[inaudible conversations]

>> good morning welcome to the subcommittee on the future of automated vehicles known as av. i'm particularly interested in this hearing fascinated because it gets us will be on roads and bridges. today we will examine the effects of the adoption and deployment of av time roadway safety infrastructure and the commercial driving workforce. we will also consider this committee's role and responsibility overseeing av deployments to ensure the highest possible safety standard are met. and all americans have access to high-quality family, wage, transportation jobs. and to be on the cusp of

transforming transportation. and with commercial trucks and buses are those in some aspects of safety critical control without direct driver import. and those that monitor the driving environment. this technology with opportunities and threats. nationwide we are experiencing a historic rise among drivers and users. av has the potential to practically reduce death on roadways by reducing traffic crashes caused by human behavior. still, safety benefits must be carefully weighed against risk. especially when deploying commercial and passenger carrying av. we have seen this disastrous

consequence of automation technology is explored haphazardly. to maximize the role of safety impact of av we must ensure technologies are held to the highest possible safety standard. they must consider the safety of all users when to act with eighties including pedestrians and cyclists and those who use wheelchairs to be especially critical in urban areas i found district of columbia. they must be integrated into our transportation system in a manner that respects american driving workforce. and then eliminating the need for a human driver also results in a widespread job

displacement if the needs of workers are not prioritize at the outset. employer transparency comprehensive regulation and oversight will be required to create and preserve high family wage jobs. thank you to each of our witnesses and offering your unique insights for the subcommittee and look forward to a lively discussion and hearing of what our committee can do to maximize the benefits that the ag aims to deliver. >> i ask unanimous consent

that we recess at any time i also ask unanimous consent that members not on the subcommittee be permitted to ask questions without objection. as a reminder please keep your microphone and muted and should i hear any background noise i will request the number please you to the microphone to insert a document into the record please have staff e-mail it. i am pleased to recognize my good friend, the ranking

member. >> and before i begin with comments can i ask unanimous consent to insert into the record comments from the national association of insurance companies? >> so ordered. we will e-mail those instructions and went to welcome everyone to today's hearing on automated vehicles offering the opportunity not only to transform the industries but also transform our nation as a whole to solve many of the challenges that we face. the subcommittee has jurisdiction over large trucks and buses. with automated technologies trucks and buses had economic and societal implications that we believe will benefit every american. most importantly incorporating this new technology will stabilize. 30680 people died in motor

vehicle accidents in 2020 and expect the tallies increase in 2021 according to the department of transportation 94 percent of series crashes are due to driver error. they are expected to anticipate dangers to mitigate and remove human error that lead to a crash. av technology increases safety and saves lives. in addition to revolutionize the ability to make the transport of goods and people safer, easier and more efficient and more accessible av technology could improve mobility for vulnerable groups including the elderly and those a disabilities , connecting them with jobs and services and allowing them to live independently. in addition the resulting deficiencies can reduce the cost of goods for consumers and in the longer term provide solutions to some of these supply chain models that

america is currently experiencing today. these benefits are compelling but we must recognize potential impacts and what they could have on our workforce. we need to implement pro- worker policies. because av deployment may lead to other jobs we have to incorporate employee development and training programs to upscale the workforce so they can take advantage of new jobs the av will create. today transit agencies are partnering with technology firms to test av our future depends on what we do now with a clear regulatory structure in place to continue to support av innovation and eventual deployment to take the steps necessary to ensure america cements its leadership the av space. with that want to thank our witnesses for joining us today and i look forward to hearing your testimony. i yield back.

>> i'm pleased to yield to the chair of the full committee for any opening statement. >> thank you for holding this important hearing and to all the witnesses since there are so many i will be very brief. obviously there is tremendous promise and a number of those aspects have been mentioned. it is also a tremendous challenge for regulators to regulate a rapidly evolving technology to be certain the public for all public interest is included in the development, deployment and operation of these vehicles. it's an extraordinary challenge for the federal regulators.

it should not be done state-by-state. we need reasonable guidelines federally and we have to get it right. we saw what happened with the boeing max we don't want that to happen with av. i read a report today agreed the post had 34 unexpected and unnecessary severe breaking incidents in tesla last month. no major accidents but it could. there are potential downsides to this technology as it is deployed and developed and we have to stay on top of that and to present a challenge to the infrastructure that they use different ways of centering themselves on the road if you don't have striping or fog liens or

regular signage come it will be a much more problematic deployment and rollout. we've got to get it right and realize the promise to mitigate suggestions or death and to be more efficient nation in terms of fuel consumption we just have to get it right. thank you madame chair. >> thank you chairman defazio. i would now like to welcome today's witnesses on our panel. city councilmember for houston texas on behalf of the

national league of cities. and from the department of transportation on behalf of the american association highway transportation officials jay johnson nelson transportation workers union of america ms. catherine chase for auto safety and the vice president of safety aurora. political director teamsters counsel seven. and university of oregon and general counsel of the

timeless vehicle industry association. thank you for being here today i look forward to your testimony without objection the statement will be included in the record. sense this has been made for the record the subcommittee request you limit oral testimony to five minutes. first you may proceed. >> good morning chairwoman and defazio and ranking member and members of the subcommittee. and representing on the southwest side of houston i'm here today in behalf of the national league of cities to discuss our experiencing with piloting autonomous vehicles

zero is the only acceptable number of death on america's road and we are losing too many residents to dangerous roads across the country any effort to reduce fatalities must include every possible strategy including autonomous vehicle handling most aspects and then to equip us to give us the opportunities and challenges. we are aiming to create the right environment of shared space connected options that led better meet our goals as a city. piloting the testing of av with the transit agency and then across the campus. and with those nonroad options between two universities in

their paratransit options. and that is where narrow launched for commercial services with lower speed and smaller lightweight vehicles. and to deliver groceries and prescriptions from kroger or dominoes or cvs or the food bank which is been extremely helpful during covid. and then also need by daily necessity. we made arrangements with local police officer to see the vehicle understand how to access in the emergency and ask questions these must be designed to operate on the road as they exist today and

just three recommendations for panel action number one is best in piloting with local government congress us department of transportation to support with the local av testing in partnership with communities and strong safety guidelines. with different areas of the country in different climates can encourage the data exchange for federal safety regulators to move in the autonomous industry forward. number two invest and ensure and we went to ensure they have access to quality jobs that have even higher earning potential we are encouraged with companies have new upscale training programs with community colleges putting investment into the nation's

workforce that needs to happen at scale we know we need growing technology industries if we do not investor worker training now the latest study shows that the us will struggle to fill at least four.5 million jobs any legislation like the build back better act in workforce training and number three technology sharing is anticipating accommodating for changes is the basis for good transportation planning. new technology is changing transportation and planning for the future to service in a more sustainable and practical way up. and with the safe adoption and

i am proud of the work we have done in houston and then to work with each of you with our shared goals of transportation safely together. inc. you. >> we moved to the director of department of education you are recognized for five minutes. >> good morning and thank you for the opportunity to speak to the important topic of automated transportation it is my honor to testify of transportation officials and the department of transportation my main messages to share the critical importance that connected and automated vehicles or cav would have equity and sustainability of the

transportation system. and they are absently dedicated to have the safe deployment of a connected automated and cooperative ecosystem for benefits to extend through all states. one of the key reasons they are so interested in cav is to improve roadway safety we know the first nine months that was deadly on the nations row 31700 people died and in iowa alone we lost 354 people last year this is entirely unacceptable and the lives lost the us dot announced a safety strategy that has actions for safety roads in vehicles. holding tremendous potential for crashes to save lives with

the cav technology has been integral part of the strategy in order to fully realize that they held the table in iowa my vision has taken it driver's ed today with a more automated transportation future including the following extensive stakeholder engagement new policies and legislation and october 2021 and with your policy principles. it is fundamental of cav across the state.

with that benefits of transportation to believe vehicles must be more than automated and it is key to ensure automated vehicles have enhance safety features to fully advance our goals of equitable and efficient transportation this is a key reason why we continue of the five.nine gigahertz spectrum. there is an urgent need for coordinated national strategy to improve the vision and roadmap that must be delivered developed collaboratively industry and communities with the safety and mobility benefits fully realizing has

clear strategic direction these are only two of the principles and i encourage you to review all time. those three critical actions to lead to deployment of technology. with that strategy and vision to foster progress by calling on the us dot in the transportation community at large to articulate a clear vision and national strategy. number two continue to foster collaboration and partnership us dot needs to continue to offer a partnership when collaborations are a competitive advantage and with that's needed spectrum to provide much-needed certainty to reserve the safety spectrum.

