►
From YouTube: House Standing Committee on Transportation (2-28-23)
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
We
want
to
welcome
everyone
to
the
third
meeting
of
the
house,
Transportation
committee,
for
this
session
and
it's
time
for
us
to
begin
this
meeting
so
I'd.
Ask
you
to
please
turn
off
your
cell
phones
turn
them
on
vibrate
and
take
your
seats.
B
A
Very
good
welcome
we're
glad
to
have
you
and
any
other
members,
if
not
Madam
Secretary.
If
you
could,
please
call
the
roll.
A
E
C
F
G
B
A
Thank
you,
Mr
chairman
John
Blanton,
with
the
92nd
district
and
I'll,
allow
you
had
to
introduce
himself
I'm.
B
B
A
You
Mr
chairman
members
of
the
committee
for
allow
me
to
be
here
today
to
present
this
very
important
piece
of
legislation
for
our
Highway
construction
workers.
A
A
He
tragically
lost
his
Young
Life
along
with
a
another
friend
that
day
and
his
name
is
Jared
Helton,
a
fine
young
man
in
our
community,
what
a
great
loss
it
was
to
his
family
and
to
each
of
us,
and
so
when
his
parents
contacted
me,
I
sought
out
Transportation
as
to
what
we
could
do
to
improve
our
work
zones
if
they
had
any
suggestions
or
ideas
of
how
we
may
make
it
safer
for
our
Highway
workers
to
work
to
do
their
job
and
feel
safe
in
doing
so,
and
transportation
had
already
been
working
on
a
lot
of
issues
of
how
we
may
go
about
something
like
this
prior
to
me
even
contacted
them,
and
so
with
that
they
they
came
up
with
this
I
filed
this
bill
a
couple
years
ago,
for
the
first
time,
Chad
contacted
me
with
the
highway
contractors
back
this
past
summer
and
said:
hey,
that's
a
good
bill.
A
A
As
a
matter
of
fact,
just
recently,
we
had
another
Highway
contractor
here
in
Kentucky.
He
loses
life
at
during
his
work
on
a
road
construction
project.
So
what
this
bill
does
is,
it
would
install
it
would
put
in
place
what
is
known
as
automated
speed
enforcement
devices
or
speed
cameras,
and
these
speed
cameras
would
be
put
into
place
on
a
pilot
project,
beginning
in
January
24,
going
through
the
end
of
25
and.
A
The
the
cameras
would
take
a
picture
of
the
driver
and
take
a
picture
of
the
of
the
license
plate
as
well,
and
they
would
be
signage
before
you
enter
into
these
work
zones,
indicating
that
these
cameras
were
present.
That
is
then
reported
to
the
transportation
cabinet
to
for
a
a
a
fine
to
be
issued
through
the
transportation
cabinet
for
75
dollars.
A
A
The
committee
sub
would
say
that
these
would
only
operate
or
be
enforceable
when
there's
actually
workers
in
the
work
Zone.
That
was
an
issue
some
people
wanted
to
see
in
there.
It
does
give
a
little
bit
of
latitude
for
for
Speed
in
in
the
legislation.
It
provides
a
a
an
appeal
process
for
those
that
feel
like
that
they
were
not
the
ones
or
or
they
weren't
speeding.
It
does
provide
a
appeal
process.
Mush.
F
Hodgson
question
mentioning
your
committee
sub
language
there
about.
When
there
are
workers
a
bona
fide
workers
present,
it
would
not
be
applicable.
How
would
the
motorists
know
that
and
what
is
the
motorist
defense
if
they
allege
that
there
was
no
worker
present
when
they
were
issued,
the
citation
by
the
computer.
A
First
of
all,
the
motorists
would
not
know
that
when
they
first
enter
in,
so
it's
it's
very
possible
and
probable
that
a
a
photograph
would
be
captured.
However,
the
transportation
cabinet
would
be
communicating
with
the
highway
contractors
to
know
what
hours
of
the
day
and,
if
there's
any
citations
outside
of
that
time,
issued
that
workers
were
in
the
work
Zone.
Then
there
would
be
no
citations
sent
to
those
drivers.
A
E
H
J
All
right,
Jason,
sawal,
Deputy,
State,
Higher
engineer
for
kytc,
so
the
language
in
the
bill
asked
us
to
establish
a
pilot
and
that
there's
several
different
ways
that
you
could
do
it
for
a
pilot.
We
haven't
really
determined
yet
whether
it
would
be
better
to
contract
it
out
or
to
you
know,
purchase
or
lease
that
equipment.
That's
going
to
be
kind
of
part
of
the
analysis
as
we
work
through
the
process,
but
those
services
are
available.
J
But
what
I
can
say
is
that
the
intention
is
for
the
cabinet
to
have
a
hand
in
ensuring
that
the
any
civil
penalties
that
are
issued
are
done
in
accordance
with
the
legislation.
So,
even
if
the
the
like
the
radar,
the
equipment
part
was
done
by
a
third
party,
kytc
would
still
be
looking
at
how
to
confirm
those
great.
B
B
B
B
K
B
B
A
Representative
Bray,
would
you
please
introduce
yourself
and
your
guests.
A
Welcome
and
I
understand
there
is
a
proposed
committee
substitute
on
this
member
measure
in
the
members
packet
by
representative
Upchurch.
Do
I
hear
motion
on
this
Commission.
A
S,
oh
there's
a
favor.
All
those
opposed
now
committee
sub
is
adopted.
Getting
a
cart
before
the
horse
representative
Bray
you
and
your
guest
May
proceed.
M
Thank
you
Mr
chairman,
so
House
Bill
135
is
a
bill
that
deals
with
autonomous
vehicles.
I
first
become
interested
in
the
technology
back
when
my
wife
bought
a
Subaru
ascent
and
that
thing's
got
Lane,
assist
and
adaptive
cruise
control.
So
when
you
hit
the
interstate,
you
can
set
your
cruise
control,
it
keeps
up
with
the
traffic
in
front
or
behind
of
you
through
radar,
and
then
the
the
lane
assist
uses
cameras
to
keep
it
in
the
lane
so
effectively
through
a
commercial
or
a
vehicle
for
sale
on
the
market.
M
Now
I
was
exposed
to
some
form
of
autonomous
vehicle,
so
in
tracking
with
that
and
making
the
hour
and
a
half
drive
back
and
forth
to
Frankfurt
every
day
you
I
started
looking
into
the
actual
technology
and
looking
at
where
this
was
going
in
the
future,
and
so
what
what
you
have
before
you
is
a
bill
on
just
that
it
would
provide
the
regulatory
framework
for
autonomous
vehicles
in
in
Kentucky.
M
M
F
Sir,
in
the
event
that
one
of
these
autonomous
vehicles,
which
I
understand,
are
substantially
better
technology
than
even
Tesla,
self-driving
Vehicles,
if
they
were
carrying
a
controlled
substance,
for
instance,
a
Narcotics
delivery,
you
know
Interstate
trafficking
and
people
who
was
liable
for
that
crime.
If
there's
no
driver
to
arrest.
N
Thank
you,
representative
and
excellent
question
on
that.
The
way
the
the
bill
would
work
and
the
way
generally
the
Frameworks
would
work
is
we
would
precede
exactly
the
inquiry
would
be
exactly
as
it
would
simply
without
a
driver
presence.
N
So
the
examination
of
the
facts
would
would
yield
the
determination
as
to
whether
the
owner
of
the
autonomous
vehicle
was
responsible
for
that
or
if,
in
some
some
case
those
substances
were
put
on
without
knowledge,
then,
presumably
that
would
proceed
that
way
and
simply
just
would
not
have
a
driver
as
part
of
the
inquiry
there.
The
the
bill
assigns
ownership
accountability
in
all
of
the
for
compliance
with
the
motor
vehicle
and
traffic
laws.
