and good working conditions for americans whose livelihoods depend on driving. thank you to each of our witnesses for being here and offering your unique and much-needed insights for this subcommittee. i look forward to a lively discussion and hearing what our committee can do to maximize the benefits that avs aim to deliver. i ask unanimous consent that the chair be authorized to declare a recess at any time. i also ask unanimous consent

that members not on the subcommittee be permitted to sit with the subcommitteed to and ask questions without objection. as a reminder, please keep your microphone muted unless speaking. should i hear any background noise, i will ask that the member please mute the microphone. to assert a document into the record v your staff e-mail it to documentsti@mailhouse.gov. now i am pleased to recognize my good friend the ranking member mr. davis. >> thank you, chair norton. and before i begin with my

opening comments, can i ask unanimous consent to insert into the record comments from the national association of mutual insurance companies? >> so ordered. >> thank you. and we will e-mail it too. follow those instructions. i want to welcome everyone to today's hearing along with chair norton on automated vehicles. avs offer the opportunity to not only transform the automotive and transit industry, but it will also transform our nation as a whole and solve many of the challenges that we face. as you know, the subcommittee has jurisdiction over large trucks and buss. elm ploying automated technologies on trucks and buss will have economic and societal implications that we believe will benefit every american. most importantly, incorporate ing this new technology will save lives. the national highway traffic safety administration estimates 38,680 people died in motor vehicle accidents in 2020 and expects fatalities to increase

in 2021. according to the department of transportation, 94% of serious crashes are due to driver error. because avs are expected to anticipate dangers and mitigate or remove human error from the chain of events that lead to a crash, av technology would increase safety and save lives. in addition, avs could revolutionize mobility and make the transport of goods and people safer, easier, cheaper, more efficient and more accessible. av technology could improve mobility for vulnerable groups, including the elderly and those with disabilities, connecting them with jobs and services and allowing them to live independently. in addition the resulting freight transportation efficiencies could reduce the cost of goods for consumers. in the long-term, provide solutions to some of the supply chain bottlenecks that americans currently experience today. all these benefits are compelling and must recognize

the potential impacts of av technology and what they could have on our workforce. we need to implement pro-worker policies because av deployment made lead to fewer professional driving jury box, we need to incorporate training programs to upskill our workforce so they can take advantage of new jobs that avs will create. today transit agencies and trucking companies are partnering with technology firms to test avs. our future depends on what we do now. we need to have a clear regulatory structure in place to be able to continue to support av innovations and its deployment. we need to take the steps in to ensure that america cements its leadership in the av space. with that, i want to thank our witnesses for joining us today and i look forward to hearing their testimony. i yield back. >> thank you, mr. davis. and now i want to yield to the chair of the full committee for any opening statement he may

have. >> thank you, madame chair. thank you for holding this very important hearing. thank you to all the witnesses. since there are so many, i will be brief. the challenges that are proposed, obviously, there's tremendous promise with avs with already a number of those aspects of those promises have been mentioned. i won't repeat those. but it's also a tremendous challenge to regulators. to regulate a rapidly evolving technology to be certain that the public is all public interests are included in the development, the deployment and operation of these vehicles, it's going to be an extraordinary challenge for the federal regulators. i shouldn't be done state by state. we need some reasonable

guidelines federally. we have to get it right. unregulated, we saw what happened with boeing and the max. we don't want that to happen with avs. i just read a report today and i think it was the post that there were 34 unexpected and unnecessary set braking incidents in tesla last month didn't lead to any major accidents yet, but it certainly could. so there are potential down sides to this technology as it is being deployed and developed. we have to stay on top of that. it also presents challenge to our infrastructure. that these avs use different ways of basically centering themselves on the road. if you don't have good striping, if you don't have fog lines, if you don't have regular signage, it's going to be a much more

problematic deployment and rollout ultimately. so we have to get it right we have to realize the promise. we can mitigate congestion, mitigate deaths and be a more efficient nation in terms of fuel consumption. there's a whole host of benefits just waiting out there. we just have to get it right as we toward them. thank you, madame chair. >> thank you, chairman. i'd like to now welcome today's witnesses on our panel. the honorable martha, vice mayor and city council member for houston, texas, testifying on behalf of of the national league of cities. mr. scott marlin, director of

our department of transportation testifying on behalf of the american association of state highway and transportation officials. mr. john samuelson, international president transportation workers union of america. ms. katherine chase, president advocates for highway and auto safety, mr. abuse, vice president of safety aurora, mr. doug block, political director for joint council, mr. larco, next center university of oregon. mr. wolf, general council opt

autonomous industry. thank you for being here today. without objection, our witnesses' full statement will be included in the record. since your testimony has been made a part of the record, the subcommittee requests that you limit your oral testimony to five minutes. first, ms. tatum, you may proceed. >> good morning, chair norton, ranking member, and members of the subcommittee. i am the vice may your protem on the southwest side of houston. i'm here today on behalf of the national league of cities to discuss our experiences with piloting autonomous vehicles. zero is the only acceptable number of deaths on america's roads. today we are losing far too many

of our residents to dangerous roads in houston and across this country. and efforts to reduce fatalities must include every possible strategy, including autonomous vehicles. cities handle most aspects of public transportation, and that experience and authority equips us to see both the opportunities and challenges to these new types of transportation. we are aiming to create the right environment of share, safe, connected av transportation options that will better serve our residents and meet our goals as a city. in houston, piloting the testing of avs started with our metro transit agency and their self-driving shuttle at texas southern university on their tiger walk across campus. they are now ex-panding to on road options between two universities. av buss and researching better

transit options. my district was one of the first three areas in houston where neurolaunched zero occupant avs for commercial service delivery using lower speeds and smaller lightweight vehicles. these avs pull right up to your home and deliver groceries, prescription or hot food from kroger, dom knows, cvs and the houston food bank, which has been extremely helpful during covid when we needed to social distance but also needed our daily necessities. when it first came to district k, we made arrangements with our local police officers to allow them to see the vehicle, understand how to access it in an emergency and to ask questions. as with all avs, these vehicles must be designed to operate on the roads as they exist today. and to interact in the real world situations. today the national league of

cities is providing three recommendations for federal action. number one, invest in piloting with local governments. congress and u.s. department of transportation can support a federal pilot for local av testing in partnership with communities and with strong safety guidelines. the scaling and spread of piloting to different areas of the country and different climates can encourage the data exchange that will allow for federal safety regulators to move the entire autonomous industry forward. number wo, invest in ensuring a skilled, trained workforce. in houston, we want to ensure residents have access to quality jobs that have even higher earning potential. we're encouraged by companies starting new upskilling training programs with community colleges, but investments in our nation's workforce needs to happen at scale. we know we need workers for infrastructure rebuilding and for growing technology

industries like avs. if we do not invest in worker training now, the latest study shows the u.s. will struggle to fill at least 4.5 million jobs. any moving legislation like the build back better act must invest in workforce training. number three, raise planning and technology sharing in regions. anticipating, adapting for changes is the basis for good transportation planning. new technology is changing transportation and investment in planning for the future will serve us in a more sustainable and practical way. in closing, we firmly believe commerce and america's cities, towns and villages are crucial to the safe adoption of avs into our existing transportation networks. i'm proud of the work that we

have done in houston, and we look forward to working with each of you as we advance our shared goals in transportation safely together. thank you. >> thank you. now we would move to mr. scott, director of the department of transportation. you're recognized for five minutes. >> chair, ranking member davis, ranking member graves and members of the subcommittee, good morning and thank you for the opportunity to appear today and speak to the important topic of automated transportation. it's my honor to testify on behalf of the american association of state highway and transportation officials and the department of trgs. my main message is to share the critical importance that connected and automated vehicles will have on improving the safety, equity, and sustainability of the nation's transportation system. state d.o.t.s are preparing for

a future with avs and they are dedicated to supporting the safe deployment of a connected, automated, and cooperaive vehicle roadway ecosystem. throughout all states. one of the key reasons state d.o.t.s are so interested is to improve roadway safety. we have learned that the first nine months of 2021 were deadly on our nation's roads. more than 31,700 people died in traffic crashes. in iowa alone, we lost 354 people to traffic crashes last year. this is entirely unacceptable. as each life lost is one too many. u.s. d.o.t. recently announced the national roadway safety strategy, which includes actions for safer roads and safer vehicles. avs hold tremendous poshl to reduce crashes and save lives. i believe the technologies must be an integral part of these strategies in order to fully