thank you again for the honor and opportunity with you the. >> thank you moved to the international president transportation workers of america. you are recognized for five minutes. >> thank you to the ranking member davis to provide us this opportunity with the thomas vehicle technology as president of the transport workers of america i'm here representing more than 150,000 working people who are on the frontlines of the great transportation system these numbers include schoolbus workers you can ask and other workers serving communities across the country our members are the ones most at risk of job loss and displacement if automated vehicles are deployed without a clear federal framework to undermine

workers and jobs. the leadership crafting av leadership is essential for the house to advance with the av proposal on the safety and economic authority and to show safety and to prioritize investment in our transportation network. let me be clear to fully support pro- worker pro safety technology and innovation and policy. we frequently stand around caps off the bargaining table to force our employers to install blind spot protection and other driver assist innovation. we strongly endorse legislation that regulates av technology to existing safety standards that it creates and sustains good union jobs in america. innovation and automation the

new york city subway when a fully automated train across manhattan 1962 through 1964. maintained and overseen by the transport workers union. the system and others like it gave rise to federal transit worker protection standards like these ensure that workers are treated fairly have access to necessary training as a change due to technology and made our transportation sector for the solid blue-collar jobs at power strong communities and our economy. and then in 1864 this approach has empowered workers for generations and should not change. the same is true of our safety policy the dot has successfully integrated tens of thousands of equipment vehicles and processes into

our transportation systems across every mode working from rotor blades to jet engines and then most recently the bureau emission buses. we have always fought to ensure these innovations meet or exceed the safety standards av must be held to the same level of accountability. and then to demonstrate their ability with their regulations to hold them accountable for any promise and improvement as automated technology integrated into other modes centered on safety requirements qualified licensed trained professionals to operate commercial vehicles airline pilots railroad engineers already work with automation and assume control a cessation on —- situation

commands those that play an equivalent role in surface transportation and the federal av policy was declared as the essential element for transit operations. no level of diesel automation should ever replace them. my written testimony provided specific recommendations on several issues that av legislation should address including elevating workers voices to develop and implement new technology and ensuring any transition to create and sustain good union jobs across the entire spectrum and then with a unified approach for regulating automation to make sure workers are supported as new technology provides. 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 integrate the next generation of technology. thank you for giving me the opportunity to address these issues with forward to your questions. >> thank you very much. before the next witness, first i would like to recognize president advocates highway auto safety. you are recognized. >> good morning chair and ranking member and the subcommittee members. thank you for holding today's hearing at a critical time

skyrocketing to historic highs since the onset of the pandemic. increasing by 45 percent since 2009. automated including cars and trucks and buses are essential way however it is yet to be fully developed and those that are unknown and in the short-term many safety solutions are available since our inception in 1989 strongly supported lifesaving technologies electronic stability control and review cameras. and we deeply concerned under tested unproven and unsafe for autonomous vehicles including

trucks and buses will overlooking the need to advance solutions now. and also shares a concern about av we commissioned a national poll last week it revealed that concerns of 80 percent are driverless cars. and even greater concern but then again throughout the country. and those would be addressed in the government standard 60 percent responded yes. since congress held its first hearing nearly a decade ago urging and adoption of standards of the tech industry can figure how to build av the us department of transportation can figure out how to develop standards last

month the secretary responded to a question during his interview stating "we need to make sure people are waiting to automate vehicles know that there is a baseline of safety to be established by regulation and we share that view without regulation government oversight and industry accountability are in peril and these adequacy's are great deal of confusion of driverless vehicles versus those with convenient features like adopted cruise control. and in turn this is led to drivers misusing over relying technology which is resulted in fatalities and injuries. also yesterday tesla recalled 54000 cars which were programmed to roll through stop signs.

the dot clearly needs to step in and step up the oversight regulatory responsibility. this includes immediately releasing the information it has been collecting since last june from automakers about cars with advanced technologies involved in crashes. advocates commend the subcommittee in the full committee for their invest in america bill, some of which were included in the jobs act and to critical safety measures are the mandated rule for large trucks and the mandated upgraded standard within one year to prevent horrific truck. and mike aeds who on the vehicles and that was

significantly reduced caused by many factors with distracted or drowsy driving. with future driverless cars and trucks. and that's also critical to advancing safety. with the bridge collapse in pittsburgh was an example of this need. to have that state approach that has infrastructure and then included in the eye i jj throughout the nation is vital. on accessibility and workforce and transit and other issues directed by the eye i aj to enforce future policy. in closing we support rigorous testing with the future goal including autonomous trucks and buses in 2020 and play by

60 groups representing disability rights on enforcement bicyclist and others to develop that tenant and we urge the subcommittee to continue the leadership role by advancing these and other protections to improve the safety of all users in the nation's infrastructure. thank you. >> thank you very much. before the next witness provides testimonial like to recognize represented to say a few words of introduction. >> thank you madame chairman excited to introduce my constituents with the 17th district working for aurora they are and incredible

farseeing company but that executives and innovators with a burnt and tesla partnering with toyota to take the lead in self driving of automation technology with cars on the road at almost any time in a really have then and honor in our community this is the vice president of safety those in western pennsylvania with their approach to safety every single day working with industry standards offer guidance he was with uber before working the private sector with motorcars school safety research program and

also serves on the board of mothers against driving. and with playing some of that work. >> thank you very much. >> good morning chair defazio ranking member davis and members of the subcommittee i'm the vice president of safety at aurora. thank you for the invitation to testify on a time is vehicle technology and thank you to the representative for the very kind introduction to to deliver the benefits safely and quickly and broadly we are

building the aurora driver the hardware and software they can be used to power any vehicle to move people and goods safely. by experts in the av field and california and montana, texas washington colorado and michigan highly the team responsible for do with developing the holistic approaches safety programs cover all aspects of her operation and organization in the engineering of our products. also working with industry standards and regulatory bodies and then to share that approach and that is critical for the sales success of this technology. my entire professional career it is a deeply personal

connection it is not acceptable with 40000 americans are lost every year and that millions are entering crashes and believable part has been going on in the wrong direction for far too long the new data yesterday shows fatalities continue to rise at a record pace. i believe deeply in the work we do at aurora every day and that is going to be a part of the solution to improve safety on our roads. first aurora is a regulated company our technology is subject to the motor vehicle safety requirements and then was safety regulations. in addition each day in which we operate has its own approach to regulate av operations amateurs connections it is clear and in full force there are several open rulemaking about the safe deployment we would like to see me forward as we continue to build our programs in

parallel so it is as fit into the regulatory system we learned from decades of learning failure to safety is rarely caused by a single person to provide multiple mistakes turning into a disaster. we are building on these lessons. to strategies for the approach are as follows. all employees are empowered to request operations if there is a safety concern and this is part of a larger approach to managing safety risk. teams across aurora responsible for completing safety key work those that are safe to operate on public roads. highly developed the public road operations also matters an incredible amount of work

to map the route and select the data for future on —- virtual testing strategically using the simulations. and she has run millions of simulations every day to train and eliminate that is all before the software is loaded onto vehicles of public roads. so we are building the driver and the pilot with fedex we are running congressional loads on i 45 between dallas and houston. this pilot is critical for us to learn on public roads. and in my remaining time there are two ways were believes to support the development. first we asked congress and the administration to ensure laws and regulations and technology and business model.

there with the experience and at that job quality is central 20 policy and industry conversation and then with congress and us dot cities the law enforcement safety advocates and other stakeholders to support safety innovation in the united states i want to think for their leadership for the community and testimony chairman defazio thank you for your work on the trucking issues and the process you learned how impactful it is. thank you again for the opportunity to testify today and i look forward to your questions. >> thank you very much.

i recognize, i'm sorry. . . . .e transportation industry congress will play a key role in determining whether the changes will be for the better or worse and in this case i'm afraid if we let large corporations write

the rules themselves then it will surely be the latter. there were skeptics that thought forces would never be replaced with motorized transportation. the technology involved and so did we. we can do it again but we need your help. the impact that it will have on workers is still unknown. congress has an opportunity to mitigate before they happen and possibly shape better outcomes. our experience made me skeptical about claims but we will trade t our way out of the job losses. we have roughly 100,000 members in california candidate and thanks to automation we are down to about 15,000 now. when campbell soup shut down they lost their jobs into the government swooped in to provide

job training systems. later the paper reported on a second generation and her mom worked there for 40 years as a single mom herself she made a $23 an hour plus benefits. after the closure it took her three years to learn to become an ultrasound technician and find a job. this is a place where the government can step in. the committee was right to include the service transportation grant program in the invest in america act. it also mandated that the transit agencies receiving grants to deploy must require workforce development plans from applicants. we are trying to get ahead of the curve. how do we capture the jobs being created by automation and make sure they are good union jobs. what can officials do to help? we are meeting with manufacturers and government to see how they do that.