G
Thank
you
Mr
chair,
and
that
was
one
of
my
questions
too.
I
appreciate
that
from
representative,
maybe
because
I'm
just
old
I'm
a
little
hesitant
about
some
of
this
so
and
that's
that's,
okay
to
be
old,
but
in
conditions
like
weather
technology
work
and
not
working.
Sometimes
I'm
driving
and
I
lose
contact
with
cell
phone
things
of
that
nature,
or
even
potentially,
could
these
trucks
be
carrying
chemicals
that
are
very
dangerous
and
nobody
there
to
monitor
that
I'm
just
concerned
with
the
safety
piece
of
that
I
understand.
G
I
G
That
how
we're
going
to
ensure
that,
because
I
will
tell
you
I,
did
read
one
report
that
said
these
type
of
vehicles
have
a
higher
rate
of
accidents
than
those
with
somebody
in
them
per
million
miles.
However,
the
good
side
of
that
they
had
fewer
injuries,
so
there's
a
good
there's,
a
plus
a
negative
on
that.
So
could
you
address
some
of
that?
Please
absolutely.
N
Representative,
thank
you
so
much
for
the
question
to
the
first
part,
with
respect
to
weather
the
the
primary
Concept
in
full,
fully
autonomous
vehicles,
where
there's
no
expectation
for
a
human
to
perform
any
aspects
of
the
driving
task,
so
not
driver
assist
but
really
fully
autonomous.
The
concept
is
known
as
an
OP,
an
operational
design
domain,
so
the
parameters
through
which
the
autonomous
vehicle
is
engineered
to
operate,
and
that
includes
considerations
regarding
weather.
So
so
as
it
currently
stands.
N
Autonomous
vehicles,
where
we're
seeing
deployments
in
Texas
and
New
Mexico
Arizona
California
Florida,
Etc
that
odd
that
operational
design
domain
May
exclude
operating
in
certain
kinds
of
weather.
It
simply
won't
won't
operate
until
the
engineering
and
the
testing,
and
the
validation
has
proven
that
to
be
the
case.
N
Oh
and
on
the
safety
point,
if
I,
if
I
may
sir,
the
the
fundamental
issue
that
autonomous
vehicles
are
coming
to
address-
and
this
has
been
the
impetus
for
over
a
decade
now-
is
the
plain
fact-
that's
been
reaffirmed
over
and
over
again
that
U.S
department
of
transportation
is
shown
and
and
again
reaffirmed
and
very
recently,
that
the
the
overwhelming
contributor
to
collisions
accidents,
fatalities
and
injuries
in
the
roadways
is
human
impairment
in
all
forms,
intoxication
distraction,
fatigue,
Etc
human
impairment
is,
is
responsible
for
that,
and
autonomous
vehicles
fundamentally
will
improve
safety.
N
The
numbers
continue
to
get
worse
and
worse
the
tragedy
in
our
roadways.
There
are
43
000
fatalities
in
2021,
and
it's
looking
like
it's
going
to
be
worse
when
they
have
all
the
information
in
2022,
so
in
that
sense,
they're
going
to
make
the
road
safer,
and
on
top
of
that,
the
data
itself
I
think
I
may
be
familiar
with
the
study
that
you
mentioned,
which
is
based
on
much
older
data,
and
there
was
some
statistical
issue
with
that.
N
We've
seen
it
come
up
a
couple
of
times
the
data
that
the
U.S
the
federal
government
is
collecting
on
AV
performance
that
was
is
required
for
every
AV
developer
to
submit
is
showing
an
incredible
safety
record
tens
of
millions
of
miles
on
the
road
with
very
few
of
any
collisions
that
result
in
even
a
you
know,
any
severe
injury
of
any
kind.
It's
just
minor
collisions,
and
on
top
of
that,
the
indications
show
that
it's
the
result
primarily
again
of
human
behavior.
P
I'm
sitting
here,
looking
through
this
and
I,
do
have
some
concerns
here.
I've
been
on
Transportation
committees
since
I
come
into
office
five
years
ago.
I
understand
the
necessity
and
the
need
that
we
need
to
get
this
going.
So
I
am
for
this,
but
I
do
have
some
concerns
if,
if
I'm
hit
by
an
autonomous
vehicle
who's
liable,
who
do
I
go
to
do
I
go
to
the
manufacturer,
do
I
go
to
the
owner
or
you
know
how
do
I
get
my
car
fixed?
P
What
about
my
medical
bills
and
and
things
of
that
nature,
because
I
I
know
that
you
know
we're
in
no
fault
state
which
basically
just
requires
everybody
to
have
insurance,
but
you
know
you've
got
a
sixty
thousand
dollar
car
out
there
you
run
into
it
and
you've
got
to
go
against
I,
don't
want
to
call
in
company
names,
but
the
manufacturer
I
mean
I'm
very
well
aware
that
could
be
hundreds
of
thousands
of
dollars
just
to
get
into
that
suit
for
a
50,
60
000
car.
How?
P
N
Representative,
thank
you
so
much
for
the
question.
It's
an
important
one.
What
the
legislation-
and
this
particular
bill,
as
well
as
legislation
around
the
country
is
looking
to
do,
is-
is
assign
clear
accountability
without
prejudging
liability
and
I.
Think
that's
what
we
have
to
focus
on
again.
The
context
is
trying
to
make
the
roads
safer
across
the
board,
so
these
collisions
go
down
and
in
fact,
widespread
deployment
of
AVS
is
expected
to
ultimately
reduce
significantly.
N
The
instances
you're
describing
the
bill
does
talk
about
the
owner
being
responsible
for
exclusively
for
the
compliance
with
traffic
laws.
There's
a
minimum
insurance
which
we've
engaged
with
stakeholders
to
address
of
of
a
million
dollars
with
a
financial
responsibility
that
has
to
be
satisfied
for
the
transportation
cabinet,
so
there's
an
entity,
a
person,
that's
operating
and
owning
the
vehicles
that
has
to
work
through
those
Provisions.
So
all
of
that
creates
this
accountability.
N
But
again
in
those
types
of
situations
we
don't
want
to
prejudge
liability
and
the
bill
does
not
disturb
in
any
way
the
existing
approach
to
liability
in
the
Commonwealth.
It
doesn't
touch
any
of
that,
certainly,
and
what
we're
not
looking
to
do
is
put
our
thumb
on
the
scale
either
way
we
want
to
maintain
the
existing
regime
while
providing
for
Clear
accountability.
M
And
within
the
committee
sub,
one
of
the
issues
that
was
kind
of
brought
to
our
attention
from
the
trial
attorneys
was
just
to
your
question.
Who
do
you
sue?
So
we
did
clarify
that
the
owner
of
the
vehicle
is
the
operator,
the
owner
of
the
V,
and
we
increase
the
minimum
insurance
requirements,
like
Ariel,
said
to
a
million
dollars.
P
Okay,
if
you
only
indulge
me
Mr,
Speaker
and
I-
do
appreciate
that
Josh
representative
Bray
we've
talked
about
this
and
we're
going
to
continue
this
discussion,
but
I
I
still
think
there's
some
ways
that,
depending
on
who
the
insurance
company
is
and
who
they
are,
where
they're
going
to
address
that
blame
and
it
could
get
into
very
high
litigation
costs,
so
I
think
we
may
need
to
dive
a
little
deeper
into
that,
maybe
not
being
specific
to
that
point,
but
at
least
open
up
make
it
clear
the
direction
you
go
and
how
you
get
there.
P
Just
for
that.
To
be
honest,
my
son-in-law's
personal
injury
attorney.
He
looked
it
over
and
he
said
you
got
a
mess
on
your
hands
because
I
don't
know
how
you
do
it
and
he
he
didn't
talk
bad
about
it.