relax the saufty promise. in iowa our vision for deployed transportation ass has taken a two-pronged approach focusing on the drivers of the today and the cavs of tomorrow. we have several strategies that promote readiness for a tomorro. there's a readiness and more connected future, including the following. defining our vision and plan. extensive stakeholder engagement through our automated transportation council, and tpha policies and legislation, and infrastructure improvements that work for human drivers today and the cavs of tomorrow. iowa's experience is not unique among the state tovs. we believe fundamental to the safe and effective deployment of cavs across our states and nation. i would like to highlight two for you now. first to realize the benefits of

automated transportation, and they must also be connected. connected vehicle technology is key to ensure automated vehicles have the enhanced safety features in place to fully advance our goals of a safe, mobile, equitable and efficient transportation system. this is a key reason why we support the preservation. second,an urgent need for a coordinate national strategy. the vision of the strategy must be developed collaboratively, and collective input, industry, communities and all levels of government. the safety and mobility benefits are potentially enormous with clear direction to focus on the

tactics. these are only two of the principles and i encourage you to review all ten in more detail. i would like to conclude my remarks this morning by the emphasis on the actions that could lead to the successful develop. congress can call on usdot to articulate a clear vision. number two, continue to foster collaboration and partnerships. usdot needs to continue to foster partnerships and cross sector dialogue because collaboration is our competitive advantage. number three, preserve the needed communication spectrum. congress can provide much-needed certainty by working within their authority for the safety for automated transportation. i will be happy to answer any

follow-up questions. thank you. >> thank you, mr. marler. we now move to john samuelsen for transportation workers of america. john, you are recognized for five minutes. >> thank you for providing us this opportunity to present our views on autonomous vehicle technology. as president of the transport workers of america i am here representing more than 150,000 working people on the front lines of our freight systems, and the includes school bus operators and mechanics and others across the country. our members are the ones most at risk of job loss and displacement if automated vehicles are deployed without ways of undermine workers and jobs.

this is essential for the house to advance an av proposal, and ensuring safety and protecting transport workers jobs and rights and our transportation network are all core to this committee's work. let me be clear. the twu fully supports pro worker, pro safety technology, innovation and policy. we frequently spend our own capital at the bargaining table to enforce our employees to install safety driver assist innovations. it holds new technologies to our existing safety standards. innovation and automation are not new to our union or members. the new york city subway ran a

fully automated train across manhattan from 1962 to 1964, a train maintained and overseen by the transport workers union. this system and others like it gave rise to federal transit worker protections, standards like these ensure workers are treated fairly and have access to necessary training and can transition as jobs change due to technology. they have made our transportation sector a major hub for the solid blue collar jobs that power our economy. while the specific futures or equipment may be different in 2022 than in 1964, this approach has empowered workers for generations and should not change. the same is true of our safety policies. the tw members have worked with

regulators to transition from rotor blades to jet engines to positive train control and most recently toward zero emission buses. as a country we always fought to ensure that these innovations not only meet but exceed our existing safety standards. avs must be held to the same accountability. they must demonstrate their ability to improve their safety and our regulations must hold them accountable to any promise safety improvements. as automated technology has been integrated into other modes, and focus has been centered along trained professionals to operate. bus, subway, truck operators play an equivalent role in

surface transportation and our federal av policy must declare these onboard workers as the essential element of safe roads, and no level of vehicle automation should ever replace them. my written testimony includes elevating workers voices and implementing new technologies, and ensuring any transition to avs creates and sustains good union jobs across the entire spectrum, and informing dot to a unified approach to regulating automation to ensure workers are supported as new technologies arrive. tw members and all transportation workers are counting on our elected leaders to fight for our jobs and our safety. this committee has an opportunity now to lead the way

as we integrate the next generation of transportation technology. thank you for giving me the opportunity to address these issues here today. we look forward to your questions. >> thank you very much, mr. samuelsen. before our next witness provides testimony -- first i would like to recognize ms. chase. ms. chase is president of the advocates for highway and auto safety. ms. chase, you are recognized. >> good morning, chair norton and ranking member. i am catherine chase. thank you for holding today's hearing at a critical time with motor vehicle crash fatalities skyrocketing to historic highs,

despite a drop in miles traveled since the onset of the pandemic, and truck crashes have been increasing by 40% since 2009. however, it is yet to be fully develop and its safety and numerous other impacts are currently unknown. in the short term, many safety solutions are available. since our inception in 1989 advocates strongly supported proven life-saving technologies as standard equipment in all equipment, these include airbags, seat belts, electronic stability control and rear view cameras. we are deeply concerned about the rush to deploy unsafe and unproven automated or autonomous thebgz, avs, including buses and trucks while overlooking the

need to look at other solutions now. we commissioned a national public opinion pole last week and it revealed that 80% are concerned about sharing the roads with driverless cars. this distress is evenly expressed throughout the country. even greater concern of 85% was found for driverless trucks. again, throughout the country. yet when asked if there were concerns about driverless cars would be addressed, 60% responded yes. since congress held its first hearing on avenues a decade ago, if they can figure out how to build avenues, the u.s. department of transportation or dot can figure out how to develop stan yards. last month secretary buttigieg

responded that we need to make sure that people are weighing how to navigate a world of automated vehicles know that there's some baseline of safety that's being established by regulation, unquote. we share that view. without regulations, government oversight, consumer information and industry accountability the safety of all road users is in peril. these inadequacies are leading to a great deal of confusion about the capabilities of driverless vehicles versus cars with convenience features like lane keep assist. in turn this has led to drivers misusing and over relying on some technologies which resulted in fatalities and injuries. also yesterday tests recalled 54,000 cars that were programmed to roll through stop signs. the dot clearly needs to step in and step up its oversight of the

regulatory responsibilities, and this includes releasing information it has been collecting since last june from automakers for cars involved in crashes. their invest in america bill was included in the jobs act. two critical truck safety measures are the mandated rule on automatic emergency braking and a mandate upgraded standard for rear guards. these and other directives must be a floor and not ceiling by dot. the issuance of minimum standards for verified advanced driver systems for all new vehicles must significant or reduce crashes including

impaired, distract or drowsy driving. they are the building blocks for the possibility of futureless driverless cars and trucks. upgrading infrastructure is critical to advancing safety precipitation tragic bridge collapse in pittsburgh last week shows this need. quick implementation throughout the nation is vital. additionally, research and data on the impacts of avs, and other issues in the study directed by the iija must be completed to inform future policies. in closing we support rigorous testing, government oversight and industry accountability with the future goal of safe deploying of the avs including autonomous trucks and buses. in 2020 advocates were joined by 60 groups representing labor, disability rights and emergency

responders, law enforcement, bicyclist and others in developing the av tenants. we urge the sub committee to continue its safety leadership role by advancing these and other needed protections to improve the safety of all road users in our nation's infrastructure. thank you. >> thank you very much, ms. chase. before our next witness provides testimony, i would like to recognize representative lamb for an introduction. >> i am excited to introduce nat beuse. one sense about aurora, they are an incredible far-seeing company that will be with us for a long time coming from executives and

innovators out of uber and tesla and waymo. they have partnered with companies like tesla to take the lead in self driving and automation technology for cars and trucking. can you see their cars on the road in the city of pittsburgh almost anytime and they really have been an honor to have in our community as one of their main headquarters. nat is the vice president of safety, and more than 190 employees that we have in person pennsylvania, and he leads the development of approach to safety, and works on regulatory bodies, and it's about how to make rules for the industry in the future. he was with uber before aurora, and before working the private sector, nat over saw the entire nation's vehicle safety research program including automated vehicles, and he also serves on the board of mothers against

drunk driving, so this is somebody coming to us today that not only has significant industry experience and can help us to understand the day-to-day, but still continues some of the work -- >> thank you very much. mr. beuse, you are recognized. >> good morning, chair defazio, ranking member graves, and ranking member davis and the members of the sub committee. thank you for the invitation to testify before you today on the subject of autonomous vehicle technology, and thank you representative lamb for the kind introduction. aurora's mission is to deliver the benefits of self driving technology safely, quickly and broadly.

we are developing that. aurora was founded in 2017 by experts in the av field, and the company has grown to over 1,600 employees across pennsylvania, california, montana, texas, washington, colorado and michigan. i lead the team responsible for developing and implementing a holistic approach to safety. we also work with industry stan yards groups, regulatory bodies to develop best practices and safety standards because transparency is critical for the success of this technology. my entire professional career has been focussed on making our roads safely. it's a deeply personal connection for me and so many other americans.

