    [Senate Hearing 115-652]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                        S. Hrg. 115-652

                         DRIVING AUTOMOTIVE INNOVATION
                              AND FEDERAL POLICIES

    =======================================================================

                                 FIELD HEARING

                                 BEFORE THE

                             COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,
                          SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                         ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 SECOND SESSION

                                   __________

                                JANUARY 24, 2018

                                   __________

        Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
                                 Transportation

     [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                    Available online: http://www.govinfo.gov

                                  __________

                        U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
    37-298 PDF                  WASHINGTON : 2019

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office,
    http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center,
    U.S. Government Publishing Office. Phone 202-512-1800, or 866-512-1800 (toll-free).
    E-mail, po@custhelp.com.

           SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION

                         ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 SECOND SESSION

                       JOHN THUNE, South Dakota, Chairman
    ROGER WICKER, Mississippi            BILL NELSON, Florida, Ranking
    ROY BLUNT, Missouri                  MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
    TED CRUZ, Texas                      AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota
    DEB FISCHER, Nebraska                RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut
    JERRY MORAN, Kansas                  BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii
    DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska                 EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts
    DEAN HELLER, Nevada                  TOM UDALL, New Mexico
    JAMES INHOFE, Oklahoma               GARY PETERS, Michigan
    MIKE LEE, Utah                       TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin
    RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin               TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
    SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia  MAGGIE HASSAN, New Hampshire
    CORY GARDNER, Colorado               CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada
    TODD YOUNG, Indiana                  JON TESTER, Montana
                           Nick Rossi, Staff Director
                     Adrian Arnakis, Deputy Staff Director
                        Jason Van Beek, General Counsel
                     Kim Lipsky, Democratic Staff Director
                  Chris Day, Democratic Deputy Staff Director
                          Renae Black, Senior Counsel

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page
    Hearing held on January 24, 2018.................................     1
    Statement of Senator Thune.......................................     1
        Letter dated January 24, 2016 from Lars Reger, Senior Vice
          President and Chief Technology Officer--Automotive, NXP
          Semiconductors USA, Inc....................................    59
        Letter dated January 24, 2018 to Hon. John Thune and Hon.
          Bill Nelson from Honda North America, Inc..................    77
    Statement of Senator Nelson......................................     3
        Prepared statement...........................................     4
        Prepared statement from Catherine Chase, President, Advocates
          for Highway and Auto Safety................................    48
    Statement of Senator Wicker......................................    28
    Statement of Senator Peters......................................    30
    Statement of Senator Heller......................................    32
    Statement of Senator Hassan......................................    34
    Statement of Senator Inhofe......................................    36
    Statement of Senator Lee.........................................    37
    Statement of Senator Capito......................................    40
    Statement of Senator Young.......................................    42
    Statement of Senator Blumenthal..................................    43

                                   Witnesses

    Randy K. Avent, Ph.D., President, Florida Polytechnic University.     5
        Prepared statement...........................................     6
    Tim Kentley-Klay, Co-Founder and CEO, Zoox.......................    10
        Prepared statement...........................................    11
    Michael Mansuetti, President, Robert Bosch LLC...................    13
        Prepared statement...........................................    14
    Luke Schneider, President, Audi Mobility U.S.....................    21
        Prepared statement...........................................    22

                                    Appendix

    Letter dated February 7, 2018 to Hon. John Thune and Hon. Bill
      Nelson from Brett Roubinek, President and Chief Executive
      Officer, Transportation Research Center Inc....................    79
    Ned Finkle, Vice President, External Relations, NVIDIA, prepared
      statement......................................................    80
    Response to written questions submitted by Hon. Maggie Hassan to:
        Randy K. Avent, Ph.D.........................................    81
        Tim Kentley-Klay.............................................    82
        Michael Mansuetti............................................    82
        Luke Schneider...............................................    83

                         DRIVING AUTOMOTIVE INNOVATION
                              AND FEDERAL POLICIES

                                  ----------

                          WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 24, 2018

                                           U.S. Senate,
            Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:02 a.m.,
    Walter E. Washington Convention Center, 801 Mount Vernon Place,
    N.W., West Salon Room, Washington, D.C., Hon. John Thune,
    Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
        Present: Senators Thune [presiding], Wicker, Inhofe, Lee,
    Heller, Young, Capito, Nelson, Blumenthal, Peters, and Hassan.

                 OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN THUNE,
                     U.S. SENATOR FROM SOUTH DAKOTA

        The Chairman. Good morning. One of the privileges of
    leading a committee with jurisdiction as broad as that of the
    Commerce Committee is that sometimes our work takes us off
    Capitol Hill and into the real world. In recent years, we have
    held field hearings in Alaska, New Hampshire, Nebraska,
    Florida, and, yes, South Dakota. While we have not traveled
    quite as far today, what we are here to discuss is no less
    important for all Americans, and it is great to be in a venue
    that will soon welcome scores of people excited about the
    future of the automobile.
        The automobile industry is an essential part of America's
    economy, generating nearly $1 trillion of economic activity
    each year and supporting 7 million jobs across all 50 states.
    And this industry is not standing still. It is hard to believe,
    but the auto industry spends more on research and development
    of new technologies than the software and aerospace industries.
    Today's high-tech automobile has some 30,000 parts drawn from a
    global supply chain.
        New technologies, such as automated vehicles, and new
    business models offering mobility as a service are poised to
    enable substantial growth. Key benefits include improved
    safety, new jobs, new transportation opportunities, and reduced
    congestion. Automated vehicles, or AVs, offer perhaps the
    largest potential gains in all of these areas.
        More than 37,000 people lost their lives on U.S. roads in
    2016, a troubling and unacceptable increase from the year
    before. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety
    Administration, or NHTSA, as many as 94 percent of those
    crashes were the result of human error. AVs, which cannot fall
    asleep, get distracted, or become impaired, could potentially
    save many thousands of lives every year.
        AVs may also spur significant new economic activity. By one
    estimate, the wide adoption of AVs will spur a new passenger
    economy worth $7 trillion over the next few decades, and AVs
    will provide access to mobility to many Americans, such as the
    elderly and those with disabilities, some of whom may be unable
    to drive today.
        If our country is to realize these benefits, policymakers
    must take a careful approach to these new technologies. We must
    allow innovation to thrive while also ensuring the technology
    is safe and reliable. We must also refrain from favoring one
    technology, business model, or type of company over another, so
    as to avoid locking in technology before innovation and market
    choices can take place.
        The bipartisan AV START Act, which Senator Peters and I
    introduced, accomplishes these goals by building on the
    existing regulatory framework to prioritize safety through
    increased reporting and oversight, thus promoting public safety
    and building public confidence and trust.
        At the same time, the AV START Act removes unintentional
    barriers to innovation in existing law and promotes a level
    playing field so that neither traditional automakers, tech
    giants, nor new startups are unfairly advantaged or
    disadvantaged.
        If U.S. regulators are not able to foster safe testing and
    deployment of AV technology through modernizations like those
    in AV START, the rest of the world will not sit by. America
    currently leads the way in auto innovation, but many other
    countries, particularly China, are catching up. We all want
    America to remain competitive and see the benefits of new jobs
    and new economic growth.
        The AV START Act is just that, a start. As AVs become more
    widespread, there will be tough policy and societal questions
    that we must all work together to answer. AV START contains
    formal processes to start answering some of these questions,
    such as those relating to data and how law enforcement will
    interact with AVs. This Committee will remain active and will
    build upon the strong foundation established by the AV START
    Act.
        I want to thank Senator Peters, Ranking Member Nelson, and
    all the Members of the Committee for their great work on this
    landmark piece of legislation, and I look forward to seeing it
    pass the full Senate soon.
        While AV technology is approaching quickly, the auto
    industry is innovating in other areas with immediate benefits.
    Advanced driver assistance systems, such as lanekeeping assist
    and automatic emergency braking are available in an increasing
    number of vehicles on the road today and are already saving
    lives. And new developments and fuel technologies, such as
    hybrid and all-electric vehicles and increased use of biofuels,
    such as ethanol, boost fuel efficiency and reduce pollution.
        To explore these issues, we have a great panel of witnesses
    today representing organizations that are leading the way in
    many areas of automotive innovation. Mr. Luke Schneider, who is
    President of Audi Mobility U.S.; Mr. Mike Mansuetti, President
    of Robert Bosch North America; Mr. Tim Kentley-Klay, the CEO
    and Co-Founder of Zoox Inc.; and Dr. Randy Avent, who is
    President of Florida Polytechnic University. I want to thank
    all of you for being with us today, and I look forward to
    hearing your testimony.
        And I will turn now to Senator Nelson for his opening
    remarks.
        Senator Nelson.

                    STATEMENT OF HON. BILL NELSON,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA

        Senator Nelson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I
    was almost one of those traffic statistics this morning. Coming
    down one of the north-south streets, going the speed limit,
    suddenly, a car in the right lane to my front suddenly does a
    U-turn in the entire street right in front of us, to which we
    commented, if we were an automated vehicle and he was an
    automated vehicle, that would not have happened. So there was a
    demonstration for me early this morning.
        I, like the Chairman, am very hopeful about the prospect of
    self-driving cars. I appreciate the efforts of Senator Peters,
    who has made this a signature issue. It is appropriate for him,
    because of being from Michigan, and he has been dogged in his
    pursuit of this legislation.
        And I thank you, Mr. Chairman, that you have arranged to be
    down here at the auto show. It seems to have gotten a good bit
    of interest. I wonder how many are here for the hearing and how
    many are here really to go to the auto show. But your planning
    was enormously successful.
        And I am very excited about my state of Florida's role in
    the development of autonomous technology. I am pleased that a
    part of our panel is Dr. Avent, who is the President of Florida
    Polytechnic University. The University is working in
    partnership with the Florida Department of Transportation to
    develop and operate a $42 million, 475-acre autonomous vehicle
    testing facility at their campus.
        And I want to congratulate you for this achievement, Dr.
    Avent, and I am confident that your world-class facility will,
    in fact, play a vital role in the ongoing research that we are
    going to do.
        This technology is advancing rapidly. Just two weeks ago,
    at the electronics show in Las Vegas, General Motors announced
    a plan to put fully autonomous vehicles without driver controls
    on public roads as early as 2019. Now whether or not that
    occurs depends on us and our legislation.
        And General Motors is not alone. Countless other
    automakers, technology companies, and suppliers, are rolling
    out innovations that have the potential to completely transform
    our sense of mobility and, as the Chairman mentioned, to cut
    down, and as I experienced, on a lot of traffic accidents.
        In addition, these vehicles may bring significant
    environmental benefits through reduced emissions; increased
    efficiency, productivity; the improved transportation
    opportunities for underserved communities, seniors and people
    with disabilities. While these benefits of self-driving
    vehicles are numerous, it is crucial that the Congress and the
    Federal Government exercise responsible oversight to ensure the
    safe development and deployment of these technologies.
        So the AV START Act, which was passed unanimously by this
    Committee in October, is an important step. The bill enhances
    safety by requiring autonomous vehicle manufacturers to submit
    safety evaluation reports to the Department of Transportation,
    and that is to demonstrate how they will address system safety,
    crashworthiness, and cybersecurity, among others. Additionally,
    this act reinforces the traditional existing roles played by
    Federal, State, and local governments pertaining to vehicle
    registration.
        So I look forward to continuing to work with you and
    Senator Peters as this legislation advances.
        [The prepared statement of Senator Nelson follows:]

       Prepared Statement of Hon. Bill Nelson, U.S. Senator from Florida
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing.
        I am very hopeful about the prospect of self-driving cars, and I
    appreciate the efforts of the chairman to arrange this event at the
    Washington Auto Show.
        I am particularly excited about Florida's role in the development
    of autonomous technology and I am pleased to have the President of
    Florida Polytechnic University, Dr. Randy Avent, testify today.
        The university is working in partnership with the Florida
    Department of Transportation to develop and operate a 42 million
    dollar, 475-acre autonomous vehicle testing facility in Polk County
    known as Suntrax. I would like to extend my congratulations to Florida
    Polytechnic for this achievement. I am confident this world-class
    facility will play a vital role in the ongoing research to improve
    autonomous technology and ultimately provide for the safe and efficient
    deployment of self-driving cars.
        Autonomous technology is advancing rapidly. Just two weeks ago, at
    the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas, Nevada, General Motors
    announced a plan to put fully autonomous vehicles--without driver
    controls--on public roads as early as 2019.
        General Motors is not alone. Countless other automakers, technology
    companies, and suppliers are rolling out innovations that have the
    potential to completely transform our sense of mobility and, most
    importantly, save lives.
        In addition, autonomous vehicles may bring significant
    environmental benefits through reduced emissions, increased efficiency
    and productivity, and improved transportation opportunities for
    underserved communities, seniors, and people with disabilities.
        While the potential benefits of self-driving vehicles are numerous,
    it is crucial that Congress and the Federal Government exercise
    responsible oversight to ensure the safe development and deployment of
    these emerging technologies.
        The AV START Act, which was passed unanimously by this committee
    last October, is an important step in the right direction.
        The bill enhances safety by requiring autonomous vehicle
    manufacturers to submit safety evaluation reports to the Department of
    Transportation demonstrating how they address system safety,
    crashworthiness, and cybersecurity, among others.
        Additionally, the AV START Act reinforces the traditional, existing
    roles played by the federal, state, and local governments pertaining to
    vehicle regulation.
        I fully intend to continue working with Chairman Thune and Senator
    Peters to get this piece of legislation to the president's desk.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I look forward to hearing from our
    witnesses.

        The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Nelson.
        And again, we want to welcome our panel. Thank you for
    being here. We will start on my left and your right with Dr.
    Randy Avent, who is President of Florida Polytechnic University
    in Lakeland, Florida; Mr. Tim Kentley-Klay, who is the CEO and
    Co-Founder of Zoox, Inc., from Menlo Park, California; Mr. Mike
    Mansuetti--I said that wrong the first time; my apologies,
    Mike--with Robert Bosch North America, Robert Bosch LLC in
    Northfield, Michigan; and Mr. Luke Schneider, who is President
    of Audi Mobility, located in the U.S. here in Austin, Texas.
        So thank you all for being here. We look forward to hearing
    from you. If you confine your oral remarks as closely as
    possible to 5 minutes, we will make sure that all of your
    testimony gets included in the written record, and it will
    maximize the opportunity that we have for members to ask
    questions.
        So, Dr. Avent, please proceed. Welcome.

            STATEMENT OF RANDY K. AVENT, Ph.D., PRESIDENT,
                     FLORIDA POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY

        Dr. Avent. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Senator Nelson,
    Members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to
    address you today on this very important topic. As many of you
    know, the vision of driverless cars has been around well over
    50 years, but very little progress was made in that area until
    2004 when DARPA created a prize competition called the DARPA
    Grand Challenge.
        Since then, there has been exponential growth in the
    underlying AV technology that mirrors the development
    trajectories and other disruptive markets, like computing,
    networking, and DNA sequencing. Today, I would like to briefly
    touch on three dimensions of connected and autonomous vehicles:
    the market impact, the technical and regulatory challenges, and
    the potential role of the Federal Government.
        As you all pointed out, numerous papers abound outlining
    the promises of autonomous vehicles. If developed and
    implemented correctly, the primary advantage of autonomous
    vehicles centers on significantly lowering driver-related
    deaths. As you pointed out, Senator Thune, last year alone,
    there were nearly 40,000 fatalities in the U.S. at a cost of
    over $410 billion, and more than 90 percent of those were due
    to human error.
        But there are many secondary advantages that are also
    significantly important. For instance, autonomous vehicles can
    improve access for the elderly, children, and poor, and can
    make public transportation more effective by solving the last-
    mile problem. It can significantly increase the utilization of
    automobiles, which is less than 5 percent now. And with higher
    utilization of fewer cars, the capacity of our transportation
    infrastructure will naturally rise.
        Beyond the transportation sector impact, core technologies
    underlying autonomy will impact other markets, such as
    agriculture, logistics, national defense, and manufacturing. In
    fact, it would be hard to find any technology with a more
    disruptive impact on both the U.S. and global economies then
    connected and autonomous vehicles.
        I often say piston-powered vehicles driven by people and
    built by traditional car manufacturers may soon be replaced by
    interconnected computers on wheels scheduled and controlled by
    autonomous algorithms and developed by IT companies. U.S. car
    manufacturers will need to look more like IT companies, as they
    already are. Insurance markets, law enforcement, hotels, real
    estate, lawyers, auto repair, and health care will all be
    affected, just to name a few.
        But while the promise of AV technology is noteworthy, there
    is still substantial barriers to its widespread adoption. For
    one, the AV technology core relies on what I call the sensor
    and signal processing chain, and there is still significant
    work that needs to be done on the edge cases to improve
    performance. A strong regulatory framework is paramount to
    safety and consumer acceptance, but an overregulated market is
    likely to stifle innovation and give our global competitors an
    advantage.
        To this end, we need a science-based, data-driven approach
    to create policies and legislation that is modeled after
    successful verification or certification approaches in other
    industries. This framework must integrate the full spectrum of
    testing approaches, ranging from digital simulation and
    hardware emulation, to closed-circuit and public open-road
    testing in urban areas.
        Last, there will be a rapid shift in transportation
    technologies toward computer science, electrical engineering,
    and analytics, as the sensor and signal-processing chain
    matures, and vehicles interact with the civil infrastructure.
    Both the transportation industry and their regulatory partners
    will need to prepare for this shift.
        States such as Florida have taken a leadership role in
    enabling this market. The Federal Government can have a very
    constructive role in enabling this transformative technology
    through research funding; through safety consortiums that
    investigate and provide factual data around AV accidents, much
    like the NTSB role in aviation accidents; and through creating
    quasi-governmental organizations, much like the Department of
    Energy's and the Department of Defense's federally funded
    research and development centers and university-affiliated
    research centers that conduct applied research and provide
    independent, unbiased technology expertise to the government.
        Finally, Florida Poly is working with its partners to
    research solutions to these challenges. This includes a deep
    partnership with the Florida Turnpike Enterprises' world-class
    AV test track called SunTrax, and a partnership with the
    Orlando Smart City initiative that provides open-road testing
    in an urban setting. These two test complexes combined with
    Florida Poly's Advanced Mobility Institute focus on addressing
    many of these vexing challenges.
        Thank you for your time today.
        [The prepared statement of Dr. Avent follows:]

            Prepared Statement of Randy K. Avent, Ph.D., President,
                         Florida Polytechnic University
    Introduction
        The Law of Accelerating Returns describes how technology is created
    and adopted. It states that technology is not created incrementally in
    a linear fashion; instead, it is relatively stable and changes little
    until there is an inflection point, after which it grows geometrically.
    The most prominent examples of the Law of Accelerating Returns are
    computing (e.g., Moore's Law), communications (e.g., Gilder's Law) and
    DNA sequencing (e.g., $1000 genome). The Law of Accelerating Returns
    can also be used to describe the development of Connected and
    Autonomous Vehicles (CAV).
        The concept of driverless vehicles has been around for over 50
    years but little progress was made until the Defense Advanced Projects
    Agency (DARPA) received government approval for a cash-prize
    competition called the DARPA Grand Challenge. It's hard to argue that
    the DARPA Grand Challenge, and its subsequent Urban Challenge, were not
    inflection points for Connected and Autonomous Vehicles. Since these
    events, the pace of technology developments in this area has increased
    substantially leading to a significant disruption in many mobility-
    related markets. It is very likely that cars of the future will not be
    piston-powered vehicles driven by people; rather, they're more likely
    to be interconnected computers on wheels scheduled and controlled by
    autonomous algorithms and developed by IT companies. With a potential
    market of over $87B within 15 years, manufacturers are racing to grab
    their share of the market.
    Benefits
        Autonomous vehicle technology has the promise of solving many of
    today's transportation related problems. One of the most important
    benefits of CAV is its promise to significantly lower driving related
    deaths. Last year alone, there were over 40,000 fatalities in the U.S.
    at a cost of over $410B--and more than 90 percent of those fatalities
    were due to human error. With the potential for human error removed,
    self-driving cars will reduce instances of accidents caused by driver
    error, drunk driving or distracted drivers.
        Autonomous Vehicles can also improve access for the elderly,
    children and poor and can make public transportation more effective by
    solving the ``last mile'' problem. Solving this last mile problem
    reduces or eliminates the difficulty of getting to and from light rail
    and other public transit modalities, leading to increased utilization
    of public transit systems and better mobility for large segments of the
    U.S. population.
        Commuters may also save up to an hour every day. This savings of
    time will have many spin-off benefits from improved well-being to
    boosting the economy. According to the 2015 Urban Mobility Scorecard,
    each year, Americans living in urban areas spend almost 7 billion hours
    in traffic, waste 3.1 billion gallons of fuel and lose around $160
    billion due to traffic congestion. With CAV vehicles able to access up-
    to-the-minute data to help monitor traffic, as well as digital maps and
    other tools, they can determine the fastest, most efficient routes
    possible. Drive times between locations will be reduced as a result.
    All of this will result in less traffic, less congestion and less time
    and fuel waste. With the ability to optimize fuel consumption, new-age
    vehicles are also expected to reduce vehicle emissions by 60 percent.
        Highway congestion can also be reduced with the implementation of
    platooning since high-tech sensors can react dramatically faster than
    humans, allowing the distance between vehicles to be drastically
    reduced. Therefore, vehicles will operate at higher speeds and require
    much less space between vehicles, leading to greater traffic
    throughputs. This will result in less traffic, improved efficiency in
    our highway systems and will reduce the need for future capital
    investments in our transportation infrastructure. Parking lots will
    also be affected since it is estimated that driverless cars can be
    parked with 15 percent less space.
    Disruption in Markets
        Predictions are that many markets will be affected as driverless
    cars become more numerous in societies around the globe.
        The disruption has already started; autonomous cars will run the
    roads sooner than we expect. Joel Barbier points to numerous industries
    that are expected to change as a result. He states that ``Business
    leaders in all industries can no longer take a ``wait and see''
    approach. Companies must start being hyperaware by monitoring changes
    in their environment (which extends beyond what their competitors are
    doing); they must start making informed decisions and execute those
    decisions quickly to respond to the threat of autonomous vehicles.
    Further, company and government leaders must immediately address the
    impact on jobs and get serious about retraining efforts.''
        Some of the companies he identifies are obvious, such as auto
    manufacturing and auto repair. Others are less obvious. For instance,
    parking, law enforcement, insurance markets, real estate, hotels, media
    consumption, auto parts, lawyers and health care are just a few that
    will be impacted. And those are just some of the ones experts can think
    of. As with most disruptions, the biggest opportunities are ones that
    haven't yet been discovered.
    Challenges
        There are significant challenges ahead that need to be solved. Four
    major categories of challenges include (1) technological, (2)
    regulatory, (3) skills shift and (4) liability.
        Automated Driver Assist Systems in many new vehicles have
    progressed, but fall short of enabling the sensor systems to guide a
    vehicle without human input. In addition, sensor development,
    improvements in data integration, data fusion and artificial
    intelligence are not yet robust enough to provide the safety of fully
    autonomous vehicles.
        Decisions are still being debated regarding the regulatory
    environment around autonomous vehicles. Having the Federal Government
    responsible for vehicle safety, as is currently the case with existing
    vehicles, seems most workable. If each state is allowed to set its own
    safety standards, the resulting milieu will drastically complicate the
    testing and certification of driverless vehicles. Either way,
    regulatory policies for product testing and certification will need to
    be data-driven and science-based to avoid overburdening the industry
    with regulations that stifle innovation. Chip manufacturers, software
    industry and defense are examples where this has been done well.
        The move to autonomous vehicles will also cause a shift in the
    predominant skills necessary and the types of workers needed in the
    transportation industry and in their regulators. Currently, both fields
    are dominated by civil and mechanical engineers but will need to
    rapidly increase the percentage of computer science and electrical
    engineering professionals in the field.
        The insurance industry is already beginning to struggle with the
    impact driverless vehicles will have on their industry--as are lawyers
    and Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) as they wrestle with
    liability issues. Additionally, the number of traffic citations is
    expected to go down thereby reducing the amount of revenue available to
    those entities which currently benefit from driver-based vehicles.
    CAV Technology Overview
        The fundamental technology core in autonomy rest on a ``sensor and
    signal processing chain'' which roughly includes sensing, signal
    processing, networking, data fusion and artificial intelligence.
        In this chain, sensors are responsible for perceiving an accurate
    description of the environment. Optical, microwave (radar) and lidar
    sensing each have advantages and disadvantages, and a robust sensing
    environment must use a combination of sensing modalities to best
    capture the environment. Signal processing provides the analysis,
    synthesis and modification of signals and is primarily responsible for
    separating the sensor signal from the environmental noise.
        Networking allows both for coordination between vehicles, but it
    also provides a conduit for fusing disparate information to provide an
    improved model of the environment. Artificial Intelligence is the
    primary engine that takes this information and turns it into an action
    within the required response time.
        This ``signal processing chain'' is used to provide different
    levels of decisions leading to autonomy. Currently, there are five
    levels of autonomy recognized.