in san francisco we represented nearly 1500 workers in parking garages. there's no reason why municipal garages cannot be retooled to serve and should be doing that work. however every time there is a hearing like this, companies call us up and while we have many good conversations, so far it hasn't resulted in many more jobs. that's why it's critical the government doesn't seize the ability to regulate these new technologies and industries. it's also important to ask what the problem we are trying to solve here. the so-called truck driver shortage. before the deregulation in the 80s driving a truck was a good middle-class job but in very little time trucking evolved to

one where misclassified contractor drivers work an average of over 6060 hours and less than minimum wage. the solution is not to do away but to better and worse and brd jobs. at the issues facing the commercial vehicles are different potentially more dangerous. every day the members see both the benefits of new technology and the malfunctions that occur. human drivers are a much needed to safety net then those scenarios and more. for example, way more recently in arizona use self driving vans

and the first deployment permit fees are under 10,000 but clearly operating in commercial vehicles. the committee included the operations and we urge you to continue to explore the statement for the appropriate regulations. in closing in all aspects when we are considering commercial motor vehicles it's important to get it done correctly rather than just quickly. we applaud you for having this hearing. thank you and i look forward to answering any questions you may have. >> i would like to recognize mrt witness. >> thank you, madam chair.

i'm pleased to introduce the next witness at the university of oregon school of architecture environment. the director of the center which focuses on how technological advancements are changing the cities and also the cofounder and codirector of the sustainable cities initiative, and nationally and internationally awarded multidisciplinary organization that focuses on sustainability issues as they relate to the environment. for the impacts or potential impacts of the technologies and help them to begin to plan for the future. i'm pleased you could join us today, and i look forward very

much to hearing the testimony. thank you, madam chair. >> professor, you are recognized for five minutes. >> thank you. the chair, ranking member davis, thank you for the opportunity to testify on behalf of the impacts this has on communities and a thanks to the chair man for all you do for the country and the state of oregon. very much appreciated. i met professor of architecture by design as well as the director of the center of the university of oregon. the cross the center focused on understanding the impacts that emerging technologies and the commerce or having and will continue to have on communities. our focus isn't on the mechanics of the technology but the impact on the land use and why these impacts matter for safety, the

environment and the economy. we work extensively on these throughout the country, private sector partners to develop professional organizations, the research organizations and foundations. our country at the earliest stages of developing the technologies and testing. what we don't know at this moment outweighs what we do know about them and how they will impact the communities. that said, one thing that is clear, it isn't another vehicle in the same way over a century, cars were not just a different horse. the research indicates they could have widespread testing impacts and because of this we need to be sure to shape the deployment to serve the community goals. research points to having both positive and negative transportation impacts. similar we are already seeing this by rideshare companies. on the positive side they can lead to 80 or 90% in the demand for parking and in transit vehicles potential improvements in the coverage. the transit service improvements as you've heard might however

come with large impacts on labor and connections can pull the writers away from transit. similarly, it makes up so they can become a transportation twist to the wealthy but implications shouldered by everyone. but they are not only a transportation issue. this is an important issue. they will have cascading impacts beyond. for instance, the potential to exacerbate allowing them to drive further distances and less time. this would impact the infrastructure of the environment and equity. another example, readers, the parking demand for the cities for other forms. we could fill them with housing and increase accessibility. this would allow us to actually put more development on any one parcel and bring down the cost increasing affordability. at the same time, the shift in the parking would increase the supply development for the community. the increases in the demand stays the same this would negatively impact the land

prices and this is true for urban and suburban areas with the largest amount affected. regarding the government revenues, they could significantly impact the revenues for the fuel tax, vehicle registration, parking fees and the transportation infrastructure operations. a study conducted by my colleagues found the revenue loss could be between three to 51% they could have substantial impact with the corporation we found the large areas with who has access. older adults and low-income individuals are not risk of this and it isn't directly addressed. with of these points in mind, first, specifically focused on the cascading impacts of the technology, efficiency and safety which are very important but also expand them to address the impact safety and the

midsize, small and rural communities. we don't we won't understand the impact and the communities will be ill prepared him to suffer adverse effects. second, support research on the cascading impacts, similar points regarding pilot goes beyond the technology, safety or deployment that extends the cascading impacts. a promising step forward and the language that was a basis. we need more programs to exist. third, assist the governments with local preparedness it's not only enabling the regulation but permitting the emergency response policy to the roles and how best to steer. how to use tools and leverage and corporate engagement. fourth, organize and lead a national dialogue only impacts the community needs. we hear the consistent desire from public and private sector to organize the research into

andbest practices on the many aspects. in closing i want to say that the future is not preordained but we can shape if we understand not only the technical requirements and regulations, but also the cascading impacts that it will have all the communities and the regulations and tools to shape the deployment to support the community goals. thank you for the opportunity to speak with you and i look forward to answering your questions. >> thank you, professor. we will hear next from the general counsel autonomous vehicle industry association. >> tiergarten, ranking member davis, members of the subcommittee, good morning. i serve as the general counsel of the autonomous vehicle industry association. i also serve as a partner of the law firm where i chair the

autonomous connected mobility practice. thank you for giving me the opportunity to testify at this important hearing. the autonomous vehicle industry association was founded as a unified voice of the av industry. they are committed to bringing the safety mobility and economic benefits of av, otherwise known as level four and five capable vehicles to consumers in the state in a responsible timely manner. for a dozen years, av technology has been tested on the roads over tens of millions of miles and maintains a remarkable safety record. at the same time, roadway fatalities in this country involving vehicles with human drivers have increased dramatically as members of the subcommittee know just yesterday the national traffic highway safety administration reported a 31,720 americans died on the road in the first nine months of 2021. those 31,720 deaths represent the highest numbers of fatalities in the first nine months of any year in the past 15 years.

the 2021 fatality numbers are part of a pattern increasingly unsafe driving that is occurring across the country. last week, in its new national roadway safety strategy, the u.s. department of transportation reaffirmed what we've 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 atvs do not drive drunk or while texting. 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 they will make the roads safer. to reduce fatalities and injuries, americans need a conveyance of approach to safety that includes a full suite of solutions from safer road designs to the driver systems to

updated traffic guidance, but the approach must also include the deployment of autonomous vehicles. av technology will transform the transportation system by making it more accessible, efficient and sustainable. just last week i visited several industry association members to see firsthand how this transformation is taking shape. i rode in those that are safely navigating the streets and cities like san francisco, las vegas, phoenix, miami and pittsburgh. i went to states like texas and new mexico to boost the supply chain. i saw how zero occupant vehicles are expanding access to fresh food and reducing emissions. to experience av technology and odysseus capabilities, if you understand the opportunity 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. expanded independence for my grandmother in florida and for my parents and in-laws as they

get older. an opportunity to expand equitable transportation as delivery options in my neighborhood here in dc. i see this happening all while growing the economy and creating new well-paying jobs. the industry is creating jobs and providing opportunities for workers with a wide array of expertise and educational backgrounds including many jobs that do not require a college degree. in locations across the country, the developers and manufacturers are hiring auto technicians, safety operation specialists and many others to support the testing and deployment of the technology. one study found that the av industry created 5500 new jobs within the first region alone. the recent department of transportation study also indicated that adoption of av trucking would increase total u.s. deployment 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 av truck deployment, autonomous trucking is not

expected to displace jobs in the trucking industry would serve as one tool to reduce the strain on the supply chain costs in part by the long-standing truck driver shortage. atvs offer great opportunities, but without a national framework that maximizes the deployment of the technology, it will be harder to achieve those benefits. i want to think the subcommittee for its leadership on these important issues. the autonomous vehicle industry association looks forward to serving as a resource lead and working with you to make autonomous vehicles the reality for americans nationwide. we are eager to engage with congress, the department of transportation and all stakeholders on the right policies to accomplish the shared goals for safer streets, expanded mobility and new jobs and economic growth and i look forward to answering any questions you may have. >> thank you very much, mr. wolfe. i now recognize the chair of the full committee, mr. defazio.