it's not acceptable we lose 40,000 americans every year, and the unbelievable part is this trend has been going in the wrong direction for far too long. information released yesterday show traffic fatalities continue to rise at a record pace. i believe deeply in the work we do at aurora every day and that's going to be part of the solution to improve safety on our roads. first, it's important to note for this sub committee that aurora is a regulated company at all levels of government. our technology is subject to the state requirements and the motor carrier requirements. it's state has it's own approach, and there are several open rule makings about the safe deployment of avs we would like the see move forward as we continue to build our internal safety programs. where does my role fit into this

regulatory system. there's one thing we know from decades of learning across safety critical industries. failures and safety are rarely caused by a single person, but insteud by organizations that failed to prevent multiple mistakes from turn into a disaster. two strategies for our approach are as follows. one, all employees are empowered to request halting of operations if there's a safety concern, and this is part of the larger approach from managing safety risks. teams across aurora are held responsible for completing our framework and providing evidence that our avs are safe to operate on public roads. how we develop the aurora driver and prepare for public road operations also matters. we collect data and use onroad

testing to validate our simulations. with our virtual testing suite, this allows us to train and evaluate the driver software across a vast range of scenarios well before the software is loaded on to vehicles or public roads. we do not build technology for its own sake or as a silver bullet. we are building it could support our partners. our pilot with fedex between dallas and houston while in autonomy. this pilot is critical for us to learn while testing safely on public roads. in my remaining time i will highlight two ways aurora believes congress and usd can support the safe development of avs. we ask congress to ensure that laws and regulations for avs are model and technology neutral. second we can congress to ensure

any commission research about the job related impacts of avs be driven with the experience and technology and job quality be central to any policy and industry conversation. aurora is committed to continuing to tackle these issues together with congress, usdot, state regulators, cities, law enforcement, safety advocates, labor and many other stakeholders to preserve jobs here in the united states. i want to thank ms. tatum and marler for their testimony today. the process you led demonstrates how impactful leadership in congress westbound today. i look forward to your questions. >> thank you very much, mr. beuse. i recognize mr. -- sorry.

we go next to mr.bloch, who is the political director of the teamsters joint council 7. >> thank you all. i appreciate the opportunity to testify before you today. my name is doug bloch, and i am proudly representing over 100,000 teamsters in northern california and nevada. a future that includes partial and full autonomous vehicles will change the nature of work in nearly every part of the transportation industry. congress will play a key role in determining whether they changes will be for the better or worse. in this case i am afraid if we let large corporations write the rules themselves it will surely be the latter.

our union is not afraid of new technologies. the teamster's logo displays a team of horses and in our early days there were skeptics that thought horses would never be replaced with innovation. the impact is still unknown. our experience makes me skeptical about claims that we will train our way out of any job losses. we once had roughly 100,000 workers in california canneries, and thanks to automation we are down to about 15,000 now. when campbells soup shut down their sacramento cannery and 1,700 teamsters lost their jobs, the government swooped in to

provide job training, and one lady worked there for 40 years, and she made $23 an hour plus benefits, and it took her three years to become a sonogram technician and find a job. the act also mandated the transit agencies receiving grants to deploy avs must require workforce development plans from applicants. we are trying to get ahead of the curve here. how do we capture the jobs being created by automation and make sure they are good union jobs? what can our elected officials do to help? we are meeting with manufacturers and government to see how to do that. in san francisco we represent nearly 1,500 workers in parking

garages. av fleets need a place to park and get charged and be maintained. this is work teamsters already do in parking garages and rental car agencies. there's no reason why municipal garages cannot be servicing these fleets and teamsters should be doing that work. however, every time there's a meeting like this, we get called up and it has not resulted in good union jobs. it's also important to ask what is the problem we are trying to solve here. one problem we hear a lot about recently is the so-called truck driver shortage. before deregulation in the '80s, driving a truck was a good middle class job, but in little time trucking evolved into

drivers work an average of over 60 hours a week, in many cases making less than minimum wage. automation is the industry's answer to a driver retention problem that the industry itself created. the solution is not to do away with humans but to better enforce our labor laws and bring back good jobs. finally the issues facing commercial vehicles are different potentially more dangerous than personal. they warrant their own separate and careful consideration. every day our members see the benefits of new technologies and the malfunctions that occur. human drivers are a much-needed safety net for those scenarios and more. the commercial use of vehicles at 10,000 pounds or less presents an agency jurisdictional issue which should be addressed. waymo recently teamed up with our player ups in arizona to use self driving vans, and these are

under 10,000 pounds but they are clearly operating as commercial vehicles. the committee included the operation of small commercial vehicles study in the invest act. we urge you to continue to explore this segment in the package industry for appropriate regulation. in closing, in all aspects of automation, we applaud you for having this hearing with the teamster's voice at the table. thank you and i look forward to answering any questions you may have. >> thank you, mr. bloch. >> i am pleased to introduce the next witness, professor nico

larco at the university of oregon school of architecture. , and nationally and internationally awarded multidisciplinary organization that focuses a national and internationally awarded multidisciplinary organization that focuses on sustainability issues as they relate to the built environment. professor larco worked directly with many cities and states to examine the impacts or potential impacts of emerging technologies and helped them to begin to plan for the future. i am pleased you can join us today and i am looking forward very much to hearing his testimony. thank you, madam chair.

>> thank you, mr. chair. and mr.larco -- professor larco, you are recognized for five minutes. >> thank you. thank you for the opportunity to testify on the future of avs and the impacts they can have on the country. i am a professor of architecture design as well as the director at the university of oregon. it was mentioned as a cross disciplinary center emerging technology are having and will continue to have on communities. our focus is on the mechanics of the technologies but land use, and building design, transportation and real estate and why these impacts matter for equity and health and the

economy. private sector partners, professional organizations and other research organizations and foundations. our country is at the earliest stages of real world av testing. that said one thing that is clear is that avs are not just another vehicle. in the same way over a century cars were not just a different horse. our research is avs could have widespread devastating affects, and they have podstive and negative impacts. we suspect it would cause the demand for parking, and potential improvements and coverage. that might also come with large impacts on labor and avs could

pull riders away from transit. similar av trips may cost so much that av travel could be a transportation choice with the healthy but their implication shouldered by everybody. this is an important point i want to make. they will have cascading affects. this would be increasing in lane consumption and impact infrastructure, the environment inequity. we could fill parking lots with houses, shops and services increasing accessibility. and it would allow us to put more development on anyone parcel and would bring down the cost of development increasing affordability. at the same time the shift, and with areas that currently have the largest amounts of parking

the most affected by the changes. avs could significantly impact licensing, parking fees and a study conducted by my colleagues found revenue losses could be between 3% and 51%. avs could have substantial impacts on equity. we found large areas of concern regarding who has access to avs. and some are at risk of falling by the wayside. don't only focus on av technology, efficiency and safety, which are very important, but expand it and focus on large city, mid sized

and smaller and rural communities. second, support research on the cascading impacts of avs, and we need to focus beyond the technology, safety and deployment and understanding cascading impacts. and it's a promising step forward and we are thankful the basis for the center. third, assist local governments and states with regulatory preparedness, and it's not only regulating policy, but also understanding governmental roles and how to steer deployment and how to corps rate community engagement. fourth, organize and lead a national dialogue on av impacts and community needs. we hear the desire to sherry search and best practices on the many aspects of av deployment.

in closing our av future is not preordained but ours to shape. we can only shape it and the cascading impacts it has. thank you for this opportunity to speak with you, and i look forward to answering your questions. >> thank you, professor larco. we will hear next from mr. ariel wolf. >> good morning. i serve as general council to the autonomous vehicle association on whose behalf i appear today. thank you for giving me the

opportunity to testify at this important hearing. the autonomous vehicle association was founded as the unified voice of the av industry. they are committed to bringing the tremendous safety, mobility and economic benefits of avs, otherwise known as capable vehicles to consumers in a safe, responsible and timely manner. for a dozen years the technology has been tested on the roads and maintains a remarkable safety record. at the same time the fatalities with human drivers have increased dramatically. yesterday there was a report that 31,721 drivers died on the roads in the first months of 2021. that represents the highest number of fatalities in the first few months of any year.