            Level 0: (now)--no automation and the driver is in complete
            control

            Level 1: (now)--function-specific automation where the driver
            can easily regain control from the specific function

            Level 2: (2013+)--combined function automation where driver is
            temporarily relieved of those driving functions; barely here
            now

            Level 3: (2020+)--limited self-driving automation where the
            driver must be available to take over controls

            Level 4: (2025+)--full self-driving automation where the driver
            is not expected to take control at any time
    Role of Verification
        There are many flavors of product testing, e.g., certification,
    validation and verification, but all are designed to ensure the product
    meets specifications, fulfills its intended purpose and is safe to use.
    Most often, this process is performed by a third party that is unbiased
    and technically strong and involves repeated testing of a product to
    determine its selectivity, accuracy, repeatability, reproducibility and
    suitability. For CAV, testing should be done on pre-defined test
    scenarios that will stress all elements of the system. Pre-defined
    scenarios consist of predictable test cases, which the system will be
    subjected to on a regular basis, and unpredictable test cases. An
    example of a predictable test cases might include an autonomous vehicle
    picking up a passenger at an airport baggage claim. An unpredictable
    test case might include a white semi-tractor trailer pulling out in
    front of a car with a bright sun in the background. Unpredictable test
    cases are most often ``six-sigma'' events: They are rare, unpredictable
    and will have the most impact on ensuring CAV technology meets
    specification, fulfills its intended purpose and is safe for humans. To
    determine test cases, the Federal Government will need legislation that
    creates or delegates power to an organization that functions like the
    NTSB for aviation safety. This organization must gather data, analyze,
    document and report on all incidents across the country so that
    technology developers, manufacturers and independent testing can
    benefit from the lessons learned to create vehicles that are safe.
        To do this, we suggest a holistic and systems oriented approach to
    testing based on four levels of testing. Each approach has advantages,
    and a robust test environment is useful only if it includes all
    approaches.
        Digital simulation models the system and the environment for a
    given test scenario. Because it is a model-based simulation, it is
    inexpensive to repeat and the scenario can be easily controlled.
        The primary disadvantage with digital simulation is that it is a
    model of both the system and the environment, and if the model is not
    correct, the results will also be incorrect.
        Hardware-in-the-loop emulation simulates only the environment by
    creating a scenario and modeling the input to the system's sensors,
    i.e., scenes are created much like a video game and played into the
    real CAV system. Because this approach only creates a model of the
    environment, it typically leads to a more robust test than simulation.
    Like simulation, testing can be easily controlled, is inexpensive to
    repeat and can easily be extended (e.g., what if the white tractor
    trailer was blue, or what if it pulled out 5 secs earlier, . . .).
    Because this approach depends on a model of the environment, it may not
    always have the fidelity needed to absolutely verify functionality. For
    this reason, a closed-test complex is needed to do real testing and
    verify the results on both digital simulations and hardware-in-the-loop
    emulations.
        A closed-test complex is a test track that ultimately provides a
    large and flexible theater where the autonomous vehicle and its actors
    are real. Test tracks lack both controllability and repeatability and
    are expensive, but they test real scenarios and are an important part
    of confirming functionality and developing models that support
    simulation and emulation.
        Public open road testing is the testing of systems on real highways
    and in cities. This approach often results in multiple scenarios all
    happening in real-time. It is expensive to repeat, and it is impossible
    to control, but it most accurately reflects the real environment. Many
    companies are now using public open road testing as their only approach
    to developing fleets of CAV and this can be very dangerous. Open road
    testing is more applicable for demos than for testing since they are
    not controllable and will not exercise those rare events that happen
    only once in a million times.
    Test Centers
        The Federal Government can have a very constructive role in
    enabling this transformative technology through research funding,
    through safety consortiums that investigate and provide factual data
    around AV accidents and through creating quasi-governmental
    organizations much like the Department of Energy (DOE) and the
    Department of Defense's (DoD's) Federally Funded Research and
    Development Centers (FFRDCs) and University Affiliated Research Centers
    (UARCs) that conduct applied research and provide unbiased technology
    expertise to the government.
        The Florida Turnpike Enterprise (FTE), Florida Polytechnic
    University (Florida Poly) and the Orlando Smart City are in a unique
    position to build a holistic test environment that could be used to
    provide certification of standards and national policies for CAV. As
    part of this holistic environment, Florida Poly is building the
    Advanced Mobility Institute which will provide digital simulation,
    Hardware-in-the-Loop emulation and layered services for the closed and
    open test grounds. FTE is building SunTrax, which provides an advanced
    state of the art closed facility test center for CAV. This test track
    represents an approximate $150M investment in a 400+ acre facility that
    provides complex test scenarios to users and can be easily reconfigured
    to adapt to evolving test cases. Both Florida Poly and FTE are members
    of the larger Orlando Smart Cities project that provides a testing
    platform on the public streets in the City of Orlando. The region also
    includes the University of South Florida's Center for Urban
    Transportation Research (CUTR), which focuses on transportation policy,
    regulations and standards.
        Florida Poly is a new public STEM University with a focus on
    emerging technologies in computer science, electrical and computer
    engineering, mechanical engineering and data analytics. It has an
    applied research function modeled after DARPA, and it is focused on
    bridging the technology ``Valley of Death'' by translating fundamental
    research out of the University and into the market place. Florida Poly
    is developing deep expertise in technology development, testing and
    evaluation by modeling approaches used in mature industries like chip
    design and Defense to create a ``science of CAV testing''. The
    University is also developing educational programs in CAV with plans to
    offer distance education to professionals and executives in CAV with
    certifications. It is strategically located in Lakeland at the heart of
    Florida's High-Tech Corridor, which includes 23 counties and three
    fellow State University System public institutions. Lakeland is easily
    accessible from two of Florida's largest metropolitan areas, Tampa Bay
    and Orlando. They have combined populations of nine million people and
    nearly 70 percent of the state's high-tech companies, creating
    opportunities for industry, government and academic collaborations.

        The Chairman. Thank you, Dr. Avent.
        Mr. Kentley-Klay.

        STATEMENT OF TIM KENTLEY-KLAY, CO-FOUNDER AND CEO, ZOOX

        Mr. Kentley-Klay. Chairman Thune, Ranking Member Nelson,
    Senators, thank you for the opportunity to testify before you
    today.
        When I arrived in the U.S. from Australia just over 3 years
    ago, Zoox was but a dream, so it is, indeed, an honor to be
    here before you and among respected business leaders. Today, I
    will share with you our vision and the journey of Zoox; our
    perspective on the step-change safety opportunity offered by
    autonomous mobility; and, finally, the opportunity we have as a
    country to set the best policy foundation on which to build
    this technology and get it on the road.
        My journey with autonomous mobility began in 2012 while in
    Melbourne, Australia, watching from afar what Google was doing,
    attempting to develop a self-driving car. My insight at the
    time was that such technology is about much more than
    incremental adaptation to the automobile. This technology,
    correctly understood, is going to transform how we move
    everyone and everything on this planet.
        The belief we hold at Zoox is that AI and mobility will
    take us from the age of the automobile into the next mobility
    age, and we think that is the age of robotics--fully automated
    transportation. Thus, Zoox was founded to ask the question:
    What is the full realization of autonomy and mobility? Can we
    imagine that? And if we can, let's not build it in 10 years.
    Let's build it now.
        At Zoox, we have gone from this founding vision to today
    augmenting cars that work as autonomous vehicles driving in
    downtown San Francisco. We are driving during the day. We are
    driving during the night, in heavy rain and fog. We are also
    driving autonomously on freeways. In short, Zoox is driving
    autonomously a complete set of urban road and weather features
    as we speak.
        Beyond this, because we believe that the full realization
    of this technology is not retrofitted cars, we are also
    creating a vehicle from the ground up, without traditional
    controls, that is purpose-built for the needs of our cities
    today and tomorrow. This means shared, on-demand, zero-
    emission, safe, and wonderful mobility.
        This represents a phenomenal effort by a highly
    interdisciplinary team that is fast-growing--over 375 at Zoox.
    Expertise ranges across fields of artificial intelligence with
    over 70 Ph.D.'s, product design, safety, vehicle engineering.
    The teams come from organizations such as Google, Tesla, Apple,
    Ferrari, NVIDIA, NASA, and NHTSA, and along with academic
    institutions, such as Stanford, MIT, Oxford, Princeton, and
    Carnegie Melon University.
        The very real safety opportunity that autonomous mobility
    will offer drives our work every day at Zoox. Autonomous
    technology holds out the promise for a whole new safety
    paradigm, one that allows us to prevent crashes in the first
    place. The number of people we lost as a result of car crashes
    in 2016 went up despite our best efforts. That number
    represents nearly 2,000 more loved ones lost. In fact, car
    crashes are the leading cause of death of young people in this
    Nation. This should be unacceptable to us.
        It is our view that only autonomous mobility offers the
    opportunity to make irrelevant the safety risks associated with
    driver impairment and error. We should act on that.
        Finally, these paradigm shifts in both mobility and safety
    innovation, what then is the policy opportunity? First, it is
    important to recognize that we are in the midst of a great and
    global race. Other countries are sprinting to harness and
    deploy this technology.
        And I know I certainly could not have started Zoox and
    scaled it as fast as I could with my cofounder and wonderful
    team anywhere else than in the United States of America. It
    welcomed me with open arms. I am grateful for that and keen to
    maintain our competitive edge here.
        The signals we send to entrepreneurs and innovators through
    our regulatory system are vitally important to meet that end.
        To date, the posture of both the Administration and
    Congress has been to create a level playing field to let the
    innovators innovate. This must continue. Your AV START Act, as
    well as the SELF-DRIVE Act, capture these principles and
    encourage innovation in a technology-neutral way without
    picking winners. The legislation making its way through
    Congress, in our view, is the right approach for this moment.
        Finally, the Zoox journey is all about connecting people
    and places safely and in an environmentally conscious way, and
    with a sense of wonder. Autonomous mobility sits on the
    vanguard of possible. As innovators, we look forward to working
    with you, the regulators, to create with verve the next era in
    mobility.
        Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Kentley-Klay follows:]

        Prepared Statement of Tim Kentley-Klay, Co-Founder and CEO, Zoox
        Chairman Thune, Ranking Member Nelson, Senators:

        Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today. When I
    arrived in the U.S. from Australia just over three years ago, Zoox was
    but a dream, so it is indeed an honor to be here before you and among
    respected business leaders.
        Today, I will share with you our vision and the journey we are on
    at Zoox; our perspective on the step-change safety opportunity offered
    by autonomous technology in mobility; and finally, the opportunity we
    have as a country to set the best policy foundation on which build this
    technology and get it on the road.
    The Zoox Vision
        My journey with autonomous mobility began in 2012, while in
    Melbourne, Australia, watching from afar what Google was doing:
    attempting to develop a ``self-driving car.''
        My insight at the time was that such a technology is about much
    more than just incremental adaptation to the automobile. This
    technology, correctly understood, is going to transform how we move
    everyone and everything on this planet.
        To understand what is about to happen, let's take a step back. The
    previous mobility age, before the automobile, was, of course, the horse
    and carriage. We were in that age for around 6,000 years. It was around
    4000 BC that we domesticated the horse, put the axle on the wheel, and
    invented coach building. So what allowed the transition from that
    mobility age to the next?
        Arguably, it was the invention of the internal combustion engine.
    We achieved a technology level on this planet where we could mechanize
    the horse's biomechanical power. The correct implementation of that
    invention was not to put the engine in the coach and keep the horse.
    People actually tried that, but it didn't work particularly well. The
    right application was to remove the horse--and change the architecture
    of the coach, quite radically, to get to a design such as the Model-T
    Ford in 1908. This transformation took us into the age of the
    automobile, an age we have been in for 130 years.
        The belief we hold at Zoox is that A.I. in mobility will take us
    from the age of the automobile into the next mobility age. And we think
    that's the age of robotics--fully automated transportation. Thus, Zoox
    was founded to ask the questions: what would the full realization of AI
    and mobility be? Can we imagine that? And if we can, let's build it not
    in ten years, but today.
        At Zoox, we have gone from a founding vision three and a half years
    ago, to augmenting cars to work as autonomous vehicles driving in
    downtown San Francisco, during the day, during the night, and in heavy
    rain. We are also driving autonomously on highways. In short, Zoox is
    driving autonomously a complete set of urban road and weather features,
    today.
        Beyond this, because we believe that the full realization of this
    technology is not retrofitted cars, we are also creating a vehicle from
    the ground-up--without traditional controls--that's purpose-built for
    the needs of our cities today and tomorrow.
        This represents a phenomenal effort by a highly interdisciplinary
    and fast growing team of over 375, with expertise ranging across the
    fields of artificial intelligence, product design, safety, and vehicle
    engineering. The team comes from organizations such as Google, Tesla,
    Apple, Ferrari, NVIDIA, NASA, and NHTSA, along with academic
    institutions such as Stanford, MIT, Oxford, Princeton, and Carnegie
    Mellon.
    The Safety Opportunity: Our Philosophy at Zoox
        The very real safety opportunity that autonomous mobility will
    offer drives our work every day at Zoox. Autonomous technology holds
    out the promise of a whole new safety paradigm: One that allows us to
    both prevent crashes in the first place and protect occupants and
    vulnerable road users in superior ways if a crash does occur.
        The number of people killed as a result of car crashes in 2016 went
    up 6 percent from the year prior. That number represents nearly two-
    thousand more loved ones lost. In fact, car crashes are the leading
    cause of death for young people in the U.S. This should be unacceptable
    to us: We should pursue autonomous technologies, which hold the
    potential to eliminate most crashes.
        Indeed, in our view, it is only autonomous mobility that offers the
    real opportunity to make irrelevant the safety risks associated with
    driver impairment and error.
    The Policy Opportunity
        Finally, with these paradigm shifts in both mobility and safety
    innovation, what then is the policy opportunity? What is the government
    opportunity?
        First, it is important to recognize that we are in the midst of a
    great race. Other countries are sprinting to harness and deploy this
    technology. And I know I certainly could not have started and scaled
    Zoox as fast as I have in any other country, and the United States has
    welcomed me with open arms. I am grateful for that, and keen to
    maintain our competitive edge here.
        The signals we send to entrepreneurs and innovators through our
    regulatory system are vitally important to meet that end. To date--and
    this brings me to my second point--the posture of both the
    Administration and this Congress has been to create a level playing
    field to let the innovators innovate. That must continue. Your AV START
    Act, as well as the SELF DRIVE Act, capture these principles, assert
    the Federal Government's preemptive role over state legislation, and
    encourage innovation in a technology-neutral way, without picking
    winners. The legislation making its way through Congress, is in our
    view, the right approach for this moment.
        Third, it is important to recognize that data-driven best practices
    must precede standard-setting. We are still in the very early stages of
    this paradigm shift, so it is important that responsible developers
    have the freedom to develop and generate the data needed for best
    practices and eventually relevant regulatory policies. I would note
    that this emerging industry has a strong safety record. In fact, there
    has been no injury caused by any fully autonomous vehicle developer to
    date. As such we should be encouraged to continue advancing our
    development while acting at all times responsibly.
        Finally, the Zoox journey is all about connecting people and
    places, safely, in an environmentally conscious way, and with a sense
    of wonder. Autonomous mobility sits on the vanguard of possible. As the
    innovators, we look forward to working with the regulators to create,
    with verve, the next era in mobility.
        Thank you.

        The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Kentley-Klay.
        Mr. Mansuetti.

              STATEMENT OF MICHAEL MANSUETTI, PRESIDENT,
                            ROBERT BOSCH LLC

        Mr. Mansuetti. Chairman Thune, Ranking Member Nelson,
    Members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to
    testify before you today.
        Robert Bosch founded the company in 1886 in Germany, and we
    established our first U.S. office in 1906. The Bosch companies
    in the U.S. today have now grown to encompass more than 18,000
    associates in 25 states. Of our four business sectors, mobility
    solutions is the largest.
        The U.S. remains at the forefront of Bosch's innovation
    efforts. We are actively testing automated vehicles in Michigan
    and in California. In 2017, Bosch announced the creation of a
    new center of competence for artificial intelligence, and
    Silicon Valley will serve as one of the three global sites for
    these efforts.
        I appreciate the opportunity to share Bosch's view on the
    transformation of the auto industry. This hearing is taking
    place at a critical juncture in our history. We are witnessing
    a revolution in almost every aspect of the vehicle, from how we
    power our cars to how we handle and transition control of the
    overall vehicle, to the future role of the vehicle in the lives
    of individuals.
        I deeply appreciate the efforts of Chairman Thune, Senator
    Peters, Ranking Member Nelson, and all of the Committee Members
    in sponsoring and passing the AV START Act. The Committee staff
    took great care to consider the issues that are impacting auto
    suppliers and to understand the complex role that we play as
    incubators and developers of automated driving systems.
        Bosch further commends the Committee for including crash-
    avoidance technologies in the consumer education requirement
    from the AV START Act. We also express our appreciation to
    Senators Heller and Markey for their ongoing support of crash-
    avoidance technologies.
        At Bosch, we have a vision for accident-free driving. We
    see the potential for automated vehicles and advanced driver-
    assistance systems to dramatically decrease vehicle-related
    injuries and fatalities. Making automated driving a reality
    calls for profound understanding of all vehicle systems. Bosch
    has this expertise, and we manufacture the key components,
    including radar, video, and ultrasonic sensors, brake-control
    systems, and electric power steering.
        Automated driving will demand much more than just the
    fitment of more sensors and cameras. It will require a new
    vision for the electronic architecture and the safety-critical
    functions of the vehicle. To realize higher levels of automated
    driving, we need redundancy in safety-critical systems, such as
    braking and steering. Bosch is actively developing redundant
    braking solutions to support all levels of automation, and this
    redundancy is a critical element especially for Level 4 and
    Level 5 automated vehicles.
        It is also important for Level 3 vehicles where a human
    driver is still necessary but safety-critical functions may be
    handled by the vehicle. As part of navigating this new
    landscape, Bosch is forging alliances. For example, in 2017, we
    announced a partnership with Daimler, which will focus on Level
    4 and Level 5 automated vehicles.
        Bosch is also cognizant of the tremendous need for consumer
    outreach. To bolster public understanding, Bosch has launched
    the Bosch Automated Mobility Academy to educate the public on
    how automated mobility can improve quality-of-life and explain
    how various advanced technologies will make the fully automated
    future possible.
        The topic of cybersecurity is tightly intertwined with
    increasingly automated and connected vehicles, and it is a
    priority for Bosch. Bosch has worked for several years to
    develop robust and comprehensive solutions for our customers.
    We strongly support a layered approach to vehicle cybersecurity
    and have espoused this principle in the development of our own
    products and engagement with our customers.
        We evaluate our customers' requirements in two ways, first
    by developing systems and technologies that can address risk
    based on the electronic architecture of the vehicles, and
    second by investing in future solutions that will be interwoven
    into vehicle design from the onset.
        Understanding the importance of industry cooperation in
    addressing potential threats and developing best practices,
    Bosch joined the Auto ISAC in 2016.
        As we look forward to these events, we cannot fail to
    address the demand for trained workers to fulfill the millions
    of jobs that will be needed to fuel the transformation. We
    clearly recognize the need to build and shape the manufacturing
    workforce of the future. To support this, Bosch maintains an
    apprenticeship program at several of our U.S. manufacturing
    facilities. In addition, our U.S. foundation, the Bosch
    Community Fund, provide grants to STEM-based educational
    programs and professional development for teachers.
        So thank you again for the opportunity today. Bosch looks
    forward to continuing to work with each of you and the
    Committee as we continue to develop technologies that are truly
    invented for life.
        Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Mansuetti follows:]

      Prepared Statement of Michael Mansuetti, President, Robert Bosch LLC
    Background
        In North America, the Bosch group of companies (``Bosch Group'')
    employ nearly 32,800 associates (with more than 18,000 in the U.S.) in
    more than 100 locations, as of December 31, 2016. In 2016, Bosch
    generated consolidated sales of $13.7 billion in the U.S., Canada and
    Mexico.
        The Bosch Group is a leading global supplier of technology and
    services. The global group of companies employ roughly 390,000
    associates worldwide (as of December 31, 2016) and generated sales of
    $80.9 billion in 2016. The operations are divided into four business
    sectors: Mobility Solutions, Industrial Technology, Consumer Goods, and
    Energy and Building Technology.
        As leaders in IoT, Bosch offers innovative solutions for smart
    homes, smart cities, connected mobility, and connected industry. We use
    our expertise in sensor technology, software, and services, as well as
    our own IoT cloud, to offer customers connected, cross-domain solutions
    from a single source. Our strategic objective is to create solutions
    for a connected life, and to improve quality of life worldwide with
    products and services that are innovative and spark enthusiasm. In
    short, Bosch creates technology that is ``Invented for life.'' The
    Bosch Group comprises Robert Bosch GmbH and the roughly 440 affiliates
    in some 60 countries. Bosch's global manufacturing, engineering, and
    sales network covers nearly every country in the world. The basis for
    Bosch's future growth is its innovative strength. At 120 locations
    across the globe, Bosch employs 59,000 associates in research and
    development.
                                     ______

