[Senate Hearing 115-665]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                                                        S. Hrg. 115-665

   TRANSPORTATION OF TOMORROW: EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES THAT WILL MOVE 
                                AMERICA

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

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                         COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,
                      SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                     ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS

                             SECOND SESSION
                               __________

                           SEPTEMBER 13, 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
                    
55-086 PDF                 WASHINGTON : 2024                   
                
                
       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 September 13, 2018...............................     1
Statement of Senator Thune.......................................     1
Statement of Senator Cortez Masto................................     3
Statement of Senator Peters......................................    29
Statement of Senator Hassan......................................    31
Statement of Senator Tester......................................    33
Statement of Senator Markey......................................    36
Statement of Senator Cantwell....................................    38
Statement of Senator Klobuchar...................................    39
Statement of Senator Gardner.....................................    41
Statement of Senator Blumenthal..................................    44
    Prepared statement from Catherine Chase, President, Advocates 
      for Highway and Auto Safety................................    46

                               Witnesses

Tina Quigley, General Manager, Regional Transportation Commission 
  of Southern Nevada.............................................     4
    Prepared statement...........................................     5
Davis S. Sanford, Naval Unmanned and Future Technologies, Rolls-
  Royce Marine North America, Inc................................     9
    Prepared statement...........................................    11
Laurie Tolson, Chief Digital Officer, GE Transportation..........    16
    Prepared statement...........................................    18
Josh Raycroft, Director, Business Strategy, Virgin Hyperloop One.    21
    Prepared statement...........................................    23

 
                      TRANSPORTATION OF TOMORROW:
                    EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES THAT WILL
                              MOVE AMERICA

                              ----------                              


                      THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 13, 2018

                                       U.S. Senate,
        Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m. in room 
SR-253, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. John Thune, 
Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
    Present: Senators Thune [presiding], Cortez Masto, Peters, 
Hassan, Tester, Markey, Cantwell, Klobuchar, Gardner, and 
Blumenthal.

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

    The Chairman. Good morning. This nation built the Erie 
Canal, the Transcontinental Railroad, the Wright 1903 Flyer, 
and the Interstate Highway System.
    These advancements made America's transportation system the 
envy of the world and unlocked enormous opportunities for 
Americans. They created jobs and new sources of wealth, opened 
markets, connected rural areas to urban areas, and the coast to 
the heartland, improved the efficiency and safety of the 
movement of people and goods, and gave American businesses a 
significant advantage over economic competitors.
    More recently, however, our transportation system has 
struggled to keep pace with the growing demands of a dynamic 
economy. Freight movement is expected to double over the next 
few decades. The growth of e-commerce continues to present new 
opportunities and challenges and competition from foreign 
countries is strong.
    Meanwhile, our roadways are increasingly congested as 
Americans spend too many hours stuck in traffic at a cost of 
over a $160 billion per year in wasted time, fuel, and vehicle 
wear and tear, and transportation connections in many areas, 
including rural areas, are hindered by deteriorating 
infrastructure conditions.
    While there is a real need for robust investment, the 
transportation sector also needs innovative solutions to 
enhance the safety and efficiency of our system. It is 
essential that the private and public sectors work together to 
prepare for the future and to promote technologies that will 
improve the ways in which people and goods get to and from 
their destinations, including urban and rural areas.
    Technology has the potential to make it easier to get to 
work, get our groceries, plan our businesses or pick up our 
kids or grandkids. Technological changes and innovation may 
transform all aspects of our transportation network from 
vehicles and equipment to the underlying infrastructure to the 
logistics software that helps connect us.
    Our Committee has been active in this Congress in automated 
vehicles, next generation telecom, unmanned aircraft systems or 
drones, and other emerging technology issues.
    Senator Peters and I have been advancing our AV START Act 
to facilitate the safe development of automated vehicles which 
will help save lives, improve mobility for all Americans, 
including those with disabilities, and create new jobs while 
maintaining U.S. leadership in this important technology.
    With the passage of MOBILE NOW, my work with Senator 
Schatz, and the STREAMLINE Small Cell Deployment Act and the 
Committee's related work on 5G Spectrum, we are also working to 
maintain American leadership in next generation communications 
technology, a position that China and others seek for 
themselves.
    In addition, this Committee has included several provisions 
in the Senate FAA bill that will help promote drone 
technologies while addressing safety and privacy issues and 
improving enforcement and Federal oversight of drone 
operations.
    Of course, there are many other forms of technology within 
the Committee's jurisdiction that will transform how we do 
business. An important role of this committee is to hold these 
types of hearings to better inform Congress and the public on 
emerging technologies in areas under our purview.
    While we do not always know which technologies will succeed 
or what the technological maturation process will look like or 
mean for our every-day lives, it is critical that Congress 
engage with innovators and ensure Federal policy supports and 
does not hold back American ingenuity.
    I expect this hearing will examine how emerging 
transportation technologies will fit within Federal regulatory 
financing and permitting policies. It will help answer an 
ongoing question and that is how should the Federal Government 
best engage in the transportation of tomorrow?
    Answering these questions can help ensure our 
transportation system keeps pace with the dynamic economy and 
is the envy of the world.
    This morning, we'll be hearing from a distinguished panel 
of witnesses on new and exciting areas of transportation that 
will transform the way that people and goods move in the 21st 
Century.
    I look forward to hearing from all of you and for all your 
testimony this morning and look forward to having an 
opportunity to interact with you with some questions when we 
conclude our statements.
    I will now recognize our Ranking Member, Senator Cortez 
Masto, for an opening statement.

           STATEMENT OF HON. CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, 
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM NEVADA

    Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair, for 
holding this hearing, and I want to thank Ranking Member 
Nelson, as well. I'm very excited about today's panel, very 
excited about the subject matter.
    This is something that I have been talking about and 
promoting around the halls here in Congress because Nevada is 
an innovation state, very, very excited to have this 
conversation today.
    You know, I have been talking about the fact that Nevada is 
an innovative state where the State Department of 
Transportation has worked to license the Nation's first 
autonomous semi-truck, where the City of Reno is a designee in 
the FAA's new UAS Integration Pilot Program, having just 
announced their recent first multi-drone delivery of automated 
external defibrillators in the presence of the FAA, and its 
other innovations in transit, like our Washoe County Regional 
Transportation Commission, which is pursuing a full range of 
electric buses.
    So I am glad that Virgin Hyperloop One is here as they have 
a fascinating test track and manufacturing outfit in North Las 
Vegas. All of this plays into what I have been advocating here 
in the Senate for most of my tenure, including my bipartisan 
Moving FIRST Act with Senators Burr and Nelson, incentivizing 
the use of emerging technologies to develop smart communities 
and intelligent transportation systems which can improve safety 
and efficiency, reduce costs, cut down on pollution, help us 
reach disadvantaged populations, and much more.
    This is something that is happening around the country and 
the world and I believe we should think of it as a global race.
    Here in the U.S., places like Farmington Hills, Michigan, 
have used smart street lights to help manage traffic flows. 
Norwalk, Connecticut, used a smart parking app to allow 
residents to see available parking in real time, and in 
Milwaukee, police are using sensors to pinpoint gunfire, 
cutting down response times and improving safety, and globally, 
places like Grenoble in France have tested three-wheeled 
electric vehicles for customers to drive on the last leg of 
their journey into and out of the city, and in Masdar, Abu 
Dhabi, a similar project system works with autonomous cars, and 
in Nevada, we are helping to lead the way in all of these 
technologies.
    So I look forward to this distinguished panel and the 
conversations today, and thank you again, Mr. Chairman, for 
your willingness to hold the hearing today.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Cortez Masto, and we'll 
proceed now with our panel and start on my left and your right.
    With us, we have Ms. Tina Quigley, who's General Manager, 
Regional Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada, and Las 
Vegas, Nevada; and next to her we have Mr. Davis Sanford, 
Campaigns Lead, Naval Ship Intelligence & Technologies with 
Rolls-Royce Marine in North America; Ms. Laurie Tolson, who is 
the Chief Digital Officer for GE Transportation; and Mr. Josh 
Raycroft, who's Director of Business Strategy at Virgin 
Hyperloop One.
    So thank you all for being here. We look forward to hearing 
from you and would ask, if you can, to confine your oral 
remarks as close to five minutes as possible. We'll make sure 
that the entirety of your remarks are included as a part of the 
permanent record of the hearing.
    So, Ms. Quigley, welcome. Please proceed.

          STATEMENT OF TINA QUIGLEY, GENERAL MANAGER,

               REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION

                       OF SOUTHERN NEVADA

    Ms. Quigley. Thank you. Good morning. Again, my name is 
Tina Quigley. I'm General Manager of the Regional 
Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada.
    I'd like to sincerely thank Chairman Thune, Ranking Member 
Nelson, Senator Cortez Masto, and Senator Heller, who's not 
able to be here today, for inviting me here.
    The RTC is a bit of an unusual agency in that we are the 
single agency overseeing several transportation functions in 
the Las Vegas region. We're the public transit agency, we're 
the roadway planning and funding agency, we're the region's MPO 
or metropolitan planning organization, and, in addition, we are 
a centralized traffic management agency, which allows us to 
easily collect, manage, and analyze region-wide data.
    With the help of private sector partners, we can leverage 
our infrastructure and data to test and implement smart 
solutions to our safety, capacity, and congestion challenges.
    Our region is growing at one of the fastest rates in the 
Nation and our tourist numbers, which are currently over 43 
million visitors a year, we basically have a super bowl every 
weekend, are estimated to grow by 25 percent over the next 15 
years.
    We like to say ``technology is the new asphalt,'' given 
that new technologies, when integrated into infrastructure, can 
deliver greater capacity enhancements and greater return on 
investments compared to paving just additional vehicle lane 
miles.
    It's clear we must lean in and not only embrace innovation, 
but also facilitate and drive it. At an agency level, this 
requires us to overcome our natural inclination to be 
apprehensive of unconventional partnerships and a bit 
distrusting of private sector's financial motives. No offense.
    To help address this in Southern Nevada, all five of our 
cities, the county, Nevada Department of Transportation, and 
the RTC universally adopted a common Southern Nevada Smart 
Community Vision that guides technology solutions, regardless 
of jurisdictional boundaries.
    This vision document provides a blueprint for continued 
coordination among the partners as they work with various 
private sector industry companies. An example of a few of the 
projects and initiatives that we have underway at the RTC 
include a partnership with Waycare. This groundbreaking 
technology compiles and analyzes data to report in real time 
the location of accidents and predict where dangerous driving 
conditions may occur and so far since we employed this, we are 
identifying accidents 12 minutes faster on average which means 
we can clear them faster, allowing traffic to flow again, and 
reducing the chance of secondary accidents.
    We recently collaborated with Lyft to launch an on-demand 
pilot program to provide non-ADA para-transit service. We 
worked with Aptiv to launch a fleet of 30 autonomous vehicles 
in Las Vegas on the Lyft Network.
    Nexar introduced a vehicle-to-vehicle network via a smart 
phone video app that will provide drivers real-time alerts to 
prevent vehicle, cyclists, and pedestrian collisions.
    Across the country, whether urban or rural, our communities 
are at a crossroads when it comes to mobility and 
transportation investments. We know we can no longer deliver 
policies and infrastructure that rely on yesterday's solutions.
    Consumer preference and expectations are rapidly changing 
and a failure to keep pace can result in public investments 
that are ineffective, inefficient, and may be inappropriate.
    There's a constant stream of new mobility options. However, 
our ability to access and integrate them is limited because 
they do not necessarily fit into a traditional transportation 
mold.
    Congress now has a significant opportunity with the 
upcoming reauthorization of the FAST Act to help states and 
local communities partner with the Federal Government and 
private industry to advance new and efficient mobility 
technologies.
    Federal funding for private and public partnerships is 
essential. We need to identify and support flexible policies 
that provide additional opportunities for pilots and testing 
new approaches.
    The creation of the ATCMTD Program in the FAST Act was a 
good start for providing competitive grants for advanced 
transportation technologies. However, the authorized funding is 
not sufficient.
    Additional opportunities are in Senator Cortez Masto's 
Moving FIRST Act, which will enable more communities and states 
to compete for resources to fund efficient and innovative 
transportation projects, and in Senator Heller's Amendment to 
the THUD Appropriations Minibus would require DOT to assist 
local communities and transportation agencies on advancing 
smart cities solutions.
    In conclusion, the opportunity is real and the timing could 
not be better to embrace it. As communities like ours face the 
risk and uncertainty of being amongst the first to embrace a 
new brand of mobility, the decisive factor is simple: 
collaboration.
    Absent congressional support, there's no realistic pathway 
to think differently, much less do differently, relative to 
transportation.
    Together, however, the opportunities to improve lives and 
accelerate the economy through advanced mobility are boundless.
    Thank you.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Quigley follows:]

     Prepared Statement of Tina Quigley, General Manager, Regional 
              Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada
    Good morning, I am Tina Quigley, and I serve as the General Manager 
of the Regional Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada. I would 
like to thank Chairman Thune, Ranking Member Nelson, Senator Cortez-
Masto, and Senator Heller for inviting me to be here today. I 
appreciate the opportunity to speak about one of the most exciting and 
critical issues affecting the transportation industry today.
About the RTC
    The RTC oversees the Las Vegas region's public transit, traffic 
management, transportation planning, and roadway funding. We also are 
the metropolitan planning organization (MPO) and administer Southern 
Nevada Strong, our regional planning effort to build complete 
communities throughout Southern Nevada.
    In addition, our integrated Intelligent Transportation System 
(ITS), housed at our traffic management center, spans all local 
jurisdictions in the Southern Nevada region. This centralized traffic 
management operation makes it easier for transportation and technology 
companies to access data and demonstrate products.
    In 2017, Nevada passed Assembly Bill 69, which provides a 
regulatory structure that welcomes advance mobility. Given our regional 
transportation authority combined with an innovation-friendly 
regulatory structure, we have the ability to forge public-private, 
multi-jurisdictional, and intergovernmental partnerships that leverage 
technology as a solution to our region's current and future mobility 
challenges.
Uncertainty of Innovation Against the Yoke of Convention
    Our community, like many communities across the county, is at a 
crossroads when it comes to urban mobility and transportation 
investments. We can no longer afford to develop, implement, and invest 
in policies and infrastructure that rely on yesterday's transportation 
and mobility solutions.
    This is especially critical at a time when today's cities and 
citizens require more of our infrastructure investment. We are, and 
have always been consumer focused. However, consumer preference and 
expectations are rapidly changing, and a failure to keep pace could 
have far-reaching effects on urban mobility.
    Over the last several decades, while we were investing in 
traditional solutions, private sector innovation shifted the terrain of 
urban mobility, making it more personalized, nimble, accessible, and 
convenient throughout the country. This entrepreneurial spirit created 
companies like Uber, Lyft, Aptiv, BCyle, and Lime focused on ride 
sharing, autonomous vehicles, bike share, and electric scooters. These 
companies and their innovative ideas are transforming the way people 
choose to move in and around our communities.
    As the market continues to evolve, we have seen a seven percent 
decline in transit ridership across the country. Today, we are forced 
to weigh the uncertainty of innovation against the yoke of convention. 
As our communities continue to grow and technology evolves, there is a 
constant stream of new mobility options; however, our ability to access 
and integrate them is limited because they do not fit into a 
traditional transportation mold.
    Ultimately, we need to work better with private industry and the 
Federal government to develop and invest in communities that create and 
encourage an ecosystem of mobility solutions foundational to a ``smart 
community,'' creating workable pathways that promote mobility, safety, 
and economic development while ensuring that we have transportation 
options that are affordable, equitable, and accessible.
Revolutionizing Our Transportation Network in the Digital Age
    We believe that ``technology is the new asphalt'' given that new 
technologies, when integrated into existing and new transportation 
infrastructure, can deliver significantly higher returns on investment 
compared to the traditional approach of simply building another lane. 
Advanced technology developments such as connected and autonomous 
vehicles, faster wireless communications, and greater data sharing, 
offer unprecedented opportunities to create safer, less congested, and 
more efficient communities.
    In this decade alone, private industry is paving the way and 
transforming our transportation network. From ride share to bike share, 
connected and autonomous vehicles to Hyperloop and The Boring Company, 
these developments have and continue to disrupt the movement of people, 
goods, and services.
    Transportation agencies, like the RTC of Southern Nevada, are 
working tirelessly to learn about and test new technologies because we 
see firsthand their potential to improve the quality of life of our 
citizens and to leverage our existing infrastructure. We believe that 
we must lean in and not only embrace innovation--but also facilitate 
and drive it. This requires us to overcome our natural inclinations to 
be apprehensive of unconventional partnerships and to distrust private 
sector's financial motivations.
    To achieve that goal, collaboration between public and private 
partners and among local jurisdictions and government agencies at all 
levels are critical. We need to work together to ensure we are 
developing policies, building infrastructure, and creating vehicles 
that can accommodate the mobility of the future.
Smart Mobility Technology and Innovative Solutions
    All six jurisdictions in Southern Nevada, the Nevada Department of 
Transportation, and the RTC recently adopted a unified ``Southern 
Nevada Smart Community Vision.'' This vision guides the introduction of 
technological solutions that seamlessly interact and complement each 
other, regardless of jurisdictional boundaries. The ``Southern Nevada 
Smart Community Vision'' provides a blueprint for continued 
coordination and cooperation among government and community 
stakeholders as they work with various private-industry companies to 
leverage advanced technology to build a smarter and more connected 
Southern Nevada. Currently, multiple jurisdictions and agencies are 
working together with private industry partners to test and deploy 
technologies that can provide solutions for our mobility challenges.
Innovation in Infrastructure
    A groundbreaking technology currently deployed in Southern Nevada 
is a partnership with Waycare, whose technology helps improve safety 
and efficiency on freeways and major arterials. Waycare compiles and 
analyzes data to report in real-time the location of accidents and 
predict where dangerous driving conditions or congestion may occur. 
This technology enables faster validation and response to roadway 
incidents. It also more efficiently uses resources to proactively 
deploy traffic patrols and abatement efforts with the goal of 
preventing incidents. The RTC Traffic Management Center uses Waycare's 
real-time analytics to better optimize traffic flows. So far, through 
Waycare, the RTC's early incident identification is on average 
approximately 12 minutes faster than prior modes of incident 
identification. By identifying incidents sooner, we can clear them 
faster, restoring normal traffic flow, and reducing the chance of 
secondary accidents. As a result, this technology is increasing safety 
and reducing traffic congestion on our roadways.
    Our regionally coordinated, traffic management operations also 
prompted Audi to select Southern Nevada to debut the first of its kind 
``Time to Green'' dashboard feature, which enables the car and driver 
to receive real time alerts when traffic lights will change. This 
information not only allows drivers to be more informed, prepared, and 
alert, but it is also a first step to developing autonomous vehicles 
and a data exchange that will help better manage congestion on crowded 
roadways.
    As connected and autonomous vehicles continue to evolve, a central 
challenge to consumer acceptance is the question of how the vehicles 
will operate safely and obey local rules of the roads. To address this 
challenge, the RTC most recently partnered with the world leader in 
connected car services and transportation analytics, INRIX, on a first-
of-its-kind platform called AV Road Rules (AVRR) to help ensure the 
safe and effective operation of highly automated vehicles (HAVs) on 
public roads. INRIX's state-of-the-art platform allows cities and 
transportation authorities to digitize their traffic rules and 
restrictions, such as speed limits, crosswalks, turn restrictions, and 
bikes lanes. This platform can be communicated to HAVs, allowing them 
to operate safely and effectively. The AVRR platform also enables HAVs 
to report infrastructure needs, such as potholes, inadequate lane 
striping, and signage issues, to the appropriate transportation 
authorities. This is a valuable tool for cities to more quickly 
identify infrastructure needs and leverage HAV operations to improve 
the safety and comfort of public streets for all users.
Innovation in Public Transportation
    Building on this regional cooperation and data exchange model, the 
RTC, along with the City of Las Vegas, provide traffic signal data to 
the Nation's first self-driving shuttle that operates in mixed traffic. 
Sponsored by AAA and Keolis, the autonomous bus is fully integrated 
with ``smart city'' infrastructure along a half-mile loop in downtown 
Las Vegas. This pilot project tests autonomous and intelligent 
infrastructure technology, and it will also help develop standards for 
how government agencies can share data with vehicles, as Federal 
standards do not currently exist.
    The project enables the RTC, the City of Las Vegas, and project 
partners to better understand the customer experience and learn more 
about how autonomous vehicles operate in mixed traffic so autonomous 
vehicles can be deployed for public use in the future. Over the course 
of the yearlong pilot, the self-driving shuttle provided a quarter-
million residents and visitors to Las Vegas with a first-hand 
experience of autonomous vehicle technology, exposing most riders to 
the technology for the first time. People have embraced the shuttle, 
which averages 150 riders per day and has transported more than 23,000 
passengers so far. It is critical that people have the opportunity to 
experience in-person these advanced technologies so they are 
comfortable with the changes that will occur in the near future.
    We also recently collaborated with Lyft to launch a six-month on-
demand pilot program to provide non-ADA paratransit service to 
approximately 145 existing customers. This pilot was designed to help 
reduce response time; improve mobility management; create an on-demand, 
individualized service; and reduce cost. We performed 5,000 trips, 
saved more than $100,000, significantly reducing wait times and 
improving service for our paratransit customers.
    In addition, Aptiv, a global technology company that develops 
safer, greener, and more connected transportation solutions, launched a 
fleet of 30 autonomous vehicles in Las Vegas on the Lyft network. On an 
opt-in basis, passengers have the ability to hail a self-driving 
vehicle equipped with Aptiv technology to and from more than 20 high-
demand locations including the Las Vegas Strip. Lyft and Aptiv's self-
driving program is the largest commercial program that is available to 
the public today and represents a major milestone in mobility and the 
future of transportation. This partnership further exposes our 
residents and visitors to autonomous vehicle technology and its 
benefits.
Education and Maintaining Our Infrastructure
    According to a RAND Corporation study: ``allowing wide use of 
autonomous vehicles when they are just 10 percent better than current 
American drivers could prevent thousands of road fatalities over the 
next 15 years and possibly hundreds of thousands of fatalities over 30 
years, compared to waiting until they are 75 percent or 90 percent 
better.'' \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ RAND Corporation, ``Introducing Autonomous Vehicles Sooner 
Could Save Hundreds of Thousands of Lives Over Time.'' https://
www.rand.org/news/press/2017/11/07.html (November 7, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Yet, the public's perception about whether autonomous vehicles 
improve safety stands in stark contrast to this data. In 2016, Cox 
Automotive found that 63 percent of respondents felt roadways would be 
safer if all cars were autonomous, versus only 45 percent this year.\2\ 
Moreover, in a study conducted by AAA, more than half (54 percent) said 
they would feel less safe sharing the road with AVs \3\. Clearly, 
technology may be moving full-steam ahead, but the travelling public 
may not yet be on board.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ Cox Enterprises, ``2018 Cox Automotive Evolution of Mobility 
Study,'' https://d8imphy647
zzg.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/2018-Cox-Automotive-
Evolution-of-Mobility-Study_Autonomous-Vehicles-Research-FINAL.pdf, 
(August 2018).
    \3\ AAA, ``Americans Feel Unsafe Sharing the Road with Fully Self-
Driving Cars,'' https://newsroom.aaa.com/2017/03/americans-feel-unsafe-
sharing-road-fully-self-driving-cars/, (March 7, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    We must collaboratively work together to educate the public about 
emerging transportation technologies such as connected and autonomous 
vehicles and better explain their benefits and how they will transform 
transportation. We need to enable our constituents to experience these 
advanced technologies in-person, so they are comfortable with the 
changes that are coming.
    As driving continues to become less burdensome, motorists may be 
more inclined to get inside their vehicles and commute, adding miles 
traveled to the infrastructure requirements. We are already seeing that 
to a certain extent with the growing use of ride-hailing companies like 
Uber and Lyft.
    If autonomous cars are added to the mix, they become even more 
attractive transportation options, allowing riders to work and read 
while on their commute. Thus, vehicle miles traveled (VMT) will likely 
increase as self-driving cars becoming more prevalent, and increased 
VMT forces policymakers to strongly consider increased investment and 
expansion in smart infrastructure.
    As the metropolitan planning organization for the Southern Nevada 
region, we have the responsibility to revitalize our infrastructure and 
modernize our outmoded transportation system to ensure that we are 
accommodating the needs of all roadway users. In some cases throughout 
Las Vegas, we can no longer add capacity by adding more roads--so we 
must look to technology to help manage congestion and capacity.
Ultimately Building the Transportation of Tomorrow
    Over the last decade, we have witnessed technology rapidly 
transform mobility; and, as it does, policy and cultural questions 
continue to evolve. I assure you that your constituents' expectations 
are evolving at a similar, if not faster, clip. It is my sincere hope 
that we do not fear this change, but embrace it, by establishing new 
funding opportunities, updating regulations, and rethinking planning 
practices.
    Congress has a significant opportunity, with the upcoming 
reauthorization of the FAST Act, to help develop, support, and invest 
in the infrastructure of tomorrow that empowers local communities to 
partner with the Federal government and private industry to advance 
mobility, data, and intelligent transportation systems.
    Federal funding for private and public partnerships in this realm 
is essential. We need to identify and support flexible policies that 
provide additional opportunities to pilot and test new ideas and 
technologies. We need workable definitions of public transportation 
including the guidelines for funding eligibility and mechanisms. We 
need the Federal government to be our invested partners with these new 
and innovative approaches. The creation of the Advanced Transportation 
and Congestion Management Technologies Deployment Program, in the FAST 
Act, was a good start by providing competitive grants for advanced 
transportation technologies to states, local governments, and 
transportation agencies. The authorized $60 million a year, however, is 
not sufficient to meet the nationwide demand for automated vehicle 
deployment.
    Additional opportunities are in Senator Cortez Masto's Moving and 
Fostering Innovation to Revolutionize Smarter Transportation (Moving 
FIRST) Act, Senator Cantwell's Smart Cities and Communities Act of 
2017, and Senator Heller's recent Smart Cities amendment to the 
Transportation-HUD Appropriations minibus legislation. Senator Cortez 
Masto's legislation will enable more communities, regardless of size, 
to compete for resources to fund efficient and innovative 
transportation projects. The legislation will expand the 2015 
Strengthening Mobility and Revolutionizing Transportation (SMART) 
Cities Challenge administered by the U.S. Department of Transportation, 
and its funding can help meet a community's transportation needs and 
support the development of groundbreaking partnerships. Senator 
Cantwell's legislation will direct the Departments of Commerce, Energy, 
HUD and Transportation, and the National Science Foundation to 
establish the Interagency Council on Smart Cities to promote 
coordination among the Federal agencies on smart cities. The 
legislation also requires the council to develop a multiyear strategy 
for the coordination of smart cities, the development of partnerships 
with the private sector, and the promotion of international 
cooperation. In addition, Senator Heller's amendment would require the 
U.S. Department of Transportation to engage with and assist local 
communities, metropolitan planning organizations, and regional 
transportation commissions on advancing Smart City solutions.
    In conclusion, the opportunity is real, and the timing could not be 
better to embrace it. As communities like ours face the risk and 
uncertainty of being among the first to embrace a new brand of urban 
mobility, the decisive factor is simple: collaboration. Absent 
Congressional support, there is no realistic pathway to think 
differently--much less do differently--relative to transportation. 
Together, however, the opportunities to improve lives and accelerate 
the economy through advanced mobility are boundless.