last week in it's new national roadway safety strategy, the u.s. department of transportation reaffirmed what we have known for many years. human behavior is a contributing factor to the overwhelming majority of crashes including drunk, impaired, distracted and reckless driving. the av industry was established to confront the monumental and ongoing tragedy on the roads, while av technology continues to develop and advance, the simple fact is that avs do not drive drunk and do not drive while texting, and they do not fall asleep at the wheel and they do not recklessly speed. the record is clear, autonomous vehicles are being developed safely and will make our roads safer. to reduce fatalities and injuries, americans need a comprehensive approach to roadway safety that includes a full sweep of solutions from driver impairment prevention symptoms and updated traffic

guidance. av technology will also transform our transportation system by making it more accessible, efficient and sustainable. last we i saw firsthand and i rode in avs safely navigating the streets of san francisco, las vegas, phoenix and pittsburgh. i climbed into trucks and saw how zero occupant delivery vehicles are expanding access to fresh food and reducing emissions. it's understanding the opportunities for this industry to change our lives for the better. on a personal note, i think about safer streets for my four daughters as they grow up, and expanded independence for my grandmother in florida and parents and in-laws as they get older, and opportunities to expand delivery options in my

neighbor here in d.c. i see this happening all while growing the economy and creating well-paying jobs. the av industry is creating jobs and krae itting opportunities for workers with a wide array of experience and backgrounds. in locations across the country av developers and manufacturers are hiring safety operation specialists and many others to support the testing and deployment of av technology. once they found that the av industry has created 6500 new jobs in the pittsburgh area alone, and adoption of av trucking will increase total u.s. employment by as many as 35,000 jobs per year on average and raise annual earnings for all u.s. workers. given the phased timeline for the deployment, it will serve as one tool to reduce strains on

the apply chain caused in part by the long-standing truck driver shortage. >> a vs offer great promise, and it will be harder to achieve the benefits. i want to thank the sub committee on the leadership. the autonomous industry looks forward to working with you to make autonomous vehicles a reality for americans nationwide. we are eager to engage with congress and all the stakeholders on the policies to ensure safer streets and new jobs and economic growth. i look forward to answering any questions you may have. >> thank you very much, mr. wolf. i now recognize the chair of the full committee, mr. defazio >> thank you, madam chair. thanks to all the witnesses up for the testimony.

this is very important and the committee needs to be focused more on these issues. i would like to address one particular concern, pretty much all of the discussion in congress has been about the technology, the vehicles themselves, and i think there has been very little discuss of the state of our -- the current state of our infrastructure and whether or not its suitable and if not what sort of measures do we need to implement in order to have, you know, vehicles safely deployed throughout the whole united states. anyone like to comment on that? >> thank you for that question, chair defazio. many of the autonomous vehicle companies stated that the infrastructure needed is not different from the current infrastructure of drivers today. we can all benefit from improved

roads, fewer potholes and better lines, but the information we received in houston is that these vehicles will operate with the infrastructure that we currently have in our cities. >> i mean, some of -- they use different ways of navigating, and if anybody else would like to comment, because i am concerned that, you know, when many states don't put state of good repair at the top of their list, that there are many roads that don't have adequate fog lines and good markings and many of these things these vehicles depend upon to range more widely. anybody want to comment on that? >> mr. chair, i can comment on that. i think being in a city that just experienced a pretty horrific bridge collapse, and thank goodness there were no fatalities, the point you raise is really important to understand around maintenance of the current infrastructure.

while i completely agree with what ms. tatum was saying, but there are normal things that make driving as human beings good, and those are good for self driving vehicles, and sometimes somebody has a different approach and when we talk about this issue it's more about what can we do to make the current environment safer, so whether that be striping or making sure road signs are there, and whether that be equipping different vehicles with different technologies, and that will help the development of avs instead of how it is done now, discreet and with the different issues. >> anybody else? >> yes, mr. chair. kathy chase. i agree with some of the points you already pointed out in terms of improvements that need to be made in terms of vehicles now and vehicles of the future,

especially as our population is aging, signage needs to be improved and the different lines of sighting needs to be improved for autonomous vehicles. i am thinking about a few years ago when the senate of sraoeurpb mental public works held a hearing on autonomous vehicles, and now the deputy secretary of transportation said something to the affect that new york city will never have a perfect infrastructure and these vehicles need to deal with what they are going to come upon, and we agree with that and that's why we are pushing so hard for the minimum standards, like a vision test, so when a car or truck takes over the responsibility of seeing that we know that the vehicle itself will actually see in response to what is happening. i think we need a holistic approach where the infrastructure needs to be approved now because people are holding on to cars for approximately 12 years, and

vehicles of the future and all of this can be accomplished. thank you. >> i want to make another point, because this is very important. tomorrow we are holding a hearing on 5g, and the fcc has created issues the way it was deployed, and the fcc is -- you referenced this. do you -- i mean, can you just comment on how bismoly stupid that is? >> i would be happy to offer perspective from the state dots. we all want good pavement condition, and we all think lane markings and clear signs are very important, and this would help drivers today and the cavs tomorrow, but it's just important to enable the communications and data

standards, and digital mapping. with specific yard to connectivity, we believe that the safety prominence of the cavs will be enhanced, so preserving the safety band, this would add certainty not only for state and local jurisdictions, and also for developers and manufacturers, and we do see that as a key component of any future automated transportation system. >> thank you, madam chair. the time has expired. >> thank you, mr. defazio. now i recognize mr. crawford for five minutes. >> thank you, madam chair. i appreciate that. i would note that this hearing was originally scheduled for 10:00 a.m. i don't know how many people this change inconvenienced, but i hope we can at the least maintain a schedule. perhaps if we held hearings more frequently we would not need to jam eight witnesses into a panel, and it does a disservice

to constrain meaningful dialogue. let me say this. i want to direct a question to katherine chase. in your written testimony the committee in november on challenges to the supply chain you responded to the argument that many of my colleagues and myself made if 18 is old enough to put your life on the line and drive a convoy in the battle, then it's old enough to make the living as a truck driver, and you minimized the hard work and sacrifice of young men and women in the uniform with a political cartoon because it's such an easy task. ms. chase, would you consider manning military vehicles an easy job? >> no, sir. >> thank you. if 18 is old enough to die for your country, is it old enough to choose to make an honest living as a truck driver.

>> i would like to address -- >> that's a yes or no question? is 18 old enough to give your life for your country, >> it's not an equal question. >> yes, not only did you make that comment but you included this, which is already in the record but i will ask unanimous consent to enter it into this record. >> so ordered. >> i find that highly offensive as a veteran and i think most veterans would that your position is that we are either incompetent and/or lazy or not well chained. do you think 18 years old is old enough to die for their country, and -- >> it's -- >> yes or no or i will go on to

my other witnesses. >> please go on to your other witnesses. >> so you have no answer? okay, i will move on. we certainly in my district like many other districts, there are a lot of truck drivers out there, and i know how vital they are out there especially with the supply chain crisis, and what impacts will it have in terms of efficiencies on automated trucking and productivity? >> congressman, i am happy to take that question. thank you for that. i think the place to start with the well documented and long standing driving shortage, truck driver shortage, and that's having an impact on the economy as we speak and the supply chain. that issue in concert with the u.s. department of transportation study that showed

a net increase of jobs, as many as 35,000 per year in addition to other economic benefits, leads us to the conclusion that it's really time to shift the way we think about the conversation around jobs and autonomous trucks. these are two areas that can compliment each other in the eke ecosystem. i would also say it's a matter of safety as a baseline matter, because as we talked about the statistics of being -- of worsening over time, 14% of fatal crashes, serious crashes involve heavy trucks. getting this technology deployed is essential for that in that respect, and the jobs front, we see overall an increase in jobs, economic growth and as i noted in testimony, as the ecosystem grows, there are a number of different roles and new kinds of jobs that are going to be created in this exciting area.

i think all of that taken together, we see a lot of positive activity going forward. >> thank you. mr. meuse? >> congressman, thank you for the question. i think i will mention two things. part of the challenge we have with this basis is the lumping of all the technologies together and we call them all automated. certainly there are technologies in the pipeline and some are already on vehicles today, commercial trucks that make the driving task easier for human drivers, and then there's technology that we are working on which is really around the driving task, which could make the driving and trucking jobs different in the future. it's not about some sort of replacement thing. that's exactly why we're doing this fedex -- this pilot with fedex so we can learn all these different issues beyond just does the tech work, but it's how do we introduce the technology into the existing system in a way that is frankly seamless.