He
said
I
can't
tell
you
to
vote
for
it
or
against
it.
So
people
know
my
history
here
so
I
just
want
to
clarify
that
I
just
wanted
to
be
fair
to
all
we.
P
We
need
this
bill,
but
we
also
got
to
be
fair
to
our
constituents
that
they
are
covered
and
that
they
will
be
taken
care
of
too
and
they're,
not
less
left
at
a
high
cost
disadvantage,
so
just
to
clarify
My
reasonings
for
that
and
and
and
and
let
you
know
but
I
appreciate
you
and
I
appreciate
the
chair,
Mr
chair.
Thank
you.
Q
First,
I
have
a
question:
what
type
of
vehicles
does
this
legislation?
Is
it
going
to
particularly
apply
to.
N
The
legislation
approaches
the
issue
of
autonomous
vehicle
technology
holistically,
so
we're
seeing
across
the
country
and
frankly,
across
the
world
deployments
of
of
Av
technology
and
anywhere
from
light
duty,
Vehicles,
medium
duty,
heavy
duty
as
well
as
Last,
Mile,
low-speed,
electric
delivery
vehicles
with
no
with
nobody
inside
at
all,
just
groceries
and
things
like
that.
So
the
technology,
the
bill,
is
able
to
accommodate
all
use
cases
while
maintaining
and
ensuring
a
safety
regime
that
is
fundamental
to
the
entire
construct
and
that's
really
three
pillars.
N
If
I
may
just
take
just
a
moment
on
that,
AV
technology
under
this
bill
cannot
be
deployed
in
any
way
unless
it
meets
three
Central
pillars
among
other
requirements.
First
and
foremost,
an
autonomous
vehicle
must
be
able
to
comply
with
all
state
and
local
traffic
laws
and
rules
of
the
road.
If
you
can't
do
that,
it
can't
be
on
the
road.
Q
Thank
you
I
appreciate
that
explanation,
that
that
was
definitely
something
that
was
very
helpful.
So
so
you
did
say
that
it
would
apply
to
commercial
vehicles
moving
for
eight
things
of
that
nature.
Would
this
apply
to
Vehicles
such
as
coal
trucks.
I
N
Would
apply
to
those
Tech
to
all
use
cases
as
as
we
look
at
it,
the
current
deployments
are
focused
on
ride
hail
and
on
Trucking
in
in
Texas
and
in
those
contexts.
I
think
it's
intended
to
accommodate
all
use
cases
over
time.
Q
Oh,
that
often
at
home
will
have
what
they
call
weigh
stations
so
that
we
have
trucks
and
I'm
sure
it's
not
just
for
call
tracks.
It's
just
I'm
Eastern
Kentucky
and,
of
course,
we
hawk
hole.
So
would
these
vehicles
be
capable
of
pulling
over
at
weigh
stations
and
and
being
weighed
to
make
sure
that
they
have
the
proper
weight
on
the
highways,
because
I
too,
am
an
attorney
and
a
lot
of
times?
Q
What
we
see
is
that
the
overloaded
Freight
vehicles
are
the
ones
that
cause
the
most
damage,
even
if
even
if
the
injury,
even
if
the
accidents
and
the
injuries
are
fewer
because
of
the
automation,
if
these
are
vehicles
that
are
going
to
be
hauling,
you
know
a
lot
of
weight.
You
know
those
are
the
ones
that
obviously
most
of
the
time
when,
unfortunately,
something
does
go
wrong.
That's
when
the
most
damage
occurs.
N
Well,
thank
you
so
much
for
the
question
the
opportunity
to
answer
that,
because
it
is
so
fundamental
to
the
industry's
focus
on
safety.
There
have
been
discussions
for
for
two
years
and
actually
culminated
just
recently
and
happy
to
follow
up
with
with
further
information
discussions
between
the
autonomous
vehicle
industry,
the
commercial
vehicle
safety
Alliance
and
the
Federal
Motor
Carrier
safety
administration
to
address
precisely
that
enhance
pre-trip
inspections
where
they're
they're
at
some
point
in
time
there
may
not
be
a
driver.
So
it's
going
to
be
an
enhanced
pre-trip
inspection.
N
How
do
we
address
weigh
stations
that's
being
addressed
through
certain
technologies
that
will
transmit
information
and
all
the
requirements?
The
key
thing
is
all
of
that.
Those
requirements
remain
in
place,
but
they
may
adapt
to
the
satisfaction
and
only
to
the
satisfaction
of
the
appropriate
regulators
and
implementers
of
those
protocols
and
that's
being
worked
out
and
maybe
in
the
coming
days,
they'll
I
believe
they'll
be
an
issue
even
addressing
warning
triangles
the
deployment
of
those.
N
So
all
of
that's
being
has
been
worked
out
and
is
about
to
be
worked
out
and
so
we're
confident
that
that
we'll
continue
the
the
elevated
safety
issues
that
you're
noting.
R
Thank
you
chairman.
Thank
you
for
this
conversation.
I
have
two
questions.
If
I
may,
the
first
is
on
the
second
page
here
under
section
one
subsection,
five
human
driver
means
a
natural
person
in
the
vehicle
with
a
valid
license
to
operate
a
motor
vehicle.
Does
that
mean
that
if
this
was
say
a
long-haul
truck
that
the
human
being
would
not
need
a
CDL.
N
Representative
thanks,
thank
you
for
the
question.
I
I,
don't
believe
that's
what
that
means.
The
the
all
requirements
remain
in
place.
If
there's
a
human
driver
of
an
autonomous
truck
that
does
not
have
the
automated
driving
system
engaged,
that
person
would
need
to
have
a
CDL.
I
N
Mentioned
the
three
pillars
earlier,
but
a
fourth
one
honorary
pillar
so
to
speak,
is
one
that's
been
adopted
in
many
states,
and
we've
included
that
here.
Of
course,
it's
called
it's
a
requirement
to
submit
what
is
called
a
law
enforcement
interaction
plan.
N
So
in
order
to
deploy
on
on
the
roads
of
this
state,
it
is
required,
prior
to
doing
so,
to
submit
this
plan
to
law
enforcement
that
provides
information
about
how
to
pull
over
what
happens
if
the
vehicle's
on
the
side
of
the
road,
how
to
interact
with
the
remote
Assistance
or
remote,
monitor
all
the
information
that
will
be
located
on
the
vehicle
where
it
will
be
located
those
kinds
of
things
and
that
gets
submitted
in
advance
before
any
autonomous
vehicle
technology
is
deployed
in
the
roads
and
that,
along
with
some
of
the
provisions
later
on
in
the
bill
that
assign
the
owner
responsibility
for
a
crash
reporting
and
all
all
the
applicable
things
that
happen
in
those
instances
that
are
fundamental
to
law
enforcement.
D
Thank
you,
Mr
chairman.
Thank
you
all
today
for
the
testimony
I
actually
had
about
four
questions,
but
representative
Bridges
asked
one
and
representative
Tackett
Lafferty,
ask
one
that
I
have
two
more
just
very
short:
first
off:
where
does
the
insurance
companies
or
Insurance
Institute
stand
on
this?
N
Well,
representative,
thanks
for
the
question,
I
I
can't
speak
for
the
insurance
companies
or
the
industry
and
I'll.
Let
them
weigh
in
what
I
will
say
is
that
on
the
insurance
side,
again,
as
representative,
it's
been
increased
to
a
million
dollars
of
insurance
coverage
and
proof
of
financial
responsibility
and
in
the
more
than
20
states
that
have
adopted
this
construct
and
the
others
that
have
adopted
similar
constructs
been
able
to
to
address
the
incorporation
of
Av
technology
in
the
insurance
framework.
D
And
and
I
have
I
really
have
no
doubt
that
these
are
very
safe.