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

we can all benefit from improved growth, fewer potholes and better lines, but the information that we've received in houston is that these vehicles will operate with of the infrastructure that we currently have in the cities. >> are some of them dependent on cameras -- they use different ways of navigating, and if anyone would like to comment, because i'm concerned that when many states don't have the repair at the top of their list, there are many roads that don't have adequate lines or marking s and other things that many of the vehicles are dependent upon the range more widely. does anyone want to comment on that? >> yes, 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 raised is really important to

understand around maintenance of the current infrastructure. while i completely agree with what ms. castex-tatum was saying, [inaudible] to your point, everybody has sometimes a different approach so when we talk about this issue, i think it's more about what can we do to make the current environment safer. so whether that be making sure road designs are there, whether that be equipping the current vehicles with different technologies, all those things together actually will help the deployment as opposed to where we treat them now with these very discrete and different issues. >> i agree with some of the points you've already pointed out in terms of improvements that need to be made both

vehicles now as well as vehicles of the future especially as the population is aging and signage needs to be improved. the different lines of sight and need to be improved for the autonomous vehicles and i'm also thinking about a few years ago when they held a committee hearing on the infrastructure and autonomous vehicles and then the head of the new york city department of transportation now deputy secretary of transportation said something to the effect of new york city is never going to have a perfect infrastructure. these vehicles better be ready to deal with whatever they are going to come upon. we agree with that and that's why we are pushing so hard for the minimum standards like a vision test so that when a car or truck takes over the responsibility of seeing, we know that the vehicle itself is seeing what happens. so the infrastructure needs to be improved both now we can see we are holding onto 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 important. tomorrow we are holding a hearing on 5g. the fcc created issues the way it was deployed, but we also saw that the fcc is proposed selling more than half the vehicle to vehicle communication spectrum. you referenced this. can you comment on how stupid that is? >> thank you, mr. chair. i would be happy to offer a few perspectives and to link it to the previous question about infrastructure. we all want good payments initially we think the lane markings into clear signs are important and these will help drivers today and the cars tomorrow, but the digital infrastructure is just as important to enable the future

transportation systems. we are talking about communications, we are talking about data, mapping. so with specific regards to connectivity, we believe that the safety will be enhanced through connectivity, so preserving the 5.9 gigahertz safety band, this would add certainty not only as far as state and local jurisdictions but also for developers and manufacturers, and we do see that is the key component of any future automated transportation system. >> thank you. thank you, madam chair. my time is expired. >> thank you, mr. defazio and i now recognize mr. crawford for five minutes. >> thank you, madam chair. appreciate that. i would note the hearing was originally scheduled for 10 a.m. i don't know how many people this change inconvenienced but i would hope at the very least we could maintain a schedule and further perhaps if we held hearings more frequently, we wouldn't need to jam it witnesses into a single panel. it also does a disservice to

both the witnesses and the members of the committee by constraining the meetings of dialogue. let me say this. i want to direct a question to catherine chase. in your written testimony, the committee in november on challenges to supply chain, you responded to the argument that many of my colleagues and myself made that if a team is old enough to put your life on the line and drive a convoy in the battle, then it's old enough to make a living as a commercial truck driver. your testimony dismissed that idea. not only did you miss the point of the argument, but minimized to the hard-working sacrifice of men and women in uniform depicting seven sailors operating one compact car including one sleeping in the back presumably because it's such an easy task. ms. chase, would you consider manning military vehicles an easy job? >> no, sir. >> thank you. if 18-years-old is enough to die for your country is it not to

make an honest living as a truck driver? it's a yes or no question, ma'am. >> is 18 old enough to die for your country, can they also drive a truck? >> they are not comparable questions. >> they are. it's an absolute yes or no question and you are taking the position that is a military veteran i find offensive and many of the members on the panel are military veterans planned offensive. 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 as we we are either incompetent, lazy or not well trained so i'm asking again, yes or no question, do you think 18-years-old is old enough to die for your country shouldn't they be old enough to make a living driving a truck? >> the point of the political -- >> yes or no and then i will go onto the other witnesses, yes or no and i will go on to the other

witnesses. >> please go onto the other witnesses. >> so you have no answer about the question. we know how you feel about the cartoon you entered earlier in the testimony. i will move on. i will move on to mr. wolf. we certainly in my district and many other districts a lot of truck drivers out there and i know how vital they've been in the economy especially during the covid pandemic and a recent supply chain crisis. can you talk about how you envision the automation making trucking jobs, truck driving jobs safer and what impact that will have in terms of these efficiencies on automated trucking and productivity? >> congressman, i'm happy to take that question. thank you. i think the place to start is the well-documented and long-standing driver shortage, truck drivers shortage 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 the net increase of jobs, as many as 35,000 per year in addition to other economic benefits leads us to the conclusion it really is time to shift the way we think about the conversation around jobs and autonomous trucks. these are two areas that can complement each other in the system and as that technology moves forward, it's a matter of safety as the baseline because as we talk about the safety statistics of worsening over time, 14% of fatal crashes, serious crashes involve heavy trucks. so, getting the technology deployed is essential for that in that respect and then the job front, we certainly see overall in increase in jobs, economic growth and is in the testimony, as the ecosystem grows, there's a number of different roles and

new kinds of jobs that are going to be created in this exciting area so i think all of that taken together, we see a lot of positive activity going forward. >> congressman, thank you for the question. i think i will mention two things. part of the challenge we have is the lumping of the technologies together and we call them all automated. certainly there are more technologies in the pipeline, some on the vehicles today and commercial trucks that make the driving task easier for human drivers and then there's technology that we are working on that is really around the driving task which could make the driving trucking jobs different in the future, so it's not about some sort of replacement thing. and that's exactly why we are doing this tied with fedex, so we can learn all these different issues beyond just does it work. 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 additional friction into the system that already has a bunch of friction in it. >> thank you. i will yield back. >> thank you very much. >> i recognize myself for five minutes. your testimony makes a strong case for ensuring the workforce needs are addressed as deployment of commercial atvs become more prevalent. i share 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, and do you believe that addressing the commercial work needs and deploying the av technology are mutually exclusive goals or can both be obtained? >> thank you for the question. so, we have a situation now whether the technology is coming into public transport, the operation of buses that require an absolute robust federal regulatory framework for them to be deployed safely, and i think the first thing that needs to be done is that there needs to be a federal check that anything that goes on to the highways and roads in america meet a regulatory and among. and the second piece of that is i've listened to some of these questions back and forth about automated technology and impact on the workforce and i think the impact on the workforce has the

chance to be extreme. right now there are, despite the discussion being introduced, there are transit systems across the country right now in embracing this technology simply for the purpose of reducing headcount. and that's absolutely true we deal with of the transit employees across the country, public sectors looking to reduce budgets and private sector operators that are looking to maximize profit and all doing this without any regard for the future safety of highways and roads and i think that the only intervener that can prevent this from happening in a chaotic way is the federal government. so, in terms of the use of automated technology, simultaneously with human operators, i think that is the way to go, to utilize the automated technology, while

augmenting and assisting humans operating vehicles, particularly in public transit. there is no real 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. and also, this notion that the introduction of automation is going to somehow create new jobs, we've heard all of this. we've heard this many times with trade with china that somehow the introduction of automated technology that could reduce and replace human operators is going to produce more jobs. we've heard that he and we have seen that already and have no trust or phase in this technology coming in in a positive way unless the federal government steps up and regulates. thank you. >> thank you very much, mr. samuelson. last time the subcommittee held a hearing on the topic was in