    The Chairman. Thank you, Ms. Quigley.
    Mr. Sanford.

         STATEMENT OF DAVIS S. SANFORD, CAMPAIGNS LEAD,

            NAVAL UNMANNED AND FUTURE TECHNOLOGIES,

             ROLLS-ROYCE MARINE NORTH AMERICA, INC.

    Mr. Sanford. Chairman Thune, Ranking Member Cortez Masto, 
and Members of the Committee, if the Committee will allow, I 
would like to share a short video of our vision for autonomous 
ships to set the stage for my testimony.
    [Video shown.]
    Mr. Sanford. Thank you for allowing me today to come before 
you to discuss innovative technologies in the commercial naval 
unmanned surface vessel market and potential opportunities and 
obstacles in this sector.
    By introduction, Rolls-Royce is one of the world's leading 
industrial technology companies. Rolls-Royce has more than 
6,300 U.S. employees in 27 states supporting civil aerospace 
power systems and defense.
    Rolls-Royce hardware can be found in more than 90 percent 
of the U.S. Navy's surface fleet, on 70 international maritime 
forces, and on over 30,000 commercial vessels.
    As we look to the next hundred years, we strive to 
continuously innovate to provide the best solutions in the 
markets we serve. This requires us to anticipate the 
opportunities and challenges that our customers will face in 
the coming years. We believe that electrification and 
digitalization will define the world's future power needs.
    Current initiatives, like enhanced engine analytics and 
civil aero, will enable greater asset utilization for our 
customers, hybrid electric solutions to realize eVTOL in urban 
air mobility setting, and advances in digitalization, which is 
cultivating the next generation of advanced sensors, 
communications, data processing, machine learning, artificial 
intelligence, robotics, and additive layer manufacturing.
    At Rolls-Royce, we believe these innovations are coming to 
reality, culminating in the development of remote and 
autonomous shipping that will be safer, more efficient, and 
less expensive to build and operate, and our unrivaled 
expertise and equipment knowledge will help transfer today's 
vessels to tomorrow's needs.
    The emerging unmanned maritime market is in the medium-to-
large unmanned surface vessels typically over 90 feet in 
length. These vessels are considerably more complicated than 
our current unmanned surface vessels on the market and, when 
manned, would have licensed mariners operating the bridge and 
in a separate set of places mariners and marine engineers 
operating critical ship systems, such as engines, generators, 
electrical distribution and auxiliary systems.
    When discussing the technologies currently developed, find 
it useful to think of them in two categories that relate to how 
a manned vessel operates: bridge autonomy and ship system 
autonomy. Broadly speaking, bridge autonomy technology are 
those that reduce or replace activities typically performed by 
a vessel's deck officers. These activities include voyage 
planning, autonomous navigation, real-time situational 
awareness, and autonomous communications to name a few.
    Ship system autonomous technology seeks to reduce or 
replace activities typically completed by a vessel's marine 
engineers. An autonomous machinery controller system will make 
decisions that a typical marine engineer onboard a vessel would 
make.
    Shore-side remote operating centers will oversee the 
vessels while at sea and will remotely operate the vessels when 
near port or under other circumstances. Such centers are 
expected to be manned by professional mariners as ships are 
operated today but they'll return home after each shift rather 
than after months at sea.
    Maritime academies will need to adapt their curriculums to 
meet the demand for the new class of sailor.
    We at Rolls-Royce believe that these and other emerging 
technologies hold great promise for a positive impact 
throughout the marine industry.
    In terms of safety, more than 70 percent of all marine 
accidents are the result of human error or interference. Having 
autonomous vessels that do not fatigue or lose concentration, 
we expect ship accidents to be reduced but not eliminated.
    Cost savings will be another driver for the commercial 
industry to invest in autonomous vessels. Through improved 
vessel efficiency, reliability, and availability, total 
transportation costs could decrease by 20 percent.
    Emerging and existing risks will continue to be an issue in 
the maritime industry, such as cyber attacks and boarding by 
unknown entities at sea.
    Looking to application of these emerging technologies, 
Rolls-Royce is collaborating with Switzer, a Danish global 
towage operator, in demonstrating the world's first remotely 
operated commercial vessel, a 91-foot tug located in 
Copenhagen.
    The U.S. Navy, through its unmanned vessel Seahunter, the 
upcoming Overlord Program, and other autonomous vessel 
programs, is researching the potential of medium and large 
unmanned surface vessels and how they'll be utilized for future 
naval operations.
    However, we as an industry face challenges in the 
development of future unmanned surface vessels, including 
maritime regulation, export controls, insurance, and 
communication band width, to name a few.
    These are the challenges we face. These are the 
opportunities we see.
    Once again, I thank the Committee for allowing me to brief 
its members on the promise of unmanned commercial and naval 
vessels. It's critical for the U.S. Government, including our 
representatives in Congress, and the domestic shipping 
industry, to begin to develop a roadmap that logically 
addresses both the opportunities for and the barriers to the 
development of medium and large unmanned surface vessels.
    We would respectfully suggest that collaboration is a 
keystone when it comes to modifying existing rules and 
regulations and developing new policies into the exciting 
future in the marine sector.
    I stand by ready to take any questions you may have.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Sanford follows:]

Prepared Statement of Davis S. Sanford, Campaigns Lead, Naval Unmanned 
    and Future Technologies, Rolls-Royce Marine North America, Inc.
    Chairman Thune, Ranking Member Nelson and Members of the Committee, 
thank you for allowing me to come before you today to discuss 
innovative technologies in commercial and naval unmanned and autonomous 
surface vessels; and to offer a perspective on the current 
opportunities and obstacles that industry anticipates as these next 
generation ships and systems move closer to becoming a widespread 
reality.
    Rolls-Royce is one of the world's leading industrial technology 
companies pioneering cutting-edge technologies that deliver the 
cleanest, safest and most competitive solutions to our planet's vital 
power needs across land, sea, and air.
    With operations in the United States for over 100 years, Rolls-
Royce has more than 6,300 employees across 27 states; producing state-
of-the-art engines and propulsion systems. In addition to powering some 
of the world's foremost civilian aircraft, we provide U.S. engineered 
power systems and equipment for a number of Department of Defense 
aviation platforms, including the C-130 transport; the V-22 Osprey tilt 
rotor; the unmanned Global Hawk and Triton; and the short take off and 
vertical landing (STOVL) variant of the F-35 Lightning II.
    In addition to powering 70 international maritime forces, and on 
over 30,000 commercial vessels, Rolls-Royce is a proud provider of 
power products to the United State Navy and Coast Guard. Our hardware 
can be found on the Nation's most capable ships, including the Nimitz 
and Ford class aircraft carriers; Arleigh Burke and Zumwalt Class 
destroyers; both variants of the Navy's Littoral Combat Ships; and the 
Coast Guard's National Security, Offshore Patrol, and Fast Response 
cutters. In fact, more than ninety percent of the Navy's battle force 
ships are driven by propellers crafted in the Rolls-Royce propeller 
foundry in Pascagoula, Mississippi.
    Rolls-Royce is at the forefront of innovation and experience in the 
maritime sector. Today, the Rolls-Royce Ship Intelligence group already 
delivers multifaceted enhancements in vessel performance, operation and 
safety, and it will continue to play a role in redefining the industry 
as we move toward a more remote and autonomous world. Rolls-Royce 
believes remote and autonomous ships will be safer, more efficient and 
cheaper to build and operate. Our unrivalled expertise and equipment 
knowledge will help transform today's vessels for tomorrow's needs.
Current Developing Technologies
    Worldwide, there are over 100 companies working on small unmanned 
surface vessels, ranging in size from a few feet up to 50 feet in 
length. Each ship has demonstrated differing abilities to operate 
without human input in applications ranging from recreation and 
commercial, to defense and security operations. Looking to the emerging 
unmanned surface market, these vessels are in the medium to large size, 
typically over 90 feet in length. These vessels are considerably more 
complicated, and, when manned, have licensed mariners operating the 
bridge, and a separate set of licensed marine engineers operating 
critical ship systems, including engines, electrical plant, cargo 
handling, and ballasting operations.
    When discussing the technologies under development, it is useful to 
think of them in two categories that relate to how a manned vessel 
operates: bridge autonomy and ship system autonomy.
Bridge Autonomy
    Bridge autonomy technologies will reduce or replace activities 
typically performed by a vessel's deck officers. These activities 
include; mission planning, autonomous navigation, situational 
awareness, and communications. Mission planning defines where the 
vessel is going and how it will get there. Autonomous navigation is the 
system programmed to execute the mission plan, including adherence to 
the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea 
(COLREGS), cognizance of navigational aids, and obstacle avoidance.

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Reduced Visibility Environment

    Situational awareness tools include radar, LiDAR (light detection 
and ranging), video, thermal imaging, and Automatic Identification 
System (AIS), allowing the vessel to identify and avoid other vessels 
and obstacles.

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Intelligent Awareness

    The situational awareness data feeds into the autonomous navigation 
system, enabling it to safely execute the mission. Despite the vastness 
of the open ocean, the sea is a constantly moving body, with vessels 
operating at different speeds and traveling in all directions. This 
greatly increases the complexity built into an unmanned vessel so that 
it may operate autonomously.
    Autonomous Ship Communications includes transmissions with other 
vessels, both manned and unmanned, via VHF, and communications to shore 
facilities through VHF, cellular networks, and/or satellite 
communications. It is critical for cyber security be built into all 
autonomy systems at the beginning to ensure that the vessels cannot be 
hacked or taken over by third parties.
Ship System Autonomy
    Ship system autonomous technology applications reduce or replace 
activities typically completed by the vessel's marine engineers. The 
primary system performing this function is an autonomous machinery 
control system, designed to execute the decisions that a typical on 
board marine engineer would make based on standard bridge operations. 
These include but are not limited to, speed and direction, maintenance 
of ship system requirements, equipment availability, and system 
troubleshooting, among many others. The machinery control system uses 
energy management, equipment health monitoring, propulsion control, and 
integrated platform management systems and other enabling technologies 
to monitor, control and direct the on board ship systems (ie power 
generation, propulsion, electrical distribution, ballast, lighting, 
lubrication, fuel, cooling, steering, and water).

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Ship System Autonomy Network

    Energy management technology monitors and compares the current 
operational profile of a vessel and assesses how it might more 
efficiently operate. An example of this would be an adjustment of 
vessel speed to enable the propulsion plant to run at peak performance. 
Similar to equipment deployed in the Rolls-Royce powered civil aviation 
fleet, equipment health monitoring surveys the ship's systems to ensure 
that they are operating properly, and to identify potential issues that 
may forecast a system shutdown. A propulsion system equipment health 
monitoring system could identify a fault in an engine lubricating oil 
system, shutting the unit down to prevent an engine failure. 
Additionally, if an engine shut down could potentially result in the 
vessel's grounding, or result in a similarly dangerous situation, the 
autonomous machinery controller, through communication with the 
autonomous navigation system, could independently make the decision to 
operate the engine until the risk has passed.
    The continued development and operation of ships with electric 
propulsion systems will lead to improved reliability, reduced 
maintenance, and improved energy efficiency throughout the ship. These 
technologies complement those being developed for the autonomous 
operation of unmanned surface vessels.
Shore Side Operations
    Currently under development, shore side remote operating centers 
may have the capability of performing many of the operations and system 
maintenance functions for certain cargo ships and other vessels. These 
centers will be manned by professional mariners and engineers, on-hand 
to support unmanned fleet operations.

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Roll-Royce Remote Operating Center Concept

    As envisioned, mariners could monitor vessel operations from a 
supervisory position and take over remote operation of the vessel when 
near port, or if other circumstances require. It is also conceivable 
that harbor pilots will be able to take command of arriving vessels 
sailing into port, thus removing the risk associated with a pilot 
transferring to a ship at sea, and potentially improving the efficiency 
of bringing a ship into port. System monitoring, data analysis, and 
failure diagnosis of equipment operating on vessels at sea, performed 
by maritime professionals, may also be performed at these facilities.
Impact of Emerging Technologies
    These technologies are expected to positively improve safety and 
increase efficiencies benefiting the marine industry. In terms of 
safety, it is notable that more than 70 percent \1\ of all marine 
accidents are the result of human error or interference. By reducing or 
eliminating the number of people operating a vessel, it's expected 
there will be fewer accidents. However, autonomous ship systems are not 
failsafe and autonomous systems will not reduce the accident rate to 
zero as the acceptance and use of autonomous ships may also result in 
new types of accidents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ European Maritime Safety Agency Annual Report 2015
    
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Rolls-Royce Autonomous Container Ship Concept

    Cost savings will be another driver for the commercial industry to 
invest in autonomous vessels. Through improved vessel efficiency, 
reliability, and availability, it is estimated that transportation 
costs could decrease by 20 percent. Cost savings can be found through 
lower power usage and demand, fewer operating and hotel load systems, 
elimination of the deck house, and a consequent reduction in the number 
of systems requiring maintenance at sea.
    Despite these advances, there are and will continue to be shipping 
activities that require a full crew, maintaining humans in the loop, 
particularly for shipborne activities that might be considered higher 
risk or labor intensive. Examples would include passenger vessels, 
oilfield service and crew boats, and ships carrying hazardous 
materials. In some of these applications, however, automating systems 
like navigation may still be possible.
    In evaluating the impact of emerging technology, the improved 
quality of life for the mariner is a very important factor to consider. 
Instead of spending several months at sea and away from home, mariners 
will have the option to pursue a career allowing them to work shore 
side, returning home after a scheduled work shift. As autonomous ship 
systems make the inevitable transition from commercial to military 
applications, specialty vessels may be fielded and autonomously 
missionized or remotely operated for dangerous or repetitive 
operations. Examples include ISR operations in hostile waters, border 
security, search and rescue, and drug smuggling detection and 
interdiction.
Risks to Maritime Industry
    The acceptance and adoption of commercial autonomous ships and ship 
intelligence systems carries both risks and opportunities for the 
maritime industry. The greatest risk may be that of a cyber-attack, 
whereby a foreign or independent actor takes control of an unmanned 
vessel for ransom, theft, or terrorist purposes. In addition to 
hardening shore side and shipboard control systems, vessels must also 
be designed to thwart or prevent ship boardings at sea.
    There is also a potential impact to the number of licensed U.S. 
mariners that may be at sea at any one time. With an increased use of 
automation and autonomous technologies for shipping and ship 
operations, licensed and trained mariners may spend less time at sea as 
opportunities are created for them to move off the vessel and into 
remote operating centers or other ship support activities. To fill the 
need for mariners in the autonomous ship space, maritime academies must 
adapt their curricula to meet demand for a new class of sailor.
Applications
    Rolls-Royce is a technology leader in the field of autonomous 
shipping and ship intelligence systems, and is actively testing and 
refining its systems and capabilities. Rolls-Royce is collaborating 
with Svitzer, a global towage operator, in demonstrating the world's 
first remotely operated commercial vessel, the 91 foot Svitzer Hermod 
tugboat. The tug, located in Copenhagen Harbor, demonstrates the 
ability of a land based captain to remotely control a working boat and 
executing representative tugboat operations from a remote operating 
center at the company's headquarters.