we don't want to introduce friction into a system that already has a bunch of friction in it. >> thank you, i yield back. >> thank you very much. i recognize myself for five minutes. mr. samuelsen, your testimony makes a strong case for ensuring workforce needs are addressed as deployment of commercial avs become more prevalent. i hear your concerns that if left unchecked, automated vehicles may create tremendous hardship for commercial motor vehicle drivers, so my question is what steps can congress and the federal government take to harness the safety benefits of automated trucks and buses while at the same time supporting a stable well-paid surface transportation workforce? do you believe that addressing

commercial driver workforce needs and employing av technology are mutually exclusive goals or both can be obtained? >> thank you. we have a situation where there are ways of technology coming into public transport, buses, for instance, the operation of buses, that require an absolute robust federal regulatory framework for them to be deployed safely. i think the first thing that needs to be done is there needs to be a federal check that anything that goes on to highways, roads in america, meet a regulatory minimum that is set forth by the federal government. the second piece of that is, you know, i have listened to some of the questions back and forth about automated technology and the impact on the workforce. i think the impact on the workforce has the chance to be extreme.

right now there are -- despite discussion about automated technology being introduced for safety reasons, for any other reasons, there are transit systems and operators across the country embracing this technology simply for the purpose of reducing head count. that's absolutely true. we deal with transit employees across the country, public sector, public sector operators looking to reduce budgets, and they are looking to maximize profit and all doing this without any regard for the safety, the future safety of highways or roads. i think the only intervener there that can prevent this from happening in a chaotic way is the federal government. in terms of the use of automated technology simultaneously with human operators, i think that's -- that is the way to go, to utilize automated technology augmenting and assisting humans operating vehicles, particularly

in public transit. there's no real -- there's no working american that believes that replacing buses with automation is a good thing for working people who use public transit in america. nobody believes it. also, this notion that the introduction of automation is going to somehow create new jobs, we have heard all of this with nafta, with nafta, with the normalization of trade with china and somehow the introduction of automated technology that will replace human operators will create more jobs, and we saw that movie already and have no faith with this technology coming in in a positive way unless the government regulates that. >> thank you. the last time this committee

held a sub committee was ten years ago, and at that time avs were still considered a technology of the future but today there are at least 1,400 avs, including automatic commercial vehicles being tested on us roadways in 36 different states. what do you think is a realistic timeline for deployment of your technology, specifically vehicles with level 4 automation and above, and what can americans expect -- when can americans expect vehicles to drive on the roads next to them? >> madam chair, i am happy to jump in and defer to my colleague on the panel here. i think that, you know, as a baseline matter, we see this technology on the roads today as you noted. one of the most important things

to see this technology scale, and again, it is as mr. beuse noted, being used in pilot projects carrying freight and trying to alleviate the supply chain crisis we face, and there's technology in arizona providing meals to individuals who live in food deserts. that's another example. but to scale this technology, the timeline is somewhat dependent on building a national framework that will accomplish two things. one is to enhance consumer trust in the technology, and the second is to maximize deployment. in my written testimony, there's work we are want to go continue to develop a national framework that will nationalize the deployment of the technology, and we will see the benefits we

talked about so many times acue to the public. >> my time has expired. i go next to mr. bust? >> thank you, madam chair. before i go on to my questions, i want to associate myself to representative crawford made. as a member on this committee, probably the only one that had my license for a tractor trailer when i was 16 was driving whenever i was 18, and by the time i turned 19 i was in the marine corps. all of those things i was capable of handling and handling safely. my family believed in me. you know, the state of illinois tested me out, and by golly, guess what? i passed that drivers test at 16 years old and never had a driver's license but a tractor trailer license. at a time when the united states

is needing people to work, wise decisions based on the individual, not discriminating against them because of their age, would probably be a lot wiser thing to do than have cute cartoons about what -- where we're at right now and what we are needing. that being said, mr. wolf, the development and deployment of the automated trucks is already raising questions for truck drivers about what the future of their profession would look like. many are wondering how their work would change and what new skills they would need. to help us understand what the future would look like for drivers, could you describe the level of standardization between the various avs as far as trucks and their technologies being developed by different manufacturers. for example, if a trucker is trained to operate one of the trucks that aurora has developed, would their skills be easily transferable to the drivers of a different

manufactured truck or technology? what would the driver need to -- or what would the driver need to have separate or additional training in? do we know that? >> thank you, congressman for the question. i am happy to address it. i think maybe the place to start is to understand that there are two different kinds of technologies here, and the autonomous vehicle, and the industry association, we're working with of course autonomous vehicle technology, which is so-called full automation, where a human driver -- the technology is not designed nor is it expected for a human to be involved in the driving task, and that's distinct from driver assistance technology which many of us have seen, lane assist and cruise control, and there's a

requirement for a licensed driver to take back control or to be vigilant at all times to take control, and that distinction is critical because often times it can be conflated. in that is of technology in that spirit but in the autonomous vehicle side, again, the expectation is there will not be a driver to take back control for the time being there are safety operators and monitors involved there. i would defer to individual members to speak to transferability of those skills. >> i understand. i appreciate that answer. well trained mechanics are essential for keeping our trucks and buses safe and on the road. what additional training needs will be for mechanics for having

automated systems? are there additional safety concerns for workers around the automated trains or buses and what can we do to make sure that the maintenance workers are prepared for these vehicles once they start in operation? >> thank you for the question. work force development of federal regulatory requirements are of the utmost importance with the latest waves of technology coming in. av technology and buses closely related and if that's a model going forward of what we could potentially expect, electric buses that seem like such a great idea in term of greening the environment, greening urban america. have had the unintended consequence of a massive negative impact on workers, particularly bus mechanics. we anticipate a 30 to 40%

reduction in bus mechanics that would be necessary when electric. we see a necessity for work force development. work to figure out how the existing work force, how the negative affects can be mitigated as best available. >> my time has expired. i yield back. >> i recognize miss johnson of

texas. >> thank you for holding this hearing. i have a question for mr. block but i'll do a part of my statement first. over the last three years, the dallas/ft. worth area has become one of our nation's central testing grounds for ab trucking technology. two companies have opened operation hubs in my district and another company aurora expanded into the dallas/ft. worth area and june of 2020, raising high-tech jobs. this wave of investment is due in large part to the leadership of close coordination demonstrated by dallas college which is our community college network and north central texas

council of government and the dallas regional chairman. the department of transportation and public safety and dallas college has opinion the leader in creating the work force development. although ab technology has the potential to provide benefits, serious questions remain. i'm concerned about the issues related to safety and want to make sure that a strong federal safety frame work is enacted. as we move forward, i believe that the congress and industry

should incorporate labor priorities and address the work force needs by including policies aimed at mitigating job losses and any potential wage decreases. i urge the industry to invest in the creation of high quality jobs for those who may face displacements. now we have large traffic in trade. we have such a small number of drivers for the traffic we have. mr. block, for highlighting the provision, i want to thank you for highlighting the provision and regarding work force

retraining. would you be able to expand on what kind of programs you would like to see when you mention work force re-training programs for surface transportation workers whose jobs have been affected by automation? i have the largest local in the country in my district so i'd like to respond to that, if you will. >> thank you very much for the question. i'm thinking about legislation we are introducing in the california state legislature and the public transit arena that will make it a subject of collective bargaining when av technology is introduced in the public transit arena.

i gave some examples out of the canneries where canneries were closed and workers were thrown out there at the mercy of work force development and it did not work well for them. they are the highest paid manufacturing workers in the united states. they make buses that mr. samuelsson's members drive.

again, the important thing here is that at least in california, when employers get money that are strong labor standards attached to that. we basic sure the workers we are training stick around and get retained in their work. >> thank you very much. i'm out of time. i ask unanimous consent to put the rest of my questions in the record. i yield back. >> so ordered.

>> i'll preface with saying i think congress needs to get this right. i think there's a happy median between letting tech companies -- my first question has to do with the actual technology used in the av as technology progresses, i have no doubt that we will see more of these vehicles throughout the country. not just in cities or areas where there are companies specific engineers to make repairs to vehicles. we have already seen what some manufacturers that they are limiting who can tally do work on their vehicles. i can tell you that i trust my local mechanic a lot more than someone who needs to fly out to my hometown in northern minnesota from silicon valley to do the repairs. this should not be offensive to you.