        Chairman Thune, Ranking Member Nelson, members of the Committee,
    thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today.
        My name is Mike Mansuetti and I am the President of Bosch North
    America.
        Robert Bosch founded the company in 1886, when he opened the
    ``Workshop for Precision Mechanics and Electrical Engineering'' in
    Stuttgart, Germany. From its inception, the company has focused on the
    importance of the international market and Mr. Bosch established his
    first U.S. office in New York City in 1906. The Bosch companies in the
    United States have now grown to encompass more than 18,000 associates
    with 25 active manufacturing sites across the country and three
    dedicated Research and Development Centers (Pittsburgh, PA; Palo Alto,
    CA; and Cambridge, MA). We maintain a significant presence in Michigan,
    South Carolina, Illinois, Florida, Wisconsin, California, Kentucky, and
    Minnesota. Bosch concluded its 2016 Fiscal Year with $13.7 billion in
    consolidated sales in North America. Bosch has four business sectors--
    Mobility Solutions, Industrial Technology, Consumer Goods, and Energy
    and Building Technology. Mobility Solutions is our largest sector,
    comprising approximately 60 percent of our business and representing
    217,000 associates worldwide.
        Bosch invested more than $450 million in North America in 2016. In
    2016, Bosch opened an expanded technical center in Plymouth, Michigan,
    and relocated its Research and Technology Center within Pittsburgh.
    Moving forward, Bosch will invest $175 million in its Charleston, South
    Carolina plant to enhance its mobility solutions manufacturing
    activities at the facility. In December 2017, we were pleased to
    announce an additional $152 million of capital investment for our
    Anderson, SC manufacturing location to accommodate the expansion of our
    automotive electronics business and to retain additional associates at
    that site.
        The United States remains at the forefront of Bosch's innovation
    efforts. We are actively testing Automated Vehicles in Michigan and in
    California, both on our own as a Tier One automotive supplier and in
    cooperation with our customers. In 2017, Bosch announced the creation
    of a new Center of Competence which will focus on Artificial
    Intelligence. Palo Alto, CA will serve as one of the three key global
    sites for these efforts. In support of our growth as an Internet of
    Things (IoT) company, Bosch founded the Chicago Connectory in May 2017.
    The Connectory serves as a community of entrepreneurially-minded
    innovators meant to foster cross-domain collaboration among corporate
    partners, startups and universities to drive the development of new IoT
    technologies. The Connectory also provides cutting-edge technology,
    expert programming, and mentorship from leading experts in IoT. In
    addition, Bosch offers technical resources, a small prototyping space,
    as well as mentorship from teams and leaders on topics in
    manufacturing, software engineering and commercialization. Part of the
    objective of the Connectory is to revolutionize the way we envision new
    products within Bosch and bring them to market.
        I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today and to
    share Bosch's perspective on the transformation of the automotive
    industry. This hearing is taking place at a critical juncture in our
    history as an industry. We are witnessing a revolution in almost every
    aspect of the vehicle, ranging from the method in which we power our
    cars, to how we handle and transition control of the overall vehicle
    and to the role that the vehicle of the future will play in the lives
    of individuals. I would also highlight the growing connection between
    the vehicle and the other aspects of our daily lives. Bosch is
    developing new applications that will enable consumers to manage their
    home, to safely engage in activities such as working and relaxing in
    the vehicle and to achieve time, economic and environmental
    efficiencies by avoiding congestion on the roads. I also wish to take
    this opportunity to express our deep appreciation for the efforts of
    Chairman Thune, Senator Peters, Ranking Member Nelson and all of the
    Committee members in sponsoring and passing the AV START Act (S. 1885).
    Your leadership in this critical area is greatly appreciated by Bosch.
    The Committee staff took great care to consider the issues that are
    impacting automotive suppliers and to understand the complex role that
    we play as incubators and developers of Automated Driving Systems
    (ADS), software and related components. We wish to acknowledge their
    hard work over the past year.
    Automated Driving and Driver Assistance Systems
        At Bosch, a driving motivation is safety. Above all, we see the
    potential for automated vehicles and for advanced driver assistance
    systems to dramatically decrease the numbers of vehicle-related
    injuries and fatalities, in the U.S. and across the globe. This is our
    primary driver as we seek to develop, refine and launch these new
    technologies into the market. We often speak of these advancements in a
    futuristic manner, but the reality is that automation is already
    providing tremendous benefits to vehicle drivers and occupants today.
    Bosch pioneered the active safety system Electronic Stability Control
    (ESC), also known as ESP, which is deployed in every new passenger car
    sold in the U.S. In 2017, the National Highway Traffic Safety
    Administration (NHTSA) issued a report which found that more than 7,000
    lives were saved by ESC during the 5 year period between 2011-2015.\1\
    The technology works by monitoring driver intent and vehicle direction
    and by automatically applying braking force as needed to prevent a loss
    of control. Most drivers are not even aware of its support as its
    activation is reflected solely in the momentary illumination of an
    indicator light on the dashboard.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ DOT HS 812 391, March 2017, Estimating Lives Saved by
    Electronic Stability Control, 2011-2015.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        As noted above, Bosch is heavily engaged in AV development and
    testing in the United States. Making automated driving a reality calls
    for profound understanding of all vehicle systems. Bosch has this
    expertise, and manufactures most of the key components itself--
    including radar, video, and ultrasonic sensors, brake control systems,
    electrical power-steering units, display instruments, and connectivity
    solutions inside and outside the vehicle. Bosch has more than 3,000
    engineers around the world working to make automated driving a reality.
        We are using our decades-long experience to ensure the safety of
    our components and ADS. Automated driving will demand much more than
    just the fitment of more sensors and cameras, it will require a new
    vision for the electronic architecture and safety-critical functions of
    the vehicle. The most highly automated systems available in the market
    today are classified as SAE Level 2. While the system is able to
    execute both steering and acceleration/deceleration under certain
    circumstances, the human driver is responsible for monitoring the
    driving environment and function as the backup to the system.
        In order to realize higher levels of automated driving, we will
    need redundancy in safety-critical systems such as braking and
    steering. Bosch is actively developing and bringing to market redundant
    braking solutions to support all levels of automation. This redundancy
    is obviously a critical element for SAE Levels 4 and 5, but it will
    also be important for SAE Level 3 vehicles where a human driver is
    still necessary, but safety-critical functions may be handled by the
    vehicle under certain traffic or environmental conditions.
        We are enabling redundant braking by replacing the vacuum brake
    booster with an intelligent electro-mechanical booster, the iBooster. A
    conventional brake system today comprises two actuators: a vacuum brake
    booster and ESC unit. In this system, in the unlikely situation that a
    failure occurs in the ESC unit, the human driver would act as the
    backup by depressing the brake pedal. The redundant brake system for
    automated driving is comprised of two actuators that are each able to
    decelerate the vehicle independent of the driver applying the brake
    pedal. Thus, even if a failure occurs in the brake system, either
    actuator (iBooster or ESC) is able to avoid wheel lock-up by modulating
    the brake pressure, which maintains the ability to steer during
    deceleration.
        Redundant steering is also a key technology for automated driving
    and Bosch is leading in this area. In 2017, Bosch introduced its
    Electric Power Steering (EPS) system with fail-operational function.
    The system, which enables either a driver or automated driving system
    to make a safe stop in the rare case of a single failure, is a key
    requirement on the path to fully automated driving.
        Bosch is forging new alliances, with both traditional partners and
    unique service providers, to address all of the key factors that will
    be necessary for automated driving. For example, in 2017, we announced
    a partnership with Daimler which will focus on Level 4 and Level 5
    automated vehicles. In addition, on January 4, 2018, Bosch announced
    its intent to acquire a five percent stake in HERE Technologies, a
    global provider of digital mapping and location services. High-
    definition maps are a requirement for self-driving cars. These must be
    kept up-to-date with data from the vehicle's sensors and supplemented
    with real-time information on traffic conditions, congestion,
    construction sites, and accidents. Bosch's ``road signature'' uses
    information from the Bosch radar and video sensors in the vehicle to
    enrich and update high-definition maps. Consequently, Bosch and HERE
    are exploring opportunities to utilize road signature in the
    maintenance of HERE's map for automated vehicles. At the same time,
    Bosch will be continuing its work on the road signature with partners
    such as TomTom, AutoNavi, Baidu, NavInfo, and Increment P.
        Bosch has built upon the foundational technology ESC, and our
    industry position as a leading manufacturer of micro-electro-mechanical
    systems (MEMS) and radar sensors, and mono-and stereo-vision cameras,
    to create a very broad portfolio of advanced crash avoidance systems
    that can help prevent an accident from occurring or minimize the
    severity of its impact. Our product list includes Automatic Emergency
    Braking, Lane Keeping Assist, Blind Spot Detection, Backover Avoidance
    Systems and Pedestrian and Rear Auto Braking systems. Bosch's Corporate
    Research and Technology Center estimates that Automatic Emergency
    Braking (City and Inter Urban) could address 35 percent of the
    accidents in the U.S. while Lane Keeping Assist and Lane Departure
    Warning (coupled with ESC) could address another 20 percent.\2\ These
    are not ideas or visions yet to be realized; these are systems that can
    offer tangible, real world and life savings benefits to drivers and
    occupants right now. This Committee, and Congress as a whole, helped to
    advance the development of these technologies by supporting and funding
    the NHTSA Data Modernization Project. Recognizing the critical need for
    more comprehensive and robust real-world data concerning the actual
    causes of crashes in the U.S., the House and Senate directed NHTSA in
    2012 \3\ to update its data collection efforts and provided funding to
    enable the incorporation of new collection sites, improved technology
    and enhanced data analysis. A deeper and more analytical understanding
    of the actual factors and aspects involved in real world crashes
    enables all of us to target those causes and to develop technology that
    provides a concrete benefit to consumers. This data is among the many
    elements that Bosch considers when determining where to invest its
    resources in creating future safety technologies.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ Bosch Corporate Research analysis based on NHTSA Traffic Safety
    Facts 2015, DOT HS 812 384.
        \3\ DOT HS 812 128, March 2015, NHTSA's Review of the National
    Automotive Sampling System: Report to Congress.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Bosch commends the Committee for incorporating crash avoidance
    systems into the consumer education requirement that was approved as
    part of the AV START Act (S. 1885). We also wish to express our sincere
    appreciation to Senators Heller and Markey for the important work that
    they have done to call attention to crash avoidance technologies
    (Safety Through Informed Consumers Act of 2015 \4\) and the need for
    their inclusion in the vehicle's star safety rating.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ S. 1535, the Safety Through Informed Consumers Act of 2015.
    This legislation was approved in 2015 as part of the Fixing America's
    Surface Transportation (FAST) Act.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Bosch urges the Committee and NHTSA to re-energize and update the
    U.S. New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) or 5-star rating program. Highly
    automated vehicles will provide significant benefits and enable a new
    vision of mobility for millions of Americans; however, these vehicles
    may take years to reach high levels of market penetration. We project
    that conditionally automated Level 3 vehicles will be available to
    consumers this decade and Level 4 highly automated vehicles will be
    available in the beginning of the next decade. Since more than 37,400
    individuals died in motor vehicle crashes in 2016, we must take
    immediate steps to help educate consumers on the options that are
    available today. Consequently, we respectfully recommend that the
    Committee examine the potential to incorporate crash avoidance
    technologies into the overall vehicle rating. A prior proposal to
    update NCAP, issued by NHTSA in December 2015, included not only
    several positive changes that would have boosted consumer awareness of
    new active safety systems, but also raised concerns relative to the
    significant adjustments that would be required in connection to the
    vehicle crashworthiness rating. We ask the Committee to re-examine the
    crash avoidance portion of the proposal, which generated notable
    support from relevant stakeholders such as leading vehicle
    manufacturers, the National Safety Council (NSC), the National
    Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), and the Insurance Institute for
    Highway Safety (IIHS).
        I wish to note that Bosch supports the Federal Guidance for
    Automated Vehicles, which was released in September 2017. We commend
    NHTSA and the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) for all of their
    efforts and wish to acknowledge the significant investment of time and
    resources on the part of DOT leadership and the staff at NHTSA to
    create this framework. Bosch understands and supports the objectives of
    NHTSA in urging the release of a Voluntary Safety Self-Assessment
    (VSSA). Indeed, our company intends to release its own VSSA.
    Consumer Education
        Bosch is also cognizant of the tremendous need to conduct outreach
    to consumers and to engage in an active debate as to the benefits of
    these technologies, the manner in which the driver will be able to
    interact with them and to the proper expectations associated with such
    innovations.
        Bosch's position on the need for improved consumer education is
    well known. We have urged NHTSA and the U.S. Department of
    Transportation for many years to include crash avoidance systems as a
    key component of the vehicle 5-star rating and to provide additional
    information to consumers through the Monroney Label.
        Bosch strongly concurs with U.S. Transportation Secretary Chao that
    consumer education and awareness are critical enablers to the future
    success and adoption of ADS. In order to bolster public understanding,
    Bosch has launched the Bosch Automated Mobility Academy to educate
    members of the public on how automated mobility can improve their
    quality of life and to explain how various advanced technologies and
    functions will make the fully automated future possible. The Academy
    also provides information on driver assistance technologies that
    provide safety and comfort benefits today and will serve as the
    building blocks to higher levels of automation.
        You may access the Bosch Automated Mobility Academy at: http://
    www.bosch-mobility-solutions.us/us/highlights/automated-mobility/amc/
        In addition to the Academy, Bosch remains committed to increasing
    consumer awareness through its partners and through demonstrations and
    presentations at dedicated industry and government events.
    Cybersecurity
        The topic of cybersecurity is tightly intertwined with the
    emergence of increasingly automated and connected vehicles and it is a
    priority for Bosch. Again, I commend the Members of this Committee and
    your staff for working so diligently to address this critical and
    complex issue. Bosch has been working for several years to develop
    robust and comprehensive solutions for our customers. Bosch strongly
    supports a layered approach to vehicle cybersecurity. We have espoused
    this principle in the development of our own products and in our
    engagement with customers.
        We are addressing our customers' requirements in two ways: (1)
    developing systems and technologies that can address risks based on the
    electronic architecture of current vehicles, and (2) investing in
    future solutions that will be interwoven into the vehicle design from
    the ground up. Our current cybersecurity product portfolio ranges from
    security embedded in the hardware of our electronic products to
    sophisticated mechanisms which serve as a ``wall'' between external
    connectors to the vehicle and the safety-critical systems that govern
    the steering, braking and other functionalities.
        Also, with the Bosch group of companies we have the leading team of
    security specialists in the automotive sector, ESCRYPT. It is an
    industry leader in securing over the air (OTA) updates of firmware and
    software, which are carried out in a similar manner as smartphone
    software updates. Users select a function on their smartphone or the
    infotainment system. The information is sent to the Cloud, which
    functions like an app store to provide the software and to start
    downloading it straight into the vehicle. Further, security updates can
    be distributed by such an infrastructure. Data transfer runs securely
    in the background while the car is being driven--and importantly the
    updates are only made when conditions are secure. According to Gartner
    Inc., 250 million cars around the world will be connected by 2020,\5\
    so this topic will continue to remain at the forefront as the industry
    advances.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \5\ ``Gartner Says By 2020, a Quarter Billion Connected Vehicles
    Will Enable New In-Vehicle Services and Automated Driving
    Capabilities,'' (Jan. 26, 2015). Press Release: https://
    www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/2970017
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        In the future, Bosch sees the focus of automotive cybersecurity as
    intrusion detection and prevention. Bosch and ESCRYPT are actively
    developing components and systems to support OEMs in developing
    vehicles that are safe and secure. ESCRYPT's Intrusion Detection
    Prevention System enables continuous monitoring of attacks in the field
    and timely detection of attacks. The information is conveyed to a
    backend office through the cloud, enabling analysis by security
    analysts and forensic experts who can then develop an appropriate
    response. This could include a roll-out of countermeasures via security
    updates for the entire fleet in order to remedy the vulnerability.
        Understanding the importance of industry cooperation and engagement
    in addressing potential threats and developing best practices, Bosch
    joined the Automotive Information Sharing and Analysis Center (Auto-
    ISAC) in 2016 and one of our associates presently serves as the Chair
    of the Supplier Affinity Group within the ISAC.
        Bosch understands that the Committee has expressed interest in the
    topic of coordinated disclosure. Bosch has already established a
    process to enable effective communication with other Bosch entities and
    external parties, including researchers. In 2016, a Product Security
    Incident Response Team (Bosch PSIRT) was created to serve as the
    central point of contact for external security researchers, partners or
    customers to report security information related to Bosch products. The
    PSIRT interface provides a clear and accessible means for external
    parties to communicate and ensures that all submissions will be
    reviewed and considered. This mechanism enables an assessment of the
    validity of vulnerability notifications and allows for a quick and
    appropriate action. The Bosch PSIRT webpage further includes a list of
    existing Security Advisories.\6\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \6\ Bosch Product Security Incident Response Team website: https://
    psirt.bosch.com/index.html
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        In addition, acknowledging security as an important element of the
    product-development process is a necessary step to ensure that security
    capabilities are properly implemented and that considered relative to
    all aspects of the vehicle life-cycle. Bosch has developed a security
    engineering process that is followed for all warranted present and
    future product development.
        I also wish to note the importance of industry standards and of the
    active engagement by standard setting bodies across the world to
    develop appropriate standards in this area and, eventually, to
    harmonize their approach where possible. Bosch believes the industry
    standards will play a critical role in framing the future adoption and
    use of the technology. We are supporting these efforts and utilizing
    the recommended practices. For example, Bosch is actively participating
    in the ISO-SAE 21434 Road Vehicles Cybersecurity Engineering
    standardization process, which addresses the means of handling security
    topics in automotive product engineering.
        Securing automobiles is a complex issue that requires both a
    comprehensive, strategic approach and a long-term commitment. We are
    devoted to developing tools and offering consulting to help the U.S.
    automotive industry with this important issue.
    Artificial Intelligence
        Bosch is advancing artificial intelligence. At the Bosch Connected
    World 2017 conference in Berlin, Bosch presented an onboard computer
    for automated vehicles. Thanks to artificial intelligence (AI), the
    computer can apply machine learning methods. The AI onboard computer is
    expected to guide self-driving cars through even complex traffic
    situations, or ones that are new to the car. Bosch's AI onboard
    computer can also recognize pedestrians or cyclists.
        Bosch is also actively seeking ways to utilize AI to improve our
    existing products and operations, including in manufacturing where AI
    can scrutinize the effectiveness of our production so that products can
    be manufactured more quickly while maintaining exceptional levels of
    precision and quality. AI also has the potential to make our lives
    easier in many areas, whether its intelligent cars finding parking
    spaces, having the room temperature automatically adjusted to our
    needs, or protecting our homes against break-ins. We wish to
    acknowledge the leadership of Senator Cantwell, Senator Markey and
    Senator Young in introducing the Fundamentally Understanding the
    Usability and Realistic Evolution of Artificial Intelligence Act of
    2017--or the ``FUTURE of Artificial Intelligence Act.''
    Powertrain
        Amongst the most dramatic challenges facing all of us in the
    industry is the design of the powertrain that will be needed for the
    future. Although much of the focus of the automated vehicle debate has
    been on the safety aspects and the engineering requirements, such as
    redundancy, fail-safe operational modes and human machine interface
    (HMI) needed to bring this objective to fruition, the reality is that
    automated vehicles will also change the needs of the powertrain.
        Bosch is investing in the future by continuing to innovate new
    technologies that boost performance and efficiency and by investing in
    the many systems and advancements that we will be demanded by electric
    vehicles. At the North American International Auto Show (NAIAS) in
    Detroit last week, we featured our electric axle drive and our second
    generation 48-volt system (which provides improvements in fuel economy
    and performance). Bosch takes the challenge of the move to electric
    propulsion by offering a complete electric drive that is cost-
    attractive, performance based and helps saving battery capacity due to
    its very high system efficiency. The Bosch eAxle platform is designed
    to support the full range of passenger car and commercial vehicle
    segments.
    Smart Cities
        In assessing the landscape before us, Bosch also sees a shift in
    how consumers utilize their vehicles and the options that they expect
    in terms of mobility. One of the most notable challenges that we are
    facing as a global society is congestion and the difficulty associated
    with traffic management in our large cities. Urban traffic is predicted
    to triple by 2050. In the U.S., the average individual spends more than
    40 hours a year stuck in traffic, wasting more than $120 billion in
    time and fuel. In order to prepare for the mobility scenario of the
    future, we have launched several smart city projects in countries
    around the world. Today, half of Bosch's 14 smart city projects include
    urban mobility solutions such as connected parking, automated driving,
    fleet management, multimodal transport, electromobility, and vehicle
    connectivity (V2X and DSRC). After a successful pilot phase, Bosch
    intends to launch community-based parking in several U.S. cities this
    year. In places such as L.A., Miami, and Boston, the company will make
    real-time information about on-street parking available to car
    manufacturers. Drivers will be able to see on their navigation systems
    where there's a free space and drive directly to it. We have also
    announced a collaboration with Daimler to bring self-driving SAE Level
    4 and Level 5 vehicles to city streets by the start of the next decade.
    This will open up new horizons in particular for people with limited
    mobility.
    The Workforce of the Future
        As we look forward to these advances and leaps within the industry,
    we cannot fail to address the demand for trained workers to fulfill the
    millions of jobs that will be needed to fuel the industry's
    transformation. Of Bosch's 390,000 associates worldwide, more than
    20,000 are software engineers, nearly 20 percent of whom are working
    exclusively on the IoT.
        Bosch recognizes the need to build and shape the manufacturing
    workforce for the future. As is the case with many of our partners in
    the industry, we encounter challenges in finding the right candidates
    for our open jobs and positions. Our strategy encompasses inspiring
    young minds and helping to generate an interest in science, technology,
    engineering and math (``STEM'') and careers in manufacturing. The
    strategy includes hands-on training for students who are enrolled in
    technical colleges and universities.
        Our investment also extends to our current associates. We provide
    access to a broad variety of training programs and skill-building
    initiatives to all of our team members. Bosch maintains several
    apprenticeship programs at its manufacturing facilities in the U.S.
    These programs enable students to receive hands-on training and gain
    valuable experience while working at a Bosch site. For example, the
    Bosch Rexroth plant in Fountain Inn, SC currently operates four U.S.
    Department of Labor-registered apprenticeship initiatives.
        Many of the participants of the apprenticeship programs transition
    to a Skilled Associate position with Bosch at the conclusion of their
    training. Bosch Rexroth has an active partnership with the Greenville,
    SC Technical College. In March 2016, the Bosch Community Fund (BCF)
    provided $62,500 to the Greenville Tech Foundation in order to
    establish a hydraulics simulation lab at the Greenville Technical
    College Center for Manufacturing Innovation.
        In addition to providing grants to support apprenticeship programs,
    the BCF also provides grants to fund educational programs focused on
    STEM, as well as manufacturing professional development for teachers.
    Last October the BCF awarded 7 grants totaling over $86,000 in the
    Owatonna, Minnesota community to support organizations and initiatives
    that provide students with robotics courses, career preparedness
    classes and manufacturing workshops. By investing in lab improvements,
    teacher training and enhancements in STEM and engineering curricula,
    the BCF is able to impact students' lives in the community and help to
    prepare the next generation for the workforce of the future. Since
    2014, the BCF has awarded more than $308,000 to schools and
    organizations in the Owatonna area, and the BCF is engaged in many
    similar efforts across the country.
        Bosch also supports both A World in Motion (AWIM) and First
    Robotics initiatives. Led by the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE),
    AWIM works with children in kindergarten through 8th grade to bring
    science, technology, engineering and math education to life. Bosch
    volunteers work directly with children to complete challenges as a
    means to inspire them and build interest in STEM topics. Today, Bosch
    employees participating in AWIM are volunteering in nearly 80
    classrooms located near seven Bosch North American facilities to bring
    STEM education to life. This not only gives us the opportunity to get
    involved in our communities, but also helps us develop our future
    scientists and engineers. The Bosch Community Fund also provides
    support to AWIM. Under the aegis of the First Robotics program, Bosch
    opens its doors to high school students and they are invited to work
    with Bosch engineers to design and build a robotic solution.
    Conclusion
        Thank you again for the opportunity to speak before the Committee.
    Bosch looks forward to continuing to work with each of you and with the
    Committee in the future. We would be pleased to provide additional
    technical information on any of these topics.
        I welcome any questions you may have.

        The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Mansuetti.
        Mr. Schneider.

                STATEMENT OF LUKE SCHNEIDER, PRESIDENT,
                           AUDI MOBILITY U.S.

        Mr. Schneider. Chairman Thune, Ranking Member Nelson, and
    Members of the Committee, I appreciate the opportunity to
    testify today, and thank you on behalf of the automotive
    industry and developers of automated vehicles for your
    leadership in working to enact the AV START Act.
        There is an urgency for the Senate to pass the AV START
    Act, because it will create for innovators a consistent,
    national regulatory framework for automated vehicles, and it is
    necessary to advance mobility solutions that will positively
    transform American cities, provide mobility to the elderly and
    the disabled, and ensure greater safety on our roads, a
    priority we share with your Committee and the Department of
    Transportation.
        Passage of this legislation will allow us to realize the
    three transportation revolutions we so often talk about: shared
    mobility, electrification, and automated vehicles enhanced by
    digitalization, which some consider a fourth. Automation and
    digitalization are disruptive innovations, especially for
    automakers, and we are driving this new future as an industry.
    The clear societal opportunities in what the related
    technologies can offer is what is motivating us to rethink
    mobility in the most comprehensive way since the 1890s.
        As the CEO of Silvercar, a disruptor in its own right, and
    the president of Audi Mobility U.S., I would like to share some
    insights into where this new frontier of automated, electric,
    and shared mobility as a service is headed.
        While some skeptics fear job dislocation from disruptive
    innovations, the fact is that disruptors have created new
    categories of jobs that did not exist before. Existing sectors
    will continue to expand and transform, and a range of new jobs
    will be created for workers across all skill levels.
        Audi is in the innovation business. Audi perfected all-
    wheel driving on racetracks, and then offered that technology
    across our fleet. We were the first to take Google Earth mobile
    in our navigation system before it was on phones. We
    implemented LED lighting before it became an industry standard.
    And as we enter what many call the ``third wave'' of the
    technological revolution, the auto industry finds itself at the
    center of it all.
        There will be more industry innovation in the next decade
    than in the last century. The cost of batteries has gone down
    significantly while the number of sensors in the average
    vehicle has increased dramatically thanks to innovations in
    everything from capacity to size.
        The way we want to access transportation through the use
    and even ownership of vehicles is fundamentally changing, along
    with the other major consumer categories in our lives.
        Innovation will continue to be our legacy and our
    responsibility, but we will not be innovating just to sell more
    cars. We will be innovating to reduce fatalities, ease
    congestion, lessen emissions, and improve mobility for all.
        The most important benefit of all this innovation is
    safety. The innovations I mentioned earlier all have one thing
    in common: safety. All-wheel drive excels in the worst
    conditions. Navigation systems tell people exactly where to go,
    so they spend less time on the road even as they keep their
    eyes on it. Our lighting illuminates that road with the closest
    thing to daylight.
        But here is the staggering reality. One and a quarter
    million people die on our roads every year globally, and human
    error is the number one cause. Vehicle automation promises to
    improve safety on our roads and reduce collisions by as much as
    90 percent.
        But maybe even more exciting, it can also deliver basic
    access that tens of millions of people currently do not have.
    The elderly and those with disabilities will be able to move
    with far greater freedom and efficiency. In America, nearly 16
    million people 65 and older live in communities where public
    transportation is poor or nonexistent. Six million people with
    a disability have difficulty accessing transportation.
        For Audi, that is why we are delivering Level 3 automation
    as well as working to develop highly automated vehicles that
    need no human driver at the wheel. Automated vehicles have the
    potential to reduce fuel use and carbon emissions, since they
    are likely to be EVs, shared, and drive more efficiently than
    humans. And fewer crashes means fewer traffic jams.
        We want to work together to address the challenges facing
    cities and communities, like reducing fatalities, reducing
    congestion and pollution, maximizing scarce infrastructure
    dollars, and optimizing transportation flows. The new mobility
    options we are pursuing and the legislation you are working on
    will help us address this challenge.
        Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Schneider follows:]

      Prepared Statement of Luke Schneider, President, Audi Mobility U.S.
        Chairman Thune, Ranking Member Nelson, and members of the
    Committee, I appreciate the opportunity to testify today. Thank you on
    behalf of the automotive industry and developers of automated vehicles
    for your leadership in working to enact the AV START Act. There is an
    urgency for the Senate to pass the AV START Act because it will create
    for innovators a consistent national regulatory framework for automated
    vehicles necessary to advance the new mobility solutions that will
    positively transform American cities, provide mobility to the elderly
    and disabled, and ensure greater safety on our roads, a priority we
    share with your Committee and the Department of Transportation.
        Passage of this legislation will allow us to realize the three
    transportation revolutions we so often talk about: shared mobility,
    electrification and automated vehicles, enhanced by digitalization.
        Automation and digitalization are disruptive innovations,
    especially for automakers, and we are adapting to this new future. The
    clear societal opportunities and what their related technologies can
    offer is what is motivating us to rethink mobility in the most
    comprehensive way since the 1890s.
        As the CEO of Silvercar, a disruptor in its own right (of the car
    rental business), and president of Audi Mobility U.S., I'd like to
    share some insights into where this new frontier of automated,
    electric, and shared mobility as a service is headed.
        While some skeptics fear job dislocation from disruptive
    innovations, the fact is disruptors have created new categories of jobs
    that didn't exist before. Existing sectors will continue to expand and
    transform, and a range of new jobs will be created for workers across
    all skill levels.
        Audi is in the innovation business. Audi perfected all-wheel
    driving on race tracks then offered that technology across our fleet.
    We were the first to take Google Earth mobile in our navigation system
    before it was on phones. We implemented LED lighting before it became
    an industry standard. As we enter what many call the ``third wave of
    the technological revolution,'' the auto industry finds itself at the
    center of it all.
        There will be more industry innovation in the next decade than the
    last century. The cost of batteries has gone down significantly, while
    the number of sensors in the average vehicle has increased dramatically
    thanks to innovations in everything from capacity to size. The way we
    want to access transportation, through the use and even ownership of
    vehicles, is fundamentally changing along with the other major consumer
    categories in our lives.
        Innovation will continue to be our legacy, and our responsibility.
    But we won't be innovating just to sell more cars. We'll be innovating
    to reduce fatalities, ease congestion, lessen emissions, and improve
    mobility for all.
        The most important benefit of this innovation is safety. The
    innovations I mentioned earlier all have one thing in common: Safety.
    All-wheel drive excels in the worst conditions. Navigation systems tell
    people exactly where to go so they spend less time on the road even as
    they keep their eyes on it. Our lighting illuminates that road with the
    closest thing to daylight. But here's the staggering reality: 1.25
    million people die on our roads every year globally. And human error is
    the number one cause. Vehicle automation promises to improve safety on
    our roads, and reduce collisions by as much as 90 percent.
        But it can also deliver basic access that tens of millions of
    people currently don't have. The elderly and those with disabilities
    will be able to move with far greater freedom and efficiency. In
    America, nearly 16 million people 65 and older live in communities
    where public transportation is poor or nonexistent. Six million people
    with a disability have difficulty accessing transportation.
        For Audi, that's why we are delivering Level 3 automation as well
    as working to develop highly automated vehicles that need no human
    driver at the wheel.
        Automated vehicles have the potential to reduce fuel use and carbon
    emissions since they are likely to be EVs, shared, and drive more
    efficiently than humans. And fewer crashes means fewer traffic jams.
        We want to work together to address the challenges facing cities
    and communities like reducing fatalities, reducing congestion and
    pollution, maximizing scarce infrastructure dollars and optimizing
    transportation flows. The new mobility options we are pursuing and the
    legislation you are working on will help us address these challenges.