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Remote Control Svitzer Hermod Bridge--Rolls-Royce/Svitzer Remote 
Operating Center, Copenhagen

    Rolls-Royce has also engineered and installed automatic water 
crossing systems into vessels operated by Fjord1, a Norwegian passenger 
ferry company. These ferries, first delivered in 2017, provide 
autonomous, point to point, ferry service for passenger and vehicular 
traffic, and rely on a totally electric propulsion system. For these 
and other commercial vessels, Rolls-Royce developed and implemented 
complementary energy management and equipment health management 
systems.
    In the not too distant future, the commercial industry is expected 
to adopt unmanned surface vessels for container ships, bulk carriers, 
and tugs. In the naval and defense market, unmanned surface vessels are 
already being studied for broader defensive and offensive operations, 
special operations, and fleet auxiliary ships. There are a number of 
companies developing technologies and systems for the next generation 
of commercial shipping. In fact the Norwegian company Yara is building 
the world's first autonomous and fully electric container vessel. It is 
expected to begin autonomous operations in 2020.
    In the United States, DARPA and the U.S. Navy are leading the 
effort to develop and deploy unmanned surface, and subsurface, vessels 
for a variety of defensive operations, including anti-submarine, mine 
countermeasure, force protection and survey operations., The U.S. Navy 
through its ACTUV, Overlord, and other autonomous vessel programs is 
researching the limitations and capabilities of medium and large 
unmanned surface vessels, and how they will be utilized in future naval 
operations.
Barriers to Development
    As companies move forward with the development of unmanned surface 
vessels, and shipping companies consider integrating autonomous ships 
and ship systems into their fleets, it's important to note that there 
are maritime regulations, or the lack thereof, that may hinder further 
development, and consequent adoption, of these technologies. For 
example, the U.S. COLREGS do not allow for the unmanned operation of a 
vessel. The Navy, however, has more flexibility in the deployment of 
autonomous boats or other vessels. The International Maritime 
Organization (IMO) has similar regulations prohibiting unmanned ship 
operations. Looking to the future, however, IMO is examining the issues 
surrounding autonomous vessel operations and is reviewing the universe 
of maritime regulations and how they might be adapted or amended to 
satisfy current limitations within ship operations and the 
International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) 
requirements.
    With the exception of the Navy's national defense autonomous 
vessels work, much of the medium and large unmanned surface vessel 
development and testing is taking place outside of the U.S. Export 
control and other perceived restrictions on foreign technologies being 
imported into the U.S. have inhibited the transfer of autonomous ship 
technologies to the United States. Quite frankly, companies are 
concerned that technology brought into the U.S. will be unduly 
regulated and restricted from selling that commercial technology 
abroad. Obviously there is a need to control certain autonomous ship 
technologies that have military and national security applications. 
However, concern remains that commercial and defense autonomous ship 
technology will be looped into a generic category making export 
difficult hence dis-incentivising companies from investing in the U.S. 
As companies begin investing in autonomous ships and related 
technologies, including larger unmanned surface vessels, the insurance 
industry must also plan for and create products that will provide 
insurance for these vessels, during both development stages and 
eventual operation. Lloyd's Register is monitoring the performance of 
the Rolls-Royce and the Svitzer remotely operated tug to understand and 
evaluate this emerging technology. Within the U.S., insurance companies 
and regulators will soon need to take an active role in designing and 
implementing policies and regulation for next generation of passenger 
and cargo vessels.
    As unmanned surface vessels move offshore, the availability of 
communication and data transfer bandwidths will be a major limiting 
factor for remote, shore side, autonomous ship operation centers, and 
their ability to monitor and visualize what is taking place on the 
ship. While satellite communications have improved greatly over the 
last decade, the bandwidth needed to exchange real-time information as 
is currently done with the Svitzer tug, could quickly escalate to a 
point countering any efficiency gains.
Closing Thoughts
    It is critical for the United States and the domestic shipping 
industry to begin developing a roadmap to logically address both the 
opportunities for and the barriers to the development of medium and 
large unmanned and autonomous surface vessels.
    Similar to unmanned aerial systems test ranges, to the extent 
possible, certain areas of our national waters might be delineated for 
unmanned and autonomous vessels testing. Isolated from recreational 
boating and cargo sea lanes, industry, with government support, could 
define a controlled area for testing with predetermined rules, 
regulations, and monitoring. This would simplify the process for 
notification and approval by regulatory bodies, including the Coast 
Guard and other state and local marine law enforcement agencies.
    To support the development of unmanned and autonomous ship 
technologies in the U.S., the Federal Government and industry must 
collaborate on the development of new and modified export rules 
relative to unmanned surface vessel technologies. Doing so will enable 
easier flow of technology between trusted parties, and encourage 
further technological innovation and collaboration by the United States 
and its allies.
    Once again, we thank the Committee for allowing us to brief its 
Members on the promise of unmanned autonomous commercial and naval 
vessels.

    The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Sanford.
    Ms. Tolson.

      STATEMENT OF LAURIE TOLSON, CHIEF DIGITAL OFFICER, 
                       GE TRANSPORTATION

    Ms. Tolson. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Cortez Masto, and 
Members of the Committee, I'm Laurie Tolson, Chief Digital 
Officer for GE Transportation.
    Thank you for the opportunity to testify before the 
Committee on Emerging Technologies that Will Move America.
    Today, I will talk about one of our most exciting digital 
success stories, the Port Optimizer. This optimizer applies GE 
innovation in solving the logistics challenges which face our 
country's major ports.
    First, let me provide some context. In the wake of 
unprecedented changes in the maritime shipping industry and the 
West Coast congestion of 2014 and 2015, consistency emerged 
that more efficiency cargo handling was possible through 
improved information sharing and collaboration among supply 
chain actors.
    Against this backdrop, GE Transportation partnered with the 
Port of Los Angeles, the largest container port in the U.S., to 
take a huge digital leap forward in the movement of goods.
    We started with the basic question. What if ports have 
forward visibility to arriving vessels as far as two weeks 
ahead of time versus the 2-days we experience now in the 
current process?
    We tested this at the port and we found that this advanced 
visibility allows for better planning and predictability, 
making for a more efficient supply chain, and in late 2016, we 
partnered to develop a common portal that provided secure real-
time access to cargo data.
    The custom-build application was piloted by the port's 
largest terminal with two of the largest shipping lines, Maersk 
and MCO. Participants also included beneficial cargo owners, 
like Walmart, Target, and Nike, trucking companies, UP and 
BNSF, chassis providers, and the largest marine terminal port 
operator in the port, AP Moller.
    Based on that pilot, the port estimates that complete 
implementation of the solution would yield 10 percent 
improvement in throughput and up to 12 percent increase in 
productivity as trucks reduce their turn times, railroads plan 
train schedules better, cargo moves faster, and containers 
receive fewer touches as they go throughout the process.
    From that successful pilot, we entered into a longer-term 
partnership with the port to develop and deploy what is now the 
Port Optimizer. By integrating data from an across-the-port 
ecosystem and combining machine learning and deep domain 
expertise, the optimizer helps supply chain monitor and respond 
to dynamic conditions, better align people and resources, and 
proactively communicate across functions.
    Let me highlight a few of the benefits to key stakeholders, 
benefits to truckers. The port's average turn time for trucks 
is about 70-80 minutes, which is quite long. This needs to come 
down to afford drivers the ability to earn sufficient 
compensation, maintain and reinvest in their equipment, and 
ensure a sustainable carriage fleet.
    Our solution will help by allowing the trucking community 
to plan ahead with labor and equipment, make operational 
decisions based on incoming volume, and better planned 
dispatch. We can do this by, first, providing single source of 
information for trucking companies who plan container drop-offs 
and pickups. Today, they have to monitor 13 different websites 
to get this information.
    Second, by enabling truck appointments to be made in one 
place in a standard way and allowing trucking companies to make 
same-day changes, the appointments can be better handled. Right 
now, if there's a missed appointment, it's very costly to 
rebook, takes time and resources.
    Benefits to the environment. The efficiency has a positive 
environmental impact. Reduced turn times obviously minimize the 
time trucks idle at the port and associated emissions can be 
reduced by up to about 40 percent, we're estimating.
    Data-sharing allows the container to move through a 
terminal with fewer touches, reducing utilization and emissions 
from the cargo-handling equipment at the port.
    Benefits to rail. There are approximately a hundred trains 
about two miles in length that lead the Port of Los Angeles and 
Long Beach every day. The railways need to know the volume of 
cargo coming their way by destination so they can best arrange 
containers on the train, which is called blocking.
    The more upfront information we can give the railroads 
about where the boxes are ultimately heading, the smarter they 
can order that cargo on the train when they build them and 
assemble the engine power they need for the length of the train 
and the weight, the rail cars and the crews. All this means 
more jobs.
    Benefits to the terminal operators. If we can facilitate 
better sharing between railroads and marine terminal operators, 
then the operators can better align their resource plans to 
changing rail schedules. The operators can reduce costs, they 
can increase their capacity, lower emissions, increase 
throughput and create more jobs.
    And last in the highlights is benefits to labor. The port 
has engaged the local longshoremen's union in the development 
and implementation of the pilot from the very beginning. The 
union has told us this solution will help and do a better job 
in planning and organizing a terminal yard as they work to 
discharge a cargo vessel.
    Increased efficiency makes us more competitive, drives more 
volume, and supports the creation of job growth across the 
supply chain. One in nine jobs in Los Angeles are at the port 
and it is the biggest employer in California.
    Based on these widespread benefits, the Port Optimizer is 
now being deployed next door at the Port of Long Beach. We're 
continuing to add participants in Los Angeles. We are also 
pushing opportunities with other ports in the U.S. and 
globally.
    There's tremendous interest in the port community for these 
types of cost-effective digital solutions. The innovation GE is 
driving with the Port Optimizer is unlocking huge operational 
capacity at our Nation's ports and across the entire supply 
chain.
    It is about enabling a dramatically more efficient use of 
existing physical infrastructure by harnessing big data 
analytics that can expand capacities securely at a fraction of 
the cost, helps the environment, and is much quicker to deploy. 
This is truly the future happening now.
    Thank you for your time and I look forward to your 
questions.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Tolson follows:]

      Prepared Statement of Laurie Tolson, Chief Digital Officer, 
                           GE Transportation
    Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee, I am Laurie Tolson, Chief 
Digital Officer for GE Transportation. Thank you for the opportunity to 
testify before the Committee today on Emerging Technologies That Will 
Move America.
Background on GE and GE Transportation
    I am thrilled to be here to highlight some of the innovations that 
are happening in transportation. GE Transportation is a leading global 
technology supplier of equipment, services and digital solutions to the 
rail, mining, marine, stationary power and drilling industries. As the 
company's Chief Digital Officer, I see innovations in our own business 
as well as across the GE Company. From pioneering traffic management 
for drones, developing hybrid-electric propulsion to bringing the first 
Tier 4 locomotive to market, GE is at the forefront of technology. 
Exciting new manufacturing techniques like 3D printing and advancements 
in lightweight materials will transform the way we travel, making 
transportation safer, more efficient and environmentally sensitive than 
today. When we pair state of the art hardware with cutting-edge 
software solutions, the possibilities for our customers are endless. 
Today I will talk about one of our most exciting digital success 
stories--the Port Optimizer.
    As GE has looked to focus its business on Aviation, Power and 
Renewable Energy, we have been looking for a new home for the GE 
Transportation business. You may have seen coverage of our intent to 
merge with Wabtec. Wabtec is a natural partner--great for our 
customers, great for our employees, and great for the communities in 
which we operate.
    GE Transportation and Wabtec's businesses are complementary, and 
the merger allows us to accelerate innovation and reduce costs, 
providing our customers with better solutions.
    GE Transportation provides digital solutions to many different 
areas across our industry, from train performance to transportation 
logistics. With applications in asset performance, train handling, 
network optimization and supply chain visibility, we've seen digital 
solutions deliver results such as 10-25 percent reduction in mainline 
failures, average 10 percent in fuel savings, 10 percent improvement in 
network velocity and 40 percent increase in rail volume.
    For example, Trip Optimizer, our smart, automated cruise control 
system for the rail industry, saves 1 million gallons of fuel per 
week. With over 10,000 units deployed, Trip Optimizer is the most 
widely used energy management system within the freight rail industry.
    Looking more broadly about how we integrate our portfolio of 
solutions for impact across the supply chain, we are launching our new 
RailConnect Visibility and Planning, which provides a consolidated 
dashboard view of the railcar supply chain, enabling cargo owners and 
railroads to plan more effectively and facilitate predictability and 
efficiency in freight rail.
Port Optimizer Solution
    As I mentioned, one of the innovations we are most excited about is 
the digital transformation we are facilitating at our Nation's ports. 
Think about this as I walk through what we are doing in ports: what if 
ports can have forward visibility to arriving vessels as far as two 
weeks ahead of arrival, as compared to just two days under the 
traditional process? We tested this at the Port of Los Angeles and 
found that this visibility allows for better planning and 
predictability, making for a more efficient supply chain--one in which 
our Nation's shippers can better serve their customers and meet 
emerging needs.
    As a result, the Port of Los Angeles was able to increase 
throughput by 10 percent and productivity by 8-12 percent for ground 
transportation. That is the power of digital solutions we are 
discussing today.
Port Changes
    As you well know, 90 percent of global trade is waterborne. Seaport 
cargo activity accounts for 26 percent of U.S. GDP and 23 million 
American jobs. As the Nation's gateways to the global economy, seaports 
are key enablers of U.S. job creation, economic prosperity and American 
competitiveness.
    Yet, maritime shipping is undergoing unprecedented change--
including the transition to ultra-large container vessels and the 
formation of cargo alliances. These changes create greater complexity 
in cargo sorting and handling at major U.S. ports, leading to 
suboptimal allocation of equipment and labor, increased cost, and 
frustration for cargo owners.
    In the wake of the West Coast congestion experienced in 2014-15, 
several multi-stakeholder efforts worked to identify solutions, 
including the Federal Maritime Commission Supply Chain Innovation Teams 
and the Department of Commerce Advisory Committee on Supply Chain 
Competitiveness. Consensus emerged that more efficient cargo handling 
was possible through improved information sharing and collaboration 
among supply chain actors. By eliminating the silos of data that 
currently exist along the maritime supply chain and providing timely 
information in one place, we can increase throughput efficiency at 
major port complexes and provide greater value (i.e., visibility and 
predictability) to cargo owners.
    Developing digital solutions that drive efficiency by addressing 
increasing cargo volumes, capacity constraints, and other operational 
challenges at ports will result in game changing economic, 
environmental, and safety benefits for business, local and national 
economies, investors, and consumers.
    Against this backdrop, GE Transportation (GET) saw an opportunity 
for this industry--to take a huge digital leap forward in the movement 
of goods. I want to tell you about our deployment of a visionary 
solution that promises to weave a digital thread across the entire 
global supply chain.
Port of Los Angeles Pilot
    In late 2016, we partnered with the Port of Los Angeles to develop 
a common portal--now known as the GE Port Optimizer--that provides 
secure, real-time access to cargo data. The custom-built application 
was piloted at POLA's largest terminal, with the 2 largest shipping 
lines, Maersk and MSC. Pilot participants also included beneficial 
cargo owners (BCOs), trucking companies, the Class I railroads, chassis 
providers, and marine terminal operators.
    Based on that 2017 pilot, the Port of Los Angeles estimates that 
port-wide implementation of the portal would yield a 10 percent 
improvement in throughput and an 8-12 percent increase in productivity 
as trucks reduce their turn times, railroads plan train schedules more 
effectively, cargo moves faster, and lower energy cost and air 
emissions as containers receive fewer ``touches'' throughout the 
process.
Port of Los Angeles Adoption
    With the success of the pilot, we entered into a longer-term 
partnership with the Port of Los Angeles to develop and deploy what is 
now the Port Optimizer. The Port Optimizer is a cloud-based software 
solution that enhances supply chain performance and predictability by 
delivering real-time data-driven insights through a single portal to 
partners across the supply chain. By integrating data from across the 
port ecosystem, and combining machine learning and deep domain 
expertise, the Optimizer helps the supply chain monitor and respond to 
dynamic conditions, better align people and resources, and proactively 
communicate across functions. Key capabilities include:

   Greater visibility for improved asset utilization;

   Single portal to collaborate with supply chain partners;

   Reduced supply chain dislocations by anticipating issues; 
        and

   Increased cargo velocity and improve service delivery

    Port Optimizer leverages GET's cloud platform with automated data 
ingestion, modeling, API capabilities for more modern and real time 
data sharing & visibility, and advanced analytic capabilities. 
Additional features under development include export optimization, 
chassis availability and ordering, scheduling and truck reservations 
systems, empty container optimizations and returns management, 
container match back capability, rail optimization, and a Blockchain 
application pilot.
    Port Optimizer is now being deployed to the rest of the San Pedro 
Bay Port Complex. We are not only expanding from our initial pilot at 
one terminal in Los Angeles to the entire Port, but also launching a 
pilot with three of the six terminals in the Port of Long Beach. We are 
continuing to add participants in Los Angeles, with agreement from 95 
percent of the major shipping lines and marine terminal operators. And 
we are pursuing opportunities with other ports in the U.S. and 
globally. There is a tremendous interest in the port community for 
these types of cost effective digital solutions.
    Our longer-term goal is to have a significant portion of ports 
around the world using this platform. As with many digital tools, 
especially those using AI and machine learning, the more participation 
we have, the richer the data pool and the more value and efficiencies 
we can deliver to the global supply chain.
Infrastructure Public Policy Considerations
    Ports across the Nation are in need of infrastructure investment. 
The American Association of Port Authorities (AAPA) estimates $66 
billion in infrastructure needs at the Nation's ports. Digital 
infrastructure should be part of the broader infrastructure discussions 
especially because solutions like the GE Port Optimizer enable more 
efficient use of existing freight infrastructure. They expand capacity 
at congested trade corridors and gateways at a fraction of the cost of 
building new ``bricks and mortar'' projects and deliver tremendous 
value for supply chain users.
    As Congress considers infrastructure policies and funding, we 
encourage consideration of digital solutions for enhancing the 
operations of industrial and critical infrastructure. New digital 
industrial and critical infrastructure should complement a range of 
infrastructure modernization priorities--including energy 
infrastructure, as well as surface transportation, aviation, ports, and 
other intermodal freight facilities and systems.
    We further encourage Members of Congress to consider the critical 
role of communications and wireless connectivity for industrial and 
critical infrastructure operators. Access to affordable spectrum for 
industrial site specific, private wireless networks will improve 
coverage, data capacity, infrastructure reliability and security. We 
are an active part of the IIoT Coalition (a group whose members 
collectively account for approximately 40 percent of the U.S. economy 
and includes entities such as Port of Los Angeles, FedEx, Union 
Pacific, Southern Linc and the Utilities and Petroleum industries), 
that is engaged with the FCC on finding meaningful policies for 
promoting industrial investment in the 3550-3700 MHz Band (or CBRS) for 
supporting the deployment of 5G services for use in industrial and 
critical infrastructure operations.
    Digital industrial and critical infrastructure, a component of the 
Internet of Things (IoT), encompasses software solutions that optimize 
infrastructure and network performance and outcomes and advanced 
private wireless networks that enable secure data communications and 
provide infrastructure operators with dedicated bandwidth for their 
operations. New infrastructure investment priorities should:

   Ensure eligibility of digital industrial infrastructure 
        across all Federal transportation and power funding and credit 
        support programs.