2013. that's going on ten years ago. and at that time, atvs were still considered a technology of the future. but today there is at least 1400 including automatic commercial vehicles being tested on u.s. roadways in 36 different states. what do you think is a realistic timeline for the deployment of your technology specifically vehicles with level four automation and above and what can americans expect, when can americans expect to see the vehicles driving on the roads next to them? >> madam chair, i'm happy to jump in and then deeper to my colleagues on the panel here. i think 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 noted being used in pilot projects carrying freight and helping to alleviate the crisis that we face as well as other instances where the technology is one example in arizona providing meals to individuals who live in food deserts. it's another example. but to scale the 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. but the number two is to maximize the deployment and in my written testimony, i note in number of different steps that we are eager to work and continue to work with the committee and we are thankful for the work thus far and other committees in congress and stakeholders to develop a national framework that will maximize the deployment of the technology so we can start to

see those benefits that we've talked about a number of times to accrue to the public. >> my time has expired and i go next to mr. boss. >> thank you. before i go on to my questions i have prepared, i'd like to associate my remarks or myself with the comments that representative crawford made. because as a member on this committee, probably the only one that actually had my license for a tractor-trailer when i was 16, was driving when i was 18. and by the time i turned 19, i was in the marine corps. all of those things i was very capable of handling and handling safely. my family believed in me. the state of illinois actually tested me out and by golly, guess what, i passed that drivers test at 16-years-old, never had a car license, only a tractor-trailer license. at a time when the united states

is meeting people to be available 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 to have cute cartoons about where we are at right now and what we are needing. that being said, mr. wolfe, 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 the work will change and what new skills they will need. to help us kind of understand what the future would look like, can you describe the level of standardization between the various atvs as far as trucks and other technologies that are being developed by different manufacturers? for example if a trucker is trained to operate one of the trucks that aurora has developed

with the skills be easily transferable to the drivers of a different manufacturer or technology? and what would the driver need, or what would the driver need to have separate or additional training? do we know that? >> thank you, congressman, for the question. happy to address it. i think may be the place to start is to understand that there are two different kinds of technologies here. the autonomous vehicle industry association we are working with the autonomous vehicle technology which is the so-called full automation where a human driver, the technology is not designed nor expected for a human to be involved in the driving task. that is from the driver assistance technology which many of us have seen after cruise control and others have

described it and that technology there is an expectation for the operator or driver to take back control were to be vigilant at all times to take control so those are two different kinds of technologies and i think that is critical and often times can be completed, so in that respect i can't speak to the expectation to license human drivers in the context of the technology and that spirit but in the autonomous vehicle side, again, the expectation is there wouldn't be a driver to take that control. at the time being there are safety operators and monitors involved, and i would defer to individual members to speak to the transferability of those skills. >> i appreciate that answer. mr. samuelson, well trained mechanics are central for keeping the 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 once they start an operation? >> thank you for the question. so, workforce development forced by federal intervention requirements is of the utmost importance with the latest waves of technology coming in. av technology and electric buses closely related and if that is a model going forward with what we could potentially expect, electric buses will seem like such a great idea in terms of greening america and the unintended impact on workers and

bus mechanics. we anticipate a 30 to 40% reduction in bus mechanics that would be necessary when they are fully electric or zero emissions without the combustion engine it's a lot less maintenance required so what we see is a necessity for the workforce development and by the federal government to ensure the current mechanics are able to make the transition to work on the fleet and the systems are able to work collectively to figure out how the existing workforce, how the negative effects could be mitigated as best available so the federal government is extremely valuable in this and they are going to be the guide and again the regulatory framework with workforce development requirements is vital. thank you. >> my time is expired and madam chair, i will yield back. >> i recognize next ms. johnson

of texas. >> thank you very much, madam chair, and thank you for holding this hearing. i have a question but i will do part of my statement first. over the last three years, the dallas-fort worth area has become one of the central [inaudible] and two companies, and way more have opened up altercation hubs in my district and another company expanded into the dallas-fort worth area in june of 2020 raising high-quality high-tech jobs to many of my constituents. indeed, this wave of investment is due in large part to the leadership and is demonstrated by dallas college and

north-central texas council of government and the dallas regional chamber. the department of transportation and public safety and dallas college has been the leader in creating the workforce development at the community college. focus on the future of transportation in part fueled by $1.5 million granted to develop the curriculum. the atv and transportation technology through a grant. however, although the technology has potential to provide benefits, serious questions remain. like many of my colleagues, i'm concerned about the issues related to safety and want to make sure a strong federal safety framework is enacted and adhered to. additionally, as we go forward i

believe that the congress and industry should incorporate priorities to address the workforce needs by instilling policies that mitigate both job losses and any potential wage decreases. and lastly i urge the industries to invest in the creation of high-quality jobs for those who may face displacement. now, we have a lot of traffic and trade and this is a way to keep things moving. i know people are worried about the jobs and we are also except we have such a small number of drivers for the traffic we have. so, for highlighting the provisions i want to thank you for highlighting them and regarding the workforce

retraining. as you can imagine i was more than disappointed that the senate deleted the language from the bill. would you be able to expand what kind of programs you would like to see when you mention the workforce retraining programs and the surface transportation, workers whose jobs have been affected by automation? i have the largest in the country in my district. i'd like you to respond to that if you will. >> thank you very much for the question. i am 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 the av technology is introduced in the public transit arena. and i think the important thing is the impact of the workers get notice of new technology before

it's introduced and have the chance to respond and have a voice. now i gave some examples. the cannery where the canneries were closed and workers were thrown out at the mercy of workforce development, and it did not work well for them. so, i do think it's important to get ahead of this, and i appreciate the efforts that are happening in your district. here, we represent 800 workers at a bus company. they are the highest paid manufacturing workers in the united states. they make buses that mr. samuelson's members drive and we are doing a partnership with funding workforce development funding from the state of california to train workers to work on zero emission vehicle buses. we really do think the win-win

scenarios are where we can leverage federal and state money to train workers for the jobs of the future, but again the important thing here is that at least in california when employers get money that are strong labor standards attached to that. prevailing wages, minimum wages, so that we make sure that the workers that we are training actually stick around and get retained in their work. >> i'm out of time and ask unanimous consent to put the rest of my questions in the record and the rest of my statement. thank you, madam chair, and i will yield back. >> so ordered. [inaudible]

thank you all for being here today. i think we've all learned a lot about the industry and about this technology already during this hearing. i think there's a happy medium between applying over restrictive government regulations on the industry. my first question has to do with the actual technology used. i have no doubt we will see more of these vehicles throughout the country not just in cities or areas where there are companies and specific engineers to make repairs to vehicles. we've already seen with some manufacturers that they are limiting who can actually do work on their vehicles. i can tell you that i trust my local mechanic a lot more than someone who needs to fly to my hometown in minnesota from silicon valley to do the repairs. and this should not be offensive to you. [laughter] i just want to know how are

companies looking at these type of issues as we move into the future? >> thank you for the question. i will take a shot at it and then pass it over to talk about what we are doing at this stage. obviously we are still in the testing phase and getting kind of focused on the path to shipping a product. one of the things we are learning and that is exactly the questions you are asking about. how do we think about maintenance, logos, but that looks like. i think the key point to reference here is that the technology we are developing is really more than a business-to-business relationship. so, think about a fedex or walmart or amazon who has their own fleet of vehicles whose maintaining the fleet of vehicles for the operations they are conducting versus the point you made about you and i needing

to get a repair at the local repair shop where we can choose to go. i think again this is where we and our principals are very supportive of congress actually doing more on commissioning the studies on jobs and it would be around at the quality of the jobs because they are going to be slightly different than i think we envisioned today. >> i may just add in response to that question that the autonomous vehicle industry is a diverse industry with respect to youth cases and applications, and so in thinking about those important issues you raised, there's of course personal vehicle ownership, the deployment of the fleet models, autonomous trucking, and then there's the last mile autonomous delivery services. in a sense it isn't a one-size-fits-all. one-size-fits-all. there may be different conversations as those

businesses start to scale up and bring businesses to the society. >> additionally, i also recognize increased automation introduces new risk factors for folks that we do not understand or folks that do not understand the sensor, camera or software problems. because of this diagnosing damage to a vehicle, determining liability and completion of police reports will increasingly rely on the data that the vehicle generates before, during and after an accident. what are the companies you represented doing to ensure they have access to this critical data and that it is timely, complete and useful? >> thank you for the question, congressman. in that respect, the autonomous vehicle industries that are operating this technology are engaging in information sharing and a number of ways. i may spell out a couple here. all of the companies are responding to an order with

respect to incidents involving autonomous vehicles. the developers and manufacturers also are participating in a voluntary initiative with the national highway traffic safety administration to provide information about the location of testing and parameters of the testing. the results have released safety studies that provide information in that respect and so for those reasons and other reasons, there's a number of ways that these companies are providing data information and i look forward to having the conversation going forward. >> last question really quick for mr. samuelson. the human component of the public transit operators are really valuable and great members of the community. in the for instance a bus or one of the transit commuters we've seen examples where there's violence happening. can you please speak to some of

these incidents and how we will look at that going forward? >> violence is prevalent. a full moon type atmosphere going on but it's been a glaring problem in urban transportation and urban transit, so actually the uniform bus operators the greatest deterrent to that taking place and i think a big problem with a potential in the public transit is the crime the writers would be exposed to absent to the uniformed presence of a bus operator. it's important to comprehend going forward. i was on a bus in brooklyn many times a month going high school and was saved so that i hope answers the question.