I
really
do
I,
believe
they're
very
safe
vehicles,
probably
much
safer
than
a
lot
of
our
vehicles
that
are
being
driven
by
people
today,
but
a
cup
just
one
other
question
and
in
referring
to,
if
there's
an
accident
that
happens
and-
and
we
all
know
that
that
will
at
some
point
happen-
we
know
that's
inevitable
to
happen,
but
in
the
in
the
language
here
it
says
if
the
accident
involves
a
fully
autonomous
vehicle
is
defined
in
section
one.
D
This
is
actually
on
page
nine
of
this
act.
The
responsibility
and
I
know
you
addressed
this,
but
it
said
the
responsibility
to
file
the
report
under
this
section
shall
rest
with
the
owner
of
the
fully
autonomous
vehicle
or
a
person
on
behalf
of
the
vehicle
owner.
So
if
there's,
if
there
is
an
accident,
occurs,
and
it's
the
fault
of
this
autonomous
vehicle,
how
how
is
there
going
to
be
proof?
I
mean
it's?
How
is
the
person
going
to
be
able
to
legitimately
prove
that
that
was
the
fault
of
that
vehicle.
N
Representative,
thank
you
for
the
question
again
going
back
to
what
I
noted
earlier.
The
bill
doesn't
doesn't
touch
any
of
the
existing
liability
structures
or
that
are
in
place
in
the
Commonwealth
and
so
would
proceed
exactly
as
it
would
under.
You
know
the
current
approach,
whatever
the
facts
are
whatever
the
police
report
says
whatever.
That
is
what
we
don't
want
to
do
is
with
a
technology
like
this
that
has
so
much
potential.
Not
just
on
safety
and
economic
benefit.
N
N
We
know
that
human
impairment
is
the
issue,
and
we
know
that
at
this
at
this
time
where
there
are
incidents
they're,
usually
the
the
result
of
human
error
not
coming
to
a
complete
stop
at
the
stop
sign
things
like
that,
so
the
accountability
is
there,
it's
the
registered
owner
must
be
titled,
it
has
to
be
plated
and
all
of
those
things
that
are
in
the
bill.
N
That
noted
earlier,
but
again,
the
facts
need
to
be
assessed
under
the
current
system
that
we
have
and
and
at
that
point
whatever
whatever
they
are,
it'll
proceed
with
insurance
or
otherwise.
D
M
So
that
section
of
the
bill
deals
with
what's
called
platooning
and
that
is
already
existing
law
within
the
state
and
so
for,
for
instance,
if
I
believe
the
way
it
works
now
is:
we've
got
a
manned
driver,
semi
driver
and
then
behind
him
is
a
semi,
that's
operating
with
a
person
inside.
They
don't
have
to
be
aware.
They
don't
have
to
be
driving
they're,
just
someone
inside
and
then
they're.
M
They
have
the
ability
to
have
another
one
following,
so
they
are
platooning
within
a
line,
and
so
all
that
does
is
adds
clarification
to
that
section
so
that
we're
not
amending
the
the
current
platooning
statute
so
that
we're
not
causing
an
issue.
That's
just
clean
up
language
for
that
in
in
the
context
of
the
AV,
so
those
are
already
going
on
on
the
roads
right
now,
I
mean
I
passed
one,
maybe
a
year
back
and
it
kind
of
blew
my
mind
because
nobody's
here's,
this
big
semi
nobody's
inside
it.
M
L
Thank
you,
Mr
chairman,
thank
you
Josh,
for
not
only
bringing
this
bill
I
think
it's
some
technology
that
puts
Kentucky
in
the
Forefront
of
this
technology
so
many
times,
Kentucky
likes
to
lag
behind
the
rest
of
the
nation
and
I
think
this
is
a
technology
that
will
put
us
squarely
in
the
you
know,
not
necessarily
in
the
driver's
seat,
but
definitely
in
the
lead.
I
know
we've
kind
of
worried
about
some
rabbit
holes,
we've
gone
down
a
few
today
and
that's
not
something
that
I
want
to
do.
But
one
thing
that
I
want
to
discuss.
L
N
I
would
defer
to
individual
companies
to
their
specific
plans,
but,
generally
speaking,
a
deployment
of
autonomous,
fully
autonomous
vehicles
starts
with
the
the
mapping
of
a
particular
area
and
that's
done
with
conventional
vehicles
and
drivers
that
they
map
the
air
very
closely
and
then
there's
testing
and
there's
a
lot
that
goes
into
it
again
to
developers.
There's
discussing
earlier
that
operational
design
domain
and
once
that
process
occurs,
the
technology
is
then
deployed
and
built
out
with
a
focus
on
safety
at
all
times.
N
I
think
the
the
key
idea
is
that
it's
important
to
preserve
the
flexibility
of
some
entities
that
have
been
doing
that
for
a
decade
or
more
and
others
that
you
know
and
everything
in
between.
So
in
that
respect
the
process,
it's
not
going
to
be,
there's
enactment
and
there's
autonomous
vehicles
everywhere.
It's
it's
a
very
deliberate
process
and
and
happy
to
follow
up
with
specific
examples
of
deployment,
including
from
some
of
the
companies
themselves.
M
Yeah
make
no
mistake
you
if
this
passes
I
mean
we're
not
looking
like
you
said
next
week.
You
know,
and
this
won't
be
the
only
time
this
statute
will
be
looked
at.
It
will
continuously
be
updated,
upgraded.
You
know
it
gives
the
the
highway
department,
the
trans,
the
flexibility
to
implement
the
regulatory
framework
now
I
wish
I
could
say
that
you
know
this
passes
and
we
never
have
to
adjust
it.
But
that's
just
not
you
know,
that's
not
true.
We
we
do
that
every
day
here,
unfortunately,.
F
L
O
Thank
you,
Mr
chairman
I
will
be
brief
with
my
comment:
I
Just
Want
to
Thank
You
representative
Bray,
for
bringing
this
issue
so
many
times
in
Kentucky.
We
are
behind
on
making
any
changes
to
things
and
I
I
applaud
your
effort
for
helping
us
be
very
proactive
rather
than
reactive.
On
this.
O
This
is
coming
to
Kentucky,
whether
we
like
it
or
not,
I
might
be
a
little
too
young
representative,
McCool,
I'm,
just
teasing,
but
I
think
it
is
something
it's
a
generational
issue,
and
so
we
recognize
this
is
coming
and
we
can't
stop
it,
so
we
might
as
well
get
ahead
of
ahead
of
the
curve
on
it.
So
I
just
want
to
thank
you
for
your
efforts
to
both
of
you
all
on
this.
A
Thank
you
and
I
do
have
a
a
couple
quick
questions.
I
will
be
brief
with
my
questions:
Mr,
Wolf
and
I'm
looking
for
very
short,
concise
answers,
okay,
because
we
do
have
three
other
groups
that
signed
up
to
speak
and
we
want
to
give
them
the
ability
to
speak
as
well.
So
we're
running
on
time
here
of
getting
close
this
this
one
Bill's
already
took
more
than
our
whole
committee
generally
does
with
that
first
off.
A
N
Thank
you,
Mr
chairman,
that
I'm
not
aware
of
any
instance
of
of
this
technology
being
Incorporated
in
school
buses
at
all
anywhere
and
no
plans
to
do
so
very.
A
A
N
Mr
chairman,
the
concept
of
the
operational
design
domain
focuses
on
a
number
of
things,
including
weather,
so
the
current
testing
is
being
done
to
ensure
that
the
vehicles
can
accommodate
weather,
but
until
that
is
the
autonomous
vehicle
companies
and
developers
can
attest
and
ensure
that
the
weather
can
be
accommodated
through
the
current
sensors
and
then
they
won't
deploy
them
in
those
contexts,
and
so
the
plan,
of
course,
is
to
be
able
to
accommodate
weather
right
now.