   Encourage consideration of digital industrial applications--
        including software--as natural complements to further public 
        investments in ``traditional'' brick, mortar, steel, and hard 
        equipment assets to enhance system performance.

   Promote the importance of affordable access to wireless 
        spectrum licenses for private wireless networks that allow 
        infrastructure operators to deploy and operate dedicated, site-
        specific 5G networks for use in digital industrial and critical 
        infrastructure operations.

   Support testing, evaluation, and deployment of all 
        technologies that boost infrastructure performance, including 
        digital, to maximize the value of public investments.
Conclusion
    The innovation GE is driving with the Port Optimizer is unlocking 
huge operational capacity at our Nation's Ports and across the supply 
chain. It is enables a dramatically more efficient use of existing 
physical infrastructure by harnessing Big Data analytics that can 
expand capacity at a relatively low cost and with much quicker 
deployment. This is truly the future happening now.
    Thank you for your time and I look forward to your questions.

    The Chairman. Thank you, Ms. Tolson.
    Mr. Raycroft.

STATEMENT OF JOSH RAYCROFT, DIRECTOR, BUSINESS STRATEGY, VIRGIN 
                         HYPERLOOP ONE

    Mr. Raycroft. Chairman Thune, Ranking Member Cortez Masto, 
and Distinguished Members of the Committee, I want to thank you 
for inviting me to testify today, to share with you the very 
exciting innovation happening at Virgin Hyperloop One.
    My name is Josh Raycroft, and I am the Director of Business 
Strategy at our Headquarters in Los Angeles.
    Prior to joining Virgin Hyperloop One, I worked as an 
engineer at GE Aviation. So it's very gratifying to be able to 
testify here alongside GE Transportation and other great 
companies and agencies that are at the cutting edge of 
transportation technology.
    We are a U.S. company that has now grown to 250 employees. 
I had the opportunity to watch the company grow from just about 
20 about 3 years ago. We are--by far--the leading company in 
this space in advancing hyperloop technology, and we have 
accomplished amazing achievements that I look forward to 
sharing with you this morning.
    I will start with a brief definition of the technology. The 
term ``hyperloop'' is shorthand for what may be better 
described as a low-pressure/high-speed surface transportation 
system.
    Travel occurs within an enclosure that maintains a very low 
atmospheric pressure while the vehicle is pressurized to normal 
atmospheric conditions--very similar to what we experience in 
commercial aircraft today.
    The benefit of the low-pressure environment is that it all 
but eliminates aerodynamic drag on the vehicle. This allows it 
to reach very high speeds and consume a small amount of energy 
while it's traveling along the track.
    We use electromagnetic propulsion to move the vehicle and 
we use magnetic levitation rather than wheels to allow the 
vehicle to glide along the track.
    In November 2016, we began to build our first full-scale 
and full-system test site. We did that in Nevada, which we're 
very happy that the state has been so helpful in that process. 
Yes, thanks, Tina.
    We call that site Devloop. It's located about 30 miles 
north of Las Vegas. This test bed is a 500-meter full-scale 
hyperloop incorporating all of the elements of our proprietary 
system.
    On May 12, 2017, we had our Kitty Hawk moment. We 
successfully completed the world's first full system self-
powered hyperloop test run. In December 2017, we reached speeds 
up to 240 miles per hour. This gives us high confidence that we 
could reach our target speeds up to about 600 miles per hour as 
we continue to develop the technology.
    I would now like to show you a short video demonstrating 
what we've done with these tests.
    [Video shown.]
    Mr. Raycroft. As you can imagine, as an engineer, that 
makes me extremely excited to see how fast our team has been 
able to design, build, and test this very exciting new 
technology.
    While we focused on improving the technology in 2017, we 
are now focused on commercializing the technology. We have 
started transportation projects with state and local agencies 
across the U.S., studying the feasibility of the hyperloop 
system in their states and regions.
    In Colorado, we are partnering with the state on a 
feasibility study. In the Midwest, we are working with Ohio 
officials on both a feasibility study and a Tier 1 EIS. In 
Missouri, we are partnering with the global engineering firm 
Black & Veatch and others to study the feasibility of a 
hyperloop along I-70 between St. Louis, Columbia, and Kansas 
City, and in Texas, the Dallas-Fort Worth officials announced 
that it will conduct a Tier 2 EIS that will consider both 
hyperloop and high-speed rail for a 30-mile corridor between 
Dallas and Fort Worth.
    In addition, the Regional Transportation Council announced 
that it will conduct a feasibility study of the longer route 
connecting Fort Worth down south to Laredo.
    On the Federal side, we plan to expand our engagement with 
the DOT and with the FRA, which has jurisdiction over our 
system under current law.
    Safety has always been our Number 1 priority and it will 
continue to be the priority of our engineering team throughout 
our commercialization. We also believe that as a railroad under 
Federal law, projects utilizing our technology should be 
eligible for relevant Federal programs designed to support 
these projects, such as RIF, TIFIA, formula and discretionary 
grants, as well as other project finance tools.
    We believe hyperloop technology would add tremendous value 
to our existing transportation system. Hyperloop has the 
potential to change not only the way people live and work but 
also the movement of cargo and supply chains and distribution 
chains.
    Time savings will expand opportunities for people and 
businesses, allowing people to live in less-densely populated 
areas while having access to jobs, services, and entertainment 
in the metropolitan areas.
    A small business owner could locate his or her company in a 
smaller city or a rural area, while still having the same 
access to as a company located in the city center.
    Hyperloop systems also allow for faster and more reliable 
movement of goods and parcels, enabling businesses to react to 
supply chain shocks on a more nimble basis.
    Virgin Hyperloop One is well on its way to building the 
next generation of high-speed ground transport. We have the 
opportunity to develop and implement this technology right here 
in the United States and we're looking forward to furthering 
the dialogue with the Committee as well as with the DOT.
    Thank you, Chairman Thune, thank you, Ranking Member Cortez 
Masto, for inviting us to testify today.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Raycroft follows:]

   Prepared Statement of Josh Raycroft, Director, Business Strategy, 
                          Virgin Hyperloop One
    Chairman Thune, Ranking Member Nelson and distinguished members of 
the committee, I want to thank you for inviting me to testify today 
about the exciting innovation happening at Virgin Hyperloop One.
    My name is Josh Raycroft, and I am the Director of Business 
Strategy at Virgin Hyperloop One in Los Angeles. Prior to joining 
Virgin Hyperloop One, I worked as an engineer at GE Aviation, so it's 
very gratifying to be able to testify here along with GE Transportation 
and other great companies and agencies on the cutting edge of 
transportation technology.
    We are a U.S. company that has now grown to nearly 250 employees, 
and I have had the unique opportunity to watch the company grow from 
just 20 employees when I joined three years ago. We are--by far--the 
leading company in the world in advancing hyperloop technology, and in 
those three years, we have accomplished amazing achievements that I 
look forward to sharing with you this morning.
    I will start with a brief definition of hyperloop technology. The 
term ``hyperloop'' is shorthand for what may better be described as a 
low pressure high speed surface transportation system. Travel occurs 
within an enclosure that maintains very low atmospheric pressure while 
the vehicle is pressurized to normal atmospheric conditions--much like 
a commercial aircraft. The benefit of the low-pressure environment is 
that it all but eliminates aerodynamic drag on the vehicle, which 
allows it to reach very high speeds and maintain those speeds with much 
less energy.
    Anecdotally, I would describe the concept as follows: when you are 
driving a car and you put your foot on the gas pedal, you accelerate. 
When you take your foot off the gas pedal--you begin to decelerate. You 
slow down because of the effects of aerodynamic drag. In a hyperloop 
environment, the low pressure nearly eliminates the aerodynamic drag, 
and when you take your foot off the gas pedal, you can continue to go 
fast and maintain your speed for a very long time. Therefore, you can 
reach very high speeds on much less power than conventional surface 
transportation.
    After initial experimentation, evaluation and testing, we settled 
on a design for our system that utilizes electromagnetic propulsion to 
move the vehicle and magnetic levitation rather than wheels. The 
electromagnetic propulsion is similar to an electric car's motor, 
except that instead of moving in a rotary fashion to turn the axle, the 
motor moves in a linear manner to propel the vehicle forward.
    The magnetic levitation system we utilize is dramatically different 
from the foreign systems developed many decades ago. Those systems, 
while engineering marvels at the time, use massive amounts of 
electricity to accomplish their levitation or require extremely precise 
construction and maintenance techniques that dramatically increase the 
installation and operating costs of the system. By contrast, our 
proprietary levitation system operates with larger tolerances on the 
track, making it easier to construct and maintain. Furthermore, our 
system uses significantly less energy than other maglev systems, making 
it less expensive to operate.
    In late 2015, we began building the first scaled prototype of our 
propulsion system. We demonstrated this to the world in May 2016. In 
November 2016, we began to build our first full-scale and full-system 
test site, which we call ``DevLoop'' in the desert 30 miles north of 
Las Vegas. We built on land controlled by the Bureau of Land Management 
(BLM), and I want to compliment the state of Nevada and the Nevada 
Senators on this committee for the very efficient and effective way 
that we were able to move through the permitting process to build and 
begin operations on this site. I also want to recognize Tina Quigley, 
who is on this panel, for all of her leadership and work with us in 
southern Nevada.
    We completed the construction of DevLoop within six months and 
began testing in May 2017. This test bed is a 500-meter full scale 
hyperloop system incorporating all of the elements of the system: A 
prototype pod vehicle, a low-pressure enclosure to nearly eliminate 
aerodynamic drag on the vehicle, an airlock, magnetic levitation, 
electromagnetic propulsion, power electronics and a control system.
    Over 400 tests have been performed at DevLoop on all aspects of the 
system. On May 12, 2017, we had our ``Kitty Hawk'' moment, successfully 
completing the world's first full system, self-powered hyperloop test, 
marking the inaugural run of this new mode of transportation. In 
December 2017, on only 300 meters of acceleration, we reached speeds of 
240 mph.
    I would now like to show you a short video from these historic 
tests.
    As you saw in the video, our vehicle is unique. We call our vehicle 
a ``pod''. It's not a train. We will run individual pods carrying 20-25 
passengers or cargo traveling direct to their destinations on demand. 
There are no fixed schedules or stops at intermediate stations. The 
pods are moved by centralized and onboard control systems to maximize 
the safety and efficiency of the system.
    Based on hundreds of tests at the DevLoop site and thousands at our 
headquarters in Los Angeles, we have integrated major improvements into 
our system. As we move rapidly toward commercialization, we have 
started engagement with various agencies across the U.S. studying the 
feasibility of a hyperloop system in their state and region. In two 
cases, these projects are advancing toward environmental permitting and 
the NEPA process.
    In Colorado, the Colorado DOT's RoadX program is partnering with 
Virgin Hyperloop One to study the feasibility of a statewide hyperloop 
network. The engineering firm AECOM is servicing the state and Virgin 
Hyperloop One for the study, which is expected to be completed this 
Fall.
    In the Midwest, we are partnering with the Mid-Ohio Regional 
Planning Commission (MORPC) on two projects: A feasibility study of 
hyperloop between Pittsburgh, Columbus and Chicago; and a Tier 1 
Environmental Impact Statement on the corridor considering both high 
speed rail and hyperloop technologies.
    In Missouri, Virgin Hyperloop One is partnering with the University 
of Missouri System, the St. Louis Chamber of Commerce, the Kansas City 
Tech Council and the Missouri Hyperloop Coalition to study the 
feasibility of a hyperloop along I-70 in Missouri servicing St. Louis, 
Columbia and Kansas City. The global engineering firm Black & Veatch, 
based in Kansas City is running the study, which will be completed this 
fall.
    In Texas, the Dallas-Ft. Worth Regional Transportation Council 
(RTC) announced that it will conduct a Tier 1 Environmental Impact 
Study (EIS) that will consider both hyperloop and high speed rail for 
the 30-mile corridor between Dallas and Ft. Worth. In addition, the RTC 
announced that it will conduct a Feasibility Study of a longer route 
from Ft. Worth to Laredo. That study will explore both hyperloop and 
rail options for the corridor. The sponsors plan to move this project 
into an EIS following completion of the Feasibility Study.
    On the Federal side, we plan to expand our engagement with the U.S. 
Department of Transportation and the Federal Railroad Administration 
(FRA), which has jurisdiction over our system under 49 U.S.C. 
Sec. 20102 (2)(A). Safety is our number one priority for this system 
and is an overwhelming focus of our design engineers. We want to work 
with the FRA and this committee to develop the appropriate safety 
regulatory framework for our system that will ensure stringent safety 
measures.
    We also believe that as a ``railroad'' under Federal law, projects 
utilizing our technology should be eligible for relevant Federal 
programs designed to support these projects, such as RRIF, TIFIA, 
formula and discretionary grants and other project finance tools. 
Clarity of the Federal regulatory and financing framework for this 
system should be a high priority for USDOT and FRA because of the 
transformative potential of this American technology.
    We believe hyperloop technology would add tremendous value to our 
existing transportation system. Today, our road, port, airport and rail 
systems face congestion and capacity challenges. The addition of 
hyperloop systems would address these and other issues our 
transportation system faces.
    Hyperloop has the potential to change not only the way people live 
and work, but also the movement of cargo in supply and distribution 
chains. Speed and time savings will expand opportunities for people and 
businesses, allowing people to live in less densely populated 
communities while having access to jobs, services, and entertainment in 
central metro areas. Furthermore, a small business owner could locate 
his or her company in a smaller city or rural area but still have the 
same access as a company located in a city center. Hyperloop systems 
also allow for faster and more reliable movement of goods and parcels, 
enabling businesses to react to supply chain shocks on a more nimble 
basis. We are working with port operators and rail companies to study 
and operationalize some of these exciting cargo concepts.
    Virgin Hyperloop One is well on its way to building the next 
generation of high speed ground transport. We have an opportunity to 
develop and implement this technology here right here in the United 
States. We look forward to working more with this committee and USDOT 
as we commercialize our technology.
    Thank you Chairman Thune and Ranking Member Nelson for inviting us 
to testify today.

    The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Raycroft, and I think we 
overlooked the Senator from Nevada.
    Senator Cortez Masto. No, Mr. Chair, thank you. I so 
appreciate you giving me the opportunity for an introduction, 
but I think they've taken care of it themselves, as you can 
see. I'm very excited to have representatives--actually, 
there's three on the panel right now that have a footprint in 
Nevada in some form or fashion. So thank you for the 
opportunity.
    The Chairman. Thanks. I have a question for following up on 
your remarks there, Mr. Raycroft.
    As innovative transportation technology is being developed 
by Virgin Hyperloop One begin to move beyond this demonstration 
phase, one of the key questions which I think you alluded to is 
how hyperloop fits into the current regulatory framework, and 
your testimony mentioned that you believe that hyperloop should 
be considered a railroad under Federal law.
    If Hyperloop is considered a railroad, what does that mean 
from a safety perspective?
    Mr. Raycroft. As I mentioned under current law, that's how 
we read that we would fall within the FRA's jurisdiction.
    We acknowledge that there are many aspects of our 
technology that might not neatly well within that framework.
    That said, we know that the FRA has begun implementing more 
systems safety approach through programs. We think that that 
could help bridge the gap and we're looking forward to engaging 
with them further in discussion to understand how we take this 
forward.
    The Chairman. If some of the traditional safety regulations 
don't neatly apply to hyperloop, in your view, how should the 
Federal Railroad Administration, as a safety regulator, 
consider your new technology? You kind of touched on that but 
maybe if you could drill down a little bit on that.
    Mr. Raycroft. Yes. Certain aspects fit very nicely within 
that framework. There are other aspects, think of the vehicle 
that you saw in the video, that resemble commercial aircraft 
today and so there's certain elements that engagement with some 
other agencies within the DOT could make sense and we want to 
engage in those discussions to ensure that we ensure safety. 
That has been our Number 1 priority as we design the system, 
but also allowing innovation to move forward.
    The Chairman. And have you looked at other regulatory 
frameworks that have been proposed for other new entrants into 
the transportation field that have dealt with some of these 
similar classification issues and have you learned any lessons? 
Are there lessons to be learned for an emerging technology like 
hyperloop, based on what you've seen?
    Mr. Raycroft. We do think that we are a bit unique. We do 
have some challenges in that we are really a new mode of 
transportation. We can look at unmanned aerial systems and 
vertical take-off and landing aircraft and, to the best of my 
knowledge, that falls within the FAA. We can look at autonomous 
vehicles and they're vehicles for us.
    We are taking aspects of different types of technologies. 
So it is a bit more challenging. That's why we need to engage 
in discussions. The lesson learned that we've taken away from 
this is that we need to engage early. The earlier we engage 
with the regulators, the earlier we can make sure that all 
aspects of safety are being considered from the get-go and so 
that's our plan.
    The Chairman. Ms. Tolson, I know that the Port Optimizer's 
up and running at many of the Port of Los Angeles terminals and 
more recently with the new pilot at the Port of Long Beach.
    Your testimony mentioned, based on preliminary results, 
that the optimizer could achieve a 10 percent increase in 
throughput, which would be really remarkable, if achieved.
    What are GE's plans to expand the technology to other 
facilities and ports in the country, and what do you see as the 
impediments to that sort of expansion?
    Ms. Tolson. There has been a lot of interest and we're 
talking to several ports across the country of how to apply and 
implement this technology.
    We're concentrating right now focused on making sure that 
this deploys properly and works really well at Port of Long 
Beach and the Port of Los Angeles.
    As far as impediments, there are always funding challenges. 
I mean, the ports need funding to help put these into place, 
but as far as other impediments, we're not really running into 
a lot. It's really the community acceptance. Sharing of data is 
somewhat new and to many of them, if the operators work within 
a port system and breaking down those silos has been probably 
the biggest challenge we've run into, and this is why it was 
really important to spend the time with the key stakeholders, 
you know, getting their inputs and helping them actually design 
this solution.
    That was a key element in making sure it was useful, it 
would be more accepted, and that it would be effective once it 
is rolled out. So it's really promising. We're seeing great 
results. The Port of Long Beach is well underway as far as a 
pilot and we expect to see this completed and done by the end 
of this year and then we'll move on and expand outside of those 
two ports.
    The Chairman. Could you speak to how you're conducting 
outreach to shippers to be a part of that tool and particularly 
small companies that import and export that may not have much 
visibility into the supply chain?
    Ms. Tolson. You know, this is a good question. We've worked 
with the biggest shipping lines, you know, Maersk, MCO, and 
several others, to get access to data and make sure that it's 
secure. This was a high priority for everybody that we talked 
to, and in conversations with their stakeholders, how does that 
benefit them, right? How would they actually participate, and 
it really comes through to how they interact with scheduling 
systems that are used throughout the supply chain.
    The more we expand this, the product itself is very 
extensible, it's API-driven, so you can add extensions to other 
systems, so that everybody can have access to certain types of 
data in a secure way. So that's how we're helping to address 
that.
    The Chairman. OK. Thank you.
    Senator Cortez Masto.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you.
    Ms. Quigley, let me start with you. Can you further 
elaborate or just describe the specific local challenges that 
you're addressing with your efforts to employ smart 
transportation?
    Ms. Quigley. Sure. Our challenges are probably not much 
different than any community's, although ours may be 
exacerbated in some areas, but safety, congestion, and 
capacity, and limited resources to enhance those are our 
challenges.
    So testing, deploying these new technologies is a way for 
us to enhance capacity, reduce congestion, and increase safety 
without having to build additional infrastructure, additional 
lane miles, or having additional right-of-way takings, 
etcetera.
    Senator Cortez Masto. And then you talked a little bit 
about the public-private partnerships, which I'm a big 
proponent of, but each state is unique in how that relationship 
should look.
    Can you talk a little bit about that for the state of 
Nevada and your involvement in a public-private partnership as 
you employ the emerging technology?
    Ms. Quigley. So as we're emerging these new technologies, 
most of them are in the pilot program or the demonstration 
phases, so we can vet them through, and one of the advantages 
of having a pilot program or a demonstration program is that 
you can work around your existing sometimes stymieing 
procurement processes, and it's only after you've vetted and 
you've tested that then you can move forward with the more 
formal procurement processes. Does that address the question?
    Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you. Thank you.
    And then, Mr. Raycroft, you talked about moving forward 
right now in testing the commercialization in certain states.
    Let me ask you this. How close is this technology to being 
truly available for people, passenger use?
    Mr. Raycroft. So right now, the company's working towards 
being operational by the mid 2020s.
    Senator Cortez Masto. OK. For passenger use?
    Mr. Raycroft. For passenger use.
    Senator Cortez Masto. And I appreciate the conversation 
that you had with the Chair because, as we develop this 
emerging technology and get to that point, we are going to have 
to be flexible with the different regulatory agencies that are 
out there and hopefully addressing the new emerging technology 
but still have a safety component and they have to be flexible 
with accepting this new emerging technology and thinking about 
it in little different ways. Is that what you were trying to 
say earlier?
    Mr. Raycroft. Of course, yes.
    Senator Cortez Masto. OK. Thank you.
    The conversation I appreciate, Ms. Tolson, you've talked 
about this, as well, which is creating jobs. Part of this and 
the use of all of the new technology is how we not only create 
jobs but there's always been this discussion about displacement 
of workers, as well, and how we should be working to give them 
the tools and the skills they need for the use of the 
technology because it will create jobs in the future.
    Can you talk a little bit about how you've created jobs 
with the emerging technology that you're utilizing? I'm going 
to ask you to talk a little bit about that.
    Mr. Raycroft, as well, could you talk about manufacturing 
jobs that could come from the use of your new technology, as 
well?
    So, Ms. Tolson?
    Ms. Tolson. Sure. So what we're seeing is that as you can 
get more throughput and more efficiency inside the port, 
there's more work to be done. It doesn't slow the shipments 
that are coming in. They have more work that gets backed up 
than they can handle. So this actually allows more people to 
come in, work in this, so you can get that through. That's how 
we see it, and this is how the union in the conversations is 
panning out.
    Senator Cortez Masto. And that's why labor supports it?
    Ms. Tolson. Yep. Absolutely.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you.
    Mr. Raycroft. As you know, we have opened not only our test 
facility in North Las Vegas but also a manufacturing facility 
where we have--that's where we've manufactured and assembled 
the majority of our components that we built into the test site 
that you saw on the screen.
    As we look to commercialization, as I'm sure you can see, 
this is a big system. It's an infrastructure. It involves 
vehicles that resemble the aerospace supply chains that we have 
in full force out in L.A., that we have throughout the country, 
my background at GE, and so we do see that there's a lot of 
potential for manufacturing jobs and those jobs would exist not 
only during the construction phase of a project where we need 
to procure the hardware to build the infrastructure but also 
the vehicles, but those jobs will remain for maintenance, for 
spare parts over time, and then we will also have, as we 
continue to develop the technology and innovate it to new and 
enhanced efficiencies and cost points, we will have the 
continued need for development manufacturing and so that will 
remain and we anticipate fully leveraging our facility in 
Nevada.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you.
    And then, Mr. Sanford, you talked a little bit about 
challenges and barriers. Can you elaborate on some of them and 
briefly for the Committee?
    Mr. Sanford. Sure. So one of the--I think the outstanding 
things that's delaying implementation of autonomous ships is 
regulations, both with the in-country states and from an 
international level.
    So one of the requirements of international regulations of 
prevention of collisions at sea is to have a look-out on a ship 
that requires a manned ship. Right now, there's no rule that 
allows you to supplement that person with a video camera for 
remote operation or allowing a computer system, an autonomous 
system to monitor the ship for safety.
    There's also the safety of life at sea requirements, which 
is if a ship's in distress, the closest ship comes and provides 
support for that ship. How do you handle that with an unmanned 
ship that doesn't have a crew onboard to help a distressed 
ship? So those two regulations will come about. That's both at 
the U.S. level, regulatory level, through U.S. Coast Guard, and 
then also at the International Maritime Organization level for 
international regulations because they control everything for 
the international shipping.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Cortez Masto.
    Senator Peters.