>> it does. thank you very much, madam chair. i will yield back. >> i recognize next mr. garamendi. >> thank you very much. thank you for the questions. i was going down the same line here. my questions really go to first maze chase. the gathering of information. it seems to me that one of the things we must do immediately is to make sure that information on all accidents as well as the machine nanotechnology are readily available. can you please respond to that, is the information available and what do we need to do to make sure that it is on the reporting on all accidents? >> thank you for the question, congressman. as was recently just mentioned, there's a standing general order by the national highway traffic safety administration that requires companies that are

producing vehicles to submit information regarding crashes. however, we have not seen that information so we don't know what is happening on the roadways and it is very critical the national highway traffic safety administration share this and that the public and the consumers are informed when they are on the road, when they are buying these cars, what they can trust. and i would like to comment also on the compliance with the agreement. none of these are regulatory or required. they are voluntary meaning a company can decide to submit some test information and choose what information they want to submit or walk away at any point. that's why the minimum performance requirements are so essential. a framework or voluntary agreement isn't going to do the trick. we need to know what's happening on the roads and the way to accomplish the safety through regulation. >> very good. that also applies to the insurance industry, and that was

i'm sure one of the issues brought to us earlier today. mr. samuelson, representing the men and women that are on these trucks 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 make them of the main thing here is to understand we've seen advanced technology introduced through the public transit several times before and this is about the third or fourth significant wave of technology coming in, and the technology can be used to enhance the service delivery safety while simultaneously

benefiting workers and that's what a regulatory framework from the federal government should emphasize that all of these can work synergistically together to produce a really good outcome for the writers in the transit systems and workers where no worker gets left behind and no worker gets endangered. thank you. >> thank you, mr. garamendi. so, we all know our friendly neighborhood ups driver. our members, we have 325,000 working for ups, the largest collective bargaining agreement in the country. we drive trucks that have driver assisted technologies like automated braking systems, lane controls, mapping and routing software, algorithms that all make our jobs safer and better. so, like mr. samuelson, we are not afraid of technology, and we

benefit from it. however, in response to your question, i think it's important as others have mentioned that the federal government said the floor for the regulation in the technology and not the ceilings. i'm fortunate enough to live in a state like california where a lot of this technology is being developed and we have policymakers 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 a way that benefits workers and the public and industry. thank you. >> it seems to me we have a necessity to said at least a couple standards. one, the information from the crashes and of the technology to be readily available. not only to the government but also to the insurance industry as well as to the committees so

we can then develop legislation. the second, the training programs discussed must also be in place. fortunately and unfortunately the committee wrote a very good bill on the surface transportation. unfortunately, much of the training programs that were in the bill did not find their way into the infrastructure jobs act so we have to repurpose and get that back. with that, i will yield back. >> the gentle man yields back. >> we will hear next for your questions. >> thank you all for being here. i will make a statement first that has nothing to do with my questions, but i think one of the folks said something about nafta and how they were promised jobs and how that turned out to be a joke. it might have been mr. samuelson. if you think these jobs are going to come to you, i think

you probably are mistaken and that because the only thing we seem to do up here very well is run up debt and you're either at the table or on the menu and i think american workers are currently on the menu when a lot of this comes down so i hope you all are paying very close attention to that. regarding the fedex ground pilots what to safety data is all raw rock collecting and how will that be used to improve the safety more broadly? >> congressman, thank you for the question. our safety case framework we are not just looking at the product but also the operations as well as the organizations and this is how we are addressing the safety even before the vehicles are on the road with autonomy.

then all those different principles that we have, and if there are five that we need to fulfill so it's really learning more about the operation aspects as opposed to how we are engineering the product and certainly there are some things we are actively looking at particularly with respect to the maintenance that i mentioned before. the safety of the product is handled by the safety case framework. >> i remembered hearing some ree testimony about it and sadly i think the educational level and this is lacking in the command of these because a lot of the folks thought this would be controlled community to community but reality it's got to be an entire network.

what do you think is going to be needed in the short and long-term so that it can be safely deployed. and then also in my mind i hear a lot of folks talking about how av, is it going to be somebody is going to have the master switch to be able to turn it off where if there's some other reason they can literally shut that down i wonder what your thoughts on that are. >> to give her the question. i completely agree with your points around the jurisdiction to jurisdiction approach. that is certainly not workable for the rollout of the technology nor is it to actually realize even the potential.

that is a framework that just doesn't work and that we've never used for the motor vehicle equipment in the united states. i think with respect to what's needed i think it's some of the things that bear mentioning here. so, one with the dot already outlined a number of rulemaking. some they started and some they plan as part of what was put out late last week. we need those to continue and we need them to continue with some urgency. i think one of the things i keep hearing in this panel is we are putting safety against innovation. and i don't know why we are doing that. we are literally in a crisis fatality on the nations roadway. all the rulemaking is helpful, whether they apply to lower levels of automation or to what we are doing. i think the second thing we need is for congress to show and

demonstrate some leadership with all of the stakeholders around developing laws and regulations that are technology and business neutral. i still hear a lot of commentary that seems specific to a very particular application and in some cases a particular manufacturer which again is not how we've developed the technology in the united states and then 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 shouldn't take action. again, the status quo that shouldn't be our goal. it should be what are all the tools we need to use in order to see this technology really advance. >> thank you, that is all my time. thank you so much. we will hear next from mr. johnson of georgia. >> thank you, madam chair, for holding this important hearing

and think the witnesses. thank you, witnesses for your testimony. the georgia institute of technology released a study in march of 2019 that exposed the algorithmic bias embedded in machine learning and the technology behind self driving cars. researchers found people with darker skin are more likely to be struck by an autonomous vehicle than a person with fair skin because models are programmed by people who do not consider every complexion a person can have. what measures can be taken to rule out the racial bias at the outset or the onset of newly developed technology and what if anything is holding back the industry from taking those steps? >> thank you, congressman johnson for that question. pretty important that we sit here in the beginning of black

history month as well. i think what i would say, it's not necessarily about the folks writing the software. part of what we are doing is training autonomy based on what it sees and so it really is more of the environment that it's in as opposed to someone programming something malicious and the code. there is a lot of talk in the industry about how do we go about making sure that the biases are not in the algorithms and as we get closer to deployment i know some researchers that put some studies out there but i think this is one that is worth a deeper conversation around townw just all of this is fitting together and how deeply it thinks about this particular issue. >> thank you, sir. as they increase in numbers they will need to talk to one another and their surroundings. this will result in the need for the support of infrastructure not to mention cybersecurity and

privacy safeguards for the exponential growth in data. what regulatory measures are needed to prevent against cyber security attacks and to ensure the privacy of americans data? >> thank you so much for the question. the autonomous vehicle industry has some of the world's top worp engineers working to build and in that context it's part of the engineering and design process from the start and all levels of development, so that is a very good aspect there not just for the development but for the testing and eventual deployment. now, in the 21st century of course cybersecurity is critical. every single day for the industry but it's not confined to the industry of course it's for the rest of the automotive industry and some in that context of course not just the automotive industry but all

sectors at large, so we support as an industry the robust risk-based policy approach that recognizes the cyber threats are dynamic and constantly evolving and would be happy to work with this committee and other stakeholders to develop that approach. >> thank you. how should federal agencies ensure that the wireless infrastructure can handle the data needs required without causing interference with existing systems such as what we have seen with the aviation industry? >> thank you, congressman. now i want to make sure i answer the question directly. i think there are two things. one is still the issue of spectrum and the use of connected vehicle technology, of course the industry welcomes investments in that respect but

autonomous vehicles are being developed, tested and deployed so as to not have to rely on connected vehicle technology. but again of course this welcomes investments in infrastructure that enables the functionalities. with respect to the data handling on the federal side i may have to defer to others on the panel to better answer or respond in writing and i'm happy to do so. >> thank you. the statistic that 94% of traffic crashes are caused by human error is widespread even though it's erroneous. in fact numerous structural issues play a role in the 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 so the idea that self driving cars is the solution is a bigger picture.