>> we're still in the testing phase in getting kind of really focused on the path to shipping a product. one of the things we're learning in all of that is questions you're asking about. how do we think about maintenance, the schedule of those, what that really looks like. i think a key point to reference sheer the fact that the technology that we're developing is really more of a business to business relationship. think about a fedex or walmart or an amazon who has their own fleet of vehicles who is maintaining those fleet of vehicle for the operations they are conducting versus the point, you made about you are riding in a vehicle needing to get a repair at the local repair shop or where ever we choose to go.

this is where we, in our principles, are very supportive of congress doing more on commissioning jobs and really around the quality of those jobs. they're going to be different than what we envisioned today. >> thank you, sir. mr. wolf. >> the autonomous vehicle industry is a diverse industry with respect to use cases and applications. it's not one size fits all. it may be different conversations in those cases as those businesses start to continue to scale up and bring benefits to the american

society. >> it will increase rely on the data that the vehicle generates before, during and after an accident. what are the companies that you represent, what are they doing to ensure that relative entities will have access to this critical data and it's timely, complete and useful. >> thank you for the question, congressman. that respect, the autonomous vehicle industry in companies that are developing and operating this technology are engaging in information sharing and a number of ways. let me spell out a couple here. all of these companies are responding to an order with respect to incidents involving

autonomous vehicles. the developers and manufacturers are participating in a voluntary initiative with the highway traffic safety add mgs to provide information about testing and the parameters of testing. i look forward to having the conversation going forward in oh ways as well. >> my last question, real quick, the human component of public transit operators are real valuable and great members of our community. for instance, in a bus or one of the transit commuters, we have seen examples where there's violence happening. can you speak to some of these incidents and how are we going to look at them going forward

with evs? >> violence is prevalent. it's a full moon type atmosphere going on across passenger transportation but it's been glaring problem in urban transportation, urban transit. the uniform bus operator is the single greatest derrent to that type of crime. a really big problem is the crime that riders would be exposed to. i think super important. >> thank you very much. i yield back.

>> thank you for your questions. i was going down the same line. the gathering of information, it seems one of the things we must do immediately is make sure that information on and on accidents as well as the machine and the technology be readily available. could you please respond to that. what information is available to make sure it is on reporting on all accidents? >> thank you for the question, congressman.

>> there's a standard order to submit inspection about accidents on roadways. we haven't seen that. none of these are regulatory or required. they're all voluntary meaning a company can decide to submit some information, choose what information they want to submit or walk away at any point. that's why these minimum performance requirements are so essential.

>> representing the men and women that are on these truck and vehicles, how do you envision a regulatory environment or scheme in which your workers would be protected and the transit operators and people that are on those vehicles would also be protected. what do we need to do to create a regulatory environment? >> if i may, the main thing here is to understand that we have seen advanced technology introduced into public transit several times before and my 30 years this is about the third or fourth significant wave. the technology can be used to enhance service delivery, safety while simultaneously benefitting

workers. >> we all know our friendly neighborhood u.p.s. driver. our members, we have 325,000 working for u.p.s. largest coll bargaining agreement in the country. we have drivers that driver with automatic braking system, mapping and routing software, algorithms that all make our jobs safer and bet per it's

important that the federal government set the floor for the regultion of technology and not the ceiling. i'm fortunate to live in state like california where a lot of this technology is being developed and we have policy makers that are going above and beyond to protect both workers and the general public and not to stop this technology but to ideally develop it in way that benefits workers and the public and the industry. thank you. >> thank you for that. we have a necessarity that information from crashes be readily available. not only to the government but the insurance industry as well as the to economy so we can

develop legislation. the training programs that have been discussed must also be in place. fortunately and unfortunately, the committee wrote a good bill on surface transportation. unfortunately, much of the training proms in that bill did not find their way into the infrastructure and jobs act. we have to repurpose and get that back in. with that, i yield back. >> the gentleman yields. >> i think one of folks in labor said something about nafta and how they were promised jobs and that turned tout be a joke and if you think these av jobs are going to come to you, you probably are mistaken in that.

only thing we seem to do up here well is run up debt. my question regarding the fedex ground pilots with aurora. what safety are they collecting and how is that used to improve the safety of avs, more broadly? >> thank you for the question. our safety case is a holistic approach to safety where we're not looking at just the product but also our operations as well as our organization. in this way, this is how we're addressing safety before the vehicles are on the road with

autonomy. as we get closer to releasing the product without cooperators then all of those different principles we have that we need to fulfill within that. the fedex pilot is really lerping more about the operational aspects of what we're trying to do as opposed to how we are engineering the product. there are some things that we're actively looking at. particularly with respect to maintenance. really the safety of the product is really handled pi our safety case frame work. >> thank you. i was county mayor and i remember hearing testimony about it and just the educational level on this is lacking out in the communities because a will the of folks thought some of this would be controlled community to community but in reality it's fot be an entire network. it can't be one county to one county or one state to one

state. we know those borders are not followed especially when traveling. a lot of folks talking about av, will somebody have the master switch and be able to turn it off. i wonder what your thoughts are. >> i agree with your points around jurisdiction to jurisdiction approach. that is not workable for an official roll out of the technology more workable to realize the potential.

with respect to what's needed, i think it's some of the things that bear mentioning here. we need those to continue. we need them to continue with some urgency. we are in a crisis of fatalities. we need all these tools on the table, including autonomous vehicles. all of those rule making are helpful. whether they apply to lower levels of automation or what we're doing. the second thing we need is really for congress to show and demonstrate some leadership with all of us stake holders around developing laws and regulations

that are technology and business neutral. i still hear a lot of commentary that seemed specific to a particular application and a particular manufacturer which is not how we have developed and rolled out technology in the united states. the third thing is with respect to the jobs question. no doubt there are issues that we need to study and understand, but that doesn't mean we should not take action. >> thank you. that's all my time. thank you so much. >> thank you. we hear next from mr. johnson of georgia. >> thank you for holding this important hearing and thank you for this testimony.

the georgia institute of technology released a study that showed the algorithmic of machine learning. a person darker skin was likely to be struck with fair skin. models are programmed by people who do not consider every complexion a person can have. what measures can be taken to root out racial bias at the onset of newly developed av technology and what, if anything, is holding back industry from taking those steps? >> thank you for that question. pretty important as we sit here

at the beginning of black history month. it's not about the folks writing the software. we're training autonomy based on what it see. it's more of the environment it's in as opposed to someone programming malicious in the code. there is a lot of talk in the industry about how do we go about making sure those biases aren't in the algorithms. as we get closer to deployment and i know some researchers have put some studies out there. this is worth maybe a deeper conference around all of this is fitting together and how deeply aurora thinks about this particular issue. >> thank you, sir. as avs increase in number, they will need to talk to one another and their surroundings.

what measures are needed to prevent against cyber security attack and ensure the privacy of americans data? >> cyber security efforts are part of the design from the start. that's good aspect there. not just for the development but testing an eventual deployment. cyber security is critical. we support as an industry a robust and risk based policy

approach that recognizes cyber threats are dynamic and evolving. we'll be happy to work with this economy and other stake holders to develop that approach. how should it ensure it can handle the data needs that avs require without causing interference with existing systems such as what we have seen with 5g and aviation industry? >> if it's on the industry of spectrum and the use of connected vehicle technology, the industry welcomes investments in that respect. autonomous vehicles are being

developed, tested and deployed so as to now rely on connected vehicle technology. i'm happy to do so. >> thank you. numerous structural issues play a role in traffic crashes, including the distance between crosswalks and the roadway, the width of a lane as the speed limit changes and the presence or absence of bike lanes. the idea that self-driving cars are the solution misses the bigger issue. what's more, tesla recently developed a self driving model

that includes an assertive driving feature so the car will not fully stop at stop signs. mr. wolf, what justification is there for developing a program that allows vehicles to violate state and local laws? >> it's not an autonomous vehicle. it's a driver assistance technology. autonomous vehicles are developed from the start to comply with all federal and state and local laws as one component of the safety assurance systems that are put into these technologies. whether or not it's a specific,

exact number, d.o.t., the u.s. department of transportation just last week reaffirmed in its national roadway strategy that the overwhelming majority of serious and fatal crashes involve one human behavior issue as a contributing factor. that's the key point. >> thank you very much. i recognize mr. guest for five mips. -- minutes. >> i want to thank our witnesses for educating us on the challenges that lie ahead for

automated vehicles. i see on page four you talk about the safety that was published in august of last year. thep you go onto talk about safety. one of the things i found helpful was the fact you say no single piece of evidence captures the totality of safety and then you go onto list five safety principles. those principles that you list in your report were proficient,

fail safe, continuously improving, resilient and trustworthiness. i would ask if you would take a few minutes to expand on each of these principle and explain how these principles are applied to automated vehicles. >> thank you. one of the things that help explain how this all fits together is kind of taking a step back in order to do those partnerships, we have to have deep relationships with those vehicle manufacturers who are very good at building vehicles.

these five principles are how we engineer and design the aurora driver in concert with those vehicle manufacturers. do we understand the environment we're operating in. you look at the principal fail safe. that's something we have to understand and we have to understand how that relates so the vehicle always ends up in a safety spot or whatever the case

may be. there's a continuous improving part that we'll put them back into the vehicle. these are all things we have to think through. the last one is really around trustworthy. that's with first and foremost our regulators. that's also with members of the public and our partners. we have to build a product that is safe and for them to actually be able to trust it and use it in their course of business. those we believe encompass the whole frame work of safety.