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

    Senator Peters. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to 
our panelists here today for your testimony.
    As Chairman Thune mentioned in his opening comments, this 
Committee has done quite a bit of work on automation autonomy 
in terms of vehicles. So it has been interesting to hear 
testimony about other forms of transportation, in particular 
with seagoing vessels.
    So, Mr. Sanford, I wanted to ask you to talk a little bit 
about that work and I'm proud in Michigan, in addition to being 
a leader when it comes to autonomous vehicles, that we are also 
a leader in autonomous marine research, as well.
    In fact, Michigan Tech University and the Smart Ships 
Coalition has recently launched a Great Lakes Marine Autonomy 
Research Site. It's the first freshwater test bed of its kind 
in the world. It's called MARS and it's designed to study and 
set ground rules for the use of autonomous marine vehicles in 
the Great Lakes, allowing private-public collaborators to apply 
these technologies as well as test beta operations.
    But many of the transportation stakeholders feel that the 
U.S. transportation sector, marine transportation sector's 
significantly lagging behind both the ground and air sectors in 
our country in adopting automation and autonomy, and it seems 
as if Europe and specifically the Nordic countries have a 
considerable jumpstart on us.
    So my first question is, how many of the 100 or so 
companies worldwide that are working on autonomous ship 
research and development are headquartered here in the United 
States, if you know offhand?
    Mr. Sanford. I can't give you a true number. I can think of 
probably five or six of them without a doubt based in the U.S. 
Primarily in the U.S., the autonomous ship area is focused 
around defense application, not the commercial, with some use 
in surveying of the ships. They're mainly smaller, 40 to 50 
feet, in the U.S., looking for mine countermeasure, anti-
submarine warfare-type of work with the U.S. Navy, sponsored 
under contracts with like O&R, PMS46, and that's where most of 
the focus in the U.S., I believe, has been.
    There has been some surveying work done by NOAA with a few 
companies, such as ASV Global, which is based over here and in 
the U.K.
    When you look at the large shipping industry, which is what 
I'm here today to talk about, that's primarily been developed 
offshore, coming out of the Nordic countries, as you mentioned. 
Finland, Sweden, and Norway have been investing in heavily as a 
way to kind of reboot and further support their marine industry 
that's seen a decline over the last several decades as far as 
mariners at sea running ships.
    So that's an area I believe we need to focus on in the U.S. 
is to help work with that and there are risks and kind of hold-
back from international companies invest in the U.S. has been 
export rules and the way that the U.S. tends to view autonomous 
technologies and want to export control them. So that has been 
an area where I've been as I've tried to import the technology 
into the U.S. and develop them here.
    My foreign colleagues and other portions of the company 
have had to work with them on that to try to overcome that 
hesitancy because they're worried that it will be export 
controls or their technology will be ITAR and they won't be 
able to sell it globally which is where the real money, if you 
look at commercial shipping, is right now.
    Senator Peters. So do you believe that is the major reason 
we only have five or six out of a hundred companies dealing 
with autonomy and most of those are defense-related, as you 
mentioned? Is it because of that regulation or are there other 
regulatory impediments that prevent this from occurring?
    Mr. Sanford. Well, there is the ability to test the ships 
in an environment out at sea in the U.S. where there's no area 
that can really allow for commercial ships to do that without 
people onboard.
    Right now, they're doing testing usually locally, talking 
with Coast Guard to get approval to do that, but they are not 
necessarily approved to have controlled areas in seagoing areas 
for large ships, if you're talking 200-foot ships, to go out 
there and test them at sea. So it's a danger area where you're 
liable without really being able to get insurance to back you 
up if something were to happen.
    Senator Peters. I'd like to follow up on a question Senator 
Cortez Masto asked about automation and the impact on jobs 
which is something we're always concerned about.
    You mentioned in your testimony how we need to train a new 
type of sailor going forward. Could you talk a little bit about 
the impact of employment when it comes to operating these ships 
and what sort of training will be required of folks who may 
still be on a ship that's autonomy? Talk through a little bit 
about the impact on employment and how we deal with what will 
be displacement of current jobs.
    Mr. Sanford. Yes, so when you go to fully autonomy ships, 
there will be no people onboard. That is the plan. That is how 
you're going to make your true savings as far as the ship goes.
    As you do that, you're going to displace the people, able 
seamen that typically go and maintain the ship while at sea, 
handling machine breakdowns. So with the ships, you'll have to 
build in redundancy but those jobs will still have to be done. 
The ships will have to be maintained but what will happen is 
those jobs will be brought shore-side and be maintained at 
dockside with the ships being able to go ahead and forecast 
what's going to happen, where the maintenance has to be. So 
that way it will be more service engineers rather than able 
seamen at sea handling the ships from a technical side. They'll 
still have to be technical jobs, understand the marine 
industry, the engines, and overseeing the ships operating at 
sea.
    I like to think of it kind of when the ships switched from 
sailing ships to steam ships, the seamen went from being 
sailors going up the mast to trying to haul in sails in bad 
weather to working in steam engines. It's going to be a ship 
like that to probably in the industry as far as seamen and 
operators of the ships maintaining them, making sure they're 
running, but the technical jobs will still be there. They're 
just going to be brought shore-side so people don't have to go 
to sea for weeks and months at a time to maintain them, keep 
them running.
    Senator Peters. Thank you.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Peters.
    Senator Hassan.

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

    Senator Hassan. Well, thank you, Mr. Chair, and Ranking 
Member, and thank you to all of our witnesses for being here 
today.
    I have a question for the panel. As we discuss the 
importance of new technologies that will make our 
transportation systems more efficient and safer and overall 
more accessible and effective, we also have to work to ensure 
that new transportation technologies serve everybody, including 
those who experience disabilities.
    For many individuals who experience disabilities, access to 
transportation can determine whether they can seek employment, 
get to the doctors, and be more engaged members of their 
communities.
    And, Ms. Quigley, you mentioned the pilot you are working 
on with Lyft and mentioned that right now it's a non-ADA-
compliant pilot.
    But I just wanted to touch on what you see and all of the 
panelists see as the opportunity here. I'd like to hear more 
about what your companies are working on to expand access for 
members of our communities who experience disabilities. What do 
you think can be done to focus on or enhance transportation 
services for people who experience disabilities and how can 
Congress be a partner in that? So why don't we start with you, 
Ms. Quigley?
    Ms. Quigley. OK. Thank you. Within our industry, certainly 
this is a very big conversation, and our industry group, ATA, 
the American Transit Association, is working to deal with this, 
as well.
    At a local level, you're right, our partnership with Lyft 
is for non-ADA para-transit trips. That's because that was the 
type of business and type of vehicles that they currently 
operate.
    I didn't mention that we're also starting to have 
conversations with another private sector group that has 
evolved, emerged specifically to address those who are ADA and 
mobility challenged.
    It's a local firm called Tango Car, and we hope to have the 
same type of partnership with them as we have with Lyft to 
provide mobility services on demand, same day, point to point 
services for those who do rely on mobility devices.
    Senator Hassan. Thank you. That's terrific. Anybody else 
want to add anything? Mr. Raycroft.
    Mr. Raycroft. Thank you for the question, Senator. You 
mentioned access for all.
    Senator Hassan. Right.
    Mr. Raycroft. That's our goal, and our goal is to not only 
connect big metropolitan areas but also to connect with some 
smaller places to give opportunities and specifically for those 
with a disability.
    Think of interacting with our system as being very similar 
to walking down the jet bridge to get on an aircraft. We will 
have a very similar type of system, very similar type of setup 
that makes all of us feel comfortable, including those with 
disabilities, to board safely, to feel comfortable once they're 
inside the vehicle during the trip, and then on the back end to 
get out and be on their way. That is the top priority of ours.
    Senator Hassan. OK. Thank you. Anybody else want to add 
anything?
    [No response.]
    Senator Hassan. OK. Thank you. I'll move to my next 
question.
    I will add that one of the things that I think is a 
challenge here is the realization that there are people who use 
mobility devices who really can't be separated from the device 
itself. So a custom wheelchair that somebody has to be moved 
out of to sit in a chair, for instance, in an airplane not only 
can get damaged in transport but there are people who can't sit 
without their custom equipment. So it is increasingly important 
that the technology finds ways to accommodate that custom 
equipment along with the person and not see them as separable, 
and I think if we can focus on that that would be a big step 
forward for a lot of people who face the most challenges.
    I wanted to move to something that, Mr. Raycroft, you just 
touched on a little bit. As we develop and deploy new forms of 
transportation, it's really important to keep the unique needs, 
too, of rural America in mind, and I think that that's what you 
were just getting at a little bit.
    According to the most recent Census, about one in five 
Americans live in rural areas, including many of the people I 
represent in New Hampshire. These are areas where low 
population density and the often large distances between towns 
and villages means that transportation is critical to ensure 
that people who live in largely rural areas have access to 
goods and services.
    So to each of you, can you discuss the ways in which your 
technologies can help people who live in rural areas by making 
it easier for them to travel in order to get from point A to 
point B? Why don't we go in reverse order? Mr. Raycroft, if you 
want to start.
    Mr. Raycroft. Sure. We are designing the system to be 
accessible for all. One way that we accomplish that is that 
we've designed it to be rather modular, such that we could add 
in smaller stations as necessary and they would have on ramps 
to merge into the trunk line, very similar to what you see with 
highways today. So we've put that as a priority in the design 
process itself.
    Think about a good example is the project that we're 
focused on in Missouri where we're looking to connect Kansas 
City to St. Louis in a mere 30 minutes. Imagine being able to 
cross the entire state with an intermediate boarding platform 
and station in Columbia and being able to connect to that 
relatively smaller city and giving people there access to jobs, 
services, and entertainment in the other two major cities 
within the state.
    Senator Hassan. OK. Thank you.
    Ms. Tolson. And for us, it's really facilitating the flow 
of goods and making sure that we can continue to do that and 
create jobs because I didn't mention in the earlier question, 
you know, how is it actually growing jobs.
    Well, the impact of gaining more throughput through the 
ports actually downstream adds jobs. There are three million 
jobs that are affected or grown from that supply chain effect 
and, you know, giving more efficiency again just helps the flow 
of goods to get to their destination.
    We work closely with railroads. That's one of our biggest 
segments obviously that we serve within Transportation at GE 
and finding ways to advance and streamline those types of 
operations, making those safer, as you all know with the PTC 
efforts that are underway, and getting more automation within 
the train itself to make sure that we can continue to deliver 
the goods and services timely and improve those efficiencies.
    Senator Hassan. Well, thank you, and I see that I'm over, 
Mr. Chair, and I'll follow up with the other two panelists on 
this issue in writing. Thanks.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Hassan.
    Senator Tester.

                 STATEMENT OF HON. JON TESTER, 
                   U.S. SENATOR FROM MONTANA

    Senator Tester. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and since I'm the 
newest guy on the panel, I kind of like this just shooting 
right down the line.
    But, look, thank you all for being here. I got a bunch of 
questions and I'm going to start with the first one and try to 
be as concise as you can.
    Each one of you are doing something different in a 
different realm, all dealing with efficiency in transportation. 
So could you tell me what infrastructure, what infrastructure 
that you don't have now that you're going to need in order to 
make what you're trying to do a reality? We'll start with you, 
Tina.
    Ms. Quigley. I would say one of the things that we don't 
have that we're going to need is to have clear standards and 
definitions as to what infrastructure is, clearly defining 
unambiguously the spaces where different types of activities 
happen, so where we have pedestrians, where we have bikes, 
where we have crosswalks, where we have stop signs.
    The more that we can create standards and invest in 
infrastructure that is very clear and unambiguous for the 
autonomous vehicle to be reading.
    Senator Tester. So let me ask you this. Do you have the 
infrastructure in place right now for the autonomous vehicles 
to work?
    Ms. Quigley. I would say that there will be certain 
corridors which will be much more appropriate for autonomous 
vehicles than other corridors.
    Senator Tester. OK. All right. Continue on.
    Mr. Sanford. Thank you. So infrastructure we're looking at 
is really the shore-side operating centers, so the areas where 
the people actually monitor the ships from.
    Senator Tester. OK. From a technology standpoint, you can 
operate everything you need to do with what's there right now. 
You just need the physical structure to be able to----
    Mr. Sanford. The biggest infrastructure probably when we're 
out at sea is determining how to increase band width to get the 
information between the ships and the location.
    Senator Tester. OK. All right.
    Ms. Tolson. One of the things that we're going to need as 
you go further into the inland into America is Spectrum issue 
that's at hand right now and having access to that. So that you 
have large rail yards, you have different port areas that need 
to and want to build their own area networks that are secure 
and serve their needs and without that kind of access, it's 
going to be very challenging.
    Senator Tester. We may get back to that security issue in a 
minute. Go ahead.
    Ms. Tolson. Yes, and then the other part for us is, you 
know, the definition, including digital as part of physical 
infrastructure definition.
    Senator Tester. Correct. That's correct.
    Ms. Tolson. So you can be digitally ready to improve the 
infrastructure as it goes forward and that's really important 
to us.
    Senator Tester. OK.
    Mr. Raycroft. I mentioned the regulatory frameworks. I 
think that's crucial. To piggyback on Tina's comment about 
standards, standards for manufacturing, for example, and 
working with the relevant bodies within the U.S. to formulate 
those is important for us.
    We will continue this development. We have great facilities 
in Nevada but we will continue to need more facilities for the 
development of the technology. We will need to develop a lot of 
software. We'll need a facility to do that as well as testing 
and then as far as the actual projects go and the 
infrastructure, we want to make sure that we're connecting into 
existing infrastructure, like transit. We want to be intermodal 
in that way.
    Senator Tester. Gotcha. I'm going to stick with you, Josh. 
You've got a 500-meter tube now. Is that what I read in your--
OK.
    Mr. Raycroft. Correct.
    Senator Tester. Do you have any projections on what this 
will cost moving forward per mile at this moment in time? I'm 
assuming it will decrease with volume?
    Mr. Raycroft. It will decrease with volume, decrease with 
time as we continue to innovate. What we built in Las Vegas 
won't be the final product. That is a development system and 
we're continuing to innovate. We will study in detail the 
construction costs and the operating costs in each of the 
projects.
    Senator Tester. Is there a price point which makes this 
work as far as construction costs go and which makes it not 
work? In other words, is there a price point that says I can't 
compete with air, I can't compete with buses, I can't compete 
with rail or passenger cars?
    Mr. Raycroft. Where now we have validation from third 
parties on our cost point, we think that this is a very viable 
solution, and given the fact that our system also brings 
superior benefits because we can move people even faster.
    Senator Tester. So I don't want to put you on the spot, but 
have you done that analysis on the metrics of where your price 
point needs to be?
    Mr. Raycroft. We've done that for some detailed studies 
outside of the U.S. and now we're working to refine those 
estimates. As you know, these vary by project. So we're working 
right now to do that.
    Senator Tester. I think it's really cool. I mean, I 
remember back when I was a kid, they put those little tubes 
full of money and they'd shoot them around the office 
buildings. I think it's pretty neat.
    You all talk about efficiency and efficiency means cost 
savings and one of the biggest cost savings in this--there has 
been a couple questions before this. I'm going to word it a 
little different--is manpower reductions. I'm not talking about 
manpower repurposing. I'm talking about manpower reductions.
    Have you--and this may or may not apply to all of you. It 
certainly applies to Davis and probably Carrie more than the 
other two. But have you guys done any projections on the 
percentage of manpower that won't be necessary?
    Now I know there will be different people doing different 
jobs, but overall if we're going to save money and make it more 
efficient, manpower is a big part of that efficiency savings.
    Have you done any research to determine what kind of cost 
savings there would be in manpower from a percentage 
standpoint? In other words, 10 percent less people working, 
whether it's sailors, mechanics, whatever it might be?
    Mr. Sanford. So I haven't looked at the specific manpower. 
That 20 percent I called was looking at the ship operating 
costs itself, looking at house loads, exterior cargo you can 
put on displaced by all the areas for people and all the 
systems that they would take up. That's where we see the 
savings as far as transportation goes.
    Senator Tester. OK. So would that also flow to the 
manpower? There'd be 20 percent less manpower?
    Mr. Sanford. I don't believe so. You're still going to have 
to have ships manned. It'll be a different type of manning.
    Senator Tester. Do you think there will be any savings in 
manpower?
    Mr. Sanford. I think there will be, but I don't have a 
quantitative number for that, no.
    Senator Tester. OK.
    Mr. Sanford. Let me look into that and I'll see if I can 
come up with a number.
    Senator Tester. The Chairman is being very generous.
    Carrie, really quick, do you have any projections on 
manpower?
    Ms. Tolson. I do not. I do not have any projections on 
that. I can get back to you on that, but we expect there 
actually would be growth.
    Senator Tester. Oh, really?
    Ms. Tolson. Yes.
    Senator Tester. OK. Cool. Thank you.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Tester.
    Senator Markey.