        The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Schneider.
        We are going to have 5-minute rounds of questions here. We
    will try to keep this moving as much as we can. But again,
    thank you for being here. Thank you for your testimony.
        I find this technology incredibly exciting, and I just look
    at the transformational impact it can have on our economy in
    terms of safety first and foremost, but second productivity,
    providing mobility for, as has been pointed out, communities of
    people that previously have not had access to it. And some of
    us up here have had the benefit, too, of being able to ride in
    some of these vehicles and see what is happening out there.
        But I have a question for you, and I am going to make this
    a two- or three-prong question, so I can try to cover a lot of
    ground here. But there are skeptics out there, and I know that
    a lot of it has to do with Americans like to drive and it is a
    difficult transition to integrate AVs into a national fleet,
    but how do we, one, build consumer trust and confidence in this
    technology? Two, how do you address the concern that people
    have about negative impacts on the labor market, people who
    drive vehicles, for example, as a profession? And three, one of
    the other concerns that I have heard is, how do you address the
    issue of cybersecurity? That question comes up with regard to
    this technology as well.
        So if you could speak to how we convince people this is a
    good thing, and we will come back. Those are at least three
    questions that I hear posed to me, and questions I would love
    to have you get an opportunity to answer. So feel free, whoever
    would like to take a stab at that.
        Mr. Mansuetti. Perhaps I will start. Thank you for those
    questions. We are also very concerned with those issues and
    have been working a lot to address those.
        To your first question regarding building consumer trust,
    that was one of the big things that we see that we need to do
    and is a job of the automotive industry. That is why we started
    the Bosch Mobility Academy.
        So when we talk to people and we talk to consumers about
    automated vehicles and are they ready to let go, many of them
    are not. They are ready to let go of certain functions; for
    example, parking. And we see parking as an early use case to
    help speed the adoption of automated vehicles, because who
    would not like to just get out, push a button, and have their
    car automatically valet parked or returned. And that helps to
    build the trust.
        So we would be happy to talk more, and we have this academy
    to help educate consumers on that.
        Regarding the labor impacts, I think we all stated that
    there will be quite a number of new jobs and new opportunities
    created. So on the manufacturing side, we continue to invest in
    apprentice programs and re-educating our workforce.
        And I think with the new business models that emerge, we
    are going to see tremendous opportunities. As vehicles become
    more highly utilized, the increased opportunities for
    maintenance and cleaning and different things of this nature
    will arise from these new business models.
        And cybersecurity is very important to us. So this all
    hinges on good, robust cybersecurity measures. We see
    cybersecurity kind of as a layered approach, if you think about
    it from an onion, starting at the basic silicon levels and
    building in technology and cybersecurity and the hardware and
    the connections, and then looking at the entire network from an
    intrusion detection system.
        So those are some of the things that we are working on.
        Mr. Schneider. I wanted to respond to that question with a
    few examples and a few instances in my personal experience.
        The first is, one of the great things about the AV START
    Act is that it contemplates consumer education in the bill
    itself, that the Department of Transportation alongside
    individual OEMs and other industry players and industry
    associations all really need to conspire to do this together,
    so that the consuming public can become more comfortable with
    the concept of a car driving itself.
        With respect to jobs, I can speak from personal experience
    there. We started a company, Silvercar, 5 years ago, created
    about 200 jobs in a very short period of time, all of which
    spanned a number of job categories. I think the big difference
    here is that the people employed in personal transportation are
    going to be working at some different things, not exactly the
    same things that they are working on today. That is fundamental
    to the nature of technology changing the way we move around.
    But we are optimistic about it because of the job classes and
    categorizations and the heavy technology orientation that they
    have had in companies like Silvercar.
        And the last piece of this is really about security. This
    is always going to be a concern. And, frankly, I think from a
    safety and security perspective, very few industries are as
    regulated as the automotive industry. What we look at is the
    ability to separate systems within cars, so that we do not
    impact driving systems or core systems, and we are still able
    to make use of the data that is generated by the use of these
    shared mobility systems to provide better and more efficient
    transportation.
        Mr. Kentley-Klay. Senator Thune, thank you for your three
    questions.
        To address them briefly, in terms of adoption, there is
    always a bell curve with a new technology. You have your early
    adopters. You have the mainstream in the middle. And then you
    have your laggards at the end that may never adopt the
    technology. In the case of aviation, even though it is one of
    the safest modes of transportation, some people still refuse to
    fly. Ironically, though, they will drive, even though it is
    much more dangerous.
        So I think the way to do this is you have to build trust
    with the community. This is happening today as developers
    develop this technology. There has been no injury by any
    developer of autonomous technology working in America yet from
    a vehicle that is driving itself. And yet, there has been many
    cases where the vehicles have been hit by human drivers.
        So I think by limiting the geographic domain of deployment
    of the vehicles in the first instance to, say, downtown areas,
    in lower speeds, in good weather, we can win the public's trust
    and expand the technology over time.
        In terms of the job space, people often talk about
    disruptive technology. I find that term a little bit myopic. I
    see us actually creating a constructive technology, correctly
    understood. For a new way to come into vogue in the mainstream,
    I think it has to be materially better than the incumbent.
        So I think what we are actually creating is a new way of
    doing things better, and that will lead to new job creation.
    And this is always the way with technology.
        If you look in America 100 years ago today, 40 percent of
    the workforce worked in agriculture. Today, it is less than 1
    percent, but we do not have 40 percent unemployment as a
    consequence, because of a whole new set of economies and jobs
    that we have. Just as there are more people and more revenue
    from the automobile industry than the horse and carriage
    industry, there are going to be more people working and more
    revenue in autonomous mobility era as well.
        So we see great opportunity here, and the challenge for
    society is, really, how do we reskill people to get the new job
    opportunities that will come from new technology?
        Finally, in security, that requires perpetual vigilance.
    Cybersecurity is always going to be a threat. It is probably
    not the best to disclose in intimate ways what our
    countermeasures are at Zoox, but it is something we think a lot
    about and something we would be happy to chat about offline.
        But one thing I would say is that it is important to
    understand the geometry of how these vehicles will work. In
    Zoox's case, we own and operate the vehicle, so a customer
    cannot buy it, and they cannot reverse engineer it in their
    garage to understand how to hack it or how it can work. To
    access the vehicle, you need to have a credit card and be part
    of a system, so we know who you are.
        And then we are tracking the vehicle. We know where you are
    and what you are doing.
        And then that vehicle is limited to the road network. The
    occupant in the vehicle has no capacity to take it off that
    road network as a bad actor.
        So if you add all that up, I think it means the technology
    is actually quite secure, and it is really not a good area for
    a bad actor to try to do something that would be negative for
    society.
        The Chairman. Senator Nelson.
        Senator Nelson. Dr. Avent and Mr. Kentley-Klay, if you
    would, paint the picture, as a result of autonomous vehicles,
    what the downtown streets of New York City, Manhattan, look
    like in the future.
        Dr. Avent. Just to follow on the conversation previously, I
    think that there is no magic bullet for consumer trust, and it
    is going to have to be built incrementally, and probably is
    going to lag behind the technology. So I think this technology
    is going to be adopted maybe a little bit slower than what many
    are predicting.
        But when it is adopted, I think that you will see
    interconnected computers that are scheduling each other. They
    are optimizing. They are adaptive. So downtown New York City
    will have vehicles on it. There probably will be fewer vehicles
    with more capacity because utilization of vehicles now is about
    5 percent, and parking will change significantly. I think that
    you will see vehicles communicate to each other and interact
    with the environment, so much safer and more efficient
    transportation.
        Senator Nelson. So will there be as much the need to
    purchase your own vehicle in the future, Mr. Kentley-Klay?
        Mr. Kentley-Klay. Senator Nelson, thank you for your
    question.
        While people love driving cars, people do not like driving
    a car in gridlock. It is not a good use of our time. It is
    already clear in cities, and Manhattan is a great example, the
    average car ownership is 0.6 per household. Nationally in
    America, it is a little bit under two.
        The demographics are quite clear, that young people see car
    ownership as a hassle. They have to park it. They have to do
    insurance. They had to do maintenance. They would much rather
    just have an on-demand model where they can pay for what they
    use. And when they are not using it, someone else is, which is
    a wonderful use of that product. It is getting high
    utilization.
        To address your question before, in terms of, how does this
    change Manhattan? I mean, Manhattan is the crown jewel for this
    technology, in many ways. There are actually 13,000 Ubers,
    Lyfts, and taxis operating on the island at any one time.
        In the opening stanzas of the technology, I think we are
    developing our technology to work in a mixed-mode environment.
    But beyond the launch of the technology, I think in the space
    of sort of 5 to 10 years, I think you will see cities creating
    disincentives for cars that pollute and that are human-driven
    to come into the most congested areas, and just to have
    autonomous mobility, and that will be transformational for the
    cities. You will reduce congestion. You will enhance the air
    quality within the city. You will be able to clean up the urban
    landscape. There is a lot of visual pollution from traffic
    lights, signposts, car parking. You will open up new lanes.
        So I think, from an urban-planning point of view, the
    technology actually holds great promise to actually refresh and
    reinvent our most dense urban areas to be safer and more
    enjoyable.
        Senator Nelson. Paint the picture of the future of travel
    from New York to Chicago, from Washington to Philadelphia. What
    is it going to look like? Anyone of you.
        And then I want to ask you, Mr. Schneider, since you are
    one of the auto companies, I want you to tell me why is this
    not threatening the purchase of your automobiles?
        Go ahead, paint the picture of this long-distance travel.
        Mr. Kentley-Klay. Well, I think it is going to be
    wonderful. Imagine the difference between a horse and carriage
    and the Model T Ford. That is an incredible transformation. And
    it is our belief that we are about to go through the same
    transformation in terms of the products that the general public
    will be able to access to enhance their ability to move across
    the country.
        Senator Nelson. So is it that we are going to have high-
    speed, dedicated lanes that you are going to punch in that I
    want to go to Philadelphia or I want to go to Baltimore or New
    York or Boston? Is that what the future of long-distance travel
    is? Anybody?
        Mr. Kentley-Klay. I think you will see mixed-mode
    transportation. People will still fly and take trains, and they
    will drive cars. I think that technology will start in more
    dense urban areas first. But as it matures, it will lead to
    intercity travel, and it will be wonderful for people, because
    it will be safe. It will still work in a mixed-mode
    environment.
        Senator Nelson. OK, Mr. Schneider, why are you not dealing
    yourself out of business?
        Mr. Schneider. Well, this is a great question, and this is
    sort of at the heart of the matter.
        So what is great about this is that we as an industry are
    beginning to speak in terms that are typically more associated
    with the technology in the high-tech sectors, and that is in
    the form of use cases. Some mixed-mode, multiple-use cases,
    whether you are trying to get from point to point in a city or
    from city to city, inter-urban, suburban, there are so many
    different use cases for personal transportation that to think a
    $10 trillion global industry is going to be solved by a single
    solution is really not realistic, from our view.
        The way we look at this, and the reason why we as an
    automaker are excited about the future, is that in pretty much
    every other category that we consume--food, music, media,
    lodging--the consumer models either are changing or have
    changed. We buy things differently. We buy what we want. We pay
    for what we use. And we do it on our phone. And from our
    perspective, that concept of a consumer model where you are
    consuming this category of personal transportation is an
    entirely unexplored area, one that really marks the
    transformation of our industry.
        So whether you use public transportation, which we believe
    will still be an available option to go from place to place, or
    use a private conveyance, which is automated or in some other
    way even highly automated, is an option.
        The point is that getting from place to place will become a
    more efficient and a lower cost per passenger mile opportunity
    for people. We think that if you reduce that cost per passenger
    mile, then you will unlock demand for mobility. People view
    mobility and moving around as a basic need today, not a luxury
    or something like that, and that is exciting, because if you
    really believe that, and you are looking at the people who can
    create the assets that move people from place to place,
    fundamentally, that is what we do.
        So if the way we offer those up to the consuming public is
    different, just a different consumer model, then that is our
    obligation, to figure out how to serve them what they need.
        The Chairman. Senator Wicker.

                  STATEMENT OF HON. ROGER F. WICKER,
                     U.S. SENATOR FROM MISSISSIPPI

        Senator Wicker. Gentlemen, clearly, we need automated
    microphones at this hearing.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Wicker. Mr. Kentley-Klay, you said the AV START Act
    and the SELF-DRIVE Act are the right approaches. Mr. Schneider,
    you said there is an urgency to passing the AV START Act.
        So let me ask you, Mr. Mansuetti, have you looked at this
    legislation? And do you advocate the passage of it?
        Mr. Mansuetti. Yes, we support it. We appreciate the work
    that has been done, and it provides a clear and certain
    framework moving forward, so we very much support it and look
    forward to the passage.
        Senator Wicker. Doctor, we have taken a vote up here, and
    we cannot seem to get up a majority for how to pronounce your
    name, so would you help us?
        Dr. Avent. Yes, sir, it is Avent, just like what air comes
    out of.
        Senator Wicker. Just like the dairy in Oxford, Mississippi.
    OK.
        What do you think about this legislation? Is there an
    urgency to getting this done? And if we get it done, how soon
    will we see the fruits of it?
        Dr. Avent. I actually have not read it in its entirety, so
    I will pass on that question.
        Senator Wicker. OK, and that is fair enough. Let me ask
    you, then, who wants to talk about HOT CARS? Three of you have
    advocated the passage of this legislation. The AV bill contains
    the hot car provision, which I helped co-sponsor.
        There were approximately 755 child vehicular heatstroke
    fatalities in the United States between 1990 and 2015. We have
    heard concerns about the costs of this, but we have also heard
    that, with the development of sensors to detect the presence of
    other vehicles, we might as well go ahead and spend the extra
    $30 to $50 to incorporate heat-detection sensors in the
    backseats of vehicles.
        So let me start with you, Mr. Schneider, because you
    already have the Audi MMI connect App for smart phones with
    this level of precise sensing and mobile connectivity. Can that
    be a way to jumpstart the provision and save the lives of
    children in the backseats?
        And then other people might want to comment on this.
        Mr. Schneider. Sure. I appreciate the opportunity to
    respond to that.
        The ability to save lives in vehicles, regardless of how
    those lives are lost, is a priority for Audi. So the ability to
    use smart phone technology or wireless or anything, really, to
    improve the safety of vehicles, is in our best interest. So
    this is yet one other example, I think, of how we have shown a
    commitment to safety and how we believe that the passage of
    this bill and the ability to greater connect cars, both to
    terrestrial and in other locations, is important.
        Senator Wicker. How close is Audi to this capability?
        Mr. Schneider. I cannot speak to that directly, but I can
    definitely give you a response after the hearing.
        Senator Wicker. Anyone else want to comment? Mr. Kentley-
    Klay?
        Mr. Kentley-Klay. Senator Wicker, thank you for your
    question. I think it is important to understand there are two
    directions this technology will develop. The first is
    automobiles that are sold to customers, they will have
    increasingly automated functions. And I cannot speak to hot
    cars in that category. The category that Zoox is developing is
    we do not sell the car. We own and operate the vehicle in a
    city, and customers pay per minute, per mile.
        In that case, our vehicle is designed to be deployed for up
    to 16 hours. We expect a utilization rate of 50 percent to 60
    percent, so we would condition the cabin throughout its
    deployment environment. It is never parked for a long period of
    time in a car park and getting hot. So the ability for that
    issue to be eradicated with our architecture is, I would say,
    complete.
        Senator Wicker. Mr. Mansuetti?
        Mr. Mansuetti. As we develop sensors for interior occupancy
    sensing and also driver monitoring, these technologies can also
    be used to do just that, to detect occupants in the car and
    also sense the temperature and provide a warning, so those are
    things we are looking at actively as we develop this
    technology.
        Senator Wicker. It seems like we ought to be able to do it
    without much cost.
        We have heard questions about infrastructure in New York,
    and we have heard questions about cross-country trips. We hope
    Congress is about to get a recommendation from the
    administration about an infrastructure bill. What do we need to
    include in infrastructure legislation that could facilitate the
    development of autonomous vehicles?
        Mr. Schneider. That is another great question, and one
    where I think we have to take this initiative in the right
    perspective. So while many would like to think that tomorrow we
    are going to see autonomous vehicles connected and taking us
    where we want to go, the reality is that this will be a longer
    term, more of an evolution than a revolution.
        So specifically, what we need in an infrastructure bill
    today is not something, I do not think, anybody can comment on
    specifically. But what we do need is the ability to put more
    vehicles on the road, to test them, to understand where the
    pinch points are, where the safety compromises might be, and to
    be able to very accurately and clearly communicate that to an
    administration and a legislature that has the ability to enact
    and improve those conditions.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Wicker.
        Senator Peters.

                    STATEMENT OF HON. GARY PETERS,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM MICHIGAN

        Senator Peters. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank
    Chairman Thune and Ranking Member Nelson for hosting this
    meeting.
        I will say this is the best-attended Committee meeting I
    have been to since I have been a Member of this Committee, so
    maybe we need to have more meetings here at the auto show, Mr.
    Chairman, or just have more hearings about an incredibly
    exciting topic.
        It is really a pleasure to be here with the industry.
        And, Senator Thune, thank you so much for your leadership
    on this bill. I think we all saw his passion in his opening
    comments. And I enjoy working with him because he is a no-
    nonsense Senator. You can tell that by the fact that he asked
    the three big questions right out of the box, like no-nonsense,
    let's get right to the core of this.
        And that is what you have done all along. Thank you, Mr.
    Chairman.
        And, Senator Nelson, thank you for being there every step
    of the way as well and working with all of us to make this a
    reality.
        And I agree, this technology is transformative. You can
    call it disruptive or creative. It is all of those things. In
    fact, I believe it is the biggest thing to happen to the auto
    industry since the first car came off of the assembly line, and
    we all know that was a pretty big deal for the auto industry to
    have an assembly line. And this will be equally as big, and it
    is happening faster than I think the public realizes.
        Given the fact that General Motors, as Senator Nelson
    mentioned, has already announced for 2019 to have these cars.
    The Ford Motor Company is going to have a self-driving car off
    their assembly line, they have announced, by 2021. Other
    companies are making similar claims.
        I was just at the Detroit auto show last week, which is an
    incredible show, and they were featuring a number of self-
    driving cars, including the Ford Motor self-driving car that
    they are working on and testing in Ann Arbor, Michigan, that
    delivers pizzas, Domino's pizzas, to your door, which is
    innovative and just one example of all the things that are
    going to happen as a result of this.
        But in order for that to happen, and this topic has already
    been brought up about consumer trust, we are certainly aware of
    that. You have to win trust because this is a new thing for
    consumers, that they have to feel comfortable. That can be a
    potential limiting factor to it.
        So the legislation before us, the AV START Act, actually
    creates a requirement that the Department of Transportation
    work with both industry and other government agencies to
    advance responsible consumer education. Central to that, in my
    mind, is to make sure consumers understand what these cars can
    and cannot do, particularly before we get to Level 4 and 5.
    There is always an issue related to the car may not do
    everything you think it is, and you will expect it can, and
    then something bad will happen as a result of that.
        If those kinds of accidents occur, we can expect to have
    significant consumer pushback on this technology, if we are not
    doing it right or we are not doing it in a way that fully
    informs consumers.
        So my question to you, this is required in the legislation,
    is how will your companies, or some ideas of how we will
    accomplish that to make sure that, before anybody gets in that
    car, they understand what this car can or cannot do? Given that
    requirement in this bill, how will you react to it? Anyone can
    start.
        Dr. Avent. I may differ a little bit from some of the other
    panelists in that I think open-city testing alone is not the
    right option. It is only one piece of a very thorough and
    integrated approach to testing.
        The problem with open-city testing is that your events
    aren't controllable. They are real world, which is a great
    thing and something that needs to be done, but you cannot
    control events, and it is hard sometimes to observe them, and
    it is certainly hard to repeat them.
        So I think you need a holistic approach, an integrated
    approach, to testing to build the trust. That includes
    everything from simulation and emulation, where you can really
    control and run lots of test cases, to closed-track testing,
    where you can focus on those edge cases.
        For instance, like Senator Nelson said today, when someone
    makes a U-turn out in the middle of the road, that is a six
    sigma event that happens once in a million times,
    unfortunately, but there will be lots of those cases. For
    instance, the Tesla that was in the automobile accident where a
    white truck pulled out in front of it, and the sun was just in
    the perfect location that it could not see it, the sensor could
    not see it, and it ran into it.
        There will be a vehicle that is going down the road in
    Kentucky that has potholes on it, no lanes on it, and a horse
    will run out in front of it. Those are the rare events that you
    are not going to be able to get in-city exclusively, so you
    have to build an infrastructure that allows you to test all
    those cases and really characterize when it works, and when it
    does not work.
        And for those cases where it does not work, what can we do
    to improve that? I think that is going to take a little bit of
    time to do that.
        Senator Peters. Anyone else?
        Mr. Mansuetti. Thank you, Senator Peters. I would say, as I
    mentioned before, this awareness and education of the consumer,
    we have a duty as an industry to do this, and I would liken it
    to when we introduced electronic stability control. We were
    early innovators in ABS. This is a foundational element of
    automated driving. We really undertook, together with the
    insurance industry and other industries, to educate the public
    on how to use this particular safety system and what is
    happening when it is in use.
        So I think we have to continue to demonstrate through good
    use cases--I mentioned before the example of parking--that
    people can become familiar in a safe environment and begin to
    trust the overall technology. I think that is happening as we
    introduce some of these safety features in the vehicles today,
    like automatic emergency braking or lane departure warning or
    adaptive cruise control. So I think people will become more
    familiar.
        And as more technology is available on the road, we will
    continue to build that consumer trust.
        Senator Peters. Dr. Avent, if I may just ask a quick
    question, because you brought up the point of having not just
    city testing but testing in other environments, including
    proving grounds. Of course, you are one of the automated
    vehicle proving grounds that has been designated. We have one
    in Michigan. I see Mr. Maddox here from the American Center for
    Mobility.
        How are these proving grounds operating? How do you feel
    where we are with them, how important they are? And what can we
    do in Congress to make your work and the other nine proving
    grounds work more efficiently?
        Dr. Avent. I think they are emerging, and they are evolving
    over time as the technology evolves, and they are being
    responsive to how the technology is going. I think they are a
    critical part. Like I said, one of the big advantages of these
    test grounds is that you can control the events and you can
    experiment with it, so you can take those fringe test cases
    that technology really is not quite mature for and you can
    experiment around them and really understand when and where
    this technology works.
        As you mentioned, there are 10 sites across the Nation that
    have been chosen as testing grounds, and all of them are going
    to have a little bit different expertise, so I do not think
    there is a winner-take-all approach to it. I think you need
    multiple people doing different things and integrating it all
    together.
        I think that these test grounds can provide a valuable
    interface to the government to help with regulations, because
    it can provide data and a science-based approach to what
    regulations need to be and what ones do not need to be. I think
    many of them are attached to universities, which I think is a
    great thing, because universities are independent. They are
    unbiased. They do not have anything in this market, and they
    can provide real, true advice.
        Senator Peters. Thank you.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Peters. And by the way,
    thanks for your great work on this and continued work trying to
    get this cleared through the Senate.
        Next up is Senator Heller.

                    STATEMENT OF HON. DEAN HELLER,
                        U.S. SENATOR FROM NEVADA

        Senator Heller. Mr. Chairman, thank you for this work. I
    want to thank our panelists for being here. Clearly, with the
    size of the crowd we have here today, there is a tremendous
    amount of interest in this technology.
        I am kind of proud that Nevada has been one of the leaders
    in driverless technology. We were the very first state to pass
    autonomous vehicle legislation in 2011 that paved the way for
    testing. And last year, Nevada also passed a full
    implementation of autonomous vehicles for personal and
    commercial use, and we now have autonomous trucks and buses
    that are testing on our roads.
        So in Nevada, we have nearly a half million seniors. We
    have about 275,000 disabled individuals. We also have 300,000
    veterans. I think my father-in-law and my father fall in all
    three of those categories. But needless to say, for these
    individuals, this technology will bring them, I think, greater
    independence and greater mobility.
        Having said all that, my experience in this, without
    telling you my age, everybody younger than me loves this
    technology. Everybody that is older, they are a little worried
    about this technology. So we have a lot of work to do.
        But I do believe that there is a real opportunity. I know
    that most people on this panel have probably, at one time or
    another, had an opportunity to be in an autonomous vehicle. In
    fact, 20 years ago, I was at CES, and they had the latest and
    greatest piece of equipment, and that was a hydrogen vehicle
    that could go about 60 miles on a tank of gas at 30 miles an
    hour and cost $1 million. Here we are 20 years later, Tesla has
    Model 3, and it is $35,000 and will go 500 miles, and it will
    go 80 miles an hour. So it is amazing how much things have
    changed in the last 20 years.
        In fact, last year at CES, I was in an Audi with Delphi
    technology and was able to drive seven miles on the freeway,
    get off the freeway, in an autonomous vehicle. There was
    somebody in the driver's seat, but their hands were off the
    wheel and were off the brakes and the gas pedal. It is just
    fascinating to see just what has happened in the last 20 years.
        Mr. Kentley-Klay, you talked a little about the future. I
    know Senator Nelson talked about 20 years from now. It sounds
    like to me that the equipment and the technology that you are
    offering, it sounds like, 20 years from now, no one will own a
    vehicle.
        Mr. Kentley-Klay. Senator Heller, thank you for your
    question. I think it was in 1908 that the Model T Ford shipped.
    How long did it take before the coach builders were out of
    business? If you look back historically, it was around 2
    decades.
        I think with the safety case in this technology and how
    quickly we can advance it, well within 2 decades, I think
    everyone will be driving automated vehicles or using shared
    automated mobility, because that is what we need to do to make
    the roads safe.
        Senator Heller. Talking rural vehicles or rural areas, I am
    part of that 1 percent of those farmers you were mentioning. We
    had 303 vehicular deaths last year in Nevada. More than half of
    them happened in the rural portions of the state.
        What kind of testing is being done out in the rural
    portions? Even though it is less than 20 percent of the
    population, rural America, it still has an above average
    vehicular death rate.
        What are we going to do for--Dr. Avent talked about
    animals. How are we going to ensure that, in the rural
    portions, where these accidents do occur, that they are being
    tested?
        Mr. Kentley-Klay. I am reminded of the Arthur C. Clarke
    quote, ``Any sufficiently advanced technology is
    indistinguishable from magic.'' This is a really new
    technology. To people in rural areas or in cities, it might
    look like magic, but to developers, this is advanced
    technology. And we understand what we are building and how it
    works.
        In fact, the way our vehicles are engineered, we do not
    have to understand that it is a horse or a squirrel or a person
    to know that there is something there and we need to stop. And
    so we can engineer the vehicles that understand abstractly what
    is happening geometrically in the environment to get the
    requisite safety we need, and what we really need to do is take
    the public, everyone in America, on the journey of how this
    technology works so that they can understand it, to get the
    assurance that they need that it is safe.
        Senator Heller. Let me ask you one more question really
    quickly before I run out of time, and that is, why was it
    advantageous for you to go from Australia to the United States
    to do your work here as opposed to your own home country?
        Mr. Kentley-Klay. Thank you for the question. I think the
    intersection of creativity, capital, and computer science in
    America is unprecedented. And to create the technology that we
    do, we need the engineering depth of talent that is in this
    country that we can access to scale. We need investors that are
    brave enough to invest in such an advanced technology. And we
    need the connections that are in this country, because it is
    integrated, to bring the right set of peoples together, even
    working with you today, to make this technology a reality.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Heller.
        Next up is Senator Hassan.

                   STATEMENT OF HON. MAGGIE HASSAN,
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE

        Senator Hassan. Thank you, Mr. Chair and Ranking Member
    Nelson.
        Thank you to all of the witnesses for being here and for
    the work you are doing. This is, indeed, very exciting
    technology and really represents the potential for enormous
    innovation in all aspects of American life and global life,
    actually. So thank you for the work you are doing.
        I wanted to drill down on a couple things. I happen to be
    the mom of a 29-year-old young man with very severe
    disabilities, so much of what you talk about is very exciting
    for those of us who live in a world in which we have a family
    member with a disability. But it is also a reminder that people
    who do not have disabilities often think they know what
    solutions are for people who experience disabilities, and they
    forget to talk to people who actually experience disabilities,
    example being, ``Yes, Mrs. Hassan, the entryway is accessible
    for your son in a wheelchair,'' to find that there is a little,
    tiny lift without the adequate turning radius to get a
    particular kind of wheelchair in and out, right?
        So can you all just talk to me about what interactions you
    are having with people who might represent the disability
    community to really understand and drill down on what the
    different populations within that community will need?
        Mr. Schneider. This is an immensely important topic, and it
    is one in a very recent personal experience I came to
    understand in a much more profound way of someone with a
    disability and the challenges associated with getting into and
    out of a vehicle to do some very simple things.
        The reality is that automated vehicles hold the potential
    for greater self-sufficiency and the ability to provide a basic
    level of mobility for persons with disabilities that does not
    exist there today. And the way we think about that is really
    the way we think about engineering almost any system, which is
    to understand that customer's journey, to try to think through
    the very specific moments that matter and the points of
    considerable duress that are undergone, and to really
    understand and factor into our engineering models the many
    differences faced by people with disabilities, because
    disabilities are not all the same. There is a wide, wide
    variety.
        Our work with ADA compliance and with other regulations has
    given us as an industry a very deep respect for the need to
    provide mobility and transportation for all. And this is yet
    another case where it is a very exciting moment in time.
        Senator Hassan. Thank you.
        Anybody else just briefly, because I do have a couple other
    questions?
        The second question, shifting to some of the concerns I
    hear from consumers and constituents is, because of the
    technological innovations that drive AV, you all will have an
    awful lot of consumer data available to you. So the question
    is, what information will be collected on consumers who
    purchase AVs? What is the industry doing to protect the data
    from being sold and shared without the consumer's consent? And
    how easily can consumers access and change what data is
    collected and shared about them?
        Anybody?
        Mr. Mansuetti. Maybe I will start. Consumer data, and
    especially security and privacy, is very important, so we
    believe that, first and foremost, we need to protect this data.
    We also need to have consent to use the data.
        As to the extent of what data will be collected and how it
    will be shared and how it will be used, I think that continues
    to develop as these business models develop. But for us, in
    developing the technology, it is first and foremost how we
    protect this data and data security.
        Senator Hassan. Anybody else?
        All right, last question, which we probably cannot handle
    in 48 seconds, and I will submit it in writing, but I am a
    former Governor, and I am sitting here listening to all the
    things that State and local governments are going to need to be
    thinking about to accommodate and help launch this technology,
    everything from, what kind of roads do we build, right? Where
    do we build them? How do we deal with the reality that there
    are bad actors out there who would like to try to infiltrate
    the systems--the software systems that run this technology?
    This becomes critical infrastructure. How are we going to
    partner and deal with that?
        How are we going to deal with job training for the next
    generation and for the people who are today going to be
    displaced by this technology?
        And last, there is always that question in rural America,
    which is, how do we get out this new technology and
    infrastructure to that last mile where population, or in my
    case, in New Hampshire, the last two-thirds of my state--it
    isn't the last. It is the first to everybody who lives in my
    north country. But two-thirds of my state is populated by
    52,000 people. And so how are we going to leverage what we need
    to leverage and get this technology out to the least densely
    populated places in our country so that everybody has the
    freedom and the economic advantage that this technology poses?
        We will submit that in writing, and I look forward to
    working with you guys on that.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Hassan. We will make sure
    we get that responded to.
        Senator Inhofe is up next.