>> is the something that can be expanded injury wide. talking about the use of safety case and sochl the things they consider. >> thank you very much. i yield back. >> thank you very much, mr. guest. i next call on ms. brownley. >> thank you.

i think always safety has to be first. i think everybody agrees on that. as mr. samson noted, he said over reliance on automation can be deadly. we saw that on this committee 737 max and the 2009 redline metro crash in d.c. in my opinion, we're going to continue to need highly skilled drivers for transit vehicles and trucks. why do you think there's a disconnect between the rel sta

statist -- real statistics and the rhetoric? >> the introduction of automated operation into public transit is so new. it's so new. it's not here yet. the rhetoric will accompany the introduction because it's new and nobody has seen it before. we just saw dualing statistics now with how many accidents there were for 100,000 and whether or not they are based in reality or based on human error or based on traffic design and that type of thing. i don't think i'm answering your question quite well. >> well, i appreciate your attempt at it. i just think it's an important

distinction to make. >> the confusion about what technology can and can't do, not to beat up on tesla. i don't mean to do that at all. when a company call a system auto driver, auto pilot or full self driving, it communicates a message that's what it's going to do. while aurora and other companies might be tapping the best of the best, that's not happening throughout the industry. that's why the federal government needs to step in. we need our regulators to do their job.

with that assurance to federal government and then we will see all crash reduced. >> thanks for that. that leads me to another question for mr. wolf. there seems to be some misunderstanding regarding the level of autonomy that some offer. we have seen the videos of people sleeping behind the wheel or sitting in the backseat of vehicles not fully autonomous.

what additional steps do you think are needed in this area? >> thank you for that question. it speaks to a very important safety issue that is at play today. autonomous vehicles are distinct and different from driver assist technology. that conflation as the outline, that conflation is having twofold impact. it's dangerous because it's leading consumers to believe that lower levels of automation and technology are, in fact, actual autonomous vehicles and over reliance on that. second, it's having an impact on consumer trust of the autonomous vehicle industry which is problematic because of the very positive safety benefits that will accrue if we get that technology deployed. it has a twofold impact as well as other thing. the industry is absolutely committed to trying to delineate

this as clearly as possible. i'm trying to work on terminology, standardizing terminology so that consumers can understand that. a number of different ways, we are laser focused on trying to get this distinction decoupling this. what we're concerned about in addition to what i mentioned is in some respects in the conversation, leveraging these high profile failures that have a strong safety record going on, more than ten years and will involve a number of safety problems that are driven by human behavioral issues in the statistics. happy to follow up with you more on that and explore ways to fry

and brighten the line. >> thank you for that. my time is way over. i yield back. >> next call on mr. fitzpatrick for five minutes. >> thank you. thanks to all our panel for being here. we do appreciate your expertise. i want to start and talk a bit about avs. d.o.t. issued a set of innovation for precipitation. these principles make it clear that innovation investment should be in service creating high quality jobs. do you believe that congress should adopt this approach to over seeing new technologies like avs as well and do you expect this approach to improve the lives of your members in your union? >> yes. thank you for the question. congress should follow the lead

that the d.o.t. set out. innovation assessment can be an absolute win, win, win across the board in public transit. it could be a win for the work force in terms of ensuring that good jobs are protected and when good jobs are created they are solid, union jobs. it can enhance service delivery and enhance the overall transit rider experience. that type of innovation investment is what we're looking at. with a regulatory frame work in place, that bears in mind the impact on workers, our members will likely greatly benefit from much of this technology. >> appreciate that. i want to expand on that topic. d.o.t. has taken steps to having regulatory frame work. if congress were to move forward this year with an av bill, what twu provisions or benefit would

you like to see in there. the av bill is congress could tell us what kind of provisions would ensure that labor has a seat at the table? >> we would want to see a bill that put an emphasis on rider safety, worker safety, work force development and an absolute assurance we don't revisit mistakes of the past. all of this can be achieved with federal government intervention. it would be helpful to workers and i fear without a piece of legislation that accomplishes what i just laid out that workers will be severely negatively impacted going forward. >> thank you. next up, mr. wolf. the faa has extensive experience with auto pilot technologies going back.

it's dealt with avs. some avs have ambitions to serve as surface and air taxis. has there been adequate cost agency, collaboration? >> thank you, congressman, for the question. i can't speak to what conversations have taken place and so forth. i can say is that the autonomous vehicle industry and the engineers and scientists and all the folks working to develop that technology, i know are open to learning from all different analogies to make this as safe as possible. there's some key and important differences. a few hundred 70 plus million

vehicles registeredregistered. our approach does take a human driver. all of us get behind a wheel and as i noted a couple of times, it bears reiterating that the u.s. department of transportation has reaffirmed just last week that it remains the case. the overwhelming majority of serious and fatal crashes involve one human behavior issue as a contributing factor. it becomes very important to scale and deploy so it can work to remove those human behavioral issues that contribute to these tragedies on our road. if we can get that technology out and scale it quickly and safely as possible in conjunction with many other safety approaches that may apply, then we can start to see a reversal of the terrible trend

regarding fataiies and injuries. you believe there should be a new agency? >> there's a number of regulatory instruments under way. it will help address the national frame work that we need to get this technology to scale. at the moment, we're looking at those rule makings and advancing them as quickly as possible in conjunction with congressional action that will, some of the measures enumerated in my written testimony will help the industry scale and build out and bring the benefits to the public. >> thank you very much. >> i yield back.

>> thank you. thank you to all of our witnesses. i think what we have heard is the tremendous opportunities, challenges of the autonomous vehicle technology that it presents to us. mr. block, i want to hear from your perspective how these technologies impact a part of our supply chain which is over looked. it's really a disenfranchise part of our supply chain. i represent the port of long beach. frequently, drivers are

misclassified, i believe, misclassiied as independent contractors. it leaves them in a cycle of poverty without the benefits of employment, without benefits of potential unionization. how do we facilitate the department of av technology to take advantage of their potential to improve working conditions such as the drivers system technology and improve operator safety and job quality while also mitigating the risk of job loss or displacement when we're really talking about those that are already disenfranchised? do you have any thought about how this will impact those that are the most disenfranchised

today? >> i appreciate the question. i appreciate the work we have been able to do with you during your work in california to improve the working conditions for truck drivers at all of our california ports. we did a study with a researcher out of the university of pennsylvania a few years ago looking at how automation with going to roll out in trucking. the se -- scenario he projected that the trucking is poised to take advantage of the technology from pla sooning to semiautonomous to fully autonomous vehicles. when you get into urban areas such as long beach and l.a.,

it's hard to imagine fully automated doing that work. we could have hubs that operate at our ports. hiring workers as independent contractors instead of employees. making them buy the trucks, making them liable for everything and them making less than minimum wage after they pall off their expenses which has led to huge turnover in the work force and gets back to my earlier point about the supply

chain problems are not really a training and recruitment problem but a worker retention problem that's tied to making sure that drivers make decent wages and benefits so they can stay in their jobs. i hope that answers your question. >> yes. thank you. >> anything to add? >> you spoke about information technology working the systems and that it's ultimate goal. utilize technology, make transportation either passenger transportation or otherwise as safe as it can be. we all know that automation fails. we have seen automation fail. there's been testimony and

answers to questions about how safe it is. all we have to do is look back at the 737 max incident where in one fell swoop a computer overrode the decision of a pilot and crash killing several hundred people more than once. i'm not suggesting that's imminent but that type of thing that a human operator would stop and this type of technology working hand in hand with a human operator is an ideal we should be pursuing. thank you. >> thank you. i yield back. >> thank you. i recognize mr. johnson of south dakota. >> thank you. i appreciate it. my conversation will be with mr. marlor. i like the fact you called out the fact it's 19% of our population. it's 68% of our nation's land miles and 45% of our fatal

crashes. i care a great deal. i thought about the effectiveness of the automated vehicles depends a lot upon the vehicles. depends a lot on the quality of the roads. you mentioned this automated shuttle service that was operating all different kinds of railroads including gravel and unmarked roads. tell us a bit more about that. tell us how you would have answered the question. >> thank you for that question. rule road and toerpgss of autonomous vehicles is on minds of many of our states because many of our populations are rural in nature. as you pointed out the rural areas have 45% of all fatality on rule roads. this is a concern. up with of the things that we focus on in iowa is our physical infrastructure across the board needs to be in good condition.

