[Senate Report 113-255]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
113th Congress Report
SENATE
2d Session 113-255
_______________________________________________________________________
Calendar No. 563
DRIVER PRIVACY ACT
__________
R E P O R T
of the
COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
on
S. 1925
September 15, 2014.--Ordered to be printed
SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
one hundred thirteenth congress
second session
JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia, Chairman
BARBARA BOXER, California JOHN THUNE, South Dakota
BILL NELSON, Florida ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi
MARIA CANTWELL, Washington ROY BLUNT, Missouri
MARK PRYOR, Arkansas MARCO RUBIO, Florida
CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri KELLY AYOTTE, New Hampshire
AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota DEAN HELLER, Nevada
MARK BEGICH, Alaska DANIEL COATS, Indiana
RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut TIM SCOTT, South Carolina
BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii TED CRUZ, Texas
ED MARKEY, Massachusetts DEB FISCHER, Nebraska
CORY BOOKER, New Jersey RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin
JOHN WALSH, Montana
Ellen Doneski, Staff Director
John Williams, General Counsel
David Schwietert, Republican Staff Director
Nick Rossi, Republican Deputy Staff Director
Rebecca Seidel, Republican General Counsel
Calendar No. 563
113th Congress Report
SENATE
2d Session 113-255
======================================================================
DRIVER PRIVACY ACT
_______
September 15, 2014.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Rockefeller, from the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation, submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany S. 1925]
The Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, to
which was referred the bill (S. 1925) to limit the retrieval of
data from vehicle event data recorders, having considered the
same, reports favorably thereon with an amendment (in the
nature of a substitute) and recommends that the bill (as
amended) do pass.
Purpose of the Bill
The purpose of S. 1925, the Driver Privacy Act, is to
establish limitations on data retrieval from vehicle event data
recorders (EDRs). Under current law, there are no Federal
standards for ownership or privacy of this data. The bill would
establish that the owner or lessee of the vehicle owns the data
contained within the EDR, and would create specific
circumstances under which the data can be accessed by entities
other than the owner or lessee.
Background and Needs
EDRs capture information about a vehicle just before and at
the time of a crash. While the EDR records continuously as a
vehicle travels, the data is only stored if a major event
occurs, such as a crash or airbag deployment. The data in these
recorders is used for crash reconstruction and is also used by
the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to
conduct investigations into potential vehicle defects. While
NHTSA currently enforces no rule requiring installation of EDRs
on new light vehicles, the agency estimates that vehicle
manufacturers voluntarily install these devices on
approximately 96 percent of these new vehicles.
Summary of Provisions
The Driver Privacy Act would establish the owner or lessee
of a vehicle as the owner of data collected and stored on the
vehicle's EDR. The bill would limit access to that data by
anyone other than the owner or lessee of the vehicle, and it
would enumerate the specific circumstances under which the data
could be accessed. In addition, the bill would call on NHTSA to
conduct a study for submission to Congress on the appropriate
amount of time that EDRs should capture data before and after a
crash and, within two years after the study's completion, issue
regulations establishing the appropriate time period.
Legislative History
Senator Hoeven introduced S. 1925 on January 14, 2014, with
Senator Klobuchar and 16 other cosponsors. On April 9, 2014, in
an open Executive Session, the Committee considered the bill
with an amendment in the nature of a substitute and reported S.
1925 favorably by voice vote. The amendment clarified the
description of the data to which the bill refers, made clear
that the requirements of section 2 would apply to ``motor
vehicles'' not just ``passenger motor vehicles,'' removed a
limitation on data retrieval that would have prevented such
retrieval without data having been recorded, provided for two
years for NHTSA's rulemaking, and made other minor changes.
Estimated Costs
In accordance with paragraph 11(a) of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate and section 403 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee provides the
following cost estimate, prepared by the Congressional Budget
Office:
S. 1925--Driver Privacy Act
Based on information from the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA), CBO estimates that implementing
S. 1925 would cost about $1 million over the 2015-2019 period,
assuming the availability of appropriated funds. Enacting S.
1925 would not affect direct spending or revenues; therefore,
pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply.
S. 1925 would establish that any data collected by event
data recorders (EDRs) in motor vehicles are owned by the owner
or lessee of the vehicle and would set broad conditions under
which such data could be retrieved by others for purposes such
as judicial proceedings, investigations, and traffic safety
research. The bill also would require NHTSA to complete a study
and a rulemaking about the data collected by EDRs. Based on
information from NHTSA, CBO estimates that work would take
about 18 months to complete and would require two or three
staff members.
S. 1925 contains no intergovernmental mandates as defined
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) and would impose no
costs on state, local, or tribal governments.
By requiring NHTSA to issue regulations that establish the
appropriate period for EDRs to capture and record information,
the bill could impose a mandate on automobile manufacturers if
those regulations require changes in the design of motor
vehicles. Because the cost of that mandate would depend on
future regulations, CBO cannot determine whether the aggregate
cost of the mandates would exceed the annual threshold
established in UMRA ($152 million in 2014, adjusted annually
for inflation).
The CBO staff contacts for this estimate are Sarah Puro
(for federal costs) and Amy Petz (for the private-sector
impact). The estimate was approved by Theresa Gullo, Deputy
Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.
Regulatory Impact
In accordance with paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee provides the
following evaluation of the regulatory impact of the
legislation, as reported:
number of persons covered
The legislation would apply to vehicle owners and lessees
and to auto manufacturers that build vehicles with EDRs. The
regulations would revise existing regulations and would not
impact any additional entities.
economic impact
This legislation is not expected to have an adverse
economic impact on the Nation.
privacy
S. 1925 would not have a negative impact on the personal
privacy of individuals.
paperwork
The Committee does not anticipate a major increase in
paperwork requirements for private individuals or businesses
due to S. 1925. The bill would call on NHTSA to conduct a study
and issue regulations regarding the appropriate amount of time
for an EDR to record a crash.
Congressionally Directed Spending
In compliance with paragraph 4(b) of rule XLIV of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee provides that no
provisions contained in the bill, as reported, meet the
definition of congressionally directed spending items under the
rule.
Section-by-Section Analysis
Section 1. Short title.
Section 1 would establish the title of the bill, the Driver
Privacy Act.
Section 2. Limitations on data retrieval from vehicle event data
recorders.
Section 2(a) would establish the owner of the vehicle - or,
in the case of a leased vehicle, the lessor - as the owner of
the data contained in an EDR.
Section 2(b) would establish that data in an EDR could not
be retrieved by anyone other than the owner or lessee unless
one of five conditions is met: a court authorizes retrieval;
the owner or lessee provides written or electronic consent; the
data is retrieved pursuant to an investigation or inspection by
NHTSA and no personally identifiable information is disclosed,
except that the vehicle identification number may be disclosed
to the certifying manufacturer; the data is retrieved for the
purpose of determining the need for, or facilitating, an
emergency medical response; or the data is retrieved for
traffic safety research and no personally identifiable
information or vehicle identification number is disclosed.
Section 3. Vehicle event data recorder study.
Section 3 would require NHTSA to conduct a study to
determine the amount of time that EDRs should record vehicle-
related data in conjunction with an event in order to provide
sufficient information to investigate the cause of motor
vehicle crashes. NHTSA would be required to submit that study
to Congress and, within two years, issue regulations
establishing the amount of time before and after a crash that
EDRs must record vehicle-related data.
Changes in Existing Law
In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee states that the
bill as reported would make no change to existing law.