                     STATEMENT OF HON. JIM INHOFE,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM OKLAHOMA

        Senator Inhofe. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        First of all, every time you ask for a yes or no answer,
    you do not get a yes or no answer, so I am going to test you
    guys. I have two questions I am going to ask and listen very
    carefully.
        First of all, I want to say, Mr. Kentley-Klay, you are the
    only one in your opening statement that used a couple of
    phrases that I like to use, one being ``level playing field,''
    and the other, ``government without picking winners.''
        So here is the first question. Since we are at the auto
    show, I want to highlight an issue that is of concern to me and
    perhaps to others who are here today, which we do not talk much
    about, the fact that Federal policy is stacked against liquid
    fuels. This year's auto show is debuting the most electric
    vehicles ever. But electric vehicles do not even make up 1
    percent of the Nation's auto sales, and auto manufacturers are
    producing more and more of them, of course. Why?
        As Merrill Matthews, a scholar at the Institute for Policy
    Innovation, puts it, ``carmakers are building cars and trucks
    the government wants their consumers to have, and that means
    electrical vehicles.''
        In 1975, Congress created a law to help with the fuel
    shortage situation by establishing the Corporate Average Fuel
    Economy, or CAFE standards. We no longer have a fuel shortage
    issue, but that did not stop the Obama Administration and
    California from ensuring standards kept increasing beyond the
    technology, what you can do to force their electric car
    fantasies on the rest of us.
        But consumers want trucks and SUVs. They make up two-thirds
    of the vehicles sold. Yet these vehicles do not help automakers
    meet current DOT and EPA regulations, so they make more and
    more electrics to lower the overall mileage at a significant
    loss.
        Additionally, taxpayers are on the hook for up to $7,500
    per electric or hybrid vehicle sold today in the form of tax
    credits. When Hong Kong ended their tax credit, the sales
    dropped significantly, which goes to show you that people want
    to make their own decisions. So as electric vehicles are forced
    onto the U.S. consumer, the liquid fuel industry, and I am
    talking about oil and gas and ethanol, will be wondering why
    their government abandoned them in pursuit of the California
    dream.
        The Federal Government should not be in the business of
    dictating to consumers what type of cars they should have or
    creating winners and losers.
        So question number one, do you believe the Federal
    Government should be in the business of dictating to consumers
    what types of cars they should have and creating winners and
    losers?
        Let's start with you, Mr. Klay. Yes or no?
        Mr. Kentley-Klay. No.
        Senator Inhofe. Very good. How about you, Doctor?
        Dr. Avent. No.
        Mr. Mansuetti. So the question is of the government picking
    winners and losers, that was your main question? No.
        Mr. Schneider. Do we have time?
        Senator Inhofe. Yes, go ahead.
        Mr. Schneider. On the issue of level playing fields and the
    government picking winners and losers, we believe the consumers
    should have the choice.
        Senator Inhofe. Good for you. All of you, I am proud of
    you.
        Now the last question is, the promise of automatic vehicle
    technology will impact all the users of our Nation's highways
    and transportation system.
        You highlight, and this would be to you, again, starting
    Mr. Klay, you highlight in your testimony the strong safety
    benefits that come with more autonomous vehicles on the road.
    Do you believe that these benefits can be or should be realized
    by all motor vehicles, including trucks which are driving on
    the roads today? Yes or no?
        Mr. Kentley-Klay. Thank you for the question. I believe
    this technology will expand to all modes of technology and
    transportation.
        Senator Inhofe. Yes or no? That is yes.
        OK, go ahead, the rest of you, please.
        Dr. Avent. I do not think that it has to be done, but I
    think it certainly could be an advantage.
        Senator Inhofe. OK, your answer, Mr. Mansuetti?
        Mr. Mansuetti. Yes, this can be helpful.
        Senator Inhofe. Thank you.
        Mr. Schneider?
        Mr. Schneider. I agree.
        Senator Inhofe. OK.
        Dr. Avent, what justifies the exceptions of not having this
    apply to trucks, in your mind?
        Dr. Avent. I do not think there is an exception. I think
    that, again, it can be market-motivated. But I think that the
    technology certainly can help that industry tremendously.
        Senator Inhofe. That is good. Good answer.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Inhofe.
        Senator Lee is up next.

                      STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE LEE,
                         U.S. SENATOR FROM UTAH

        Senator Lee. Thanks very much to each of you for being here
    and for answering your questions. We are on the precipice of a
    groundbreaking technological revolution, one that combines
    computing power with telecommunications abilities, sensing
    abilities, so as to really change the way the American people
    interact with their means of transportation. And it has the
    power, simultaneously, to make us healthier, to make us safer.
        One of the things that I worry about in this circumstance
    is that the only thing that can stop this technological
    revolution from taking place and from improving the lives of
    330 Americans is the government itself.
        I worry, for example, about the push that some are seeming
    to desire, to depart from our traditional regulatory processes
    and to add an additional layer here, specifically for you,
    specifically for this technology. I shudder at the thought of
    what the government might have done had premarket approval been
    a prerequisite for starting some of the technologies that
    brought the Internet to life for the American people, or if
    premarket approval had stifled any of the number of innovations
    that make the lives of the American people better from day-to-
    day.
        So Mr. Kentley-Klay, I would like to start with you and ask
    you a question regarding how regulations like NHTSA premarket
    approval might stifle innovation in this industry from your
    perspective?
        Mr. Kentley-Klay. Senator, thank you for your question. I
    do not know that NHTSA actually has a regulation out for
    premarket approval, but our view is that, with a new
    technology, you definitely do not want to stifle it. At the
    same time, we need to deploy it in a safe and risk-managed way.
    And the right way to do that is exactly what we are doing here
    today, having informed conversation so that all stakeholders
    understand the politics of what is being created and making the
    right judgment calls about how to bring it into reality.
        Senator Lee. And it is not in your interests, it is not
    your desire to make an unsafe vehicle, correct?
        Mr. Kentley-Klay. Absolutely not. I mean, I would say that,
    today, in the states of Michigan and Florida and I think
    Arizona as well, you legally could drive a vehicle with no one
    sitting behind the wheel, but no developer is doing that
    because they are making the judgment themselves that the
    technology is not ready.
        Senator Lee. Right. And if you did make that judgment call
    and you went for it, people would not drive that vehicle,
    people would not purchase that vehicle, people would not buy
    stock in the company, people would not invest in that company.
        Mr. Kentley-Klay. It would be incredibly counterproductive
    to spend years and billions of dollars developing the
    technology to release it prematurely and have people lose
    confidence in the technology.
        Senator Lee. By the same token, you are not asking for a
    regulation-free environment. You are not asking for the
    government to stay out of this entirely and to pretend as if
    this were the Wild West in which there are no rules?
        Mr. Kentley-Klay. Absolutely not. We are asking for an
    informed conversation to, in a risk-managed way, deploy the
    technology in a way that expedites its benefits.
        Senator Lee. Aren't there, in fact, some safety-related
    risks that could result in the wake of and precisely because of
    an overly aggressive Federal Government regulatory regime?
        Mr. Kentley-Klay. That is a potential outcome, yes.
        Senator Lee. In other words, isn't there a very real risk
    with an emerging technology like this one that the government
    sets a standard, and that standard could become at once the
    floor and the ceiling, thus stifling innovation?
        Mr. Kentley-Klay. I think standards should be set based on
    data, and we do not quite have the data yet. So if we set
    standards before we fully understand what we are creating, we
    could stifle innovation.
        Senator Lee. Just about two weeks ago, Secretary Elaine
    Chao, the head of the U.S. Department of Transportation, made
    an announcement that the Department of Transportation would be
    seeking public input across the transportation industry to
    ``identify barriers to innovation and shape initiatives.''
        I would like to ask each of you, in the moment we have
    remaining, in just a few seconds, tell me what you think the
    biggest barriers to innovation are?
        We will start with you, Dr. Avent.
        Dr. Avent. I do think the application of all existing
    regulatory policies is not best--because it is completely
    different, and it is a new frontier, and we have to be careful
    of taking existing policies and regulating based on those.
        Senator Lee. Mr. Kentley-Klay?
        Mr. Kentley-Klay. I would commend Senator Thune and Senator
    Nelson on their opening remarks. I think you guys get it. As a
    new entrant into this new era of mobility, the biggest barrier
    to innovation would be an incumbent trying to make it difficult
    for us to deploy the technology when we actually know what we
    are doing.
        Senator Lee. To drive out would-be competitors.
        Mr. Kentley-Klay. That is right.
        Senator Lee. Mr. Mansuetti?
        Mr. Mansuetti. We must be careful not to overregulate here,
    and that is why we are in such strong support of the AV START
    bill. I think you guys are doing exactly the right thing that
    allows us to continue to innovate iteratively on these
    technologies and bring them to market as safely and quickly as
    we can.
        Senator Lee. Well-said. I tend to agree.
        Mr. Schneider?
        Mr. Schneider. I think you said it in your opening
    comments. There is a confluence of technological changes
    happening, and to properly regulate this so that that does not
    prohibit innovation while maintaining the safety that we all
    require.
        Senator Lee. Thank you very much. I see my time has
    expired.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Lee.
        Senator Capito.

                STATEMENT OF HON. SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO,
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM WEST VIRGINIA

        Senator Capito. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member.
    And I thank all of you. It has been a very interesting hearing.
        I wanted to touch on a subject that I think Mr. Mansuetti
    mentioned in his opening statement, and that is the workforce
    issues here. I would imagine, at this point, with the
    innovation that is going forward, it is pretty highly
    technically advanced degrees, engineering and computer science
    types of innovationists that have gotten us to this point. But
    for the workforce of tomorrow to meet the challenges of the AV
    technology, you mentioned apprenticeships. You mentioned grants
    for STEM and then professional development for teachers.
        I am wondering how you think this will impact the jobs of
    the future, because we have heard a little bit about how it is
    going to impact the jobs of the future in a negative way, in
    the development and in the training. And I also would like to
    just remind everybody that, in the STEM fields, women and
    minorities are very underrepresented, and it is important that
    we spur that next generation into what I think is going to be a
    very exciting field.
        So, Mr. Mansuetti?
        Mr. Mansuetti. I think, first, when you look at the current
    state we are in when we are developing the technology, the
    technology is very exciting, and we are being able to attract a
    lot more of these STEM candidates into things like autonomous
    driving. If you look at the automotive industry, that has been
    kind of stigmatized as, ``Do I want to go into the automotive
    industry?'' which was once seen as perhaps dying.
        So now we are seeing a lot of excitement generated and
    being able to attract those candidates to work on the exciting
    new technology.
        I think, in the future, as we discussed, the jobs will be
    changing in mobility. So when we look at just a simple case
    with the auto itself, whether it is a car that we have today,
    an electrified vehicle, or maybe even a shared taxi, with the
    increased utilization, there is going to be more and different
    types of maintenance functions, for example.
        So we will see new opportunities opening up along all these
    different lines of how the technology is deployed, and then in
    these use cases, as we go to a shared mobility.
        So I think the importance is to continue to train the
    workforce, educate them in these new opportunities, and be
    ready for the new jobs of the future.
        Senator Capito. Dr. Avent, do you have a comment on that?
        Dr. Avent. Yes, I think exactly the same thing. Certainly,
    the technology relevant in this is going to be around new
    fields, around machine intelligence, around artificial
    intelligence, which is computer-science-based. Certainly, there
    is going to be a lot of sensor developments related to this
    that are going to have to take place. So technology around
    STEM, and particularly what we called core STEM, which is the
    engineering, mathematical, and physical sciences, are going to
    be very relevant.
        Senator Capito. The opportunities are going to be all up
    and down the scale here. It is not just going to be at the high
    end, probably where it is now on the development portion.
        Dr. Avent. On the development portion, but also, they are
    going to have to be maintained. They are going to have to be
    improved. So really all up and down the scales.
        Senator Capito. My second question involves partners. We
    talked about some partnerships, but I am curious to know, it is
    going to change the face of the highway in terms of road signs
    and indicators, so that the car can pick up indicators rather
    than the human eye picking up indicators.
        I am wondering what kind of partnerships you have with road
    builders and State DOTs and local transportation authorities?
        Mr. Kentley-Klay?
        Dr. Avent, did you have a response to that?
        Dr. Avent. In the case of Florida Polytechnic University,
    we have a partnership with the Florida Turnpike Enterprise,
    which is a part of the Florida Department of Transportation,
    and we are working hand-in-hand with them on exactly those
    types of things, and experimenting on a closed-loop test track.
        Senator Capito. So, Mr. Kentley-Klay, you are already doing
    this. So what kind of coordination do you have with your local
    transportation authority, sign makers, all those things?
        Mr. Kentley-Klay. Senator, thank you for your question.
    This overlaps a little bit with the previous question about
    infrastructure and spending, and should that be deployed in the
    area of autonomous vehicles.
        Our view is that we are developing the technology to work
    with infrastructure as-is. We do not require new signs, new
    lane markings, or anything like that for the technology to be
    introduced into the market and scale. We think if we had that
    dependency, it would cripple our ability to bring the
    technology into the marketplace.
        There is various talk of technologies where traffic lights
    can talk to vehicles, or vehicles can talk to other vehicles or
    pedestrians. They are interesting, in theory, but the problem
    with those technologies is, if you are actually dependent on
    them, if there is a fault, then the system will fault. So we
    are developing our systems in a way that they are robust
    without dependencies on any sort of infrastructure changes.
        Senator Capito. That is good to hear. Thank you.
        Mr. Mansuetti, did you have an additional comment?
        Mr. Mansuetti. With regard to partnerships, we are doing a
    lot with cities around the country, especially in this area of
    smart city development, so we are involved a lot within their
    department of transportations and what they are doing on the
    mobility front in cities. So that has been very interesting.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Moore.
        Senator Young.

                     STATEMENT OF HON. TODD YOUNG,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM INDIANA

        Senator Young. Thank you, Chairman. This has been a very
    interesting hearing. There are a lot of reasons for optimism
    and outright excitement moving forward as these technologies
    develop.
        I think the thing perhaps I am most excited about are the
    potential changes to the quality-of-life of a disabled person,
    of an elderly person, of someone who happens to be site-
    impaired. It is going to give them a new sense of independence,
    to be more mobile, improve their quality-of-life. You can see
    them integrating into the workforce more.
        Mr. Kentley-Klay, you talk about this in your testimony,
    how there have been previous mobility ages, I think as you
    referred to them, and how AI is going to bring on a new
    mobility age.
        Could you unpack this concept, this new mobility age a bit
    for us, please? And just try to paint a picture of how the
    lives of our disabled and elderly Americans might change as
    this technology evolves.
        Mr. Kentley-Klay. Certainly, Senator. Thank you for your
    question.
        The pace of change is accelerating. The previous mobility
    age was, of course, the horse and carriage. It was actually
    around 4000 B.C. that we domesticated the horse and put the
    axle on the wheel, and that gave us coach building, and that
    was a huge change for society on that day because we could move
    goods at a much more expeditious rate.
        That was 6,000 years ago. It looks like we are about to
    leave the automobile age, which we have been in for around 130
    years, so it is a much, much more compressed time span, and go
    to the age of fully automated transportation, which is coming.
    There is no unobtainium that needs to be created to create this
    technology. We understand what we need to do, and it is now
    just a lot of elbow grease to make it ready for commercial
    operation.
        So the change is happening. And we are excited, as many
    people have commented, that this technology will increase
    access. Our mission statement is connecting people and places,
    and that is people without qualification, and that is what we
    want to enhance.
        Senator Young. Does anyone have anything to add?
        Dr. Avent?
        Dr. Avent. Thank you. I think if you look at a lot of
    industries, they start off as a craftsman model. Then over
    time, they become more efficient by becoming software-managed
    industries.
        I think in the case of transportation, it is still a
    craftsman model. We teach a driver how to drive. They get
    behind the wheel. This is the natural progression of that
    industry, to move over to a much more software-managed
    industry. They become much more efficient. As part of that, we
    do not to teach people how to drive. It will improve access to
    a lot of people that generally do not get that.
        Senator Young. Mr. Mansuetti, let me turn to discussing
    something others have touched down, the workforce of the
    future. I know that Bosch at least appears to have thought
    pretty creatively about this, from the manufacturing
    professional development programs to STEM to apprenticeship
    programs. Continued career and technical education we know will
    be needed to alleviate any shortfall in the workforce and make
    sure that workers have the skillset required to fill the jobs
    of the future in this space.
        Could you discuss what role you see moving forward for
    government, particularly the Federal Government, but maybe
    government generally, in making sure that companies like yours
    will have access to the skilled workforce that they need?
        Mr. Mansuetti. I think that is going to be very important
    in the future. As we look today, there is a shortage of skilled
    workers, so we need to continue to expose and be able to train
    and qualify the workforce of the future. I think that requires
    a partnership between State and local and Federal officials, as
    well as industry.
        We kind of need to look at the K-through-graduate education
    model and getting those things to work together. Many times, we
    see that there are disconnects when you go through certain
    education systems. So we are trying to partner not only with
    universities but also, for example, where we are working, where
    we are heavily involved in manufacturing, for example, in the
    Southeast, working together with states, with the State
    universities, the technical colleges, the universities, to
    ensure that the right training is being applied and that we are
    training people at the right time in the right skills that we
    need.
        So we have a very good partnership, and we need to continue
    that.
        Senator Young. And from a policymaker's standpoint, I see
    one of the challenges being trying to work with you to
    determine what skills are generalized that are needed across
    the economy, which skills are specifically needed for this
    emerging sector, if you will, of the economy, and then which
    skills are firm-specific and ought to be invested in by
    companies like Bosch, for example.
        I guess the last thing I would add, Mr. Chairman, I just
    want to commend those who are responsible for drafting this
    legislation, for working with all the stakeholders. I
    understand principled compromises are required to end up where
    we are today, and I have high confidence this is going to
    become law, and I will be supportive.
        I still do lament, and I want to be on public record of
    lamenting the fact that we have limited this to passenger
    vehicles and not incorporated trucks into this legislation. I
    think we could save a lot of lives and improve a lot of lives
    if we were to broaden the scope of it.
        But with that said, I will end on an optimistic note and
    thank you once again for being here.
        Thanks for holding this hearing, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Young. And that view you
    articulated on trucks is one that I share, and I hope that, at
    some point, we can get that aspect of this important debate
    addressed.
        Senator Blumenthal.

                 STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL,
                     U.S. SENATOR FROM CONNECTICUT

        Senator Blumenthal. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
        I want to begin on an optimistic note and thank this
    excellent panel for giving us a view of the future with this
    exciting, wondrous technology that will give us a brave new
    world in automobiles and perhaps beyond automobiles in transit
    in general.
        And I want to avoid appearing to be an automotive
    Neanderthal or Luddite, but simply express a couple of
    reservations about potential irrational exuberance when safety
    is at stake.
        I want to avoid creating another generation of cars that
    may be unsafe at any speed, and we know from our experience
    that the simplest of devices in automobiles right now--ignition
    switches that malfunction, or safety bags that are killers, as
    a number of my colleagues know--can potentially pose great
    dangers.
        Right now, collision-avoidance technologies, such as
    automatic emergency braking, have been proven. They are
    available. They offer substantial safety benefits. And they
    have been recommended by the Federal Government, by safety
    authorities, by consumer advocates.
        And in fact, Mr. Mansuetti, 73 percent of Audis sold last
    year had AEB systems, so Audi is doing way better than many of
    your colleagues, because they sell only about 19 percent,
    according to 2017 model statistics. I assume you would agree
    that making collision avoidance systems standard should be a
    top priority for 2019?
        Mr. Mansuetti. Yes, from a Bosch perspective, we certainly
    agree. But speaking to Audi, I do not want to talk for you.
        Senator Blumenthal. I am sorry. Mr. Schneider?
        Mr. Schneider. Absolutely. Look, our record on implementing
    safety-related automotive devices, like automatic emergency
    braking, I think is pretty well-documented, and we do support
    the further infusion of that technology into our fleet.
        Senator Blumenthal. So that something as simple as AV
    technology, and I know, Mr. Mansuetti, you produce it, so you
    would agree, can help save lives.
        GM has said it is going to be manufacturing autonomous
    vehicles without steering wheels or peddles by 2019, but
    Nissan's R&D Chief has said, ``We will always need a human in
    the loop.''
        At CES earlier this month, as you know, Mr. Kentley-Klay,
    Phantom Auto demonstrated how a car in Los Angeles can be
    remotely controlled by a human operator in Mountain View,
    California. I understand that your company has a patent on this
    kind of teleoperation technology, so my question to you is,
    what kind of fallback system would you envision perhaps making
    use of this technology or a similar technology in the vehicles
    that will be under your control?
        Mr. Kentley-Klay. Thank you, Senator. That is a great
    question.
        I think the headline is that this technology fully realized
    is going to be incredibly safe to the point we are going to
    look back to the age of the automobile and say, wow, we were
    super-reckless, allowing that carnage on our roads. And I think
    you are going to have society having that judgment call within
    5 to 10 years.
        How do we achieve that endpoint? Not to get too deeply into
    the technical details, but our vehicles are engineered with
    three computers. There is a main AI computer. There is a backup
    computer behind that, and a backup computer behind that, and
    they are on different power buses.
        So if there is a hardware fault or a software fault, our
    vehicle has special hardware that is designed to stop itself in
    its lane. It will not go out of its lane and go into what we
    call a minimal risk condition.
        This is taking techniques used in aerospace. They are
    proved to be very space safe. In fact, I do not think there has
    been a fatality in aviation in America in the past 8 years, and
    these airplanes are all flown by triplex fly by-wire computer
    systems.
        So again, I think it is partly a public education campaign,
    but we are very confident that we can engineer these vehicles
    to be robust and safe.
        Senator Blumenthal. So you would view teleoperation as
    having a role in the future of your vehicles?
        Mr. Kentley-Klay. Yes. I think when your model is to have
    autonomous vehicles deployed as a for-hire service in cities,
    you are still going to need a command center in that city that
    has human-in-the-loop oversight of the fleet, both to deal with
    vehicles if they have an issue but also to deal with customers
    if they need help as well, and that is part of our model.
        Senator Blumenthal. Thank you.
        My time has expired. I have more questions, but maybe we
    will have a second round.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Blumenthal.
        Yes, if you want to ask another question, go ahead. We have
    a little bit of time, if these guys do not mind, and if anybody
    else has any final questions on the panel, too, we can use this
    as wrap-up.
        Senator Blumenthal. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
        Dr. Avent, on this issue of teleoperation, what role do you
    think that teleoperations should have in anticipating or
    dealing with unexpected or unpredictable events. In your
    testimony, you talk about the importance of testing autonomous
    vehicles against the rare, unpredictable six sigma events to
    make sure that they are safe for humans. Do you envision
    teleoperation as having a role?
        Dr. Avent. By teleoperation, do you mean remote control----
        Senator Blumenthal. Exactly.
        Dr. Avent.--where you have a user somewhere else, not in
    the vehicle?
        I think that may be a wrong path to go. It could be an
    interim, but I think that it is more appropriate to go from
    having a driver in the vehicle over to fully autonomous.
        I think the military certainly has experimented and done a
    lot in teleoperation with UAVs and drones and all, and they
    work, and they are safe. But I think that it does not meet the
    full benefit of going to autonomous vehicles.
        Senator Blumenthal. And let me ask all of you, having taken
    GM's statement that we will have AVs on the road by 2019, how
    soon, in your view, will be have Level 5, safe, autonomous
    vehicles? Maybe you can just go down the line and get a
    prediction, in terms of years from now.
        Dr. Avent. I think there is a common thing that says
    technology is overrated in the near term and underrated in the
    long term. I think that it is going to be longer than probably
    many technologists believe. I think a big part of that is going
    to be the adoption of it and the trust, more so than the
    technology itself. But I would say 10 years, if I was a betting
    person.
        Senator Blumenthal. Ten years.
        Mr. Kentley-Klay?
        Mr. Kentley-Klay. I think there is a shallow ramp for this
    technology into early adoption and then mass adoption. I think
    around 2020, you will see fully automated vehicles that are on-
    demand working in confined geo-fenced areas in certain
    locations. As the technologies improve, that is going to
    expand.
        Senator Blumenthal. But that is a more confined area ----
        Mr. Kentley-Klay. That is right.
        Senator Blumenthal.--in 3 years and then being consistent
    with----
        Mr. Kentley-Klay. Two to 3 years.
        Senator Blumenthal. Mr. Mansuetti?
        Mr. Mansuetti. At Bosch, we agree with that, with Mr.
    Kentley-Klay. We see by the end of the decade, 2020, we will
    see these use cases emerge in limited areas. In the next
    decade, increasingly more rollout of the technology. And by the
    end of the next decade, I think you will start to see fully
    autonomous Level 5 vehicles in all cases.
        Mr. Schneider. I think, in general, we would agree with
    that timeframe. But again, just to reiterate, this is going to
    be an evolution, and the full benefits of autonomous vehicles
    really come from not just a single-use case or even a handful
    of use cases. It comes from a preponderance of those use cases.
        So over the next decade, we are going to see these enter
    the full one by one, but certainly, in the near term, we will
    have some pretty serious progress.
        Senator Blumenthal. I just want to close with a final
    question, recognizing the reservations that have been expressed
    about the overinvolvement of government and premarket approval,
    as one of my colleagues said. Nobody is for overregulation or
    overinvolvement by government, but sometimes standards are
    necessary, and enforcement of these standards are critically
    important to saving lives.
        And, Mr. Kentley-Klay, you say in your testimony, I think
    you would all agree, that standards should be data-based. They
    should be driven by real facts from the real world.
        So my question I think, finally, to the panel is, how do we
    make sure that the government is receiving the kind of data it
    needs to make smart decisions about how to protect consumers?
    Anybody who wants to volunteer is welcome.
        Mr. Mansuetti. I mean, we see the technology with automated
    vehicles, no one can do it alone, so it takes a coalition, a
    collaboration, and a partnership, and that includes the
    government. So we will continue to collaborate openly.
        And where you need information, we are very helpful to
    provide that, so that we make good, sound decisions, we do not
    overregulate, and we provide this framework that allows us to
    move forward in the future to bring this technology to life,
    which everyone wants as quickly and as safely as possible.
        Senator Blumenthal. Mr. Avent?
        Dr. Avent. I agree with that. There is not going to be one
    industry or one type of person who is going to solve this
    problem. It is going to take a collection of lots of people. So
    I think consortiums, everyone working together in developing
    the technologies and testing them is very important.
        Senator Blumenthal. And you would all agree, I assume, that
    government does have a role to play in protecting safety?
        And in fact, in developing this technology, the reference
    was made earlier to the Internet. In fact, the Internet was the
    result of a partnership, a continuing partnership over many
    decades of private industry, academia, and the government,
    principally the military, as is demonstrated very dramatically
    and powerfully by a book called ``The Innovators'' written by
    Walter Isaacson.
        Anybody who has any question about that partnership should
    read the book, and I think it provides a useful template,
    perhaps for this new technology.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Blumenthal. We have in our
    bill safety-reporting requirements that address a lot of those
    concerns that you have voiced today. And I am hoping the panel
    has been influential in getting you to vote for the bill
    eventually when the time comes.
        I think Senator Peters has a question.
        Senator Peters. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And you are right.
    We have thought long and hard about making sure that safety is
    first and foremost in this legislation, making sure that we are
    trying to find that middle ground to allow innovation to
    flourish but also being careful about making sure these
    vehicles meet standards before they get out onto the road. The
    proving grounds, as you talked about as well, which we need to
    have more government involvement as well to make sure you have
    the resources to fully test these vehicles.
        We will collect those data as time goes on. And there will
    be a lot of data collected, and it will get better and better.
        We have to get to the point, Mr. Kentley-Klay, where you
    said that we deal with roughly 40,000 deaths on the highway and
    hundreds of thousands of debilitating injuries. We are on the
    verge of making major progress to eliminate nearly all of those
    when you take out the human factor--the human error factor. So
    that is a major motivator for me, and I think most of the folks
    on the Committee, to get to that point.
        The question that I had--and you can comment on that if you
    like, as you are pushing the button. Before you do that,
    though, a question that came up a little bit dealt with the
    power plant. We talked about a lot of factors related to this
    technology, but one thing that I have heard, and I want the
    panel to comment on, does this mean we are moving to electric
    power plants?
        My understanding is that this technology works best with an
    electric power plant as opposed to an internal combustion
    engine. Are we seeing a change in the as well?
        Mr. Schneider, you may be first, given the work that you
    are doing with your company, and any others who would jump in.
        And if that is the case, we have had a number of questions
    related to infrastructure, et cetera. That will lead to a lot
    of other issues as to how we make sure we have the
    infrastructure to support those electric vehicles that are on
    the road.
        Sir?
        Mr. Schneider. Certainly, that is an outstanding question,
    and one of those things at Audi that we think of as one of
    three major technological changes that are driving the
    industry. In addition to mobility and autonomous vehicles is
    electrification.
        So yes, indeed, power plants are moving to the electric
    variety, whether those are battery-operated or use other
    technologies to do that is I think an industry question in the
    longer term. However, the infrastructure of a vehicle is moving
    to an electrical one as a whole.
        And as a guy who started his career as a powertrain
    engineer designing engines at Ford, I tell you that it has
    moved and accelerated even just over the past decade, so I
    would expect it to continue.
        Mr. Mansuetti. For us, we see the future of mobility as
    automated, connected, and electrified. So electrification will
    play a large role in the future of autonomous vehicles.
        And to your specific question, yes, some of the things are
    much more easily realized in electrical vehicle architecture
    for this new technology.
        Mr. Kentley-Klay. Getting around cities on roads kind of
    sucks today. This technology is going to make it awesome, so we
    should all work together and just make it happen. Zoox is pure
    electric.
        On top of the 40,000 fatalities in America alone in 2016,
    and millions actually going to hospital, there is a study from
    MIT that came out that said around 50,000 people in the U.S.
    died up to a decade early because of pollution from mobility.
    The United Nations also forecasted in 2050, 75 percent of the
    world population is going to live in mega-city-like
    environments. So to get longevity of life, we really want to
    have zero-emission mobility in our most dense urban
    environments.
        Dr. Avent. I will defer to the panelists, because they are
    actually developing a lot of this technology. But as an
    academic, I do not think that the coupling of the technology is
    neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition. I think you can
    do autonomy on internal combustion engines. But I do think
    electrification is an incredible opportunity that we should
    take advantage of.
        The Chairman. Senator Peters, thank you.
        Senator Nelson.
        Senator Nelson. Mr. Chairman, for the record, I would like
    to insert a statement of Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety
    as part of our record.
        The Chairman. Without objection.
        [The information referred to follows:]