better payments and bridges. our lane markings, signage, shoulders. we know those good stewardship of our physical structure helps to enable automated vehicle of the future. we're also looking at the digital infrastructure. that's getting at the demonstration project that you mentioned. university of iowa received a federal grant to look at the operation of rural shuttle buses in rural part of iowa. these buses are operating on gravel roads and unmarked roads. very rural scenarios in the state of iowa because we're trying to make sure that we are able to serve all of our populations across the state. one of the things that is very important for this shuttle bus to work is the digital infrastructure and more specifically the high definition mapping that's on board. that map is able to digitally paint a center line down a gravel road and this is very key

for the operation of this particular rural shuttle. that's one thing that we're learning. there are many lerpings that we're experiencing but i would say there is work yet to do here and we need to ensure that the benefits are going to be widespread. i'll mention one other thing that aisle tie into this is the expansion of broadband across our states and nations. in iowa this has been a focus for us. we invested 223 million in broadband grants for the private sector to install more broadbands. >> as we work on this demonstration project, what appears to be the biggest challenge? logistically what will be the largest hurdle to clear? >> logistically is standards across the board. this project is helping us understand the data standards that that we need but we're

building that through this demonstration project. what are the minimum standards across the nation that we need to look at for data? what is the minimum for connect -- connectivity? >> do -- is the demonstration project -- tell me more about if they are analyzing and what extent these things are scaleable. what about the other things? you talk about upgrading the quality of the roads. that's a pretty substantial undertaking as well. is the demonstration project very scaleable? >> we think it will be and keep in mind we're alerting a lot with this. the reason we think it's scaleable is because these lessons that we're learning, we're trying to look at it from

a nostic point of view and saying what are those basic things that we need in the rural areas. that's why i mentioned the broadband perspective. >> one more thing, quickly. what will come clearly. what will come next? let's say the demonstration project is a big success. what does phase 2 look like? >> phase 2 is we're trying to understand operationally what we can do as transportation departments to help the situation with rural automation. what can we do from an infrastructure and investment perspective to set that stage such that it can really, as you say, be scaleable and go to the next level. so it's really our operations focus is what comes next as we analyze the data. >> thank you, sir. thank you, madam chair, for your

indulgence. i yield back. >> as automation becomes more common across all our transportation modes including public transit we must pro actually ensure that we are holding the highest safety standards. we can do this by including workers in the decisionmaking in how automation is deployed and making sure that they're given knowledge to use the new technologies. my question is, to mr. samuelsen, in your testimony, you mentioned how av framework needs to focus foremost on upholding the highest safety standards and on creation of good jobs. as you mentioned, we can do this by giving workers a seat at the table so that they can help shape innovation. employers who automate jobs, including transit agencies, usually know that they will eliminate positions years ahead of time.

is this information generally shared with workers in a timely manner, and if not, should the federal government require companies that use automated technology to give workers advance notice on these kinds of procurements? >> yeah, absolutely. and thank you for the question. certainly there is very little notice given in general to workers or representatives of workers, workers unions. very little notice. it would be common for a worker or the union to find out that there's going to be technology displacing human jobs when a pink slip arrives. that would not be uncommon at all. >> and how best can we bring workers to the table when it comes to deploying innovation? is it fair to say that making sure workers learn about these kinds of events far enough in advance to find other employment or to retrain in the u.s. of new technology as a first step? >> yeah, absolutely. and we -- in cities in america

where workers have the power to compel that to happen, it's happened. but the overwhelming majority of transit cities across the country, that does not exist. the federal deposit is stepping up and compelling transit employees or municipalities and state governments to give as much advance notice as possible as a requirement would be ultrahelpful and in fact it would enhance labor peace in the long run, absolutely would give the unions and the employees a chance to work together to identify jobs that workers who are potentially facing displacement could land in. and that's what this should all be about. >> thank you. mr. bloch, from a teamsters perspective, how can you bring workers to the table when it comes to innovation so that we're putting workers first? >> i appreciate the question and would echo the comments of mr. samuelsen. when new technology comes to the

workplace and workers have the ability to join together in unions then they can sit across the table from their employer and bargain about it. as i mentioned, we're introducing legislation in california to make the introduction of autonomous vehicles in the public transit sphere where we also represent a lot of drivers a mandatory subject of collecting bargaining. we're going into bargaining with united parcel service this year, as i mentioned, the largest collective bargaining agreement in the country. and you better believe we're going to be bargaining around technology. how experience has been that new technology can help make our jobs safer and make us more productive. but as you've said, sir, to have those discussions on the front end allows us to be proactive and adapt. and for workers that don't have unions, they just have to take whatever they get from the boss.

and that's not the sort of protections that workers need. >> thank you, sir. councilmember castex-tatum, in your testimony you discussed how the manual on uniform traffic control devices needs to be modernized. is the infrastructure investment and jobs act that congress directed the u.s. department of transportation to revise, mutcb, including by making sure that vulnerable users are protected and by incorporating avs into mutcb for the first time. what reforms need to be made to the mutcb to modernize it? >> [ inaudible ] definitely supports the modernization of the manual. we think that better protection for road users equally is extremely important. the main thing we want to point out is we want to make sure this does not become an unfunded

mandate on cities. local governments own many of the roads in our cities and they maintain those roads. so concerning the manual, we just want to make sure it does not become an unfunded mandate with those changes. >> thank you, and thank you for your indulgence, madam chair. i yield back. >> the gentleman yields back. i recognize mr. nehls for five minutes. >> thank you, chairwoman holmes norton and ranking member davises. i have concerns about how we integrate avs safely on the roads and into the economy. trucking is a critical industry and disruptive technology like avs promises great increases in efficiency and safety but it threatens jobs in an already strained truck driving market. while i appreciate talking about how technology could disrupt the trucking market in 20 to 30 years i want to talk about what

is forcing [ inaudible ] and that's the vaccine mandate. while the supreme court thankfully struck down the unconstitutional vaccine mandate imposed by president biden both the canadian and u.s. governments are imposing vaccine mandates on truckers just to be able to cross the border. we are releasing potentially covid infected aliens from federal custody into our country on the southern border but on the northern border we are not allowing truckers to cross simply because they don't have the vaccine. interesting. for the first two years of the pandemic it was considered safe but now that the main variant causes less serious infections, the truckers must be vaccinated. doesn't make a whole lot of sense. this also threatens to disrupt trade with one of our most important partners, canada, in the middle of an artificially created supply chain crisis. in canada we have seen a massive

protest against these senseless mandates, a convoy of trucks 45 miles long, made it all the way to ottawa to protest and a similar protest is being planned in the u.s. so i have a question for mr. bloch, one question. you talk about the difficulties truckers face in the occupation including supply chain inefficiencies that cause drivers to wait in line for hours. the freight division and the car haul division of the teamsters represents thousands of hard working drivers across the u.s. and canada. do you know how many of your members either resigned or lost their jobs due to earlier vaccine mandates and is the union concerned about the new cross-border mandates' impact on your members' livelihood? >> thank you for the question, sir.

on the federal policy on the cross-border, i will have to ask our federal policy experts to respond to your question, which i'm happy to do. the california experience on the inefficiencies, i think everybody on this panel today who has worked for somebody or supervised anybody during their career can appreciate the efficiencies you have with an employee, where you can direct that person to go somewhere and do something, versus this model that mr. lowenthal talked about of hiring truck drivers as independent contractors. >> okay. so you represent -- okay. got it. so you represent 100,000 truck drivers from california and nevada and you're telling me you can't answer the question, how many of those truck drivers have been affected, how many have lost their jobs as a result of the vaccine mandate? you can't answer that? >> i can tell you that we have

not heard complaints here in -- we've heard complaints, but we have not seen resignations because of vaccine mandates here in california. >> very well. not surprising. >> and sir, we did not take a position on the mandatory vaccinations as well. >> i'm just saying with all the issues we're facing across this country and right now what you're seeing in canada and now coming to the u.s., with vaccine mandates and our truckers, i'm surprised that you, who represent the teamsters, you can't have an answer to my question, but again, doesn't surprise me. >> the gentleman yields back. since a vote has been called on the house floor, the committee, subcommittee, will stand in recess subject to the call of the chair. we will restart the hearing as soon as the last vote is over.

that's approximately 30 minutes. it could be longer and we do have a number of members who haven't had the opportunity to ask their questions. we will reconvene after a recess for votes that are now being taken.