N
That's
why
we
see
the
deployments
in
certain
cases
where
there's
there's
nicer
weather,
but
over
time
and
that's
happening
very
quickly.
They
will
be
able
to
be
able
to
accommodate
all
sorts
of
weather
conditions.
A
N
So
they're
designed,
if
there's
a
weather,
condition
again
to
achieve
that
minimal
risk
condition
and
so
in
the
ride,
hail
context
and
there's
a
dispatched
to
retrieve
the
vehicle
or
in
the
trucking
context,
something
similar.
So
again,
it
would
if
it
detects
that
it's
not
able
to
read
the
lanes
in
a
certain
way
or
whatever
it
is
that
it
cannot
perform
that
driving
task.
It
achieves
a
minimal
risk
condition
and
that's
the
safest
thing
that
any
of
us
would
do.
If
it's
you
know,
we
can't
see
the
road.
A
Very
good,
a
couple
quick
concerns
from
from
law
enforcement,
one
of
the
things
that
that
we
see
happen,
especially
in
commercial
vehicles
with
long-haul
Trucking,
is
oftentimes.
They
will
utilize
that
to
transport
large
amounts
of
illicit
drugs,
and
generally
you
have
a
driver
to
debris
for
interrogate.
How
do
we
address
that
issue
and
those
concerns
for
them?.
N
N
These
are
going
to
be
dispatched
from
a
Depot
and
and
that's
again,
the
facts
are
either
going
to
be
that
there's
responsibility
or
accountability
resting
there
or
in
some
in
some
way
it
was
without
any
knowledge
and
that
that
will
be
the
inquiry
that
that
proceeds
without
at
some
point,
if
there's
no
driver
at
all,
though
right
now
there
are
safety
monitors.
If
there's
no
one
at
all,
that
simply
wouldn't
be
part
of
the
inquiry.
A
I
understand,
but
if
we
take
a
driver
off
in
Kentucky,
obviously
we
could
we
could
interview
them
and
the
fear
of
maybe
being
incarcerated
in
Kentucky
May
influence
them
a
little
bit
to
be
cooperative,
whereas
if
the
owner
of
the
vehicle
is
in
California,
it's
hard
to
do
an
interrogation
in
California
and
and
get
truth.
A
The
other
issue
that
that
they
have
is
oftentimes
and
this
would
apply
to
work
zones
as
well
from
from
flagman
But
First
Responders
will
be
at
the
scene
of
an
accident
and
they'll
be
using
their
hands,
stop
move
traffic
along
put
them
in
other
lanes.
Now.
F
A
Know
that
the
technology
on
these
vehicles
doesn't
follow
these
hand
signals
because
I
have
witnessed
this
firsthand
and
one
of
the
cars
I
rode
in
in
California.
We
came
up
on
a
four-way
intersection
in
the
vehicle
across
from
us,
was
motioning
for
us
to
come
on
through
car.
Just
sit
there
didn't
know
what
to
do.
The
driver
got
frustrated.
He
realized
there
was
no
driver
in
the
car
right.
So
how
do
they?
How
do
they
handle
that?
N
Mr
chairman,
thank
you
for
the
question.
The
this
is
at
the
core
of
what
the
AV
deployment
and
testing
is
is
being
looked
at
and
currently
underway.
In
all
these
instances,
they're
called
you
know
edge
cases,
and
so
it
focuses
on
those
particular
scenarios.
The
simulation
the
closed
course
testing
and
all
of
that
technology
be
able
to
handle
that
in
the
public
roads
fundamentally
back
to
the
concept
of
the
minimal
risk
condition.
N
If
there's
something
that's
so
out
of
out
of
touch
or
out
of
sync
that
it
has
to
Simply
achieve
that
that
low
risk
condition,
then
that's
that's
one
thing,
but
I've
seen
I
can't
speak
to
the
instance
that
you
noted
that
being
able
to
navigate
those
scenarios
without
Lane
markings
without
things
in
my
experience
having
been
in
one,
was
a
little
bit
different
where
it
was
able
to
go
around
a
double
Park
vehicle.
N
Because,
again,
the
sensors
are
able
to
see
in
such
high
resolution
picture
360
Degrees
in
in
a
radius
that
humans
can't
do
it's
able
to
navigate
those
situations
much
better
than
potentially
we
you
know
a
human
driver
could,
because
we
can't
see
on
the
other
side
of
the
truck,
whereas
radar
and
lidar
and
all
that,
so
it
kind
of
depends
on
the
situation,
but
certainly
there
may
be
cases
where
it
has
to
achieve
and
just
pull
over
if
there's
something
by
and
large
they'll
be
able
to
accommodate
those
situations.
N
A
You
all
representative
bright,
you
have
any
other
comments
before
we
call
our
other
groups
or
you
want
to
wait
till
after
they
finish.
We
can
wait.
Okay,
thank
you.
Next
up,
we
have
to
speak
Mr,
Bill,
Miller
and
Steve
Roth.
A
Please
come
to
the
table,
and
I
will
remind
our
guests
that
we
are
starting
to
get
along
and
some
time
here
and
to
the
members.
Let's
try
to
keep
our
questions
short,
concise,
so
that
we
can
give
this
to
just
do
that.
It
needs
welcome
Mr
Miller
if
you'll
introduce
yourself
and
your
guests
for
the
committee.
Please.
K
S
K
Thank
you
for
allowing
me
to
appear
before
you
this
afternoon.
As
I
said,
my
name
is
Bill
Miller
I'm,
the
political
director
for
Teamsters
Local
89
in
Louisville
Kentucky.
The
teams
just
represent
over
25
000
working
people
in
Kentucky.
There
are
Teamster
members
in
every
legislative
district
in
Kentucky
and
Kentucky
Teamsters
work
in
many
different
industries
that
drive
the
Commonwealth's
economy.
The
teamsters
are
asking
you
to
vote
no
on
House
Bill
135.
K
The
autonomous
vehicle
industry
is
pushing
and
will
continue
to
push
for
the
broadest
and
least
regulated
framework
in
which
to
operate.
There
are
many
issue
areas
that
this
committee,
the
Kentucky
general
assembly
and
general
public,
need
to
take
into
consideration
when
discussing
anything
related
to
highly
automated
Vehicles.
Here
are
just
a
few
of
these
issues
and
I'll
tear
it
down.
For
the
sake
of
time,
even
companies
number
one
is
100
transparency
and
safety
crash
data
in
both
simulations
and
live
testing.
K
Companies
that
wish
to
operate
in
the
state
should
provide
all
safety
and
crash
data,
which
must
also
be
publicly
available
if
a
company's
technology
is
truly
ready
to
be
put
on
the
road
alongside
unsuspecting
Kentucky
families.
Companies
should
be
willing
to
provide
that
information.
Last
year,
HIV
company
waymo
sued
the
state
of
California
in
order
to
keep
driverless
crashed
out
of
secret.
This
is
attempting
to
block
a
public
records
request.
We
cannot
accept
the
excuse
that
crash
data
is
a
trade
secret.
K
We
would
we
would
request
a
public-facing
website
for
all
incidents
and
accidents.
Some
are
what
we
just
discussed
above
another
on
there.
Let's
see,
oh
here,
we
go
sorry
about
that.
There
must
be
a
human
operator
in
all
autonomous
vehicles
to
act
as
both
a
human
Fail-Safe,
as
well
as
to
mainly
operate
the
more
complex
driving
tasks,
necessary
ports,
warehouses,
fuel
centers
loading
and
unloading
and
even
at
weigh
stations.
K
There's
been
some
recent
polling
done
in
other
states
about
autonomous
vehicles,
most
recently
in
Indiana
and
Tennessee,
and
the
more
the
larger
the
vehicle
gets.
The
more
opposed
drivers
are
to
it.