               Prepared Statement of Catherine Chase, President,
                     Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety
    Introduction
        Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety (Advocates) is a coalition of
    public health, safety, and consumer organizations, insurers and
    insurance agents that promotes highway and auto safety through the
    adoption of Federal and state laws, policies and regulations. Advocates
    is unique both in its board composition and its mission of advancing
    safer vehicles, safer drivers and safer roads. We respectfully request
    that this statement be included in the hearing record.
    Motor Vehicle Deaths are Climbing
        According to the Federal Government, each year motor vehicle
    crashes kill tens of thousands of people and injure millions more at a
    cost to society of over $800 billion.i Unfortunately, deaths
    resulting from motor vehicle crashes have been on the rise. According
    to the latest statistics from the National Highway Traffic Safety
    Administration (NHTSA), 37,461 people were killed on our Nation's roads
    in 2016. This is an increase of over five percent from
    2015.ii This follows a seven percent increase from 2014 to
    2015.iii Preliminary figures for the first six months of
    2017 show no significant change.iv
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \i\ The Economic and Societal Impact of Motor Vehicle Crashes, 2010
    (Revised), HS 812 013, U.S. DOT, NHTSA (May 2015 (Revised)), available
    at http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/812013.pdf. (NHTSA Cost of Motor
    Vehicle Crashes Report).
        \ii\ Traffic Safety Facts Research Note, 2016 Fatal Motor Vehicle
    Crashes: Overview, NHTSA, Oct. 2017, DOT HS 812 456.
        \iii\ National Center for Statistics and Analysis, 2015 motor
    vehicle crashes: Overview, Report No. DOT HS 812 318, National Highway
    Traffic Safety Administration (Aug. 2016).
        \iv\ National Safety Council, NSC Motor Vehicle Fatality Estimates
    (June 2017).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Advocates firmly believes that automated vehicle (AV) technology
    has the potential to make significant and lasting reductions in this
    mortality and morbidity toll. However, the process created in the AV
    START Act will allow untested and unproven AVs to be sold to the public
    without appropriate independent or governmental oversight to provide
    necessary protections to both those in the AVs and those sharing the
    roads with them.v In addition, the AV START Act will
    potentially allow the sale of hundreds of thousands of AVs that are
    exempt from existing federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS). In
    fact, longstanding Federal law was recently amended to allow for an
    unlimited number of vehicles that are not in compliance with FMVSS to
    be tested on public roads,vi despite opposition from
    consumer, public health and safety organizations.vii This
    was a massive increase from the previous limit of 2,500 vehicles for
    most manufacturers.viii Therefore, AVs can already be sold
    to the public as long as they are in compliance with FMVSS, and AV
    manufacturers can already put an unlimited number of AVs that are not
    required to comply with FMVSS on public roads for testing purposes. The
    AV START Act ``takes a wrong turn'' by allowing for the sale of
    potentially millions of AVs to the public without minimum safety
    standards, without necessary consumer information so that the public
    understands their capabilities and limitations, and without
    cybersecurity standards to protect against hackers.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \v\ S. 1885, American Vision for Safer Transportation through
    Advancement of Revolutionary Technologies Act, 115th Congress, 1st
    Session (2017).
        \vi\ Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act, Sec. 24404, Pub.
    L. 114-94 (2015).
        \vii\ Examining Ways to Improve Vehicle and Roadway Safety: Hearing
    Before Energy and Commerce Committee, Subcommittee on Commerce,
    Manufacturing and Trade, 114th Cong. (Oct. 21, 2015) (Statement of Joan
    Claybrook).
        \viii\ 49 U.S.C. Sec. 30113.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Instead of creating an unchecked, wide-open path for the entry of
    AVs exempt from safety standards into the marketplace, academic
    facilities and testing grounds should be utilized as the proper venues
    for evaluating AV technology. Research centers, such as those already
    established in Michigan and Florida, among others, should serve as the
    incubators for this unchartered technology. In fact, a number of
    automakers themselves readily admit that AV technology is still in its
    infancy. As Bryan Salesky, the Chief Executive Officer of Argo AI, a
    company partnering with Ford on the development of AV technology
    recently noted:

            We're still very much in the early days of making self-driving
            cars a reality. Those who think fully self-driving vehicles
            will be ubiquitous on city streets months from now or even in a
            few years are not well connected to the state of the art or
            committed to the safe deployment of the technology. For those
            of us who have been working on the technology for a long time,
            we're going to tell you the issue is still really hard, as the
            systems are as complex as ever.ix
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \ix\ Bryan Salesky, A Decade after DARPA: Our View on the State of
    the Art in Self-Driving Cars (Oct. 16, 2017), available at: https://
    medium.com/self-driven/a-decade-after-darpa-our-view-on-the-state-of-
    the-art-in-self-driving-cars-3e8698e6afe8.

        Additionally, Gill Pratt, chief executive officer of Toyota
    Research Institute, stated, ``It's a mistake to say that the finish
    line is coming up very soon. Things are changing rapidly, but this will
    be a long journey.'' x
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \x\ David Welch and Gabrielle Coppola, Don't Worry, Petrolheads.
    Driverless Cars Are Still Years Away, Bloomberg News (Jan, 9, 2018),
    available at: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-09/
    toyota-to-hyundai-say-pump-brakes-on-hopes-of-robo-car-s-arrival.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Whether it is children's toys, new medication or innovative vehicle
    technologies, radically different products should first be assessed in
    a controlled environment instead of allowing widespread public
    distribution in order to determine whether they are safe or have
    unintended consequences. The AV START Act, which could govern AVs for
    years to come, fails to include several critical and commonsense
    protections that will help to ensure the safe development and
    deployment of this technology.
    Advocates Has Consistently Promoted Advanced Technologies in Vehicles
            to Save Lives and Prevent Injuries
        Advocates has always enthusiastically championed vehicle safety
    technology and for good reason. It is one of the most effective
    strategies for preventing deaths and injuries. NHTSA has estimated that
    since 1960, over 600,000 lives have been saved by motor vehicle safety
    technologies.xi In 1991, Advocates led the coalition that
    supported bipartisan legislation sponsored by former Senators John
    Danforth (R-MO) and Richard Bryan (D-NV) that included airbag
    technology in the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act
    (ISTEA) of 1991.xii As a result, by 1997, every new car sold
    in the United States was equipped with a front seat airbag and the
    lives saved have been significant. In fact, airbags save over 2,000
    lives annually,xiii and have saved an estimated 44,869 lives
    since 1987, according to NHTSA.xiv
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \xi\ Lives Saved by Vehicle Safety Technologies and Associated
    Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, 1960 to 2012, DOT HS 812 069
    (NHTSA, 2015); See also, NHTSA AV Policy, Executive Summary, p. 5
    endnote 1.
        \xii\ Pub. L. 102-240 (Dec. 18, 1991).
        \xiii\ National Center for Statistics and Analysis, Lives Saved in
    2015 by Restraint Use and Minimum-Drinking-Age Laws, National Highway
    Traffic Safety Administration, Report No. DOT HS 812 319 (Aug. 2016).
        \xiv\ Traffic Safety Facts 2015, Lives Saved by Restraint Use, and
    Additional Lives that Would Have been Saved at 100 Percent Seat Belt
    and Motorcycle Helmet Use, 1975-2015, DOT HS 812 384, NHTSA (2017).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Advocates continued to build on this success by supporting
    additional lifesaving technologies as standard equipment in all
    vehicles in other legislation and regulatory proposals. These efforts
    include: tire pressure monitoring systems;xv rear outboard
    3-point seat belts;xvi electronic stability
    control;xvii rear seat belt reminder
    systems;xviii rear view cameras;xix brake
    transmission interlocks;xx seat belts on
    motorcoaches;xxi electronic logging devices;xxii
    and, crash avoidance systems such as automatic emergency
    braking.xxiii These safety advances have saved hundreds of
    thousands of lives and many have been accomplished because of the
    bipartisan leadership of the Members of the Senate Commerce, Science,
    and Transportation Committee.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \xv\ Transportation Recall Enhancement, Accountability, and
    Documentation (TREAD) Act, Pub. L. 106-414 (Nov. 1, 2000).
        \xvi\ Anton's Law, Pub. L. 107-318 (Dec. 4, 2002).
        \xvii\ Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity
    Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), Pub. L. 109-59 (Aug. 10, 2005).
        \xviii\ Id.
        \xix\ Cameron Gulbransen Kids Transportation Safety Act of 2007,
    Pub. L. 110-189 (Feb. 28, 2008).
        \xx\ Id.
        \xxi\ Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21) Act,
    Pub. L. 112-141 (Jan. 3, 2012).
        \xxii\ Id.
        \xxiii\ 80 FR 62487 (Oct. 16, 2015).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    NHTSA Has a Statutory Duty to the Public to Ensure the Safety of
            Autonomous Vehicles
        Over fifty years ago, Congress passed the National Traffic and
    Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 because of concerns about the death
    and injury toll on our highways.xxiv The law required the
    Federal Government to establish minimum vehicle safety performance (not
    design) standards to protect the public against ``unreasonable risk of
    accidents occurring as a result of the design, construction or
    performance of motor vehicles.'' xxv While motor vehicles
    have changed dramatically since that time and will continue to do so in
    the future, the underlying premise of this prescient law and NHTSA's
    safety mission have not.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \xxiv\ Pub. L. 89-563 (Sept. 9, 1966).
        \xxv\ Title 49, U.S.C. Sec. 30102.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Unfortunately, recently NHTSA has chosen to issue only ``voluntary
    guidelines'' for the development of AVs.xxvi Voluntary
    guidelines are not enforceable because they are not legally binding,
    and, therefore, are inadequate to ensure safety and protect the public.
    Manufacturers may unilaterally choose to deviate from the guidelines or
    ignore them entirely at any time and for any reason including internal
    corporate priorities such as cost or marketing considerations. In
    addition, some entities may choose to follow the guidelines while
    others may not, creating a dangerous and unreliable patchwork of safety
    protection. Consumers and NHTSA also have no legal recourse against a
    manufacturer's failure to follow the guidelines. NHTSA cannot bring an
    enforcement action, force a statutory recall, or even influence a
    voluntary recall for failure to abide by the guidelines.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \xxvi\ NHTSA, Automated Driving Systems 2.0: A Vision for Safety
    (Sep. 12, 2017).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Opinion polls already show strong public skepticism and reticence
    about AVs and those doubts are warranted. Over the last few years,
    automakers have hidden from the American public and regulators safety
    defects that have led to numerous unacceptable and unnecessary deaths
    and injuries as well as the recall of tens of millions of
    vehicles.xxvii Consumer acceptance of AV technology is
    critical to its success and to fully realizing the lifesaving potential
    of AVs. Advocates recently commissioned a CARAVAN public opinion poll
    that revealed intense apprehension regarding the widespread deployment
    of AVs. In fact, two-thirds of respondents (64 percent) expressed
    concern about sharing the roads with driverless cars.xxviii
    Moreover, a recent study conducted by the Massachusetts Institute of
    Technology garnered similar results. Only 13 percent of those polled
    reported that they would be comfortable with vehicle ``features that
    completely relieve the driver of all control for the entire drive.''
    xxix In addition, 59 percent of respondents reported that
    the maximum level of automation that they would be comfortable with
    were ``features that actively help the driver, while the driver remains
    in control.'' xxx Similarly, in a national survey
    commissioned by Kelley Blue, 80 percent of those polled believed that
    people should always have the option to drive themselves, and nearly
    one in three respondents said they would never buy a Level 5 (entirely
    automatic) vehicle.xxxi Furthermore, a poll by the Pew
    Research Center found a majority of U.S. adults would not want to ride
    in a driverless car (56 percent).xxxii The reluctance and
    hesitation of the public to embrace AVs will not be overcome unless the
    development of the technology is transparent and AV failures are not
    widespread.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \xxvii\ United States Department of Transportation, NHTSA, Docket
    No. NHTSA-2015-0055, Coordinated Remedy Program Proceeding; NHTSA,
    safercar.gov, Vehicle Owners, Consumer Alert: GM Ignition Switch Recall
    Information; U.S. v. Volkswagen, Case. No. 16-CR-20394 (E.D. Mich.).
        \xxviii\ Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, CARAVAN Public
    Opinion Poll: Driverless Cars (Jan. 12, 2018).
        \xxix\ H. Abraham, B. Reimer, B. Seppelt, C. Fitzgerald, B. Mehler
    & J. Coughlin, Consumer Interest in Automation: Preliminary
    Observations Exploring a Year's Change, Massachusetts Institute of
    Technology, AgeLab, White Paper (2017-2), p. 6 (May 2017).
        \xxx\ Id.
        \xxxi\ Kelley Blue Book, Future Autonomous Vehicle Driver Study
    (Sept. 2016).
        \xxxii\ Pew Research Center, Automation in Everyday Life (Oct.
    2017).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        As with any segment of American society, people with disabilities
    have varying needs. While AVs may be part of the answer to increasing
    mobility for people with disabilities, it is certainly not the only
    solution, and it is by no means ``one size fits all.'' AVs will help
    some people but provide little or no assistance to others based on
    their circumstances. The cost of a vehicle retrofit or utilizing a taxi
    or ride-sharing company on a regular basis remains out of reach for
    many people with disabilities. Installing an automated system in a
    vehicle or removing the driver from an automated ride sharing service
    does not necessarily reduce or eliminate cost barriers that inhibit
    mobility. Moreover, there is no guarantee that the current designs of
    automobiles that do not easily allow for a ramp or lift system to be
    integrated into the body of the vehicle, or for a wheelchair to be
    stored safely in the trunk or passenger area, will be changed once AVs
    are introduced. The AV START Act allows for potentially catastrophic
    scenarios in which hundreds of thousands of cars could be allowed to
    operate that do not meet Federal safety standards, including those that
    provide occupant protection. Allowing AVs that do not meet critical
    Federal safety standards puts all roadway users at risk, but poses
    particular problems for people with disabilities who may be especially
    vulnerable when AVs are involved in a crash, do not function as
    intended, or have a defect.
    Federal Oversight is Essential if Autonomous Vehicles Are to Ensure
            Public Safety
        The AV START Act unnecessarily eviscerates the current Federal
    regulatory scheme that has been in place for decades to ensure the
    safety of motor vehicles traveling on American roads. AV technology can
    be expeditiously developed while not jeopardizing public safety. In
    order to achieve that end, several provisions of the AV START Act
    should be revised or deleted.
        Section 6 of the AV START Act will allow millions of vehicles to be
    sold to the public that are exempt from existing critical safety
    standards, the FMVSS. Providing broad statutory exemptions from the
    FMVSS for AVs is both unnecessary and unwise. As mentioned above, there
    is already a statutory process in place for manufacturers to seek an
    exemption from the FMVSS which Congress amended only three years ago.
    Section 24404 of the Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act
    xxxiii permits auto manufacturers to test or evaluate an
    unlimited number of vehicles exempt from one or more of the FMVSS.
    Exempt vehicles under this provision may not be sold or resold to the
    public. Furthermore, the exemption provision in current law, 49 USC
    Section 30113(a), provides that manufacturers may receive an exemption
    from compliance with the FMVSS for the sale of 2,500 vehicles to be
    sold in the United States in any 12-month period. There has simply been
    no demonstrable evidence presented that the development and deployment
    of AVs requires that an untold number of AVs should be exempt from such
    critical Federal safety standards that are essential to protecting
    public safety.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \xxxiii\ Pub. L. 112-141 (Dec. 4, 2015), codified at 49 USC
    Sec. 30112(b)(10).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Furthermore, the legislation currently contains no prohibition on
    AVs receiving an exemption from crashworthiness or occupant protection
    standards which protect the vehicle's passengers. Such exemptions can
    diminish the level of occupant protection that has been established
    through years of research under the existing regulations. For example,
    removing the steering wheel should not eliminate the requirement to
    protect the occupant from injury using safety systems such as airbags.
    Prohibiting such exemptions will in no way inhibit the development of
    AV technology but will ensure that passengers of AVs are properly
    protected in a crash.
        Advocates supports the provision in Section 6 of the AV START Act
    that requires NHTSA to evaluate the safety performance of the AVs which
    have been granted an exemption(s) before an additional or greater
    number of vehicles may be granted a subsequent set of exemptions.
    However, the time period before the total number of vehicles that are
    exempt from the FMVSS should be lengthened from 12 months to 24 months,
    at a minimum. This will allow for NHTSA to gather the data it needs to
    make an accurate assessment of the AVs that have already been granted
    exemptions.
        Finally, Section 7 of the AV START Act drastically alters current
    Federal law which prohibits manufacturers from rendering safety
    systems, such as the brakes and brake pedal, inoperable. This provision
    is a dangerous change in settled law because it would allow automakers
    to turn off safety systems while the AV is being driven by the
    computer. This could unnecessarily dilute safety at the discretion of
    the manufacturer and sets a precedent of Congress allowing
    manufacturers to circumvent many of the existing safety standards.
    Currently, automakers cannot turn off safety systems without government
    oversight. As such, Section 7 should be removed entirely.
    Recommendations:
       Reduce the number of AVs that will be permitted to be exempt
            from critical Federal safety standards. Increase the time
            period after granting an exemption from 12 to a minimum of 24
            months so that NHTSA has an opportunity to collect enough data
            to make accurate safety assessments before permitting more
            exempt AVs to be sold.

       Prohibit any and all exemptions from Federal safety
            standards that will diminish the level of occupant protection
            currently provided by the FMVSS.

       Eliminate the provision that permits manufacturers to
            unilaterally disable critical safety systems while the vehicle
            is operating in autonomous mode.
    The Development of Autonomous Vehicles Must Be Transparent or Public
            Confidence in the Technology Will Suffer
        The development and deployment of AVs as well as NHTSA's role in
    regulating this technology must be open and transparent. Section 9 of
    the AV START Act requires manufacturers of AVs and AV technology to
    submit to NHTSA a Safety Evaluation Report (SER) that details the
    development of the technology and its expected performance in real
    world conditions. While Advocates support that this submission be
    mandatory, this provision only directs manufacturers to ``describe''
    their AV systems. This language should be revised to require that
    sufficient information and data are included in the SER to ensure that
    NHTSA can properly assess the safety performance of the technology. In
    the absence of such a legislative directive, manufacturers will
    continue to submit slick marketing brochures such as those recently
    released by two manufacturers xxxiv instead of providing
    data and documentation that will allow the public and NHTSA to
    accurately evaluate the safety of the technology. Advocates supports
    two important provisions in Section 9 of the AV START Act which require
    the SERs to be promptly made available to the public and which subject
    manufacturers who knowingly and willfully submit false information in
    the SER to the civil penalty provisions of 49 U.S.C. Sec. 30165.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \xxxiv\ Waymo, Waymo Safety Report: On the Road to Fully Self-
    Driving (Oct. 2017); General Motors, 2018 Self-Driving Safety Report
    (Jan. 2018).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The AV START Act should ensure that consumers are given essential
    information about an AV. While the requirement in Section 12 of the
    bill calls for a rulemaking on consumer information, it could be years
    before a final rule is issued. Every manufacturer should be required to
    provide each consumer with information about the capabilities,
    limitations and exemptions from safety standards for all vehicles sold
    in the U.S. at the time of sale. This information should be made
    available to consumers from day one, even before NHTSA issues a rule.
    Therefore, the agency should be required to issue an Interim Final Rule
    immediately requiring such information be provided to consumers.
    Additionally, it would be useful for consumers and researchers to be
    able to automatically identify AVs by vehicle identification number
    (VIN).
        NHTSA should also be required to establish a publicly-available AV
    database with basic safety information for consumers and for use in
    safety research. The database would be similar to the safercar.gov
    website that NHTSA maintains to inform the public about safety recalls
    applicable to their vehicle. The AV database would enable consumers to
    enter their VIN to obtain critical information about their AV such as
    the level of automation, any exemptions granted by NHTSA from the
    FMVSS, and the operational design domain which includes limitations and
    capabilities of each autonomous driving system with which a vehicle is
    equipped. Such a database will be critical for consumers who purchase
    AVs, especially used vehicles that are not required to have a consumer
    sticker (Monroney label) on the window and may be missing an owner's
    manual. According to Edmonds, there were 38.5 million used cars sold in
    2016.xxxv The database would also allow NHTSA and other
    research groups to perform independent evaluation of the comparative
    safety performance of AV systems, and identify poorly performing and
    unsafe autonomous driving systems, as well as those that provide
    greater safety performance.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \xxxv\ Edmunds, Used Vehicle Market Report, Executive Summary (Feb.
    2017).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Additionally, data sharing among manufacturers is essential to
    improve overall safety among AVs. Data and information about known
    flaws or problems encountered during development and while in use must
    be shared among manufacturers and with NHTSA and the public to ensure
    that all AV systems are learning about problems in real time and can
    benefit from the experience of other AV systems. This type of
    collaborative development is already taking place in the industry with
    the creation of the Automotive Information Sharing and Analysis Center
    (ISAC). Data sharing will expedite solutions to unusual or unique
    safety problems and ensure they are readily identified and corrected.
    Yet, the AV START Act does not require that the critical safety data
    generated by AVs will be shared or even provided to NHTSA. It is
    essential that the legislation require all crashes involving AVs be
    reported immediately to NHTSA by manufacturers. The Early Warning
    Reporting of crashes requires manufacturers to submit a very small
    portion of this information, but all crashes involving AVs should be
    fully reported.
        Section 10 of the AV START Act establishes a technical advisory
    committee that will make recommendations to the Secretary of the U.S.
    Department of Transportation (Secretary) on the safety standards that
    should be issued for AVs. Advisory committees, which may be useful in
    limited circumstances, are unacceptable substitutes for the agency
    fulfilling its statutory mission and issuing safety standards through
    public rulemakings. These committees often escape public scrutiny
    especially when the advisory committee is not subject to the Federal
    Advisory Committee Act (FACA),xxxvi as is the case with the
    advisory committee established under the AV START Act. In addition, the
    representation on these committees is often not fairly balanced and as
    such the committees are incapable of providing accurate and unbiased
    recommendations to the Secretary. Moreover, these committees are often
    a significant drain on agency staff time and already sparse funding.
    Instead of establishing an advisory committee, the AV START Act should
    authorize NHTSA to receive the funding it so badly needs to hire the
    experts it must have to properly regulate AVs and fulfill the agency's
    statutory mission.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \xxxvi\ Pub.L. 92-463 (1972).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Recommendations:
       Ensure that manufacturers are required to include sufficient
            data and documentation in the SER to ensure that NHTSA has
            enough information to accurately assess the technology.

       Provide consumers with critical information about the
            capabilities and limitations of AVs. Direct NHTSA to
            immediately require information at the point of sale and in the
            vehicle's owner manual.

       Direct NHTSA to establish a publicly-available AV database
            with basic safety information for consumers and for use in
            safety research.