               STATEMENT OF HON. EDWARD MARKEY, 
                U.S. SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS

    Senator Markey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, very much.
    Just following up on Senator Tester's question, again my 
father was a truck driver. He was a milkman. Then all the 
milkmen got laid off, every milkman. No more milk going to 
homes. So that's a small example of what can happen as a 
transition compared to this massive change which, you know, 
you're talking about and just anticipating that dramatic impact 
it has on families when something like that happens, you know, 
multiplied milkmen times a thousand, right, in terms of all the 
people who are going to be impacted. So it's an important 
discussion to have, I know, from my own family experience.
    As we modernize the infrastructure, put sensors on the 
roads, it's going to be very expensive. We already have an 
incredible infrastructure backlog in the United States in terms 
of investment that should be made to upgrade our roads, our 
bridges, our transit.
    How would you suggest that we pay for this? Should this be 
a Federal program, state by state, or should the individual, 
you know,--what's your recommendation, Ms. Quigley? Who pays?
    Ms. Quigley. So I would like to reiterate that I truly 
believe again technology is the new asphalt and that by 
investing in technologies, we have the ability to actually get 
more capacity out of certain corridors with a higher rate of 
return on investment.
    We look to the Feds to be our partners certainly in funding 
but we can take a look at the pots of money. Are there 
opportunities for shifting away from additional lane miles and 
instead enhancing corridors with these new technologies that 
will produce the same or enhanced capacities?
    Senator Markey. So are you seeing again just a continuation 
of the same Federal-state-local partnership with more money 
just flowing over into these new modern technologies?
    Ms. Quigley. I think that's a great question, and I think 
the answer is yes and yet there's more to be done, as well. I 
think that the traditional partnerships or certainly in funding 
approaches are things we need to consider, but we also from the 
Feds not only need funding but we also need help in terms of 
the regulatory environment, making sure that we can move these 
things forward efficiently, and then, to the extent possible, a 
partnership in terms of best practices and ways to really 
enhance and educate us as to how we move this forward 
efficiently so we are not investing inappropriately in 
yesterday's technology, yesterday's infrastructure.
    Senator Markey. OK. Great. Thank you. Now as we move in 
this direction, as we digitize our roads, our bridges, our 
tunnels perhaps, Mr. Raycroft, who knows, it's going to cause 
the creation of a massive amount of information about every 
person who's driving. It's going to raise privacy issues and 
it's going to raise cybersecurity issues, right?
    So would any of you like to talk about those issues and how 
we should address them in an anticipatory fashion heading 
toward this massive potential benefit but also in the digital 
era, there's a sinister side to the cyberspace, as well. How do 
we build in the protections for people to make sure that 
they're not harmed and their privacy is not compromised?
    Ms. Tolson. So I'll respond to that first. I think it is 
that there is an ever-present threat and it will continue to 
persist to have bad actors out there and it is a top priority 
for, I think, all of us to ensure that as we expand the use and 
identifying data of locations and processes and all the things 
that makes, you know, our economy flow, that we protect those.
    In everything that we look at, we want to make sure that 
you're following this, you're following the standards that are 
out there, and that you're doing the job that all of us take 
from a technology standpoint very seriously and ensuring that 
those are going to hold up and protect you and that you have a 
resilience in that, which is why, you know, the Port Optimizer 
is FedRAMP-approved, certified, and we follow all those types 
of things, but I think this is a topic that will not die down 
and we need to be very diligent on ensuring that we've got NIST 
standards that continue to evolve and that they are executed.
    Senator Markey. Anybody else?
    Mr. Sanford. So for cybersecurity, from our point of view, 
I think the biggest worry would be if a third party were to 
gain control of the ship as it, let's say, entered U.S. waters. 
We have a series of cybersecurity built into the systems from 
the base level, from their design. Constantly, it's monitoring 
itself but also we see that control of the ships would be 
passed over to a local area specifically to ensure that the 
ship was under control of a U.S. person while it enters the 
water to reduce the risk for cybersecurity of somebody trying 
to use it for nefarious acts.
    Senator Markey. OK. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Markey.
    Senator Cantwell.

               STATEMENT OF HON. MARIA CANTWELL, 
                  U.S. SENATOR FROM WASHINGTON

    Senator Cantwell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you 
and the Ranking Member for holding this important hearing.
    It's so important that we keep moving ahead on technology 
and my state obviously, Washington, is so excited writ large 
because we see so many applications every day that are cost 
effective. So we love the Smart Cities Program and we love that 
Spokane is working diligently on better street lighting and 
that everybody from our utilities there, like Vista and Itron 
and others are working together to really help lower costs and 
drive efficiency. So we like that and want to see that 
continue.
    We just had this article come out about electric planes and 
the fact that even the aviation sector is looking at 
electrification, which is one of the things I wanted to ask the 
panel about, is just, you know, I know we have somebody here 
from Rolls-Royce and thank you for that focus on the maritime 
sector because we have to drive efficiencies into the maritime 
sector, as well, and there are some good security systems that 
people are working on to make sure that those protections are--
nobody can override your system or make it more cyber secure.
    But how big do you see the transportation sector, the rest 
of the transportation sector, maritime, aviation, transit, and 
the continued electrification of that as a big economic 
opportunity to drive efficiencies into our system and growth 
opportunities for the U.S.? Anybody who wants to take that?
    Ms. Quigley. So I can address it from the transit agency 
perspective, and it sounds like you're very knowledgeable, as 
well, from the transit agency perspective.
    When autonomous vehicles and electric vehicles have become 
synonymous pretty much. We know that electric vehicles will be 
the autonomous vehicles. The computer can control an 
electrically powered system much better than through a fossil 
fuel-type system.
    I think that the efficiencies that come from electric 
vehicles, the ability to operate quieter, cleaner energy, 
allows us also to get into communities that we formerly were 
challenged in terms of getting into. A lot of communities don't 
want to embrace public transit. It is loud. It does create 
noise.
    When you have an electric vehicle, you create an 
environment that is very friendly toward neighborhoods and so 
we look forward to eventually adopting more electric vehicles. 
Right now in Las Vegas, the environment and the amount of hours 
that we demand out of our vehicles has precluded us from being 
able to migrate toward electric vehicles. They still have a bit 
of maturation to do before we'll be able to do that.
    Mr. Sanford. So I am a marine guy, so I know a little bit 
about the aero as far as electric work we're doing, but from 
the marine side, we currently have our autonomous auto-crossing 
technology being employed on zero-emission flow electric 
ferries in the Nordic countries for going fjords, improving 
efficiency of those ferries that way. We can get the longest 
life out of the battery power and without having to have 
anything and we also just started a full new battery electric 
system for ships to improve efficiency on it. So that's where 
we believe the industry's going is to a full electric as far as 
marine industry.
    Mr. Raycroft. I just wanted to add that when we design the 
hyperloop system, we are designing it to be fully electric with 
zero-direct emissions. We found that this was desirable by our 
customers when we did a study engaging with the Ports of L.A. 
and Ports of Long Beach to study the goods movement out of the 
port. That was a very important criteria for any technology 
that we brought into the area. We feel that's very important 
and for all of our projects, we're ensuring that our impact on 
the grid is sustainable and what we do to the existing grid, 
the existing grid can tolerate the power needs of our system.
    Ms. Tolson. So I had mentioned in my written and oral 
statements about the emissions that will be reduced through use 
of digital tools as the Port Optimizer just from idling trucks 
and lowering all of those types of things.
    Also, another part of the business, we build locomotives, 
and we're working on hybrid systems for that and, you know, the 
impact of going from a diesel locomotive to a hybrid and the 
emissions that you will get through using the newer locomotives 
plus what we're moving to the future will be a big impact and a 
positive way to the environment.
    Senator Cantwell. Well, I thank all of you for your answer.
    Mr. Chairman, thank you for the hearing. I don't know what 
our intent as a committee is after this, but I just think that 
the Government needs to harness the information age, as well, 
and what you just discussed are a lot of applications where we 
help cities or regions do that and by making these investments 
drive down the cost of delivering services and that's a key 
thing for us as well as the private sector.
    We want everything to become more efficient. So I hope that 
our committee and maybe that other committee that you serve on 
with me, the Finance Committee, we could keep looking at ways 
to move forward and keep incenting smart cities and other 
transportation applications because I really do think that 
they--I mean, not only as you said, Mr. Sanford, the 
Scandinavians are already working on this and have had some 
really great success in the maritime sector and we want to 
continue to match that.
    Thank you.
    Ms. Quigley. I'd just like to say thank you to the Senator, 
as well. I'm getting familiar with your Interagency Council on 
Smart Cities and very much appreciate the focus on partnering 
and peer learning as part of that.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Cantwell.
    Senator Klobuchar.

               STATEMENT OF HON. AMY KLOBUCHAR, 
                  U.S. SENATOR FROM MINNESOTA

    Senator Klobuchar. Well, thank you so much, Chairman Thune, 
for this hearing and thank you, as well. It's good to see 
Senator Cortez Masto, Marie, in the place of honor. Thank you. 
As well as Senator Nelson for scheduling this hearing.
    I'll start out at home. A lot of questions have been asked. 
I was looking over my questions. They all said someone else 
asked them, but so no one asked about Duluth, Minnesota, so 
I'll start there.
    So the Port of Duluth is the largest and busiest port on 
the Great Lakes, hosting about 1,000 vessels and an average of 
35 million short tons of cargo per year. The port plays an 
important role in the region's economy and support industries 
from ag to manufacturing.
    In March of last year, a new intermodal terminal opened for 
Canadian National Railway and Duluth Cargo Connect to improve 
the flow of freight in and out of the port.
    Ms. Tolson, as port traffic increases, what new technology 
solutions can help to support the flow of intermodal cargo?
    Ms. Tolson. Thanks for the question. We actually are in a 
development phase and partnering with BNSF on a solution that 
will actually further optimize intermodal yards and terminals.
    This is a system that brings more automation into those 
yards so again you don't move things more times than you need 
to. It's similar to what I described in the Port Optimizer 
tool. We have a system already that does this. It's an older 
system that we're adding more functionality so that as these 
ports experience growth, further growth in intermodal traffic, 
which is up by about 25 percent year over year, it's growing 
tremendously and has a big impact on the ports, it's bringing 
those types of solutions that have automation into the actual 
yards themselves, have the port communities themselves that can 
share that information that also helps them organize and plan 
and get visibility into how to make the flow of goods move 
smoothly and quicker.
    Senator Klobuchar. Thank you. And along these same lines of 
commercial vessels, Mr. Sanford, adequate education and 
training is crucial to help ensure that marine engineers have 
the necessary skills to safely operate these vessels.
    As the technology changes, it's important that the training 
keeps pace. Advances in the safety technology will only have a 
positive impact if mariners know how to use the technology.
    What steps do you believe will be necessary to ensure that 
mariners receive adequate training in the new vessel 
technology?
    Mr. Sanford. So I believe focusing on the maritime 
academies will be important. My brother-in-law is a captain on 
an oil tanker. So I'm very well aware of the aspects of what 
the technology will be doing and what improvements will be 
created and necessary training.
    I've done work at Mass Maritime, so I've worked with that 
group and known a lot of sailors and I think that's a starting 
area, and then when you go more to the able seamen and the 
people executing the technologies, you're going to continue 
needing the engine training and maintenance of all the ships, 
though there will be a reduced number of them. That will be 
supplied but that will be done on shore. So the transfer of at-
sea work maintenance to shore-side work will need to be 
increased and the infrastructure at the ports to be able to do 
that.
    Senator Klobuchar. Very good. See, I started with these 
port things because I knew that Nevada and South Dakota 
wouldn't have as much to one-up me on the ports, so really 
thought I'd go for that.
    But I did have one other question and that's as the--we've 
seen this technology, this competitive agenda that we need for 
the country, I believe, really focuses a lot on this training 
and the infrastructure being up-to-date, but you also need the 
way to carry this technology, and Senator Fischer and I had 
recently signed into law the MOBILE NOW Act and it would 
require the FCC to explore ways to provide incentives for 
wireless carriers to lease unused Spectrum to rural or smaller 
carriers and we are going to see the demand for Spectrum 
increasing as we see more of this technology, especially in 
rural areas.
    Ms. Tolson, how are the communications needs changing? What 
can we do to improve the coverage of data capacity of the 
networks? Anyone can answer this, but it's really just focused 
on the fact that if we're going to start using precision 
agriculture and we're going to have all this updated 
transportation, we're going to need the capacity and the data 
capacity to make it work.
    Ms. Tolson. Absolutely. And it is really important as we 
expand back to the amount of information that we're generating 
every day, especially, you know, advancement of IoT and devices 
and everything that's connected. The needs of the rural areas 
especially are going to have is back to having access to the 
broadband, you know, the 3550 and up, so that they can actually 
have the secure networks, they have the bandwidth, and they can 
afford to do the investment. They've already started to make 
sure that those are in place in places that they need them 
which might not be the case if you're a big telco or others 
that doesn't have that kind of incentive.
    So it's important to us that we continue to have that 
availability, that they can bid on those types of things, that 
they can actually create that and do the investment that 
they're all willing to make to make that a reality in those 
areas.
    Senator Klobuchar. OK. Very good. Thank you.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Klobuchar.
    Senator Gardner.

                STATEMENT OF HON. CORY GARDNER, 
                   U.S. SENATOR FROM COLORADO

    Senator Gardner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to 
the witnesses.
    You probably have been frustrated by the number of 
witnesses coming in from other hearings. Just when you thought 
you were finished, one more question. So I apologize for being 
that guy. You were that person, too. That's right, that's 
right.
    But I do thank you because in Colorado, we've seen 
significant growth over the past several years, particularly 
along the I-25 corridor, from Pueblo, Colorado, to Fort 
Collins, Colorado, where a vast majority of the population in 
the state lives, and you would think by perhaps some of the 
traffic we face, that damn traffic is actually one word in 
Colorado and we have to address solutions to that.
    So, Mr. Raycroft, in your written testimony, you talk about 
partnerships Virgin Hyperloop One is forging to bolster its 
technology. You even recognize, I believe, Ms. Quigley for her 
local leadership to advance hyperloop.
    You also touched on Hyperloop One's efforts in Colorado, 
talked a little bit about that with the Colorado Department of 
Transportation, Aecom, an engineering firm, to advance the 
hyperloop.
    Colorado had other initiatives in place, like its RoadX 
Program, that tries to take advantage of different approaches 
to transportation solutions because, look, when you have a 
state that has some pretty awesome mountains that you have to 
travel through, around or by, with a lot of traffic, you're 
going to have to find solutions that include ideas other than 
just drilling holes through them again because of the cost and 
the environmental concerns that that can bring with it.
    So could you talk a little bit about how that partnership 
is working with the public and private partnerships and the 
sectors there?
    Mr. Raycroft. Yes. It's been working out great. I think 
it's an exemplary case of us working with partnerships, working 
with government, with both CDOT as well as with the private 
sector and Aecom to develop that feasibility study.
    We are looking to build a system that really connects the 
state from the south near Colorado Springs up to Fort Collins 
and then with a spur that would go out to the mountains. We 
could see that being a later phase of that project and so far 
we are evaluating what the transformative impact would be 
within the state if we could deploy that system.
    We look forward to continuing that discussion and exploring 
how we could deliver that project through a public-private 
partnership because that will be the method we use to deploy 
these projects around the country.
    Senator Gardner. You talked about the Front Range and we 
talked about the mountains and the mountains, of course, have a 
lot more tourism and recreational opportunities than perhaps, 
say, the Eastern Plains.
    How would hyperloop affect or this type of a technology 
solution or any future technological innovation in 
transportation, how is it going to address those truly rural 
areas that maybe don't have a recreation or tourism economy but 
are a farm economy and how does transportation solution 
innovation affect them?
    Mr. Raycroft. From a connectivity and accessibility 
standpoint, we think that this will be a huge step forward to 
enable businesses that could locate along the Front Range to 
have access to whether it's labor pool, whether it's their 
supply chains or companies they interact with that are in 
Denver. We think that that's very powerful.
    And then as far as the interaction with from more of an 
environmental standpoint, we are studying that in detail of how 
our structure, elevated structure could follow potential 
existing rights-of-way to minimize the impact to local 
communities.
    Senator Gardner. And so I fly into Denver International 
Airport. I land. I get on the train, the A Train, and I take it 
to downtown or take it somewhere, but I want to get on a 
hyperloop to take it over to the mountains. How does the 
interface work? How will it work?
    Mr. Raycroft. So right now, we're in detailed discussions 
with the airport, for example, where we're talking about how we 
could be integrated into that A line station to make this a 
true multimodal statewide connectivity solution.
    Senator Gardner. Very good. And if you talk to folks back 
home, and you've heard it, too, in Colorado in your work, the 
congestion of traffic, we know the impact it has on families 
and their time at home. In Colorado, time means everything, 
time with family, time to be outside, time to be at the soccer 
games, and obviously it has an impact on our economy, as well. 
As the roads tighten up, the congestion tightens up, it has an 
impact on freight, mobility, economy.
    Department of Transportation's projected that in the year 
2040, the number of vehicles making daily trips in the I-25 
corridor, which is already congested, could increase by 60 
percent. It's a corridor that, as I've said, is already seeing 
significant congestion.
    So you mentioned the feasibility study for hyperloop in 
Colorado in your written testimony. Are you still on track to 
release that this fall? Is that the plan?
    Mr. Raycroft. Yes. That is the plan. We're very excited to 
share the results.
    Senator Gardner. I'm looking forward to it, too. Thank you. 
Thanks for being part of the solutions.
    Mr. Raycroft. Thank you, Senator.
    Senator Gardner. I guess it's up to me now. We may have an 
additional Senator who's coming to join this. So I appreciate 
that.
    I don't know if Senator Cortez Masto or Klobuchar, if you 
have some questions that you would like to follow up with.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Absolutely. Are you kidding? This is 
a great conversation, and I've said this before and we touched 
on it a little. I'm going to open it up to the panelists 
because, as we buildout this infrastructure that we've talked 
about that is so necessary for this emerging technology, we 
have a great opportunity to incorporate within to that the 
cybersecurity piece at the same time.
    Senator Markey talked a little bit about that. I don't know 
if you can elaborate for us. As you're looking at this emerging 
technology, what are you doing in particular to address that 
cybersecurity piece of it and how should we at a Federal level 
be working with you to help address those issues? Tina, let me 
start with you.
    Ms. Quigley. Sure. I'll go ahead and comment that certainly 
cybersecurity is one of the most important things to consider 
as you're deploying this technology.
    We feel that using tests, smaller pilot programs is one of 
the safest ways to start to advance new technologies, while at 
the same time keeping it within a geo-fence, very safe area 
that you can monitor and learn from in case of hacking, in case 
of risks that you're exposing the public to.
    So I very much am a believer in and appreciate our state's 
help in doing these small pilot programs to vet and test before 
anything is taken larger.
    Senator Cortez Masto. So when you're talking about that 
vetting and testing, that is including addressing the 
cybersecurity piece?
    Ms. Quigley. It is, exactly, and that's specifically what 
I'm talking about as related to this, yes.
    Senator Cortez Masto. OK. And is there anything at a 
Federal level we should be doing to support and assist?
    Ms. Quigley. Well, I do believe that as part of the AV 
START Act that there is quite a bit of conversation related to 
cybersecurity.
    Senator Cortez Masto. That's right.
    Ms. Quigley. Yes. We do appreciate the Feds taking some 
leadership on that.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Great. Thank you. Anyone else on what 
you're doing on cybersecurity piece?
    Mr. Raycroft. Yes. From our perspective, as I mentioned, 
safety is our first priority. We think cybersecurity is a very 
crucial element of that and we know that those risks will 
persist, as Laurie mentioned earlier.
    So what we're doing is we're ensuring that we're following 
the best industry practice. We're also working according to 
NIST and making sure that we're with the most modern policy 
framework around this and we're also engaging third-party 
testers that can come in and try to poke as many holes as they 
can and so from that standpoint, we're just trying to prevent 
and ensure that if something did happen, we can respond to it 
quickly to ensure safety on our system.
    Senator Cortez Masto. OK. And let me finally--data 
collection. As this emerging technology--as you continue to 
test it and look at it for use in everyday jobs and employers 
use it, you're collecting data to some extent.
    Can you address the data collection piece of it and the 
privacy piece, how you secure that, as well, and is there a 
privacy issue involved in any of this that you have addressed 
or are looking at or anticipate being something that we should 
be looking at for the future?
    Ms. Quigley. Well, I'll address that. We collect vast 
amounts of data, but I can assure you that all the data that we 
collect is anonymized. It is truly just telling us that 
somebody used the road, what time of day, what conditions, 
traffic conditions. Absolutely nothing is tied to personal 
ownership of that particular movement.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you.
    Ms. Tolson. And for us, we don't have personal information. 
This is all cargo-related. So it's less of a concern from a 
privacy consumer's perspective, but, you know, securing the 
data is very important for us and we've got measures in place 
that make sure that the viewers or the personas of people who 
work and have access have it just for the data that they're 
allowed to actually have access to.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you. Thank you.
    Senator Gardner. Excellent job, Senator Cortez Masto. Thank 
you very much.
    And Senator Blumenthal, who is the last last last, I'm 
sure.