what's more, the testimony recently developed a self driving model that includes an assertive driving features so that the car will not fully stop at stop signs. what justification is there for developing a program that allows vehicles to violate state and local laws? >> i appreciate the question, congressman, and the simple answer is tesla isn't a member of our association because it's not an autonomous vehicle it's a driver assisted technology. autonomous vehicles are developed from the start to comply with all federal, state and local laws as just one component of the safety assurance systems that are put into these technologies. other examples as you raised deal with other technologies again, driver assistance that just don't relate to it and i would maybe make one additional note quickly on the statistics

that you noted. whether or not it's a specific exact number, the u.s. department of transportation just last week reaffirmed in the national roadway safety strategy that the overwhelming majority of serious and fatal crashes involved at least one human behavior issue as a contributing factor and that's the key point and the autonomous vehicle industry fundamentally in first and foremost exists to address the safety failure as contributing to the crisis on the roadways and in addition to many other solutions and strategies outlined in that paper and as you noted we are hopeful and look forward to getting the technology deployed to solve that problem. >> thank you very much. thank you madam chair. i want to first think all the witnesses for educating us on the challenges that lie ahead

for automated vehicles. i want to talk to you for just a few moments. in your testimony, you talk about the importance of safety and trust. you said in the written testimony on page three safety is at the cornerstone of everything we do. if shapes how we work and develop our products. i see you later on on page four, you talk about the safety case framework, which was published in august of last year, and which you describe as the first safety case framework that applies to autonomous trucks and passenger vehicles and then you go on to talk a little bit more in-depth about safety. one of the things that i found helpful is you said no piece of evidence captures the totality of safety and then you go on to

list five safety principles. those that you list are proficient, failsafe, continuously improving resilience and trustworthiness and so i would ask if you would take a few minutes to expand first on each of these principles and then to explain how these are applied to automated vehicles. >> thank you, congressman for the question. safety appears a lot when i talk. it means a lot to me. one of the things that i think maybe helps to explain how this all fits together is kind of taking a step back and talking about the technology versus being inserted into one of our platform partners. in order to do those partnerships we have to have deep relationships with those

vehicle manufacturers who are very good at building vehicles and what we are doing is putting together the best of the best. we are good at building hardware and software and they are very good at building vehicles that are used today and for the foreseeable future so when we think about the safety it is the safety of the whole package together so these principles are how we engineering and design the driver in concert with the vehicle manufacturers. let me talk about proficiency for example. so, proficiency is around how we put in the vehicle and understand what those mean. we understand the environment we are operating in and so on and so forth. when you look at the principal failsafe that is in the presence of all faults and failures, so the chair mentioned like the camera goes out. that's something we have to understand and how that relates

whatever the case may be. when you think about improving this is where we are always learning and i think one of the challenges that we have in the industry right now is the assumption you do it once and then it's done forever. that's not the case with all. there's a continuous improvement part of it that we will always input the lessons learned and put them back into the vehicle. resilience is where we sort of really focus on things like software and how we vehicle can be misused. these are all things we have to think through as we design the driver to be used in commerce into the last is around trustworthy. that's first and foremost with the regulators and also with members of the public and then it's also with our partners. we have to build a product that is safe and for them to be able to trust it and use it in their business. so those five principles together we believe encompass the whole framework of safety that is needed to deploy each

vehicle safely. >> and this can be expanded industrywide so not just something unique to you but the same principles would be important to anyone who would be in this industry, is that correct? >> yes it is. we've been openly sharing our framework in fact i would note i was in dc about two weeks ago and there were some of our competitors talking about the use of the cases and some of the things they consider. >> thank you. at this time i will yield back. thank you very much. i next call on ms. brownlee for five minutes. >> thank you, madam chair. i do appreciate you holding this hearing today and i'm sure this is going to be one of many hearings on autonomous vehicles certainly as the technology progresses on this.

i think always safety has to be first. i think everyone agrees on that. as noted in the testimony, he said overreliance on automation can be done and we saw that on the committee with the 737 and the 2009 redline crash in dc. so in my opinion we are going to continue to need the drivers for the transit vehicles. speaking further on safety you also noted in your testimony that there are 9.1 self driving car accidents per million miles driven versus 4.1 per million miles among regular vehicles. so to me it's a startling statistic so many proponents of

the technology will improve safety. why do you think there is a disconnect between the statistics and the rhetoric? >> first of all, i think that the introduction of the automated is just so new it's not even here yet in reality there were tests going on in the big city public transit systems in america so the rhetoric has to accompany the introduction because it's new and nobody's ever seen it before. but absolutely the statistics that are being put forth we just saw right now with how many accidents there were per 100,000 and whether or not those are reality or based on human error or traffic design and that type of thing. i don't think i'm answering the question quite well.

>> i appreciate your attempt and think it's an important distinction to make as we move through. we want to move forward based on the science and the facts and not by rhetoric. do you have anything to add a? >> i do. i think that the lack of the standards right now and the confusion about what the technologies can and can't do and the human overreliance on the technologies, not to beat up on tesla. i don't mean to do that at all but when a company calls a system auto driver, autopilot or self driving it communicates a message that that is what it is going to do. while aurora and other companies might be as said, tapping the best for the best, that isn't happening throughout the industry, and that's why the federal government needs to step

in. we need the regulators to do their job. with that assurance to the federal government, then we will see all of them is reduced. >> thanks for that and that leads me to another question for mr. wolf and this is more about the public education. there seems to be some misunderstanding among the general public regarding a level of autonomy some vehicles offer. i'm sure we've all seen the viral videos of people sleeping behind the wheel were sitting in the backseat of vehicles which are not fully autonomous and then there've been some high-profile crashes that raise concern and i understand the necessary level of the driver engagement required to operate vehicles that are considered level to vehicles. two vehicles. so my question is what is the association doing to educate consumers about the differences between level two and level four

or level five autonomy and what additional steps do you think are needed in this area? >> thank you so much for that question because it speaks to a very important safety issue that is at play today. autonomous vehicles are distinct and different from driverless technology and that conflation as outlined is having a twofold impact. it's dangerous because it is leading consumers to believe the lower levels of automation and technology are in fact of actual autonomous vehicles and overreliance on that and then second it's having an impact on consumer trust, the autonomous vehicle industry which is problematic because of the very positive safety benefits that will accrue to get that technology deployed so it has a twofold impact as well as other

things. now the industry is absolutely committed to trying to brighten this line and delineate as clearly as possible and has undertaken some initiatives on the consumer education. there's a number of educational initiatives to work on terminology, standardizing terminologies of the consumers can understand that. there is a number of different ways we are laser focused on trying to get the distinction essentially decoupling it. what we are concerned about in addition to what i mentioned is in some respects in the conversations leveraging these high-profile failures of driverless technology and having that disparage the autonomous vehicle industry that has a very strong record going on more than ten years and again will solve a number of safety problems that are driven by human behavioral issues so happy to follow-up

follow upwith you more on that d explore ways to brighten that line. >> thank you for that. my time is over and i will yield back, madam chair. >> i will next call on mr. fitzpatrick for five minutes. >> thank you, madam chair. thanks to all the panelists for being here. we appreciate your expertise so i want to start with that. it's so good to see you. wanted to talk a little bit recently issued the principles for transportation. these principles make it clear innovation investments should be creating high-quality jobs. do you believe congress should adopt this as opposed to overseeing new technologies as well and do you expect if so this approach to improve the lives of your members?

>> thank you for the question. absolutely, congress should follow the lead that the dot set out. innovation investment can be an absolute win-win across the board with public transit, for the workforce in terms of ensuring good jobs are protected and when good jobs are created that they are solid union jobs. it can also enhance the service delivery repairs and the overall transit experience so that type of innovation investment is exactly what we are looking at and with a regulatory framework in place that bears in mind the impact on the workers the members will likely benefit from much of the technology. >> appreciate that. moreover on the topic about 2016 they've taken steps to having a regulatory framework. if congress were to move forward this year with a bill, what

provisions would you like to see? congress could tell what kind of provisions would ensure. >> so, we would want to see a bill that put an emphasis on the rider safety, worker safety, workforce development and absolute assurance that we don't revisit and make mistakes of the past in the same way that they would be displaced by jobs. all of this can be achieved with federal government intervention and that piece of legislation would be helpful to workers and i fear without a piece of legislation that accomplishes what i just laid out that the workers will be severely negatively impacted going forward. >> thank you. next mr. wolf. the faa has extensive experience

with technology going back. more recently it's filled with. some even have ambitions to be multilateral and serve. from your industry perspective has there been adequate cross agency? >> thank you, congressman for the question. i can't speak to what conversations have taken place between the modes at a dot whether it is between this and faa and so forth. what i can say is the autonomous vehicle industry and vehicle scientists and all the folks working to develop that technology i know are open to learning from all different analogies and technologies to make this technology as safe as possible and i would note of

course there's an important key differences, 270 million plus vehicles registered in the united states and our approach does take a human driver approach to see how those operate with licensing. as i noted a couple of times and it just bears reiterating the u.s. department of transportation has reaffirmed just last week that it remains the case that the overwhelming majority of the crashes involve at least one human behavioral issue as a contributing factor so in that respect it becomes very important for the autonomous vehicle industry to scale and deploy so it can work to remove those human behavioral issues that contribute to these tragedies on the road and if we can get that technology out and scale it quickly and as safely as possible in conjunction with other safety approaches that may

apply then we can start to see a reversal in the terrible trend regarding the fatalities and injuries on the road. >> the mission would be to oversee the technologies. >> i would say as we look right now there are a number of regulatory instruments and rulemaking that are underway both at the federal safety administration that will help address the national framework that we need to get this technology to scale so at the moment we are looking at those rulemaking advancing them as quickly as possible and in conjunction with federal action that will also, some of the measures lay enumerated in my written testimony will help the industry scale to build out and bring those benefits to the public. >> thank you, very much.