       Require manufacturers to report all crashes involving an AV
            to NHTSA.
    Commonsense Safeguards Must be in Place to Ensure the Safety of
            Autonomous Vehicles
        Without essential changes and additions to AV START Act, this
    legislation will needlessly put all road users at risk. The additional
    improvements outlined below will in no way inhibit or even slow the
    development and deployment of AVs. Rather, these commonsense
    recommendations will ensure public safety and industry accountability.
    Include Level 2 AVs
        The AV START Act does not include Society of Automotive Engineers
    (SAE) Level 2 AVs, like the Tesla Model S which was involved in the
    2016 fatal crash in Florida.xxxvii During a September 12,
    2017, hearing on the crash conducted by the National Transportation
    Safety Board (NTSB), deadly failures of Tesla's Level 2 Autopilot
    system were readily identified.xxxviii NTSB found that
    similar problems also exist in other Level 2 AVs across many
    manufacturers.xxxix In the near term, Level 2 AVs will
    likely comprise the majority of the passenger vehicle AV fleet. Proper
    safeguards to curb Tesla-like failures must be put in place. At a
    minimum, Level 2 AVs should be covered by the SER safety assessment
    reporting, consumer information disclosure and cybersecurity provisions
    in the AV START Act.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \xxxvii\ National Transportation Safety Board, Collision Between a
    Car Operating With Automated Vehicle Control Systems and a Tractor-
    Semitrailer Truck Near Williston, Florida, Report No.: NTSB/HAR-17/02
    (Sep. 12, 2017) (NTSB Tesla Crash Report).
        \xxxviii\ Id.
        \xxxix\ Id.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Require Cybersecurity Standards
        A failure to adequately secure AV systems and to protect against
    cyber-attacks could endanger AV passengers, non-AV motorists,
    pedestrians, bicyclists and other vulnerable roadway users. It could
    also clog roads, stop the movement of goods and hinder the responses of
    emergency vehicles. Problem areas could include subjects such as global
    position system (GPS) signal loss or degradation, spoofing, and off-
    line and real time hacking of single vehicles or fleets of vehicles.
    The real possibility of a malevolent computer hack impacting hundreds
    or thousands of AVs, perhaps whole model runs, makes strong
    cybersecurity protections a crucial element of AV design. Yet, Section
    14 of the AV START Act merely requires manufacturers to have a
    cybersecurity plan in place with no minimum standards of protection or
    effectiveness. Instead, the legislation should require NHTSA to
    establish a minimum performance standard to ensure cybersecurity
    protections are required for all AVs levels 2-5. Considering the recent
    record of high-profile cyber-attacks,xl allowing
    manufacturers merely to have a cybersecurity plan in place is grossly
    inadequate to ensure that AVs are protected against potentially
    catastrophic cyber-attacks and breaches.xli
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \xl\ Stacy Cowley, Equifax Breach Exposed Data From 2.5 Million
    More People Than First Disclosed, N.Y. Times, Oct. 3, 2017 at B2.
        \xli\ Chester Dawson, The Dangers of the Hackable Car, Wall St. J,
    Sep. 17, 2017.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Provide Standards to Prevent Driver Distraction
        In AVs that require a human to take control from the AV system
    (Levels 2 and 3), the automated driving system must keep the driver
    engaged in the driving task. Research demonstrates that even for a
    driver who is alert and performing the dynamic driving task, there is a
    delay in reaction time between observing a safety problem and taking
    appropriate action.xlii For a driver who is disengaged from
    the driving task during autonomous operation of a vehicle, that delay
    will be longer because the driver must first understand the situation,
    then take control of the vehicle before taking appropriate action. The
    failure of the automated driving system to keep the driver engaged in
    the driving task during the trip was identified as a problem by the
    NTSB Tesla crash investigation. The NTSB found that the Tesla Autopilot
    facilitated the driver's inattention and overreliance on the system,
    which ultimately contributed to his death.xliii The
    Autopilot was active for 37 minutes of the 41 minute trip and of the 37
    minutes the system detected the hands on the steering wheel only 7
    times for a total of 25 seconds.xliv The NTSB also found
    that these problems are widespread across manufacturers with similar
    systems.xlv The AV START Act fails to address this critical
    safety problem, yet technology to discern distraction and provide
    alerts is already available, and NHTSA should be directed to establish
    a minimum performance standard to ensure driver engagement throughout
    the trip.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \xlii\ Human Factors, Koppa, R.J., FHWA, Ch.3, Sec. 3.2.1
    Perception-Response Time.
        \xliii\ NTSB Tesla Crash Report.
        \xliv\ Id.
        \xlv\ Id.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Provide for Standards to Protect the Electronics that Power Safety
            Systems
        Motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment are powered and run by
    highly complex electronic systems and will become even more so with the
    introduction of autonomous driving systems. Similar to the Federal
    Aviation Administration (FAA) requirements to protect the electronics
    in aircraft,xlvi NHTSA should require minimum performance
    standards for the electronics in all motor vehicles, particularly AVs.
    Also, interference from non-safety systems can affect the electronics
    that power critical safety systems if they share the same wiring and
    circuits. For example, in one reported instance a vehicle model lost
    power to its dashboard lights when an MP3 player was plugged in and
    used.xlvii Minimum performance requirements are essential to
    ensure the electronics that power and operate safety and autonomous
    driving systems function properly. Performance requirements are also
    needed to make certain these systems are not compromised by non-safety
    features that share the same electronics. However, the AV START Act
    fails to direct NHTSA to develop and issue performance standards for
    the electronics systems of modern motor vehicles as the FAA does for
    aircraft which, like AV cars, are highly dependent on electronic
    systems.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \xlvi\ 14 CFR 25.1309.
        \xlvii\ General Motors, LLC, Receipt of Petition for Decision of
    Inconsequential Noncompliance, NHTSA, 79 FR 10226, Feb. 24, 2014.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Require an AV ``Vision Test'' to Ensure Operating Safety
        In order for an AV to properly interact with its surrounding
    environment, it must not only detect other vehicles and roadway
    infrastructure but also other participants using our Nation's
    transportation systems such as pedestrians, bicyclists, construction
    workers in work zones, first responders providing assistance after
    crashes, and law enforcement officers directing traffic. A failure to
    properly detect and react to any of these could have tragic results.
    AVs and automated driving systems must be subject to objective testing
    to ensure that they properly detect other road users, as well as
    pavement markings and infrastructure, can correctly identify the type
    of object that has been detected, and can then also respond properly
    and safely. Therefore, the AV START Act should direct the Secretary to
    initiate a rulemaking proceeding to require automated driving systems,
    including SAE Level 2 automated driving systems, to meet a minimum
    performance standard for detecting and reacting to the AV's driving
    environment.
    Provide NHTSA with Additional Authority to Counter Widespread Safety
            Problems
        Regulating AVs presents unique challenges for NHTSA, and those
    issues warrant the agency being given additional tools to protect
    against potentially catastrophic defects. Flaws or viruses in computer
    software of AVs could adversely affect thousands of vehicles
    simultaneously. The agency, therefore, should be given imminent hazard
    authority in order to expedite the grounding of vehicles that the
    agency has identified as having a potentially dangerous, widespread
    software problem or cybersecurity threat that could lead to inordinate
    crashes, deaths and injuries. Also, because of the potential serious
    nature of any software problem that could imperil safety in thousands
    of vehicles, the ability to levy criminal penalties is essential.
    Criminal penalties will deter manufacturers and suppliers from
    willfully permitting the sale of AV systems with flawed software
    operating systems that could pose a danger to human life in the event
    of a crash.
    Recommendations:
       Amend the AV START Act to apply critical safety provisions
            to Level 2 AVs as these vehicles will likely comprise the
            majority of the passenger vehicle AV fleet in the early years
            of deployment.

       Direct NHTSA to issue safety standards addressing critical
            safety issues involving AVs including cybersecurity, driver
            engagement, electronics systems and the ability to detect
            objects in its driving environment.

       Provide additional legal authority to NHTSA to enable the
            agency to effectively respond to crises and protect public
            safety.
    NHTSA Needs Additional Resources
        The unacceptable level of motor vehicle crashes, fatalities and
    injuries combined with the demands being placed on NHTSA with regard to
    AV technology necessitates an increase in agency funding. While the
    FAST Act did provide some additional resources, the agency budget is
    still inadequate to manage the myriad of challenges facing the agency.
    Today, 95 percent of transportation-related fatalities, and 99 percent
    of transportation injuries, involve motor vehicles on our streets and
    highways.xlviii Yet, NHTSA receives only one percent of the
    overall U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) budget.xlix
    NHTSA will face even greater challenges in the future as AVs continue
    to develop and are introduced into the market. For NHTSA to exercise
    proper oversight over AVs, and even just comply with the current
    requirements in the AV START Act, the agency will need to hire more
    staff with technical expertise.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \xlviii\ National Transportation Statistics 2015, U.S. DOT, RITA,
    BTS, Tables 2-1, and 2-2 (2017).
        \xlix\ Budget Highlights Fiscal Year 2018, U.S. DOT.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Moreover, in light of the fact that motor vehicle crashes impose a
    comprehensive cost on society of $836 billion, $242 billion of which is
    direct economic costs such as lost productivity, medical costs and
    property damage, it is imperative to provide adequate resources to
    advance serious measures to combat a serious problem.l The
    AV START Act requires NHTSA to take on new significant responsibilities
    such as: reviewing SERs filed by manufacturers; evaluating and making
    determinations on potentially numerous requests for thousands of
    exemptions from the FMVSS within 180 days of receipt; amending and
    issuing safety standards; and, supporting advisory committees.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \l\ NHTSA Cost of Motor Vehicle Crashes Report.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        In order to efficiently execute all of these tasks, an office
    dedicated to AV safety should be established within NHTSA. Safety
    should not be compromised and progress should not be slowed because the
    agency does not have adequate technical expertise, organization and
    funding to oversee the development and deployment of AVs.
    Recommendation:
       NHTSA must be given additional funding and a new dedicated
            office to AVs should be created to meet demands being placed on
            the agency with regard to the advent of AV technology.
    States Must Not be Preempted from Acting to Protect their Citizens
            Especially in Light of NHTSA's Failure to Regulate Automated
            Vehicles to Date
        Advocates agrees with the statutory mission of NHTSA to regulate
    the design and performance of motor vehicles to ensure public safety
    which, in modern day terms, includes AVs and automated driving system
    technology. However, in the absence of comprehensive Federal standards
    and regulations to govern the AV rules of the road, the states have
    every legal right, indeed a duty to their citizens, to fill the
    regulatory vacuum with state developed proposals and solutions for
    ensuring public safety. NHTSA, by issuing only guidelines, has left the
    field of AV safety open to the states to fulfill their traditional role
    of protecting the health and welfare of their citizens. As the National
    Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) noted in its comments to
    NHTSA's first set of guidelines issued in September 2016, ``Without any
    indication on forthcoming Federal regulations regarding the safe
    operation of HAVs, states may be forced to fill the gap in order to
    ensure the safety of public roadways.'' li Moreover, the
    Pennsylvania Department of Transportation stated in its comments to the
    same guidelines:
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \li\ William T. Pound, Executive Director, National Conference of
    State Legislatures, Public Comments on Federal Automated Vehicles
    Policy, Docket No.: NHTSA-2016-0090 (Nov. 21, 2016).

        Yes, there should be consistent treatment of highly automated
    vehicles nationwide. However, where the adoption of `safety standards'
    being applied to highly automated vehicle testing is totally voluntary
    (as opposed to self-certifying as against a regulatory framework in the
    FMCSS) [sic], what level of comfort does that give to the states and
    their citizens that their transportation and law enforcement agencies
    are properly discharging their duty to ensure that highly automated
    vehicles are in fact safe? lii
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \lii\ Leslie R. Richards, Secretary of Transportation, Commonwealth
    of Pennsylvania, Letter to Secretary Foxx and Administrator Rosekind,
    Docket No.: NHTSA-2016-0090 (Nov. 21, 2016).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Recommendation:
       Until NHTSA issues comprehensive standards and regulations
            to govern AVs, states must not be precluded from enacting state
            developed solutions to protect their citizens.
    Conclusion
        Autonomous vehicles have the potential to address the unacceptable
    annual death and injury toll and associated costs reaching billions of
    dollars. As the Senate takes the first step to creating national policy
    on AVs with potentially long-lasting consequences, it is critically
    important that the AV START Act include provisions that advance this
    life-saving technology in as safe and expeditious manner as possible.
    However, this technology cannot reach its full safety potential without
    critical safeguards put in place by Congress. Currently the process the
    bill creates for AV deployment is flawed, and Advocates has put forth
    12 recommendations which we urge the Senate to consider moving forward.
    We believe the role of our Nation's experts in academia to provide the
    needed testing and proving grounds, as opposed to exposing other
    highway users on public roads, is essential to both make sure the AVs
    are safe as well as to build confidence in a currently skeptical
    public. In conclusion, the current ``hands off'' approach to hands free
    driving renders our Nation rudderless at a time in our Nation's
    transportation history when leadership is needed more than ever.
    Advocates urges an immediate course correction to ensure the safe
    development and deployment of AVs.

        Senator Nelson. And I would like to conclude my remarks and
    questions by asking Dr. Avent what is going to be the impact of
    this new kind of quickly developing technology upon our
    educational system?
        And I ask the question since my experience is informed by
    what happened to the whole educational system as a result of
    the space program. Going to the Moon in the Apollo program
    created a whole generation of engineers, mathematicians,
    scientists, and technologists. What do we see going forward
    here?
        Dr. Avent. That is a good point, sir. Once I heard that the
    amount of money that we spent on the entire space program, we
    saved in communications within 6 months. And this was when I
    was in college, which was a long, long time ago, and I am sure
    the statistics are much more compelling now.
        Certainly, this is a big market. As we talked about, it is
    going to be a disruptive market. It is going to be a change and
    far-reaching into a lot of industries, but also into a lot of
    end applications. As I pointed out in my testimony, not just
    public transportation but agriculture. And it will be
    pervasive.
        And the technology involved in this will be new technology
    that needs to be developed. Artificial intelligence has been
    around for many years, but it still needs to evolve a lot and
    to grow. So I think that we are going to see a new generation
    of engineers. I think we will see much more focus on electrical
    engineering, on computer science, on data analytics, machine
    learning, those types of technologies. And I think the market
    will pull from the universities and really create many more
    people going into those areas.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Nelson.
        I have just one last sort of quick question. One is,
    because a lot has been talked about today, and as we have
    looked at this issue, the stakeholder community, obviously,
    highlights, emphasizes, the fact that this is going to save a
    lot of lives. My question, very directly, is, do you think the
    safety in terms of lifesaving result of automated vehicles as
    advertised by the industry will be realized? Are the lives
    saved as a result of this technology consistent with what the
    reality is?
        Mr. Schneider. I can say that I am more than optimistic
    that we will realize the benefits that we are even just laying
    out today. I do not think that there has ever been a moment in
    the history of the industry where we were on the verge of such
    a profound improvement both in safety, lost productivity, and
    just the benefits of living in our cities and the quality of
    our air and everything that goes with it.
        So from that perspective, I think that I am absolutely
    optimistic that this is going to happen.
        The Chairman. Thanks.
        Mr. Mansuetti. We share that feeling as well. This is
    revolutionary technology that will dramatically improve the
    quality of all of our lives. And with safety, absolutely, we
    will make tremendous progress with this technology.
        Mr. Kentley-Klay. Yes.
        The Chairman. Good.
        Mr. Kentley-Klay. Beyond that, these vehicles have
    pervasive, 360-degree perception with no blind spots, and they
    are always watching. Having been developing this technology now
    for 3 years full-time, I and my team are absolutely convinced
    that it will deliver on its safety promise and then some.
        Dr. Avent. Even when you account for the once-in-a-million
    events, which are the rare cases, when you divide 40,000 by 1
    million, it is pretty close to zero. So yes, I do agree, it is
    going to make an incredible impact.
        The Chairman. So one quick follow-up question. I agree with
    that. I think when you get out there into the future and the
    quality of those predictions in terms of lives saved I think
    will be realized. But I think for a lot of people, it is
    looking at this transitional period, and I will use as an
    example Senator Nelson's example this morning of the car that
    made a U-turn in front of him, and in a perfectly autonomous
    world, the autonomous vehicles would have detected that and
    reacted accordingly and prevented an accident.
        But what happens when you have a driver in one vehicle, an
    autonomous vehicle operating next to it? In the transitional
    period, when you have drivers on the road and autonomous
    vehicles on the road, what happens in those types of
    situations? I am just curious as to what your thoughts are
    about what the safety features might be if a human reacts the
    wrong way to an autonomous vehicle?
        Mr. Kentley-Klay. So, Senator, and anyone on the panel
    would be welcome to come visit Zoox in San Francisco and see
    for yourself exactly how it would respond in those situations.
    Driving in complex downtown environments, we actually face
    those scenarios every hour.
        Now is not the time to go into the technical reasons about
    how we solve that, but we have the methods in place to handle
    those situations.
        The Chairman. OK.
        All right, one more, Senator Blumenthal. Now you really
    have to vote for the bill.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Blumenthal. I withdraw my question.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Blumenthal. I expect I will vote for a bill.
        In the meantime, in the time that we are waiting, whether
    it is 3 years or 10 years, for the deployment of this
    technology on a widespread, perhaps universal scale, would
    everyone here agree that safety mechanisms like collision
    avoidance technology, automatic braking systems, should be
    fully deployed, and that Audi's example should be followed by
    the rest of the industry?
        I will spare you an answer, Mr. Schneider.
        Mr. Mansuetti. Absolutely.
        Dr. Avent. Absolutely.
        Mr. Kentley-Klay. As we are developing a 100 percent
    autonomous vehicle, we already have those systems in place in
    our architecture. Yes.
        The Chairman. Before we close out, I want to ask unanimous
    consent to place in the record testimony from NXP
    Semiconductors concerning connected vehicles and cybersecurity,
    as well as testimony submitted from Honda regarding innovation
    in the changing automotive industry. We will include those,
    without objection.
        [The information referred to follows:]

                                   NXP Semiconductors USA, Inc.
                                           Austin, TX, January 24, 2016

    Chairman Thune, Ranking Member Nelson, and members of the Committee,

        Thank you for the opportunity to share insights from the forefront
    of mobility. As the world's largest automotive semiconductor company
    employing 7,000 Americans, NXP plays an active role in the
    transformation of the most fundamental of all American relationships:
    the driver's connection to his or her car. Every era of innovation in
    our vehicles has placed key car attributes in the spotlight:
    horsepower, sleek design, and enhanced efficiency have all taken center
    stage at one time or another. We believe that when scholars write this
    decade's transport history they will view it as the era powered by
    automotive semiconductors, an era that witnessed the enablement of a
    vehicle's ability to sense, think, and act. We are honored to take you
    on a behind the scenes tour of the coming age.
        America's roads and vehicles constitute the lifeblood of the
    Nation's commerce, the basis of its storied freedom of movement, and a
    core part of its pioneering identity. Despite these positive transport
    attributes there are also negative consequences including road
    fatalities, air pollution, and heavy traffic. The latter alone takes
    its toll across the globe with 1.3 million lives lost every year to
    road accidents (more than 30,000 in the U.S. alone). According to
    research by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), electrified automated
    cars could reduce energy consumption by as much as 90 percent. With
    today's technology, we are well positioned to take on traffic flow,
    road safety, and the environmental challenges presented by a growing
    worldwide vehicle fleet. In all of these areas, the expanded deployment
    of semiconductors will play a significant role in bringing about
    massive improvements.
    The role of automotive semiconductors
        An understanding of the role of technology in the future of smart
    mobility requires a grasp of some basic terminology:

       Dedicated Short-Range Communications, or DSRC, is a two-way
            short to medium-range wireless communications capability
            adhering to the IEEE 802.11p standard that permits very high
            data transmission critical in communications-based active
            safety applications. The Federal Communications Commission
            allocated 75 MHz of spectrum in the 5.9 GHz band for use by
            intelligent transportation systems vehicle safety and mobility
            applications.

       V2V stands for vehicle-to-vehicle communications. The data
            exchange occurs via radio signals designated as DSRC, and occur
            nearly instantaneously between vehicles without the need for
            operator intervention. Vehicles exchange information on speed,
            trajectory, etc., signaling the driver via a human-machine
            interface (HMI--a visual display, audio alert, haptic--such as
            steering wheel vibration--feedback system, or some combination
            of these) with regard to road conditions, environmental
            hazards, traffic signal timing, and more.

       V2I stands for vehicle-to-infrastructure communications.
            Vehicles equipped with on-board units, radios capable of
            communicating with intelligent roadside infrastructure and
            relaying information to the driver via the HMI, are V2I-
            enabled.

       V2X is a catch-all term covering vehicle-to-everything
            communications. Ideally, all new production vehicles would be
            equipped with DSRC equipment capable of communicating with
            dense deployments of intelligent roadside infrastructure linked
            in turn to municipal and regional traffic management centers.
            Numerous pilot deployments are planned and/or underway to
            further demonstrate the massive increases in safety and
            efficiency to be realized by wide implementation.

        Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) are the foundation of
    increasingly automated cars. NXP masters the full complexity of self-
    driving technology, offering silicon-based solutions that span a range
    from SAE Levels 1-5. Our solutions help ensure that every journey will
    be safe, secure, and enjoyable.
        The concept of the car has morphed into a securely connected, self-
    driving robot with the capacity to sense the environment, think, and
    act autonomously. In addition to having a powerful ``brain'', an
    automated vehicle must be capable of receiving sensory inputs, and
    turning associated ``thoughts'' into actions. To make precise, safety-
    related decisions, an array of complementary sensor technologies needs
    to draw a high-precision digital map of the car's environment and
    accurately detect objects. As autonomous cars are expected to generate
    +1GB of data per minute, cars need to securely process multiple streams
    of information with flawless intelligence. Just like the human body,
    strong reflexes will be required in addition to the central brain to
    meet this challenge. At the same time, automated cars need smart
    actuators to generate power, put the car in motion, and regulate
    systems. NXP covers the complete self-driving portfolio with solutions
    that sense, think and act.

       Sensing: Our radar, secure V2X, and vision technologies act
            as a vehicle's state-of-the-art eyes and ears. An estimated 50
            percent of all car radar modules shipped in 2017 rely on NXP
            processing and front-end technology to make life safer for
            drivers and passengers. NXP's vision processors deliver the
            performance and features to power critical driving functions
            such as pedestrian detection, lane keeping, traffic sign
            recognition, collision avoidance, and blind spot monitoring.

       Thinking: Holistic intelligence across all architecture
            domains enables reliable decision-making. Sensor fusion at high
            performance and low power is at its core. NXP's pioneering
            sensor fusion solutions enable autonomous vehicles to
            coordinate input from numerous sensors throughout the car to
            make decisions. The NXP BlueBoxTM platform fuses
            these disparate data streams to create 360+ awareness around
            the vehicle.

       Acting: We offer a range of smart actuators--including motor
            control, power/battery management, intelligent amplifiers, and
            LED drivers.

        A semiconductor company's insights into the automotive space may
    seem like an unusual vantage point until you consider how vital
    electronics have become to automotive architectures. In fact, 90
    percent of innovation in the automotive sector now comes from
    electronics. Electronics are also at the center of the three most
    important automotive megatrends; autonomy, connectivity, and
    electrification.
        Today's cars are safer, more efficient, and smarter than ever
    before, and semiconductors are a big part of the reason why. The
    vehicles rolling from assembly lines are more like robots on wheels,
    and the very high degree of electronic sophistication is largely due to
    semiconductor technology. As this trend toward electronification
    continues, semiconductor companies will continue to play a significant
    role in vehicle design.
        How do you build a safe, self-driving car, securely connected to a
    new scheme of smart mobility services? By utilizing a domain-based
    architecture which intelligently groups together the functions that let
    cars sense, think, and act--and eventually to fully replacing the human
    driver. This helps manage complexity and separate concerns related to
    security, upgradability, and functional safety. The domain-based
    architecture is connected by an internal network and secure central
    gateway that acts as the ``glue'' to hold everything together, enabling
    reliable and efficient communication. NXP's portfolio covers every area
    of the connected car's domains which is why car makers look to us to
    for our insights into the future of mobility.
    Vehicle to Everything (V2X): a closer look
        Car-to-car communication is attracting significant attention
    because it promises to drastically reduce road fatalities, improve
    mobility and enable a high-level of vehicle automation.
        Supporting safety critical applications is at the core of car-to-
    car communication, and for years, the technology of choice for V2X has
    been the IEEE802.11p standard. Recently, a new standard addressing V2X
    applications has started evolving under the umbrella of 3GPP, whose
    focus is mobile broadband standardization. Because the safety of
    millions of road users will depend on the performance of these
    technologies, it is important to compare them.
        There are several relevant facts to consider when comparing
    IEEE802.11p to LTE-V2X:

       IEEE802.11p is ready now, LTE-V2X is not. Today,
            IEEE802.11p-based products are available on the market from
            multiple silicon chip vendors. Some Tier1s (companies providing
            components such as seats, electronic modules, windows, etc.
            directly to the automotive OEMs) have complete solutions
            available. In contrast, there is no LTE-V2X product available
            in the market today, and it will most likely take several years
            before a complete solution will be ready and tested. The
            promised 5G version of V2X will have an even longer time
            horizon;

       IEEE802.11p is already installed in cars on the road. An
            end-user can buy a vehicle (e.g., Cadillac) equipped with
            IEEE802.11p technology today;

       IEEE802.11p mass deployment could begin soon. Volkswagen,
            one of the largest car manufacturers worldwide, publicly
            announced that from 2019 onwards, they will equip their first
            model series with IEEE802.11p technology.

        The cellular community is advocating that V2X implementations
    should wait for cellular technology to be ready and tested, and
    disregard the investments and field tests done to validate IEEE802.11p
    for safety critical applications. More concretely, the cellular
    community claims that LTE-V2X offers:

       A strong cellular eco-system which leverages years of
            experience in providing paid-services and a mature technology
            available worldwide. This is a valid argument, but it refers to
            entertainment services in a cellular-based technology. The
            communication between a device and a base-station is
            fundamentally different from the device-to-device communication
            in a dynamic environment;

       Twofold better performance. However, it is IEEE802.11p which
            outperforms LTE-V2X in important V2V use cases;

       Minor added cost. This is questionable as the support of
            safety critical applications strongly indicates the need to
            separate those from the entertainment SW and HW. Therefore,
            LTE-V2X will likely be physically separated from the cellular
            modem;

       A roadmap of evolution and future proof technology due to
            the continuous effort in improving the technology via the well-
            tested mechanism of the 3GPP meetings. While this might be
            true, introducing an updated standard every 12 to 15 months
            does not guarantee that older vehicles will be able to
            communicate with newer ones. This is in contrast with the need
            of creating a stable and universal international standard to
            enable the success of V2X technology.

        The proposed LTE-V2X technology is a derivative of the cellular
    uplink technology that maintains similarity with the current LTE
    systems: frame structure, sub-carrier spacing, clock accuracy
    requirements and the concept of a resource block, to mention a few.
    These properties were not made to fit the vehicular use cases, but
    rather are inherited from existing cellular technology. Consequently,
    LTE-V2X struggles to meet the specific application requirements of car-
    to-car communications.
        Technically, LTE-V2X suffers when there is no network to support
    the communications. It has stringent synchronization requirements, it
    cannot properly receive messages from nearby and closed-by
    transmitters, and it is limited in its maximum range. Furthermore, it
    proposes a resource allocation scheme that does not properly handle
    messages with variable size and a multiple user access mechanism that
    is not well suited for broadcasting messages or for handling collisions
    of messages. The heavyweight design of LTE-V2X translates into a higher
    overhead.
        Commercially, LTE-V2X cannot leverage the presence of the standard
    LTE modem in the car. Different safety requirements and technology
    needs strongly suggest that the safety critical domain of LTE-V2X will
    be separated from the entertainment domain of the standard LTE modem.
    The stringent synchronization requirements could significantly increase
    the costs in the LTE-V2X hardware.
        Strategically, LTE-V2X might not be the best technology for safety
    critical applications as its fast development cycle does not match the
    automotive development cycle. The 3GPP community has already started
    working on a new version of LTE-V2X while the current version has not
    been tested in the field yet. The next generation of IEEE802.11p is
    also being considered to capitalize on the experience of multiple
    large-scale field trials to test safety critical applications.
        Our conclusion is that IEEE802.11p technology is ideal for safety
    critical applications that must be supported in the absence of a
    network. If the cellular infrastructure is available, LTE-V2X is a
    valid alternative and offers a more mature eco-system for entertainment
    services. The win-win situation would be to focus on the strongest
    points of each technology and work together to provide the best car-to-
    car communication solution, continue deploying IEEE802.11p for safety
    critical applications and ensure that the upcoming LTE-V2X technology
    can coexist.
    Security: a fundamental necessity for the future of advanced mobility
        As we have said before, cars are morphing from smart machines to
    self-driving robots on wheels. A big part of this transformation
    depends on the car's ability to draw from real-time data about its
    surroundings using wireless technologies like V2X communications, GPS
    and radar. This external wireless input is needed to be able to
    instantaneously assess the current context of the vehicle and
    continually plan the autonomous trajectory. This external wireless
    input presents security challenges because it increases the ways that
    hackers can attack cars.
        Another critical factor is that soon the driver will be missing--we
    are removing the computing, rationalizing and double-checking functions
    of the human being--and replacing these with smart machine computing
    performance, mimicking what the driver does naturally.
        Right now, there is a shift in the way we think about security.
    Systems engineers are focusing on the basics--applying fundamental
    security to the critical areas including the interfaces that connect
    the vehicle to the external world, gateways, which separate safety
    critical systems from other car and infotainment systems and networks
    that provide secure communication between control units (there can be
    over 150 of these control units in a vehicle). But in addition to these
    measures, we can see advancement in three ways--(1) security
    management, especially the delegation of aspects of security to e.g., a
    rental car company or a delivery company; (2) Over-The-Air software
    updates to be able to update any software in the vehicle at any time
    (there will be 200-300 million lines of code in a car soon),
    seamlessly, to patch vulnerabilities real time, and (3) further
    protection and monitoring against the increasingly intelligent and
    devious hacker--against wireless and physical attacks. A core aspect of
    this is the Secure Element (SE), a tamper-resistant platform (typically
    a one-chip secure microcontroller) capable of securely hosting
    applications and their confidential and cryptographic data (e.g., key
    management) in accordance with the rules and security requirements set
    forth by a set of well-identified trusted authorities.
        The attached White Paper, ``A Multi-Layer Vehicle Security
    Framework'', provides additional insights into securing connected
    vehicles and creating a safer, more efficient mobility future.
    Conclusion
        We hope that the Committee takes three key points from the
    foregoing message:

       In addition to electrified automated cars helping to
            prospectively reduce energy consumption by as much as 90
            percent, today's technology--if more widely deployed--could
            bring about a radical reduction in traffic fatalities and minor
            accidents alike. In all of these areas, the expanded deployment
            of semiconductors will play a significant role in bringing
            about massive improvements.

