[Congressional Record Volume 162, Number 142 (Tuesday, September 20, 2016)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1310]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




              H.R. 3471, THE VETERANS MOBILITY SAFETY ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. VERN BUCHANAN

                               of florida

                    in the house of representatives

                      Tuesday, September 20, 2016

  Mr. BUCHANAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my concerns about 
certain aspects of the Veterans Mobility Safety Act (H.R. 3471) as 
reported from the Veterans Affairs Committee. Thousands of disabled 
veterans each month are provided exterior vehicle lifts for their 
motorized scooters or wheelchairs and/or fully modified vehicles, 
depending on the degree of their mobility limitations. These serve as 
essential tools to ensuring that veterans have the freedom they deserve 
and help them live their lives to the fullest. While it is important to 
ensure that vehicles are operating safely after they receive VA-funded 
accessibility benefits, this legislation, which creates a new 
regulatory regime for the VA to implement, would benefit from some 
minor improvements.
  I am pleased that the Veterans Affairs Committee stated that in 
approving this legislation, Congress intends for the VA to preserve 
access to residential installations and service of exterior vehicle 
lifts, which is essential for our veterans. Veterans with limited 
mobility, as opposed to no mobility, often have an exterior lift 
installed on their vehicles via a standard trailer hitch that allows 
for the transport of a scooter or power wheelchair. Currently, the vast 
majority of these lifts are installed in the driveway of the veteran's 
home in as little as 30 minutes, as opposed to an equipment dealer's 
place of business, which is far more convenient for veterans and their 
families. These simple modifications significantly differ from 
modifications to the structure or controls of a vehicle, which are not 
done at a veteran's home and can take days or even weeks.
  And while the bill would permit manufacturers of vehicle lifts to 
continue to certify dealers and their employees as compliant with 
safety requirements, I would like to have seen a more robust conflict 
of interest provision related to the use of a third party certification 
organization for the new safety standards. The bill should also have 
explained more clearly how the new regulatory regime should 
differentiate between simple modifications, such as the addition of an 
exterior lift, and complex modifications, which affect the structure 
and/or operation of the vehicle. These simple changes to the bill could 
increase veterans' safety while ensuring against unintended 
consequences that could limit choices and access for our veterans.
  H.R. 3471 authorizes the VA to allow third party organizations (other 
than manufacturers) to certify that vendors are meeting the standards 
created by this bill but only instructs VA to ``minimize'' conflicts of 
interest. I am troubled because even a ``minimal'' conflict of interest 
could give segments of the automotive adaptive market a competitive 
advantage. I am particularly concerned that a trade group, which is 
dominated by and representative of a fraction of the industry, is 
seeking to become a certifying organization and could be in a position 
to certify (or not) the competitors of its members. Accordingly, I am 
pleased that the Committee Report notes that Congress ``expects VA to 
take all appropriate steps to minimize the potential for conflicts of 
interest, particularly if a third party organization who stands to 
unreasonably gain from designating quality standards high enough so 
that only the organization itself can certify providers of modification 
equipment is selected as a certifying body.'

                          ____________________