i will yield back. we will next hear from mr. leventhal. >> thank you madam cheering thank you to all of the witnesses. i want to hear from your perspective how these impacted the supply chain that is often overlooked and that is really the disenfranchised part of the supply chain. i represent the port of long beach and am also the cochair of the caucus. truckers face some of the

conditions frequently as the independent contractors what that means is frequently it's a cyclone policy about the benefits of the potential unionization. so the question i have is when we are dealing with those that are the most disadvantaged all do we facilitate the deployment of the technologies to take advantage of the potential to improve the working conditions for existing drivers for the safety while mitigating the risk of the job displacement when we are talking about those that are already disenfranchised and members of the trucking workforce. we have any thoughts how this is going to impact of those that

are the most disenfranchised today? >> i appreciate the question and all the work we've been able to do with you during your time as a representative in california to improve the working conditions for truck drivers at all of our california ports. .. >> but when you get into urban

areas such as long beach and l.a. it's hard to imagine sure haul trucking fully automated doing the work so the scenario we saw was outside urban areas and are concerned unchecked is that we could have had outside of urban areas our but the united states to operate under the same model. which is hiring workers of independent contractors and minimum wage after he pays those expenses.

and then to get back to my earlier point of the supply chain problem is not really a training and recruitment problem but a worker retention problem that drivers make these wages and benefits to help that answers your question. >> yes. thank you. spackling the comments leading up to the actual question is spoke about that the innovation and technology with truck drivers and i think that it is the ultimate goal here to utilize technology to make transportation or otherwise we all know that automation fail

we have seen automation fail we have testimony of how safe it is all have to do is look back at the one fell swoop the computer over of the intention of the pilot and crashed more than 700 on —- 700 people more than once. i'm not suggesting that that is a type of thing a human operator could stop in this technology again and is an idea we should be pursuing. thank you. >> i yield back. >> and i like the fact that you call out the fact that the rural areas only hold 19 percent of our population.

for 45 percent of crashes. >> and with those other witnesses about the effectiveness and then that depend on —- it depends a lot on the quality of the roads. so you mentioned the automated shuttle service with all kinds of roads like gravel and unmarked roads so tell us more about that. and the operations of the policy. and as you pointed out the rural areas 5 percent and that

physical infrastructure across the board with the signage in the shoulders. we are also looking at that digital demonstration project that you mention university of iowa actually received a federal grant to the role shuttle buses and other parts of iowa. and in the state of iowa because we are trying to make sure that with that digital infrastructure that high definition mapping on board.

and then to paint a centerline down the gravel road. this is key for the operation for this particular shuttle. those that we are experiencing we need to ensure that benefits are going to be widespread. that is the expansion of broadband across the state the nation in iowa very important focus for us and in the last 12 months invested 323 million in broadband grants for the private sector to install. >> what appears to be the biggest challenge? >> statistically across the board and with those standards

that we need through the demonstration project one of those minimum standards? for connectivity? this is one reason we talk about the gigahertz space we need to rely is those beta standards make the distribution of that technology ubiquitous. >> tell me more as they are analyzing to what extent and if it is scalable with that digital infrastructure is critically important but what about all the other things? that is a pretty substantial undertaking as well.

>> we think it will be in keep in mind that the reason we think it is scalable is because the lessons we are learning we try to look at it from the agnostic plaintiff you what are the basic things that we need? we need that broadband perspective. >> it is a big success what is phase two? >> we are trying to understand operationally what we can do as a transportation department to help the situation with rural automation. what can we do from the infrastructure investment perspective to set the stage so they can be scalable at the next level? that's what comes next as they analyze the data. >> i yield back. >> . >> thank you for holding this

important hearing on automated vehicles automation becomes more common with public transit to proactively ensure that we are placing workers first. and then that they are giving knowledge to use the new technologies. so and then you mentioned and as you mentioned by giving the workers a seat at the table so they can help shape innovation and employers who automate jobs including transit agencies usually know they

would eliminate positions years ahead of time. should the federal government use automated technology to have advance notice on procurement? >> thank you for the question. and in general and with the workers unions, very little it would be common to find out that there's going to be technology displacing union jobs but that would not be uncommon at all. >> can we bring workers to the table with deploying innovation? and then far enough in advance to train and the use of new

technology? >> and then to compel that to happen it has happened but the overwhelming transit cities across the country does not exist so the federal government stepping up and then as much notice as possible as a requirement is ultimately helpful. and then a chance to work together for those who are facing displacement and that is what this should all be about. >> and from a teamsters perspective how do you bring workers to the table when it comes to innovation so they put workers first? >> i appreciate the question and echo the comments.

>> when new technology comes to the workplace and they have the ability to join together in unions, they can sit across the table. introducing legislation in california to make the introduction of autonomous vehicles and public transit but we also represent a lot of drivers. also partnering with ups the largest collective bargaining agreement and we will be bargaining about technology. and can make it more productive as you said and that allows us to be proactive.

and then just to take whatever they get from that's not the kind of protection the workers need. >> councilmember the testimony discuss than that needs to be modernized. the infrastructure jobs act that congress directed us department of transportation by making sure and what about to modernize a quick. >> . >> and to support the modernization of the manual and those that are extremely

important. to make sure this doesn't become an unfunded mandate local governments inner cities to maintain those levels we want to make sure it doesn't become an unfunded mandate. >> thank you for your indulgence madame chair i yield back. >> . >> thank you chairwoman for having this hearing. i do have some concerns how we integrate av safely onto roads and into the economy. it is a critical industry and disruptive technology promises great increases of efficiency. in the already strained market. and how that could disrupt the

trucking market and out of that profession to date with the vaccine mandate. the supreme court thankfully struck down the vaccine mandate posed by president biden that the canadian and us government are proposing vaccine mandates on truckers just to be able to cross the border we are releasing those from federal custody on the southern border but on the northern border we are now a lot - - not allowing truckers simply because they don't have the vaccine interestingly for the first years of the pandemic it was considered safe but now it causes less serious infection they must be vaccinated. and also threatens to disrupt trade with one of the most important partners of canada

in the middle of an artificially created supply-chain crisis in canada we have seen a massive protest against the senseless mandates a convoy of trust 45 miles long that made it all the way to ottawa to plan for the us. in your written testimony you talk about the difficulties truckers face including supply chain inefficiencies that caused drivers to wait in line for hours a great division of the teamsters represents thousands across us and canada do you know how many of your members either resigned or lost their job due to earlier vaccine mandates? and is the union concerned about the new cross-border mandates on your members likelihood? >> thank you for the question.

on the federal policy cross-border i would have to ask the federal policy experts to respond to your question with those inefficiencies everybody on the panel that supervise anybody during the queer can appreciate the efficiencies with an employee to direct that person to go somewhere and do something versus a model that's talked about of hiring truck drivers as independent contractors. >> got it you represent 100,000 truck drivers in california and nevada anywhere telling you cannot answer the

question how many had been affected or lost their job as a result of the vaccine mandate quick. >> you cannot answer that? >> we have not heard complaints. we have heard complaints but we have not seen resignation because of the vaccine mandate hearing california. >> not surprising. >> we did not take a position. >> with all the issues we were facing across the country and now coming to the us with vaccine mandates i am surprised you who represent a teamster with an answer to my question. but that does not surprise me. >> . >> since about has been called on the house floor, the subcommittee will stand in researchers we will restart as

long as the last vote is over approximately 30 minutes it could be longer and we do have a number of members who have had the opportunity to ask questions. we will reconvene after a recess of votes now taken.