Voters
are
uncomfortable,
shooting
the
roads
of
autonomous
vehicles,
65
percent
in
Indiana
oppose
it.
70
percent
in
Tennessee
voters
are
overwhelmingly
not
supportive
of
sharing
the
road
with
driverless
tractor
trailers
83
in
Indiana
and
81
percent
in
Tennessee.
K
To
quote
this
letter
on
April
5th
2022,
a
cruise
AV
stopped
and
a
travel
link,
creating
an
obstruction
for
a
San
Francisco
Fire
Department.
On
its
way
to
a
three
alarm.
Farm,
the
fire
department
has
an
additional
operational
concern
about
Cruise,
a
b
driving
around
Fire
Apparatus
on
June
12
2022,
a
cruise
AV
ran
over
fire
hose
that
was
in
use
in
an
active
fire
scene.
Driving
over
fire
hose
that
is
in
use
can
seriously
injure
our
firefighters.
K
The
letter
goes
on
with
more
examples
on
January
21st
2023.
A
similar
incident
occurred.
The
cruise
AV
entered
the
area
of
an
active
firefighting
and
approached
fire
hoses
on
the
ground.
Firefighters
on
the
scene
made
every
effort
to
prevent
the
crew's
AV
from
driving
over
their
hoses
and
were
not
able
to
do
so
until
they
shattered
their
front
window
on
the
cruise
AV
Californians
obsession
with
Indus
with
this
industry
has
shown
us
what
happens
and
their
citizens
are
paying
the
price.
This
isn't
California.
Let's
keep
Kentucky
the
minimal
risk
condition
for
AVS
is
to
vote.
S
Appreciate
the
opportunity
I've
been
around
trucks
37
years
I'm,
getting
ready
to
turn
40
been
Third
Generation
in
this
business
and
when
he
brought
up
Mr
Wolf
brought
up
the
enhanced
pre-trip.
Has
anybody
looked
into
what
an
enhanced
pre-trip
is,
and
what
that
means
is.
Is
that
they're
going
to
supposedly
do
a
more
thorough
inspection
before
a
trip
starts,
but
then
they
are
exempt
from
having
to
go
through
a
weigh
station
they're
exempt
from
regular
just
a
State
Trooper
pulling
me
over
I.
S
Don't
have
to
have
any
calls
to
be
pulled
over
anybody
in
a
regular
car.
You
have
to
be
speeding.
Anything
else.
I
can
just
be
checked
everybody's
aware
of
what's
going
on
in
Ohio
right
now
with
the
catastrophe
with
that
up
there,
with
that
train
derailment,
I
have
the
ability,
if
I'm
in
control
of
that
vehicle.
If
it
anything
malfunction
anything
happens.
That's
when
your
breakdown
happens.
You
know,
anytime,
you
have
any
issues
with
your
cars.
It's
when
you're
driving
yourself.
S
S
I
just
ask
everybody
to
consider
that
on
your
way
home
today,
just
think
about
how
that
would
be
to
feel
sitting
there,
a
truck
going
down
the
road
next
to
you
any
kind
of
cars,
there's
no
actual
real
human
control
of
this
situation
and
then
think
about
what
good
is
it
going
to
build
to
sue
somebody
whenever
you
don't
have
that
loved
one
there
anymore
anyway,
because
of
that
situation
yeah
we
can
make
mistakes.
Humans
made
mistakes
through
their
whole
lives.
It's
just
the
way
it
is,
but
why
take
it
out
of
your
hands?
A
T
Hello,
my
name
is
Lillian.
Brentz
I
represent
a
mega
made
it
Transit
Union.
Thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
speak
today.
I
represent
a
megamated
Transit
Union,
who
includes
a
thousand
Transit
workers
throughout
the
Kentucky,
including
Covington,
Lexington
and
Louisville,
where
I
am
the
union
president
of
1447.
House,
Bill
135,
which
established
the
regulatory
framework
for
operation
of
fully
autonomous
vehicles
on
public
highways
in
Kentucky,
is
a
dangerous
bill
which
should
be
shelled
in
the
name
of
Public
Safety
I'm.
Also
a
mother
of
five
kids.
T
Imagine
your
kids
being
on
the
bus
of
an
autonomous
vehicle.
Imagine
the
weather
suddenly
here
in
Kentucky
goes
bad.
Imagining
that
vehicle,
stopping
with
no
directions
or
no
nothing.
Your
kids
are
out
there
on
the
road.
Imagine
your
kids
being
on
that
autonomous
vehicle.
We
also
represent
the
public
transit
throughout
the
city
and
state,
and
we
moved
the
city.
Imagine
we
hold
about
65
passengers
per
bus.
Imagine
your
loved
one
coming
from
a
concert
or
something
in
the
middle
of
that
crosswork
and
crosswalk,
and
your
loved
one
walking
in
that
crossword.
T
My
love
went
on
that
bus
that
autonomous
vehicle
unable
to
see
your
loved
one
in
that
cross
work
and
your
loved
one
is
lost,
whether
it
is
today
or
whether
it
is
five
years
from
now.
A
million
dollars
is
not
going
to
compensate
me
and
you
and
the
loss
of
a
loved
one
autonomous
vehicles
have
proven
to
be
unsafe
in
various
situations,
especially
weather
conditions,
especially
when
there's
not
a
human
present.
T
We
are
responsible
for
so
much
more
than
just
driving
a
bus.
When
operating
a
bus,
we
have
been
responsible
of
finding
your
lost
loved
one,
whether
they
was
either
in
a
situation
where
they've
been
trafficked
or
a
lost
loved
one
to
where
they
may
have
wandered
off
in
the
road.
That
is
what
a
human
does
in
one
of
those
commercial
vehicles
while
operating
the
bus
not
only
just
driving,
also
when
it
comes
to
the
autonomous
vehicle
and
the
technology
that
goes
alongside
with
that.
T
We
are
talking
about
the
many
jobs
here
in
Kentucky
that
you
will
be
putting
in
Jeopardy
autonomous
vehicle.
A
prime.
The
unproven
technology
has
been
found
to
fail
under
all
types
of
weather.
Moreover,
unsafe
AV
technology,
automatic
passengers
is
a
danger.
Factor
has
skyrockers,
since
they
have
been
testing
those
all
public
transit
buses.
T
T
A
few
years
ago,
at
ATU
members
stopped
a
woman
from
leaping
to
the
road
race
to
her
death,
a
person
on
side
that
bus
was
able
to
pull
over
and
get
her
to
safety
oftentimes.
We
assist
the
men
and
women
that
we
put
in
office
to
Serve
and
Protect.
We
assist
the
police
department.
T
Sometimes
we
are
often
the
first
one
on
sites
where
we
can
radio
in
and
let
them
know
a
danger
is
a
prime
by
having
an
autonomous
vehicle
on
the
road,
whether
it's
commercial,
non-commercial,
you
are
taking
away
that
added
safety
feature
that
is
implied
when
somebody
is
in
that
driver's
seat.
It
is
all
in
a
day's
work
to
have
brave
men
and
women
of
our
Union
Bus
operators.
The
eyes
and
ears
of
our
community
routinely
perform
heroics
acts
that
impact
all
of
us,
whether
you
ride
a
transit
or
not.
T
T
They
have
to
acknowledge
the
traffic
laws,
maintain
the
order
of
the
vehicle,
enforce
the
rules
and
assist
passengers
with
disability,
provide
customers
with
Vital,
Information,
oversee
Fair,
Collections,
and
so
much
more.
Imagining
traveling
someone
your
loved
one
traveling
to
this
state,
and
they
may
need
to
ask
Direction
oftentimes.
They
refer
to
a
Transit
worker.
T
To
do
so,
our
autonomous
vehicle
would
not
be
able
to
assist
your
loved
one
instead
of
pushing
Transit
workers
to
the
unemployment
line.