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

    Senator Blumenthal. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
    Ms. Quigley, I'd like to ask you about the NTSB 
investigation into self-driving vehicles, specifically the 
self-driving shuttle crash in Las Vegas. Would you agree that 
it would be helpful to have the results of that investigation, 
in fact, very valuable in informing legislation about self-
driving or autonomous vehicles?
    Ms. Quigley. I would say that it's important to move 
forward, of course, with the NTSB investigation and learn more 
about the incident, but I also think that it's equally 
important that we continue to test and deploy again in these 
safe environments. This particular shuttle operates in a geo-
fenced half mile loop at very slow speeds, but it's only 
through these small tests and deployments and dipping our toe 
in the water, that we really start to learn how these vehicles 
interact in these live environments.
    We can test in petri dishes and test in closed environments 
but really until it's out there, you're never going to really 
be able to progress, we believe, the technology further without 
learning now how it operates.
    Senator Blumenthal. But wouldn't you agree, Ms. Quigley, 
that the results of that investigation would be valuable to 
this committee, to our colleagues, in----
    Ms. Quigley. I would.
    Senator Blumenthal.--working on that legislation?
    Ms. Quigley. I would agree.
    Senator Blumenthal. And maybe we should postpone voting 
until we have the results of that investigation?
    Ms. Quigley. Again, I would champion that we do test and 
deploy in small safe geo-fenced environments just to really see 
how these vehicles are acting in live conditions, but I think 
they're both important.
    Senator Blumenthal. Do you think the recommendations of the 
NTSB ought to be swiftly implemented?
    Ms. Quigley. I do.
    Senator Blumenthal. Ms. Tolson, last month, as you know, 
the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Highway 
Traffic Safety Administration proposed a rollback of the Clean 
Air/Clean Car Standards.
    You mentioned in your written testimony that GE has focused 
on renewable energy, reducing costs for consumers and 
increasing fuel efficiency. Those actions and this 
Administration seems to be at odds with industries and 
companies like GE that are trying to do the right thing, 
preventing climate change and protecting public health and 
benefiting consumers and creating jobs.
    I wonder if you could tell the Committee how have existing 
fuel economy standards resulted in innovation within GE and the 
electric vehicle market?
    Ms. Tolson. So I'll answer that, you know, to my knowledge 
base but we very much focus on across many of our sectors and 
including our renewables business in finding ways that we can 
actually, you know, get more clean and efficient energy.
    As I mentioned earlier, we're also working on having a 
hybrid system within locomotives which will have a big impact, 
but I believe that, you know, reducing our standards for clean 
air are probably working in the wrong direction in that we 
continue to find ways to further advance technologies that 
will, regardless of the standards, continue to march down that 
path of output that doesn't harm the environment, that we have 
more efficient use of fuel so you use less.
    As a matter of fact, in locomotives, we've got a cruise 
control system, for example, that saves 200 million gallons of 
diesel fuel a year. So it's really at the core of all we think 
about as far as, you know, innovations and continuing to march 
down a path of bringing those two, you know, industries, 
critical infrastructure industries that we all experience and 
interact with every day. So it's important to us.
    Senator Blumenthal. Have these rollbacks in the standards 
stifled innovation?
    Ms. Tolson. You know, I can get back to you with more 
details on that. This is a little bit more out of my depth. I 
don't know what the direct impact is. I can imagine that 
they've had done, but I'll have to get back to you on that.
    Senator Blumenthal. Thank you. My time has expired anyway. 
So I would appreciate your getting back to us.
    Thank you, Ms. Tolson and all of the members of the panel.
    Senator Gardner. Thank you, Senator Blumenthal. Thanks to 
the witnesses for your time and testimony today.
    That concludes the hearing. The record will remain open for 
two weeks. Members are asked to submit their questions for the 
record and your homework assignment is to respond to those 
questions in writing as soon as possible to the Committee which 
will be made again a part of the record.
    Thank you very much for your attendance today.
    Senator Blumenthal. Mr. Chairman, if I might just ask----
    Senator Gardner. Take back the gavel.
    Senator Blumenthal. I ask that a statement from the 
Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety be included in the 
record.
    Senator Gardner. Without objection.
    Senator Blumenthal. Thank you.
    [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 unique 
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 works to prevent crashes, deaths and injuries 
through the advancement of safer vehicles, safer drivers and 
passengers, and safer roads and infrastructure.
Motor Vehicle Deaths Remain Unacceptably High
    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.\1\ 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,\2\ and it follows a 
seven percent increase from 2014 to 2015.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ 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).
    \2\ Traffic Safety Facts Research Note, 2016 Fatal Motor Vehicle 
Crashes: Overview, NHTSA, Oct. 2017, DOT HS 812 456.
    \3\ National Center for Statistics and Analysis, 2015 Motor Vehicle 
Crashes: Overview, Report No. DOT HS 812 318, NHTSA (Aug. 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Advocates Consistently Promotes Proven Technology 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.\4\ In 1991, Advocates led the coalition that supported 
bipartisan legislation that included airbag technology in the 
Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) of 1991.\5\ 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. 
Over the last decade airbags saved approximately 2,500 lives 
annually,\6\ and have saved an estimated 47,625 lives since 1987, 
according to NHTSA.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ 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.
    \5\ Pub. L. 102-240 (Dec. 18, 1991).
    \6\ National Center for Statistics and Analysis, Lives Saved in 
2015 by Restraint Use and Minimum-Drinking-Age Laws, NHTSA, Report No. 
DOT HS 812 319 (Aug. 2016); National Center for Statistics and Analysis 
(2017, October). Lives saved in 2016 by Restraint Use and Minimum-
Drinking-Age Laws (Traffic Safety Facts Crash Stats) Report No. DOT HS 
812 454, Washington, DC: NHTSA.
    \7\ 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); 
National Center for Statistics and Analysis (2017, October). Lives 
saved in 2016 by Restraint Use and Minimum-Drinking-Age Laws (Traffic 
Safety Facts Crash Stats) Report No. DOT HS 812 454, Washington, DC: 
NHTSA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    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;\8\ rear outboard 3-point 
seat belts;\9\ electronic stability control;\10\ rear seat belt 
reminder systems;\11\ rearview cameras;\12\ brake transmission 
interlocks;\13\ seat belts on motorcoaches;\14\ and, electronic logging 
devices for commercial motor vehicles (CMVs).\15\ These safety advances 
have saved hundreds of thousands of lives and many have been 
accomplished because of bipartisan leadership of Members of the Senate 
Commerce Committee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\ Transportation Recall Enhancement, Accountability, and 
Documentation (TREAD) Act, Pub. L. 106-414 (Nov. 1, 2000).
    \9\ Anton's Law, Pub. L. 107-318 (Dec. 4, 2002).
    \10\ Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity 
Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), Pub. L. 109-59 (Aug. 10, 2005).
    \11\ Id.
    \12\ Cameron Gulbransen Kids Transportation Safety Act of 2007, 
Pub. L. 110-189 (Feb. 28, 2008).
    \13\ Id.
    \14\ Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21) Act, 
Pub. L. 112-141 (Jan. 3, 2012).
    \15\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Additionally, crash avoidance systems, such as automatic emergency 
braking (AEB), are critical to the development of autonomous vehicles 
(AVs).\16\ This system uses on-board sensors such as radar, cameras or 
lasers to detect an imminent crash, warns the driver and applies the 
brakes or increases the braking effort if the driver does not take 
sufficient action. Research performed by the Insurance Institute for 
Highway Safety (IIHS) has revealed that AEB decreases front-to-rear 
crashes that cause injuries by 56 percent.\17\ These already impressive 
safety benefits will be increased by implementing a Federal performance 
standard for AEB and requiring that all new vehicles be equipped with 
this technology.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \16\ 80 FR 62487 (Oct. 16, 2015).
    \17\ IIHS, Real-world benefits of crash avoidance technologies Fact 
Sheet (May 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Emerging Technology of Autonomous Vehicles Requires Sensible 
        Safeguards
    Advocates believes that AVs have the potential to make significant 
and lasting reductions in the number of deaths and injuries that occur 
each year on our Nation's roads. However, deploying AVs before they can 
be safely operated on public roads and without commonsense government 
oversight and industry accountability is not only reckless and ill-
advised, but it will also substantially reduce public confidence in 
this new technology.
Experts and Industry Agree that the Widespread Deployment of Autonomous 
        Vehicles is Decades Away
    The pending AV START Act (American Vision for Safer Transportation 
through Advancement of Revolutionary Technologies Act, S. 1885) is 
being rushed through the Senate to facilitate the large-scale sale of 
experimental AV technology. The speed at which this legislation is 
being advanced is not aligned with the reality that AVs are a long way 
from being ready for prime time.
    In fact, a number of auto industry executives have publicly stated 
that fully autonomous vehicles are still likely decades away. For 
example, Ford Motor Co. CEO Bill Ford, Jr. commented, ``There's been a 
lot of over-promising and I think a lot of misinformation that's been 
out there. It's really important that we get it right, rather than get 
it quickly.'' \18\ Toyota Research Institute CEO Gill Pratt 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.'' \19\ 
And, Nissan's Senior Vice President of Connected Vehicles and Mobility 
Services Ogi Redzic remarked, ``Say a 2021 target is the example. What 
they may be saying is in a little, geofenced area with certain speed 
and conditions. If you ask generic statements, like `when will all cars 
be driverless?', well of course we are talking about the very distant 
future.'' \20\ The primacy of the technology was also underscored by a 
recent report by IIHS.\21\ The report stated, a ``production autonomous 
vehicle that can go anywhere, anytime isn't available at your local car 
dealer and won't be for quite some time. We aren't there yet.'' \22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \18\ CBS News, Bill Ford on self-driving cars, his company's future 
and the cost of Trump's tariffs (Jun. 20, 2018).
    \19\ David Welch and Gabrielle Coppola, Don't Worry, Petrolheads. 
Driverless Cars Are Still Years Away, Bloomberg News (Jan. 8, 2018).
    \20\ Craig Duff, Nissan says autonomous cars still have a long way 
to go, news.com.au (Feb 15, 2018).
    \21\ IIHS, Status Report, Reality Check: Research, deadly crashes 
show need for caution on road to full autonomy (Aug. 7, 2018).
    \22\ Id. at pg. 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Public is Deeply Skeptical about the Safety of Autonomous Vehicles
    Numerous public opinion polls show strong public skepticism and 
reticence about AVs.\23\ Those doubts are warranted based on the recent 
crashes as well as the past conduct of automakers. Over the last few 
years, automakers have hidden from the American public and regulators 
safety defects which have led to numerous unacceptable and unnecessary 
deaths and injuries and the recall of tens of millions of vehicles.\24\ 
Consumer acceptance of AV technology is critical to its success and to 
fully realizing the lifesaving potential of AVs. Right now families 
know that when they go into auto showrooms to buy a new car, the 
Federal government has protections in place to ensure their safety. 
Similar oversight and regulation are needed for AVs to both assure and 
safeguard consumers, especially when considering recent the auto 
industry history of defects and cover-ups.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \23\ Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, Public Opinion Polls 
Show Deep Skepticism About Autonomous Vehicles (June 2018).
    \24\ 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.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    To provide some examples of the numerous recent surveys, in July of 
2018, Advocates commissioned an independent public opinion poll \25\ 
that showed intense apprehension regarding the widespread deployment of 
AVs with 69 percent expressing concern about safety. In a May 2018 poll 
commissioned by the American Automobile Association (AAA), 73 percent 
of American drivers said they would be too afraid to ride in a fully 
self-driving vehicle, up from 63 percent in late 2017.\26\ A Reuters/
Ipsos poll found that 67 percent of Americans were uncomfortable with 
the idea of riding in self-driving cars.\27\ Lastly, in a May 2018 
Public Policy Polling/Consumer Watchdog poll, 80 percent of respondents 
agreed that Federal and state governments should regulate driverless 
vehicles for the safety of riders, pedestrians and other drivers.\28\ 
Clearly, the public needs assurances that they will be safe driving in 
and around AVs, yet the AV START Act falls short of establishing 
safeguards to accomplish this.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \25\ ORC International, CARAVAN Public Opinion Poll, July 2018
    \26\ American Automobile Association (AAA), Driverless Cars Are a 
Tough Sell to Americans, May 2018.
    \27\ Reuters and Ipsos, Reuters and Ipsos Poll poll of 2,592 
participants conducted between Jan. 11-18, 2018, January 2018.
    \28\ Consumer Watchdog, As Americans Hit the Road for Memorial Day, 
Consumer Watchdog Poll Finds Voters Want Congress to Apply the Brakes 
on Driverless Cars, May 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Safe Operation of Autonomous Vehicle Systems Has Yet to be Proved
    The artificial urgency to deploy immature AVs is disconnected from 
public opinion as well as the reality that serious and fatal crashes 
have revealed significant flaws in this still developing technology. On 
May 7, 2016, in Williston, Florida, a Tesla Model S on ``Autopilot'' 
struck and passed beneath a semitrailer killing the driver.\29\ On 
January 22, 2018, in Culver City, California, another Tesla Model S 
operating on ``Autopilot'' collided with a parked fire truck that was 
responding to the scene of a separate crash.\30\ Remarkably, neither 
the Tesla driver nor any first responders were injured.\31\ On March 
18, 2018, in Tempe, Arizona, an Uber test vehicle operating on self-
driving mode struck and killed a pedestrian walking a bicycle.\32\ 
Then, just a few days later on March 23, 2018, in Mountain View, 
California, a Tesla Model X operating on ``Autopilot'' collided with a 
safety barrier resulting in the death of the driver.\33\ According to 
the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) preliminary report on 
the crash, the vehicle was being operated under ``Autopilot'', had 
moved out of the lane of travel on its own and accelerated to 70 miles-
per-hour (MPH) before colliding with the barrier.\34\ The collision and 
subsequent intense fire closed the freeway for at least five hours.\35\ 
On May 29, 2018, a Tesla Model S operating on ``Autopilot'' struck a 
parked police vehicle in Laguna Beach, California.\36\ Late last month 
on August 25, 2018 in San Jose, CA, a Tesla Model S collided with a 
fire truck that was stopped in the far right lane with its emergency 
lights activated. The NTSB has investigated or is investigating all of 
these crashes except the last two.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \29\ 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).
    \30\ Peter Valdes-Dapena, Tesla in Autopilot mode crashes into fire 
truck, CNN Tech, (Jan. 24, 2018).
    \31\ Id.
    \32\ Everett Rosenfield, Tempe police release video of deadly Uber 
accident, CNBC (Mar. 21, 2018).
    \33\ David Shephardson, U.S. opens probe into fatal Tesla crash, 
fire in California, Reuters (Mar. 27, 2018).
    \34\ National Transportation Safety Board, Preliminary Highway 
Report, HWY18FH011, Jun. 7, 2018.
    \35\ Id.
    \36\ Brittny Mejia, Tesla in Autopilot mode crashes into parked 
Laguna Beach police cruiser, L.A. Times (May 29, 2018).
    \37\ Tatiana Sanchez and Annie Sciacca, Tesla crashes into San Jose 
fire truck on Highway 101, The Mercury News (August 27, 2018)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In addition to the tragic crashes that have already happened 
involving autonomous systems, data accumulated from the limited miles 
traveled also paints an alarming picture. In 2016, the latest year for 
which final data is available, on average a person was killed in a 
traffic collision every 84.7 million miles traveled on U.S. roads.\38\ 
Before the fatal crash in Arizona, Uber had reportedly logged two 
million autonomous miles as of the end of 2017 and was predicted to 
accrue another one million miles over the next 100 days.\39\ Based on a 
simple evaluation of this data, the autonomous Uber had one fatality in 
three million miles; that is a fatality rate 28 times that of human 
drivers. This analysis highlights just how little proof there is that 
these systems are safe. While it must be stated that the Uber crash is 
a single data point and may not be necessarily indicative of future 
performance statistically, if we are going to ignore this data point, 
then AV manufacturers must likewise stop touting the millions of miles 
their AVs have driven as evidence of their safety, as they are 
currently doing in the voluntary safety self-assessments filed with 
NHTSA. The fact is that the industry has yet to prove the safety of 
these systems and has yet to even agree upon a metric or method for 
comparing the safety of these systems, yet they are pushing to allow 
these vehicles into showrooms and onto the roads. Moreover, these 
numbers pale in comparison to the more than three trillion miles 
traveled by human drivers on U.S. roads each year.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \38\ National Center for Statistics and Analysis. (2017, October). 
2016 Fatal Motor Vehicle Crashes: Overview. (Traffic Safety Facts 
Research Note. Report No. DOT HS 812 456). Washington, D.C.: NHTSA.
    \39\ Carzon, B., Uber's Self-Driving Cars Hit 2 Million Miles As 
Program Regains Momentum, Frobes, (Dec. 22, 2017).
    \40\ National Center for Statistics and Analysis. (2017, October). 
2016 Fatal Motor Vehicle Crashes: Overview. (Traffic Safety Facts 
Research Note. Report No. DOT HS 812 456). Washington, D.C.: NHTSA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Similar misdirection about safety performance data has been used in 
response to recent crashes involving AVs. After the 2016 fatal Tesla 
crash in Florida, the NHTSA Office of Defects and Investigation (ODI) 
issued a report which included an analysis of data supplied by Tesla 
that showed ``that the Tesla vehicles crash rate dropped by almost 40 
percent after Autosteer [a feature of the Autopilot system] 
installation.'' \41\ However, included in the ODI report was a critical 
footnote that the crash rates reported were ``for all miles travelled 
before and after Autopilot installation and are not limited to actual 
Autopilot use'' (emphasis added).\42\ Despite this clear statement by 
NHTSA, Tesla continues to mischaracterize the ODI analysis in response 
to subsequent fatal crashes involving vehicles operating under the 
``Autopilot'' system.\43\ NHTSA has since clarified again that the 
effectiveness of the ``Autopilot'' system was not evaluated in its 
prior investigation, refuting the claims by Tesla.\44\ Moreover, Tesla 
was removed as a party to the NTSB investigation of the second fatal 
crash involving one of its vehicles shortly after a March blog post 
once again made this same claim.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \41\ NHTSA Office of Defects Investigation, ODI Resume: 
Investigation PE 16-007.
    \42\ NHTSA Office of Defects Investigation, ODI Resume: 
Investigation PE 16-007.
    \43\ Tesla, An Update on Last Week's Accident, Mar. 30, 2018.
    \44\ Reuters, `Effectiveness' of Tesla self-driving system was not 
assessed in probe: U.S. traffic safety agency, May 2, 2018.
    \45\ Levin, A., Beene, R., Tesla Was Kicked Off Fatal Crash Probe 
by NTSB, April 12, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    These types of details matter when it comes to AVs, particularly 
when evaluating claims that are made to support their introduction. 
Some members of the industry assert that waiting for AV technology to 
be perfect would be ``the enemy of the good.'' \46\ In some cases, they 
point to a report of the same title by the Rand Corporation (RAND) to 
bolster this argument.\47\ In fact, the RAND report concluded that 
allowing the deployment of AVs, which have a safety performance that is 
just 10 percent better than that of the average human driver, would 
save more lives than waiting for a perfectly safe AV.\48\ However, the 
critical underpinning of this statement, which is being widely missed 
in the use of this report, is that these vehicles are in fact 
demonstrably better, even in some minute amount, than human drivers--
this is a fact which has yet to be proved. Again, the industry and 
regulators have not even agreed upon the proper metrics for evaluating 
the safety performance of an AV, let alone requirements for operation 
which would assure that these vehicles are ten percent, one percent, or 
even a tenth of a percent better than the average human driver.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \46\ David Strickland, We Can't Afford to Put Up Any More 
Roadblocks on Self-Driving, Morning Consult (Dec. 1, 2017).
    \47\ Id.; Kalra, N., Groves, D., The Enemy of the Good: Estimating 
the Cost of Waiting for Nearly Perfect Automated Vehicles, RAND Corp., 
2017.
    \48\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minimum Performance Standards Have Both Immediate and Long Term 
        Benefits for Nascent Safety Technologies
    Advocates has always supported the introduction of safety 
technologies once its benefits have been identified and verified. Often 
additional advantages arise out of the widespread implementation of the 
base technology. For example, Advocates evaluated an abundance of 
research and data demonstrating that installing a rearview camera in 
passenger vehicles would help to prevent backover crashes and resultant 
deaths and injuries, often to young children and disabled persons.\49\ 
Advocates, together with others in the safety community especially 
KidsAndCars.org and the remarkable families of backover victims, then 
fought for a decade in total to obtain a rearview camera requirement 
for all new vehicles, which took effect on May 1, 2018. The IIHS 
conducted research, published in their November 17, 2016 Status Report, 
demonstrating additional benefits of rearview cameras such as reducing 
property damage crashes during backing, and assistance with backing 
maneuvers such as parking.\50\ Furthermore, if a video sensor stream 
was required, including additional driver assistance technologies such 
automatic rear braking, parking guidance and automated parking 
assistance, even more advantages could be realized.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \49\ Vehicle Backover Avoidance Technology Study, Report to 
Congress, NHTSA (Nov. 2006).
    \50\ Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), Rearview 
cameras reduce police-reported backing crashes, Status Report, Vol. 51, 
No. 9 (Nov. 17, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Similarly, Advocates supported equipping vehicles with anti-lock 
braking systems (ABS), which helps a driver to maintain control of the 
vehicle when braking on slippery surfaces. ABS has also resulted in 
wide ranging benefits. In fact, ABS is the base technology for 
electronic stability control (ESC) which helps to prevent rollover and 
loss of control crashes and is attributed to having saved more than 
7,000 lives since 2011.\51\ The applications which are in ABS and ESC 
are also an underlying technology for AVs. A critical component of both 
of these safety successes is a Federal standard that ensures these 
technologies have a specific level of performance so that consumers can 
have confidence in the technology as well as familiarity with a new 
feature of their vehicle. Federal standards also pave the way to build 
public acceptance and use of these technologies which magnifies the 
safety benefits. Effective government oversight and performance 
standards are critical to the success of new safety technologies placed 
into motor vehicles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \51\ Webb, C. N. (2017, March). Estimating Lives Saved by 
Electronic Stability Control, 2011-2015. (Traffic Safety Facts Research 
Note. Report No. DOT HS 812 391). Washington, D.C.: NHTSA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Moreover, examples of the success of effective standards and 
oversight of automated systems fly over our heads every single day. 
According to the U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics, 741 million 
passengers traveled on domestic flights in 2017.\52\ The tragic April 
2018 death of a Southwest Airlines passenger was the first U.S. 
commercial airline fatality since 2009.\53\ Over that same span of time 
(2010-2017), nearly 5.4 billion passengers travelled safely through our 
skies. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) estimates that airline 
pilots use automated systems 90 percent of the time while flying.\54\ 
Meanwhile, on our roads from 2010 to 2017, crashes claimed the lives of 
approximately 275,000 road users.\55\ The Federal government, 
particularly the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), has 
experience in developing standards and implementing effective oversight 
of autonomous systems in transportation. While adaptation for governing 
AVs on roads is necessary, this is not an entirely new concept. The 
U.S. DOT would do well to coordinate with other departments and its own 
agencies, and make the best use of its past research, current 
regulations, and the latest technologies to set standards ensuring the 
safe introduction of AVs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \52\ U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Annual Passengers on 
All U.S. Schedules Airline Flights (Domestic & International) and 
Foreign Airline Flights to and from the United States, 2003-2017.
    \53\ Gardner, L., Southwest passenger dies in first U.S. airline 
fatality since 2009, April, 17, 2018, Politico.
    \54\ Federal Aviation Administration, Office of the Inspector 
General, Audit Report: Enhanced FAA Oversight Could Reduce Hazards 
Associated with Increased Use of Flight Deck Automation, Report Number 
AV-2016-013, Jan. 7, 2016.
    \55\ National Center for Statistics and Analysis. (2017). A 
Compilation of Motor Vehicle Crash Data from the Fatality Analysis 
Reporting System and the General Estimates System.(Traffic Safety Facts 
2015. Report No. DOT HS 812 384). Washington, D.C.: NHTSA. National 
Center for Statistics and Analysis. (2017, October). 2016 Fatal Motor 
Vehicle Crashes: Overview. (Traffic Safety Facts Research Note. Report 
No. DOT HS 812 456). Washington, D.C.: National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration. National Center for Statistics and Analysis. (2018, 
May). Early estimate of motor vehicle traffic fatalities for 2017 
(CrashStats Brief Statistical Summary. Report No. DOT HS 812 
542). Washington, D.C.: NHTSA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proper Government Oversight is Needed for the Safe Deployment 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.\56\ The law required the Federal 
Government to establish minimum vehicle safety performance standards to 
protect the public against ``unreasonable risk of accidents occurring 
as a result of the design, construction or performance of motor 
vehicles.'' \57\ While motor vehicles have changed dramatically since 
that time and will continue to do so in the future, the underlying 
premise of this crucial law and NHTSA's safety mission have not.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \56\-Pub. L. 89-563 (Sept. 9, 1966).
    \57\ Title 49, U.S.C. Sec. 30102.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Unfortunately, NHTSA has chosen to issue only ``voluntary 
guidelines'' for the development of AVs.\58\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \58\ NHTSA, Automated Driving Systems 2.0: A Vision for Safety 
(Sep. 12, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The AV START Act Fails to Ensure Public Safety
    Compounding NHTSA's inaction are the deep flaws of the AV START 
Act. Advocates opposes the bill in its current form as it falls well 
short of the oversight and accountability necessary to ensure public 
safety. The legislation unnecessarily takes aim at the current Federal 
regulatory scheme protecting those traveling on America's roads that 
has been in place for decades.
    Furthermore, for the Senate to fully consider all of the public 
safety implications associated with the mass deployment of AVs, the AV 
START Act should not move forward until the ongoing multiple 
investigations by the NTSB of the serious and fatal crashes involving 
AVs noted above are completed. Our Nation's foremost investigatory body 
has highly regarded expertise and will issue recommendations that 
should help guide Congress as it sets our Nation's first AV policy 
which will likely set the stage for years.
    We urge the Senate to adopt the following reasonable improvements 
to the bill, which will ensure public safety and industry 
accountability, while still allowing for the development and deployment 
of AVs:

   Reduce the Size and Scope of Exemptions: Section six of the 
        AV START Act will allow potentially millions of vehicles to be 
        deployed into the public domain that are exempt from existing 
        critical Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS). 
        Providing broad statutory exemptions from the FMVSS for AVs is 
        both unnecessary and unwise. There is already a statutory 
        process in place for manufacturers to seek an exemption from 
        the FMVSS. Moreover, Section 24404 of the Fixing America's 
        Surface Transportation (FAST) Act \59\ permits auto 
        manufacturers to test or evaluate an unlimited number of 
        vehicles exempt from one or more of the FMVSS.\60\ 
        Additionally, 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. No evidence has been presented to show that the 
        development and deployment of AVs requires wholesale exemptions 
        for an untold number of AVs from critical Federal safety 
        standards that are essential to protecting public safety.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \59\ Pub. L. 112-141 (Dec. 4, 2015), codified at 49 U.S.C. 
Sec. 30112(b)(10).
    \60\ Exempt vehicles under this provision may not be sold or resold 
to the public.

   Prohibit Crashworthiness and Occupant Protection Exemptions: 
        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.\61\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \61\ For example, removing the steering wheel should not eliminate 
the requirement to protect the occupant from injury using safety 
systems such as airbags.

   Strike Provision Allowing Vehicle Systems to be Turned Off: 
        Section seven of the AV START Act drastically alters current 
        Federal law which prohibits manufacturers from rendering safety 
        systems, such as the steering wheel and brake pedals, 
        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 unilaterally circumvent many of the existing 
        safety standards. Currently, automakers cannot turn off safety 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        systems without government oversight.

   Require Sufficient Documentation in NHTSA Submission: 
        Section nine 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 
        supports the mandatory submission of such information, this 
        provision as currently written only directs manufacturers to 
        ``describe'' their AV systems. In the absence of a legislative 
        directive to require that sufficient information and data are 
        included in the SER, manufacturers are permitted to continue 
        submitting slick marketing brochures such as those already 
        released by three manufacturers \62\ instead of providing data 
        and documentation that will allow the public and NHTSA to 
        accurately evaluate the safety of the technology.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \62\ Waymo, Waymo Safety Report: On the Road to Fully Self-Driving 
(Oct. 2017); General Motors, 2018 Self-Driving Safety Report (Jan. 
2018); Ford, A Matter of Trust--Ford's Approach to Developing Self-
Driving Vehicles (Aug. 2018).

   Provide for Adequate Consumer Information: The AV START Act 
        should ensure that consumers are given essential information 
        about an AV. 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. NHTSA should also be required to establish 
        a public website with basic safety information about AVs for 
        consumers and for use in safety research. This online database 
        would be similar to the safercar.gov website that NHTSA 
        maintains to inform the public about safety recalls applicable 
        to their vehicle. This 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, whether first-hand or 
        as a pre-owned vehicle, and will also allow NHTSA and other 
        research groups to perform independent evaluation of the 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        comparative safety performance of AV systems.

   Compel AVs to Capture Necessary Crash Data: The NTSB in 
        their investigation of the fatal Tesla crash in Florida noted 
        that event data recorders (EDRs) are not required nor would 
        current standards mandate the capturing of data necessary to 
        evaluate the performance of AVs. The AV START Act does not 
        require that this critical safety data generated by AVs will be 
        recorded, shared or even provided to NHTSA and the NTSB for 
        critical crash investigations. It is also essential that the 
        legislation require all crashes involving AVs be reported 
        immediately to NHTSA by manufacturers.

   Direct Final Rules for Minimum Performance Standards:

     Cybersecurity: 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. 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 AVs of all levels. Considering the recent record of 
            high-profile cyber-attacks,\63\ 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.\64\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \63\ Stacy Cowley, Equifax Breach Exposed Data From 2.5 Million 
More People Than First Disclosed, N.Y. Times, Oct. 3, 2017 at B2.
    \64\ Chester Dawson, The Dangers of the Hackable Car, Wall St. J, 
Sep. 17, 2017.

     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.\65\ 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 be alerted to re-
            engage, understand the situation, and 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.\66\ The ``Autopilot'' 
            was active for 37 minutes of the 41 minute trip and the 
            system detected hands on the steering wheel only 7 times 
            for a total of 25 seconds.\67\ The NTSB also found that 
            these problems are widespread across manufacturers with 
            similar systems.\68\ The AV START Act fails to address this 
            serious safety problem, yet technology to discern 
            distraction and provide alerts is already available. NHTSA 
            should be directed to establish a minimum performance 
            standard to ensure driver engagement throughout the trip.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \65\ Human Factors, Koppa, R.J., FHWA, Ch.3, Sec. 3.2.1 Perception-
Response Time.
    \66\ NTSB Tesla Crash Report.
    \67\ Id.
    \68\ Id.

     Electronics Systems: Motor vehicles and motor vehicle 
            equipment are powered and run by highly complex electronic 
            systems and will become even more so with the future 
            deployment of autonomous driving systems. 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.\69\ Similar to FAA requirements to 
            protect the electronics and their functions in aircraft 
            under any foreseeable operating condition,\70\ NHTSA should 
            require minimum performance standards for the electronics 
            in all motor vehicles, particularly AVs. However, the AV 
            START Act fails to direct NHTSA to develop and issue 
            performance standards for the electronics systems of modern 
            motor vehicles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \69\ General Motors, LLC, Receipt of Petition for Decision of 
Inconsequential Noncompliance, NHTSA, 79 FR 10226, Feb. 24, 2014.
    \70\ 14 CFR 25.1309.

     AV ``Vision Test'': 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 including pedestrians, bicyclists, wheelchair 
            users, 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 of 
            Transportation 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.

   Safety and Accessibility for People with Disabilities: The 
        long-term promise of AVs to improve mobility for those with 
        disabilities is significant. However, the AV START Act fails to 
        ensure safety and access to all members of the disability 
        community who have varying needs.

   Include Level 2 AVs: The AV START Act does not include 
        Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) Level 2 AVs, which 
        require a human driver to monitor their performance and be 
        available to take over the driving task when necessary, like 
        the Tesla vehicles which have been involved in several crashes. 
        During a September 12, 2017, hearing on the 2016 crash 
        conducted by the NTSB, deadly failures of Tesla's Level 2 
        ``Autopilot'' system were readily identified.\71\ The NTSB 
        found that similar problems also exist in other Level 2 AVs 
        across many manufacturers.\72\ In the near term, Level 2 AVs 
        will likely comprise a majority of the passenger vehicle AV 
        fleet. Proper safeguards to curb Tesla-like failures must be 
        put in place. Level 2 AVs should be subject to all safety 
        critical provisions in the AV START Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \71\ Id.
    \72\ Id.

   Do Not Preempt State Action in the Absence of Federal 
        Regulations: It is 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. Section three prohibits this state action.
U.S. DOT Requires Sufficient Funding and Authority to Properly Regulate 
        Vehicle Safety
    As emerging technologies are developed and deployed, the U.S. DOT 
is already facing and will continue to confront unique challenges which 
warrant additional tools and funding to protect against potentially 
catastrophic defects and failures. NHTSA should be granted imminent 
hazard authority to expedite the grounding of vehicles that the agency 
has identified as having a potentially dangerous, widespread problem or 
when it detects a cybersecurity threat that could lead to inordinate 
crashes, deaths and injuries. Additionally, because of the potential 
serious nature of software defects that could imperil safety in 
thousands of vehicles, the ability to levy enhanced penalties is 
essential. The unacceptable level of current 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.
    Today, 95 percent of transportation-related fatalities and 99 
percent of transportation injuries involve motor vehicles on our 
streets and highways.\73\ Yet, NHTSA receives only one percent of the 
overall DOT budget.\74\ NHTSA will be required to take on new 
significant responsibilities under the driverless car legislation. In 
order to efficiently execute all of these tasks, an office dedicated to 
AV safety should be established within NHTSA. The protection of public 
safety should not be compromised and progress should not be slowed 
because the agency does not have adequate technical expertise, 
organization, resources and funding to oversee the development and 
deployment of AVs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \73\ National Transportation Statistics 2015, U.S. DOT, RITA, BTS, 
Tables 2-1, and 2-2 (2017).
    \74\ Budget Highlights Fiscal Year 2018, U.S. DOT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Many Significant Obstacles and Uncertainties Remain Regarding the Safe 
        Deployment of Emerging Technologies
    AVs will be operating on public roads, therefore ensuring that our 
Nation's infrastructure can accommodate the safe and successful 
deployment of AVs is essential. ``Stand-alone'' AVs (those that will 
not communicate with other vehicles) will be limited by the capability 
of the on-board sensors and therefore, will largely suffer from the 
same types of limitations that afflict human drivers.
    With the advent of AVs, more emphasis must be placed on consistency 
of road design, and consideration must be given to the effects 
variations can have on autonomous technology. While a human driver can 
see a unique situation and interpret those circumstances fairly well, 
an AV may not be able to do the same. As the Senate Committee on 
Environment and Public Works Ranking Member Senator Tom Carper (D-DE) 
discussed during the June 13, 2018 hearing, ``Innovation and America's 
Infrastructure: Examining the Effects of Emerging Autonomous 
Technologies on America's Roads and Bridges'', research has already 
shown that minor distortion of a sign can result in havoc for AVs, 
causing stop signs to be interpreted as speed limit signs, a confusion 
which can have serious and even potentially fatal results.\75\ 
Additionally, roadway deterioration and delayed repair, which are 
common occurrences on existing infrastructure, will have a negative 
impact on AV operation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \75\ Evtimov, Ivan & Eykholt, Kevin & Fernandes, Earlence & Kohno, 
Tadayoshi & Li, Bo & Prakash, Atul & Rahmati, Amir & Song, Dawn. 
(2017). Robust Physical-World Attacks on Machine Learning Models.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Claims made by the AV industry that the introduction of these 
vehicles will reduce congestion, improve environmental quality, and 
advance transportation efficiency may amount to nothing more than 
fanciful theories.\76\ Instead, AVs may bring about so-called ``hyper-
commuters'' who work from their vehicles on long commutes thereby 
making living further from offices and/or city centers more palatable. 
Likewise, the possibility of empty AVs adding substantial miles on the 
roads as they re-position autonomously after dropping off riders could 
undermine many of the benefits claimed.\77\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \76\ Self-Driving Coalition For Safe Streets, FAQs.
    \77\ Bliss, L., Even Shared Autonomous Vehicles Could Spell Traffic 
Disaster, Citylab, May 10, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Connected Vehicle Technology Has the Potential to Augment Safety
    Connected vehicle technologies allow a vehicle to send and receive 
communications with other vehicles (vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V)) and the 
infrastructure (vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I)). These messages can 
relay information ranging from the relative location and direction of 
motion of other vehicles to warning messages that traffic lights are 
about to change or weather conditions are soon to be encountered. These 
systems will likely help fill in gaps in the performance of AVs. For 
instance, V2V communication can provide safety applications for 
advanced driver-assistance systems (ADAS) such as Left Turn Assist 
(LTA) and Forward Collision Warning (FCW). LTA warns drivers to the 
presence of oncoming, opposite-direction traffic when attempting a left 
turn. FCW warns drivers of stopped, slowing or slower vehicles ahead. 
In a 2017 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to require V2V technology, 
NHTSA noted that ``[b]ecause of V2V's ability to provide vehicles with 
information beyond a vehicle's range of perception, V2V is the only 
source of information that supports applications like Intersection 
Movement Assist (IMA) and Left Turn Assist (LTA). These applications 
have the unique ability to address intersection crashes, which are 
among the most deadly crashes that drivers currently face in the U.S.'' 
\78\ Advocates filed comments in support of requiring V2V because of 
the technology's ability to help prevent serious crashes.\79\ However, 
despite the identified safety benefits of V2V technology, this rule is 
languishing at DOT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \78\ NHTSA, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; V2V 
Communications, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), Jan. 12, 2017, 82 
FR 3854.
    \79\ Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, Comments, NHTSA-2016-
0126-0473, May 19, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Autonomous and Connected Trucks
    The emergence of experimental autonomous commercial motor vehicles 
(ACMVs) and their interactions with conventional motor vehicles demand 
an enhanced level of Federal and state oversight to ensure public 
safety. It is imperative that CMVs be regulated. For the foreseeable 
future, regardless of their level of automation, ACMVs must have an 
operator with a valid commercial driver's license in the vehicle at all 
times. In addition, critical safety regulations administered by the 
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) such as those that 
apply to driver hours-of-service, licensing requirements, entry level 
training and medical qualifications must not be weakened. Advocates 
outlined safety concerns and recommendations for ACMVs in a September 
12, 2017 letter to the Committee, which is attached.
    Advocates is also concerned with a number of issues presented by 
truck platooning. In order to achieve any efficiency benefits, the 
trucks in a platoon must operate much closer together than is current 
practice. This presents very real safety concerns. Issues such as 
vehicle maintenance may hamper the ability to execute these types of 
operations outside of controlled experiments. In real-world scenarios, 
realities of brake and tire maintenance as well as vehicle loading can 
all affect handling capability. Currently, one in five heavy vehicles 
inspected at the roadside are placed out of service for vehicle issues, 
a large number of which are related to brakes or tires.\80\ Moreover, 
until the first vehicle in a platoon is operated by a verifiably safe 
automated driving system, the safety of the platoon relies on the lead 
human driver. There are also questions concerning the interaction of 
platoons with other road users, including the ability of other vehicles 
to pass a platoon safely or navigate between them if need be in order 
to reach an exit or enter a road safely.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \80\ FMCSA, Roadside Inspection Out of Service Rates (Jul. 27, 
2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rural Considerations
    There are many unique transportation characteristics present in 
rural America that will affect the performance of, and access to, 
emerging technologies. Necessary infrastructure such as broadband 
connectivity and up-to-date mapping may be limited. Maintenance of 
roadway markings, signs and pavement may vary. Unpaved roads in rural 
areas could increase sensor fouling which could degrade or prevent safe 
operation. More consideration must be given to this complex issue 
before AVs can be deployed on a large scale.
Conclusion
    Every day on average 100 people are killed and 6,500 more are 
injured in motor vehicle crashes in the U.S. Advocates has consistently 
promoted technology to reduce this unacceptable death and injury toll. 
So too, does Advocates proffer that automated technology has the 
potential to make significant and lasting reductions to this public 
health epidemic. However, AVs should not be prematurely deployed and 
sold before they can be safely operated on public roads and without 
commonsense government oversight in place. Serious and fatal crashes 
involving AVs which have already occurred reveal significant flaws in 
this still developing technology. In sum, the path to the safe and 
effective introduction of AVs requires government oversight, 
transparency and a comprehensive regulatory framework in all aspects 
from vehicle standards to infrastructure design.

    Senator Gardner. Thank you, and again the Committee thanks 
you.
    The hearing is adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 11:42 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                                  [all]