       In terms of cars communicating with each other, IEEE802.11p
            technology is ideal for safety critical applications that must
            be supported in the absence of a network. When and where the
            cellular infrastructure is available, LTE-V2X is a valid
            alternative and offers a more mature eco-system for
            entertainment services. The win-win situation would be to focus
            on the strongest points of each technology and work together to
            provide the best car-to-car communication solution, continue
            deploying IEEE802.11p for safety critical applications and
            ensure that the upcoming LTE-V2X technology can coexist.

       No innovative solutions will succeed without designing in
            security. NXP advocates for a multi-layered, ``4+1'' layer
            security framework as only a holistic approach to securing the
            complete vehicle architecture of a connected car can succeed. A
            secure element must serve as a tamper-proof trust anchor,
            engaging with physically and electrically isolated networks
            using a central gateway with a firewall. The remaining layers
            ideally consist of secure networks with the bus monitoring and
            cryptographic capabilities of a secure transceiver or
            microcontroller for message authentication, secure processing
            on the microcontrollers, with trusted software running in a
            protected environment, and of course, the ``+1'' layer--the
            secure car access solution.
        We at NXP are proud that our innovations--many of which have their
    origins in the United States--are driving a more secure, smarter
    mobility future. We hope that the foregoing information is of value to
    the committee, and look forward to receiving and responding to any
    comments or questions that members of the committee may have.
                Respectfully,
                                                    Lars Reger,
                                              Senior Vice President and
                                  Chief Technology Officer--Automotive,
                                                        NXP Semiconductors.
    About NXP
        NXP Semiconductors N.V. enables secure connections and
    infrastructure for a smarter world, advancing solutions that make lives
    easier, better and safer. As the world leader in secure connectivity
    solutions for embedded applications, NXP is driving innovation in the
    secure connected vehicle, end-to-end security & privacy, and smart
    connected solutions markets. Built on more than 60 years of combined
    experience and expertise, the company has 45,000 employees in more than
    35 countries. Built on a 50-year legacy with Motorola and Philips, NXP
    has design, research and development, manufacturing and sales
    operations in the United States, where we employ nearly 7,000 people.
    NXP owns and operates three wafer fabrication facilities in the US, two
    of which are in Austin with a third facility in Chandler, Arizona. The
    representative products of these fabs include microcontrollers (MCUs)
    and microprocessors (MPUs), power management devices, RF transceivers
    and amplifiers, and sensors. Find out more at www.nxp.com.
                                     ______

    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

                                      Honda North America, Inc.
                                       Washington, DC, January 24, 2018

    Hon. John Thune, Chairman,
    U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
    Washington, DC.

    Hon. Bill Nelson, Ranking Member,
    U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
    Washington, DC.

    Dear Chairman Thune and Ranking Member Nelson,

        Thank you for this opportunity to share Honda North America, Inc.'s
    (Honda) views on the ``Driving Automotive Innovation and Federal
    Policies'' hearing. Honda has been investing and manufacturing in the
    U.S. for more than 40 years. This includes 12 manufacturing plants
    which have enjoyed $3.4 billion in investments in the past four years
    alone and produce passenger vehicles, power equipment, and power sports
    products. Honda has also purchased $27 billion in parts and materials
    from 610 U.S. suppliers. Our 14 R&D facilities have researched,
    designed, and developed 29 Honda and Acura car and light truck models
    since 1991. The U.S. also hosts the global headquarters for HondaJet.
    Honda directly employs 30,000 Americans and in more than 50 years in
    the U.S. has never laid off a permanent associate.
        As our automotive products evolve, so too must our business models.
    One example of that evolution is the creation of one of Honda's North
    American research and development business units, Honda R&D
    Innovations, Inc. based in Silicon Valley. This open innovation-focused
    business unit has established two programs that serve as catalysts to
    discover and experiment with new technologies and business concepts for
    Honda products: Honda Xcelerator and Honda Developer Studio.
        Honda Xcelerator is Honda's open innovation program designed to
    facilitate collaboration between technology startups across all funding
    stages who share Honda's vision to transform the mobility experience.
    The program easily engages innovators in an open and friendly
    environment, offering funding for rapid prototyping, a collaborative
    workspace, and pairing with Honda mentors. Innovators also have access
    to Honda vehicles and vehicle data to develop, test, and refine their
    prototype. Honda Xcelerator currently works with technology incubators
    around the world, including partnerships with MassChallenge (Boston,
    Mass.), Creative Destruction Lab (Toronto, Canada), Drive (Tel Aviv,
    Israel) and equity crowd funding platform OurCrowd (Jerusalem, Israel).
    This list is expected to continue to grow.
        In 2017, Honda Xcelerator showcased its startup collaborations with
    partners LEIA 3D and VocalZoom. In partnership with LEIA 3D, Honda
    developed a driver's display meter using nano technology that can
    provide three-dimensional images, switching seamlessly between
    different viewing angles for warnings and driver-assistive systems.
    Honda also partnered with VocalZoom to apply VocalZoom's optical
    microphone technology to improve voice interaction inside the vehicle.
        Honda Developer Studio connects innovators with Honda engineers to
    quickly get their applications ready for the road. Like Honda
    Xcelerator, Honda Developer Studio also provides access to vehicles so
    that innovators can experience real-time results and vehicle feedback
    as the applications are being built. For example, Honda is
    collaborating with Visa on an in-vehicle payment technology that
    enables users to make payments, such as at a gas station or parking
    facility, from inside their cars. We envision a world where consumers
    can effortlessly make everyday purchases from the car . This connected
    car project is an early step in Honda's work regarding electronic
    commerce in the age of the Internet of Things. We've developed a proof-
    of-concept experience and will have more information on future
    commercial plans as we receive the test results.
        Additionally, Honda and DreamWorks Animation have partnered on a
    platform that leverages a ConnectedTravel software development kit,
    vehicle data, and virtual reality (VR) technology. The platform can be
    used to rapidly create in-vehicle entertainment experience for
    passengers through a location context-aware application. The technology
    uses VR goggles to display information such as restaurant guides or to
    advance a game in sync with the movement of the car.
        Honda Innovations is proactively searching for the next great
    technology to benefit our products and, ultimately, our customers. Our
    open innovation platform provides the best method to modify these
    technologies for Honda products and be able to bring them to the market
    relatively quickly. Honda stands ready to work with anyone who has an
    idea to make our products work better for our customers.

        The Chairman. I would say to the members of our panel, if
    you could, and if members of our panel here could get questions
    in, we would like to get those responded to, turned around to
    complete the record in 2 weeks, so if there are written
    questions that come in response to this hearing, do your best
    to get those back to us, the answers back to us, as quickly as
    possible. It would be greatly appreciated.
        And I want to thank the crowd for being here today. It is
    good participation from our audience.
        How about we give all these folks a hand this morning?
        [Applause.]
        The Chairman. Thanks again to our panel. Thanks to all of
    you for being here. And this hearing is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 12:03 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                                A P P E N D I X

                            Transportation Research Center Inc.
                                     East Liberty, OH, February 7, 2018

    Hon. John Thune,
    Chairman,
    Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
    United States Senate,
    Washington, DC.

    Hon. Bill Nelson,
    Ranking Member,
    Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
    United States Senate,
    Washington, DC.

    Dear Chairman Thune and Ranking Member Nelson:

        Thank you for the opportunity to share the Transportation Research
    Center Inc.'s (TRC) perspective following the Senate Commerce, Science,
    and Transportation Committee's field hearing on Driving Automotive
    Innovation and Federal Policies held Wednesday, January 24, 2018.
        TRC along with The Ohio State University (OSU) were among the first
    to begin testing automated vehicles in the 1970s. TRC's connected and
    automated vehicle (CV/AV) research, testing, and deployment has
    continued, in conjunction with the National Highway Traffic Safety
    Administration's (NHTSA) vehicle research and test center located at
    TRC, in developing objective test procedures for various applications
    of connected vehicle technology and functional testing for automated
    vehicles by procuring and verifying next generation testing
    capabilities for automated vehicles.
        We are the Nation's leading independent automotive proving ground,
    and the only industry, non-for-profit, government, and university-
    affiliated research facility in the U.S. TRC employs over 450 people
    and has served more than 1000 customers, including virtually every OEM
    and numerous tier 1 suppliers. TRC's campus encompasses 4,500 acres, a
    7.5-mile high-speed track, and operates 24/7, 359 days a year. We hope
    both of you will visit us soon. Last year we were honored to host
    Secretary Elaine Chao, Senator Rob Portman, and several Members of
    Congress, including the Chairman of the House Transportation and
    Infrastructure Subcommittee on Highways and Transit, Sam Graves.
        During the hearing, the U.S. DOT's 10 federally-designated
    autonomous vehicle proving grounds were referenced. We would like to
    share with the Committee that we are actively involved in developing a
    ``Community of Practice'' for conducting AV testing with California,
    Florida, Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Wisconsin,
    to name a few.
        TRC currently supports emerging active safety and advanced driving
    assistance systems technology development to enable CV and AV testing
    of automation systems. Our customers trust in TRC for a comprehensive,
    holistic approach to not only testing automated systems, but the
    vehicles themselves. Critical testing and validation such as dynamic
    and durability testing, performance, and mileage accumulation still
    need to be performed, even on automated vehicles.
        TRC's commitment to automated vehicle technology and safety
    continues over the next five years with significant public-private
    partnership (P3) funding for Phase One of our 540-acre Smart Mobility
    Advanced Research and Test (SMART) Center. This $45 million
    expenditure, which does not include Federal funding, will contain a
    flexible platform, mega intersection, urban network, and control center
    specifically dedicated to testing autonomous technologies and vehicles.
    Our facility will offer customers a confidential, controlled,
    repeatable environment to test their AV technologies.
        TRC's SMART Center will be the world's largest, contained within an
    independent proving ground. Once controlled testing is complete OEMs,
    innovators, and start-ups will be able take their products onto the
    open road for real world testing along the U.S. Rt. 33 Smart Mobility
    Corridor connected to TRC's facility. Funding for this corridor was
    made possible because of a U.S. DOT Advanced Transportation and
    Congestion Management Technologies Deployment Initiative (ATCMTD)
    grant. The State of Ohio, local communities, OSU, and TRC joined forces
    to match Federal dollars to implement smart infrastructure technology
    to solve congestion issues. This corridor also leads to the connected
    vehicle pilot in Marysville, Ohio and to Smart Columbus, where we have
    the only federally-designated smart city in the country.
        With capital investment in upwards of $100 million, decades of
    experience within the automotive industry, and hundreds of customers,
    TRC is pleased to provide leadership, partnership, and expertise to
    industry and government as it embarks on the next generation of
    transportation innovation.
        Chairman Thune and Ranking Member Nelson, thank you for your
    leadership and commitment to the safe deployment of automated vehicles
    onto the public roads. We appreciate the opportunity to express our
    views around this important policy conversation.
                Sincerely,
                                                Brett Roubinek,
                                 President and Chief Executive Officer,
                                        Transportation Research Center Inc.

    Cc: Senator Sherrod Brown
    Senator Rob Portman
                                     ______

     Prepared Statement of Ned Finkle, Vice President, External Relations,
                                     NVIDIA
        Chairman Thune, Ranking Member Nelson, Senators:

        NVIDIA had the great honor to testify last summer in front of your
    committee and discuss how we are helping to pave the way for self-
    driving vehicles. I believe all parties at the hearing shared the
    excitement of the improved safety and increased access that autonomous
    vehicles will soon bring to our roads. After watching last month's
    hearing with speakers from Audi Mobility U.S., Robert Bosch, and Zoox,
    we're thrilled to see that these companies are continuing to build
    momentum toward an autonomous vehicle future that closely aligns with
    NVIDIA's goals.
        During last summer's hearing, NVIDIA detailed our technology and
    our ecosystem, highlighting that the NVIDIA DRIVE artificial
    intelligence computing platform was in use by more than 225 automotive
    companies worldwide. Now, seven months later, we have grown that
    network to over 320 OEMs, tier 1 suppliers, startups, and research
    institutions, including companies such as Audi, Volvo, Mercedes-Benz,
    Bosch, and PACCAR trucks. Also included are over 150 startup companies
    that are using the NVIDIA DRIVE platform to innovate in autonomous
    technology in such areas as HD mapping, simulation, sensor technology,
    or even reinventing the entire mobility ecosystem, like Zoox is
    proposing.
        At the beginning of 2018, NVIDIA further strengthened its ecosystem
    of partners and its technology offerings with a series of announcements
    at the Consumer Electronics Show. Our DRIVE Xavier, the world's first
    autonomous machine processor, is being delivered to customers this
    quarter. Capable of calculating 30 trillion operations per second,
    while only consuming 30 watts, it is targeted to bring Level 3 and 4
    autonomy to production vehicles in the next couple of years. We also
    announced at CES our DRIVE Pegasus AI computing platform, which
    delivers 320 trillion operations per second--the compute horsepower
    needed for Level 5 robotaxis. DRIVE Pegasus takes the performance of a
    trunk full of PCs, and sizes it down in an auto-grade form factor the
    size of a license plate. Our customers will have Pegasus in hand for
    R&D by mid-2018, which aligns with the 2020 time-frame stated today on
    when speakers believe Level 5 vehicles will be available.
        We also revealed new partners: Uber is using NVIDIA technology to
    power its fleet of self-driving cars and trucks; Volkswagen will infuse
    AI into its future vehicle lineup; and Aurora, founded by three self-
    driving technology pioneers, is utilizing NVIDIA technology to create a
    new Level 4 and 5 self-driving hardware platform.
        Last month's testimony spoke to the need for simulation, in
    addition to physical proving grounds. Through the power of our GPUs,
    NVIDIA can simulate potentially hazardous situations that are too
    dangerous to perform in the real world, and use these techniques to
    train AI software before putting a vehicle in the real world. Through
    AI technology, we can simulate driving 300,000 miles in five hours, and
    cover every paved road in the United States in just two days.
        But in-vehicle technology is useless for transportation services
    unless it is of the strictest automotive grade. NVIDIA DRIVE is the
    first functionally safe AI self-driving platform that can operate even
    when faults are detected. Certified to the international safety
    standards of ISO 26262, safety certified ASIL-D makes DRIVE a holistic
    safety platform.
        The speakers expressed the need for consortiums to come together so
    companies can provide the data the Senate and House need to better
    rollout legislation. We couldn't agree more. NVIDIA would like to let
    the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation know
    that we are at your service and are always available to provide insight
    on why AI is the key to unlocking the challenge and promise of self-
    driving cars, including, most importantly, creating a safer, more
    productive, and less congested world.
        Thank you.
                                     ______

       Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maggie Hassan to
                             Randy K. Avent, Ph.D.
        Question 1. As a former Governor, I recognize that there are ways
    that state and local governments can work to accommodate and help
    launch this technology, as well as ensure that it is safe and
    appropriately regulated. That is particularly important when we
    recognize that there are bad actors out there that would like to try
    and infiltrate the technology systems that run these cars. What should
    states and localities be thinking about in terms of a regulatory
    infrastructure that will allow this technology to flourish in a safe
    manner?
        Answer. There are two unique factors I believe will drive the
    regulation of this technology at the Federal level, more than at the
    state level. First, it is a very complex capability that involves
    integration of multiple advanced technologies in sensing, signal
    processing, machine learning, Artificial Intelligence (perception,
    reasoning, . . .) and mobile communications. This complexity will
    require significant resources in test centers and test configurations--
    and deep technical expertise in specialized areas. Second, with the
    estimated market value well in the billions, there will be a rush to
    market before the technology is fully mature. In fact, we have already
    seen that and some of the results have been fatal.
        To make this technology safe for all conditions (everyday
    conditions as well as rare events), I believe we will rely heavily on
    the national test centers. These centers are best equipped to study and
    characterize the extended operating conditions (e.g., someone walking
    out behind a car at night, a white tractor trailer pulling in front of
    the car when the sun is positioned such that it blinds the sensors,. .
    .). These centers should have strong ties to universities (most of them
    do) because universities are uniquely postured to provide unbiased
    technical expertise. It is for this reason, I suggested imitating the
    defense (and energy) FFRDC or UARC programs. Lastly, regulations should
    be developed in a data-driven framework so as not to overburden and
    slow down adoption of the technology.
        States can have an active role in this technology by working with
    the test centers to make sure their unique geographic conditions are
    represented in the test scenarios. They should also supply data from
    state run investigations into accidents so that vehicles can mature
    much like the airline industry has over the years. States can also help
    speed adoption through infrastructure projects like dedicated limited
    access lanes, similar to bike lanes, for the last mile. Well-marked
    road networks will help provide guidance for the algorithms, and new
    civil infrastructure projects should consider that vehicles will soon
    begin communicating with signage, stoplights and each other.

        Question 2. My state is very sparsely populated especially in the
    North. There is always a question in rural America, of how we will get
    this technology off the ground and make sure rural communities aren't
    left behind. How are we going to leverage what we need to leverage, and
    get this technology out to the least densely populated places in our
    country, so that everybody has the freedom and economic advantage that
    this technology poses?
        Answer. Rural areas are likely to poise certain challenges for the
    vehicles that need to be addressed as the technology is developed and
    tested. First, these vehicles are safer when they are slower because
    they have more time to react. At first glance, one may think this
    improves safety in rural areas, but many rural areas have winding roads
    with limited visibility; and in the case of northern New Hampshire,
    mountainous terrain that can affect communications between vehicles
    through obscuration. Roads in rural areas may also be more challenging
    for these vehicles because they may be narrower and may have less
    defined markings, making it more difficult for the algorithms to detect
    road boundaries. These problems are likely not insurmountable but need
    to be addressed through research, development and testing to make this
    technology safe for all.
                                     ______

       Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maggie Hassan to
                                Tim Kentley-Klay
        Question 1. As a former Governor, I recognize that there are ways
    that state and local governments can work to accommodate and help
    launch this technology, as well as ensure that it is safe and
    appropriately regulated. That is particularly important when we
    recognize that there are bad actors out there that would like to try
    and infiltrate the technology systems that run these cars. What should
    states and localities be thinking about in terms of a regulatory
    infrastructure that will allow this technology to flourish in a safe
    manner?
        Answer. Thank you for the question. As this technology comes to
    market, states and localities should consider ways to encourage
    interaction between developers of this technology and state and local
    law enforcement and first responder communities. The model that exists
    in California is useful for others. In California, the DMV has
    promulgated rules for autonomous vehicle (AV) developers to generate a
    law enforcement interaction plan, to share that plan with the
    California Highway Patrol, and also to notify local authorities.

        Question 2. My state is very sparsely populated especially in the
    North. There is always a question in rural America, of how we will get
    this technology off the ground and make sure rural communities aren't
    left behind. How are we going to leverage what we need to leverage, and
    get this technology out to the least densely populated places in our
    country, so that everybody has the freedom and economic advantage that
    this technology poses?
        Answer. This is a very good question. It is important that everyone
    enjoy the safety, mobility, and sustainability opportunities that AV
    technology can bring to the market. The deployment of fully autonomous
    vehicles across the U.S. will not happen overnight, and the initial
    vehicle costs are likely to high to sell to individual consumers. Over
    time, however, the availability of the technology is expected to expand
    across the country. Additionally, Level 2 and Level 3 (ADAS) autonomous
    systems will likely be available for individually owned vehicles that
    are sold in rural areas. Even just in the past few years,
    semiautonomous ADAS technologies have made driving safer. It is
    important to know that there are different business models to bring
    automated and semi-automated technologies to market. Zoox's particular
    model focuses on deployment in dense areas. But the technology that
    companies like Zoox are developing through cutting-edge R&D will make
    automotive travel safer, period, throughout different geographical
    regions, both urban and rural.
                                     ______

       Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maggie Hassan to
                               Michael Mansuetti
        Question 1. As a former Governor, I recognize that there are ways
    that state and local governments can work to accommodate and help
    launch this technology, as well as ensure that it is safe and
    appropriately regulated. That is particularly important when we
    recognize that there are bad actors out there that would like to try
    and infiltrate the technology systems that run these cars. What should
    states and localities be thinking about in terms of a regulatory
    infrastructure that will allow this technology to flourish in a safe
    manner?
        Answer. Bosch agrees that cybersecurity is an issue of great
    importance. Automakers and suppliers are actively working together to
    advance the cybersecurity state of the art and to define best practices
    to secure vehicle systems. Coalitions such as the Auto-ISAC promote
    entities to work together at an industry level, which helps to
    coordinate and develop standard procedures and protocols. Through the
    Auto-ISAC, members can report incidents, exploits, threats and
    vulnerabilities from testing, consumer reports or security research,
    which encourages industry-wide sharing and maturity.
        Bosch strongly supports a layered approach to vehicle
    cybersecurity, in alignment with the approach encouraged by NHTSA in
    its 2016 Cybersecurity Best Practices. Further, Bosch is committed to
    providing products that meet or exceed industry guidelines to minimize
    cybersecurity threats. With the Bosch group of companies we have a
    leading team of security specialists in the automotive sector, ESCRYPT,
    which has enabled us to design a layered approach to enable intrusion
    detection and mitigate against cyber-attacks during the entire
    lifecycle of a vehicle. The core layer protects the integrity of each
    individual ECU (electronic control unit) with secure updates and
    defined privileges. The second layer focuses on the in-vehicle network
    by protecting the integrity of critical signals. For example, Bosch
    uses AUTOSAR-standardization to support authentic communication between
    different vehicle systems. The third layer focuses on securing the E/E
    (electric/electronic) architecture by protecting and separating
    domains. Lastly, the fourth layer includes vehicle firewalls and
    security standards for communication and external interfaces. When
    protecting against external attacks, this is the first line of defense,
    which protects the safety and integrity of the vehicle and privacy of
    the driver.
        Bosch supports a framework that allows the industry to continue to
    adapt to rapidly changing technology and ever-evolving threats. The
    automotive industry has been proactive in continuing to develop a
    robust cybersecurity system to protect users. Bosch supports the
    efforts of NHTSA, which has encouraged entities to develop layered
    cybersecurity protections for vehicles to minimize risks to safety.
    Bosch has maintained an open dialogue with NHTSA concerning this topic
    and our technology. We also supported the two NHTSA cybersecurity
    workshops, which were convened in 2016 and 2018 to help encourage and
    enable an information exchange between various government agencies and
    the industry. We believe that additional interaction between the
    industry and other interested stakeholders could help to create a
    greater understanding and awareness of this complex subject.

        Question 2. My state is very sparsely populated especially in the
    North. There is always a question in rural America, of how we will get
    this technology off the ground and make sure rural communities aren't
    left behind. How are we going to leverage what we need to leverage, and
    get this technology out to the least densely populated places in our
    country, so that everybody has the freedom and economic advantage that
    this technology poses?
        Answer. Automated driving functions have the ability to save lives
    in all types of communities. NHTSA's March 2018 Traffic Safety Facts
    report stated that 90 percent of all car accidents are caused by human
    error. Vehicle automation will continue to increase levels of safety
    for all road users.
        Bosch believes that vehicle automation will likely first benefit
    drivers in rural communities by increasing safety through Level 1 and
    Level 2 automated systems (as defined by SAE J3016). Essentially, these
    categories include Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) which
    support the driver but do not take control of the vehicle. According to
    NHTSA, 33.4 percent of all police-reported crashes in the U.S. in 2015
    involved a rear-end collision with another vehicle as the first harmful
    event in the crash. ADAS technologies, such as forward collision
    warning and automatic emergency braking, can aid drivers in avoiding
    these collisions in both urban and rural environments. Similarly,
    partially automated driving functions, such as highway assist, can
    support drivers on highways and well-developed state and Federal roads
    by taking over the vehicle's longitudinal and lateral guidance. As one
    example, this can help drivers to maintain safety when driving in
    certain stressful and/or monotonous situations. Bosch has a long-term
    commitment to helping to make these technologies more affordable so
    that, in turn, they can penetrate into a greater portion of the overall
    vehicle fleet and to more lower-cost models. This commitment led Bosch
    to introduce a medium range radar in 2013, which offers carmakers an
    additional option when deploying driver assistance technologies. Bosch
    continues to believe that an update of the U.S. New Car Assessment
    Program (also known as the Vehicle 5-Star Rating) to include driver
    assistance systems would enable a more widespread understanding and
    adoption of these technologies in the U.S.
        Furthermore, Bosch is working to develop highly automated vehicle
    technologies for urban environments and foresee that, as automated
    vehicle technology matures, it may become available to a wider group of
    communities. Greater penetration rates of highly automated vehicle
    functions could allow this technology to reach even the least densely
    populated areas in our country.
                                     ______

       Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maggie Hassan to
                                 Luke Schneider
        Question 1. As a former Governor, I recognize that there are ways
    that state and local governments can work to accommodate and help
    launch this technology, as well as ensure that it is safe and
    appropriately regulated. That is particularly important when we
    recognize that there are bad actors out there that would like to try
    and infiltrate the technology systems that run these cars. What should
    states and localities be thinking about in terms of a regulatory
    infrastructure that will allow this technology to flourish in a safe
    manner?
        Answer. NHTSA has the regulatory authority over the design,
    construction and performance of motor vehicle safety and to mitigate
    risks of harm, including risks that may arise in connection with ADSs.
    The U.S. Department of Transportation restated NHTSA's enforcement
    authority with respect to ADSs in A Vision for Safety 2.0 and clarified
    and delineated Federal and State regulatory authority. I would note
    that NHTSA has shown it will move aggressively to investigate any AV
    incidents. One of NHTSA's main recommendations to States that want to
    encourage ADS adoption was to review their existing laws and
    regulations for language that might create unintended barriers to ADS
    operation.
        That said, some of the most useful things States and localities can
    be doing to facilitate optimal conditions for automated vehicles would
    be to ensure that infrastructure is in good repair, such as roads and
    lane markings. Cities and localities should also be planning today for
    mobility needs soon to come, such as pick up and drop off zones, truly
    connected street signals and charging station infrastructure.

        Question 2. My state is very sparsely populated especially in the
    North. There is always a question in rural America, of how we will get
    this technology off the ground and make sure rural communities aren't
    left behind. How are we going to leverage what we need to leverage, and
    get this technology out to the least densely populated places in our
    country, so that everybody has the freedom and economic advantage that
    this technology poses?
        Answer. Fortunately, much of the life-saving ADAS technologies
    known as SAE Levels 1 and 2 automation are available in today's
    vehicles such as lane departure warning and automatic emergency
    braking. These systems help keep passengers safer on rural roads where
    the percentage of crashes are higher based on vehicles miles traveled.
        Future mobility transportation services in rural areas could
    include automated shuttles in partnership with hospitals or health care
    centers or on demand shared mobility services for elderly individuals
    who are no longer driving, allowing them to retain their mobility and
    age in place.
        It is interesting to note that providing mobility access to older
    persons in rural districts is a primary motivation for exploring this
    technology in Japan and for its automakers and technology companies. In
    the U.S. the focus has been more on serving urban and suburban
    districts, however different use cases will be pursued across the board
    and there are many compelling aspects of rural use.

                                      [all]

                      This page intentionally left blank.
                      This page intentionally left blank.
                      This page intentionally left blank.