Kentucky
should
instead
focus
on
the
Workforce
Development
increase
the
funding
for
a
Transit
operations
and
maintenance
employees
get
those
vehicles
on
the
road
safely
before
we
start
experiment
with
unproven
unmanned
technology,
which
can
turn
Riders
into
crash
dummies.
Thank
you
for
your
consideration
of
our
views.
A
U
You
Mr
chairman,
my
name
is
Paul
Kelly
I'm,
the
president
of
the
Kentucky
Justice
Association
I'm,
also
an
attorney
with
the
law,
firm,
Saturday
and
Kelly
in
Louisville.
I
want
to
thank
Mr,
chairman
and
members
of
the
committee
for
giving
me
the
opportunity
to
speak
today.
I
will
be
as
brief
as
I,
possibly
can,
first
and
foremost
the
Kentucky
Justice
Association.
The
trial
attorneys
generally
agree
that
legislation
is
needed
for
autonomous
vehicles.
We
understand
the
wave
of
the
future.
U
We
understand
that
they're
already
on
the
roadways
in
some
places
and
that
there's
a
you
know,
it's
it's
an
Unstoppable
force
and
it's
going
to
happen.
I
believe
the
comment
was
made
earlier.
That
Kentucky
needs
to
be
at
the
Forefront
of
legislation
for
these
type
of
vehicles,
and
we
agree
with
that.
U
We
think
that
Kentucky
should
be
on
the
Forefront
for
legislation
of
this
kind
and
it
should
be
on
the
Forefront
of
accountability
and
responsibility
for
things
that
can
occur
and
we've
looked
at
the
the
language
and
I
do
appreciate
representative
Bray,
Mr,
Wolf
and
and
their
team.
They
have
worked
with
us
to
try
to
try
to
get
some
language
that
our
organization
can
agree
to
and
that
that
would
really
help
Kentucky
citizens,
but
we
still
have
a
few
concerns
about
some
of
the
details
of
the
the
legislation
that's
pending.
U
Now
that
really
needs
to
be
improved
in
order
to
make
it
tenable
and
protect.
The
citizens
of
Kentucky,
specifically
in
representative
Bridges,
have
really
honed
in
on
the
issue
earlier
and
we're
concerned
that
the
practical
application
of
House
Bill
35,
the
committee
substituters
that
exist
right
now.
The
practical
application
of
that
bill
is
going
to
result
in
eliminating
negligence,
claims
negligence,
claims
for
product
or
for
property
damage,
you
know
and
other
types
of
injuries.
U
So
the
example
I
think
representative
bridges
used
really,
you
know,
does
hone
in
on
the
issue,
and
so
imagine
today,
under
today's
you
know
framework
you
have
two
drivers:
One
driver
runs
a
red
light,
hits
the
other
driver
totals
there's
sixty
or
eighty
thousand
dollar
vehicle,
and
we
have
all
kinds
of
avenues
that
we
can
use
to
address
those
situations
now
to
address
that
property
damage
the
the
eighty
thousand
dollar
property
damage.
We
can
file
a
negligence
claim.
You
ran
a
red
light.
You
should
be
held
accountable
for
that.
U
If
there
was
something
wrong
with
the
vehicle,
we
can
file
a
product's
liability
claim,
but
but
we
still
have
both
those
and
it's
not
neither
or
now
I
have
been
representing
folks
in
personal
injury
and
specifically
products
liability
claims
for
21
years
products
liability
claim.
Unfortunately,
the
issue
with
that
is,
you
have
to
prove
that
there
was
a
problem
with
that
product.
You
have
to
prove
that
there
was
a
design
defect.
You
have
to
prove
that
there
was
a
manufacturing
defect
associated
with
the
product
that
caused
whatever
event
occurred.
U
In
this
situation
it
will
cost
several
hundreds
of
thousands
of
dollars
each
each
and
every
time
an
autonomous
vehicle
strikes
another
vehicle
causing
damage
to
that
property.
It
is
absolutely
cost
prohibitive
to
spend
that
kind
of
money
which
would
be
required
to
prove
damage
for
sixty
or
eighty
thousand
dollar
vehicle
in
the
impact
of
that
would
be
that
folks
wouldn't
be
able
to
do
it.
If
that's
the
only
Avenue
that
you
have
to
pursue
such
a
claim,
you're
out
the
property
damage
and
who
else
could
be
out
the
property
damage?
U
U
They
have
no
recourse,
so
we
are
are
significantly
concerned
about
that
aspect.
A
negligence
action,
on
the
other
hand,
is
generally
cheap,
generally
inexpensive
property
damaged
cases
are
resolved
in
car
collision
cases
every
day
in
Kentucky,
and
they
generally
don't
require
great
deals
of
litigation.
They
generally
don't
require
people
to
expend
significant
amounts
of
money,
and
people
have
recourse
if
something
occurs
with
their
property
or
other
injuries
are
incurred.
H
U
Is
whether
that's
going
to
have
any
impact
whatsoever
on
on
a
person
who
suffered
a
loss
like
their
expensive
truck,
whether
it's
going
to
have
any
impact
at
all
on
their
ability
to
be
able
to
pursue
a
negligence
claim
because
I
think
again,
representative
Bridges
identified
the
problem
as
the
bill
exists
right
now,
I
think
the
owner
is
going
to
say
what
did
I
do
wrong.
I
didn't
do
anything
wrong.
I
just
owned
the
vehicle.
There
was
something
else
wrong.
U
U
So
we
certainly
agree
that
there
should
be
some
legislation
on
on
this
growing
technology
in
this
issue.
That's
going
to
certainly
be
the
wave
of
the
future
in
Kentucky
and
everywhere,
but
we
don't
think
that
people
should
be
treated
differently
because
they
were
hit
by
autonomous
vehicle
as
opposed
to
human
driver,
because
we
know
what
happens
when
they're
hit
by
a
car
operated
by
a
human.
They
can
file
that
negligence
claim
and
they
can
recover
their
property
damage
for
a
relatively
inexpensive
amount.
U
Just
a
couple
other
small
concerns
that
we
have
with
the
bill
as
it
exists
now,
I
believe
that
everybody
agrees
that
we
are
decades
away
from.
You
know:
individuals,
owning
autonomous
vehicles,
individuals,
writing
and
autonomous
vehicles
for
personal
use
and
and
because
we're
decades
away
from
that,
we
think
that
house
bill
35
probably
ought
to
address
the
immediate
issue,
which
is
commercial
vehicles
that
look
to
be
on
the
roadways
much
much
sooner.
U
The
insurance
issues
that
have
been
addressed
so
far.
We
think
they're
they're
certainly
better,
but
we
think
it's
unclear
at
this
point
if
this
bill,
which
I
believe
Mr
Wolf
addressed
earlier,
will
apply
to
all
types
of
vehicles,
we're
a
little
concerned
that
the
language
concerning
insurance
coverage
doesn't
doesn't
fully
address.
Who
has
to
own
this
insurance?
Is
it
the
owner?
Is
it?
Is
it
someone
else
we're
concerned
that
it
doesn't
address
whether
the
insurance
only
covers
commercial
vehicles
or
whether
it
covers
personal
vehicles?
U
So
so
those
are
types
of
things
that
we
think
need
to
to
certainly
be
addressed,
and
also
out
of
state
Vehicles.
The
legislation
really
seems
to
impact
right
now.
You
know
in-state
owners
and
operators
of
automatic
erotic,
automated
Vehicles.
What
happens
if
an
automated
vehicle,
it's
owned
by
an
entity
out
of
state,
comes
into
Kentucky?
U
It's
not
addressed,
and
it's
unclear
at
this
point
as
to
whether
these
insurance
coverages
and
whether
any
of
the
rules
that
are
set
forth
in
the
proposed
bill
or
the
current
substitute
would
be
applicable.
So
again
we
we
really
do
support
the
enactment
of
legislation.
We
we
simply
want
to
make
sure
the
kentuckians
are
protected.
We
want
to
make
sure
that
kentuckians
have
recourse
for
their
property
damage
losses
and,
and
we
think
that
there's
a
path
to
accomplishing
that
very
goal,
while
getting
this
important
technology
on
the
road
and
and
making
it
normal.
A
Thank
you,
Mr
Kelly.
We
do
have
a
question
representative,
Elliott.
V
Thank
you,
Mr,
chairman
I'll,
be
very
brief.
Have
you
been
able
to
look
at
other
states
that
have
AV
framework
and
liability
that
they
have
put
into
place,
and
has
that
been
successful
is
that
is
that
better
than
what
this
legislation
calls
for
in
your
mind,
and
if
it
is
what
recommendations
would
you
have
to
I
think
you've
given
us,
given
us
your
recommendation,
but
I
was
just
wondering
if
you
had
looked
at
other
states
and
how
it
had
worked
in
those
States.
Thank.
U
You
representative
Elliott,
thank
you
for
your
question.
We
have
looked
at
other
states
and
and
quite
frankly,
we
don't
think
that
other
states
have
really
adequately
addressed
this
issue.
Other
states
will
have
different
definitions
of
the
automated
driving
system
and
who
the
operator
is,
it
can
be
the
owner.
U
It
can
be
the
system
itself,
it
can
be
the
manufacturer,
but
none
of
these
other
states
that
we've
seen
and
and
and
I
won't
represent
that
I've
seen
every
Bill
Across
the
Nation,
but
nothing
that
I've
seen
specifically
hones
in
on
the
issue
that
we've
phase
today,
the
representative
Bridges,
you
know
brought
up
concerning
what
happens
and
and
how
cheaply
or
how
it's
you
know
expensive.
Would
it
be
to
to
get
some
recourse
for
any
property
damage
that
occurs.
U
So
our
recommendation
would
be
the
the
expressly
say
it
put
it
into
the
bill
and
it
wouldn't
be
an
issue
where
we're
predetermining
liability,
because
I
think
that
was
a
concern.
It
was
raised
earlier
that
that
we
don't
want
to
put
something
in
the
bill.
That's
going
to
say
that
anybody
is,
is
you
know,
responsible
for
a
particular
accident
or
incident
that
occurred,
but
we
do
think
that
the
bill
can
say
that
the
owner
of
the
the
automated
car
can
be
liable
for
negligence
or
a
claim
can
be
pursued
for
negligence
against
that
owner.
U
A
I
understand,
thank
you.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Sin
no
further
questions.
Thank
you.
Mr
Kelly.
Thank
you.
Representative,
Bray
I
did
say
that
give
you
some
time
it's
111
to
1
15,
because
we
do
have
two
more
bills
to
take
up.
We
do
go
on
session
at
two
o'clock,
so
at
1
15
we
will
be
taking
a
vote
all.
M
Right
just
a
couple
things:
real,
quick
as
to
the
liability
issue,
you
know:
we've
we've
worked
with
the
the
trial,
attorneys
and
we've.
You
know
Incorporated
some
things
that
makes
that
a
lot
clearer,
but
you
know,
as
the
gentleman
stated,
this
isn't
an
issue
in
other
states
and
I.
Don't
exactly
know
why
you
know
it
would
be
an
issue
here
and
listen
if
if
we
want
to
get
into
the
safety
issue
and
I
would
like
for
Mr
Wolf
to
talk
about
that.
M
Just
briefly,
I
mean
these
things
are
so
much
safer
than
even
I
am
driving
down
the
road
and
if
we're
looking
at,
you
know
running
over
a
fire
hose,
my
mayor
ran
over
a
fire
hose
and
it
was
a
big
deal
in
the
local
paper,
and
you
know
that's
what
the
mayor
behind
the
wheel
of
a
car.
So
you
know,
there's
no
doubt
in
my
mind
that
a
lot
of
these
same
issues
were
brought
up
when
we
were
looking
at.
M
You
know
transitioning
from
the
horse
and
buggy
to
the
to
the
Model
T,
and
so,
but
with
that
I
would
like
Mr
Wolf
just
to
touch
on
some
of
the
safety
issues
and
help
ease
the
committee's
concerns
on
that.
N
Thank
you,
representative,
I'll,
be
very
very
brief
here.
What
I'll
say
is
I'd
like
to
emphasize.
There
is
an
urgency
here.
We
have
a
catastrophe
on
our
roadways
Nationwide
and
in
Kentucky.
734
traffic
deaths
reported
in
2022
doesn't
include
the
thousands
tens
of
thousands
of
injuries,
many
of
which
are
life-altering,
as
well
as
the
economic
damage.
There's
an
urgency
here
and
again
reaffirmed
and
affirmed
over
and
over
again,
human
impairment
is
the
primary
factor
there.
So
autonomous
vehicles
are
going
to
make
the
roads
safer,
and
that
is
the
primary
impetus
for
this.
N
This
technology
for
this
industry,
an
industry
that
it's
facing
Global
competition
primarily
and
predominantly
from
China.
We
have
an
obligation
to
make
sure
that
there's
a
regulatory
framework
in
this
country
that
can
accommodate
in
the
safest
and
swiftest
way
the
deployment
of
this
technology.
So
in
just
one
more
note,
just
on
the
on
the
safety
of
it,
I
believe
it's
14
or
15
percent
of
fatal
crashes
involve
long-haul
Trucking.
This
is
across
the
board.
This
is
about
making
our
roads
safer
in
all
contexts
and
all
uses
in
all
vehicles.
A
Q
I'm
sorry,
just
quickly
there
was
a
concern
raised
just
recently
that
that
I
hadn't,
even
thought
of
obviously
when
you
only
have
liability
insurance
if
you're
struck
by
this
property
damage
is
actually
very
concerning.
So
when
he
said,
there's
no
recourse.
Obviously,
if
you
only
have
liability,
you're
driving
a
work
truck
to
work,
you
get
hit,
you
don't
have
insurance
coverage
to
cover
it.
Q
You're,
not
gonna.
Your
insurance
will
not
cover
your
car,
but
if
you
cannot
say,
there's
a
situation
where
you've
bought
an
80
000
vehicle,
you
drive
it
off
the
lot.
It's
totaled,
your
your
insurance
pays
the
fair
market
value
of
that
car
and
it
pays
it
to
the
debt
that
you've
bought
the
vehicle.
But
when
you
drive
it
off
the
lot,
there's
a
difference.
Is
there
a
recourse
for
the
against
the
owner
of
that
vehicle
for
the
difference
of
that
contract?.
N
Thank
you
representative.
Nothing
in
this
bill
changes
in
any
way
the
the
recourse
structure
in
in
the
Commonwealth
at
all.
There's,
no
there's
no
language
of
any
kind.
It
is
exactly
as
it
would
proceed
under
current
law
and
common
law
and
precedent
would
address
these
situations
and
there
are
novel
situations
at
all
every
day.
That's
how
it
would
proceed
and
the
courts
would
would
find
a
framework
under
current
Law
Without
prejudging
liability,
not
in
any
of
those
cases,
including
language
that
create
the
implied,
implied
liability.
Thank.
A
P
P
My
vote
I
want
to
vote
Yes
I
I
support
this
bill.
I
do
have
some
concerns,
but
I
think
it's
something
we
need
to
move
on.
We
are
the
major
Corridor
north
and
south
to
Michigan
to
New
York,
and
it's
very
important
so
what's
been
said
today
is
not
my
unsupported
the
bill
and
represent
Braves
very
aware
of
that,
but
I
do
think.
We
need
to
take
a
little
longer
look
because,
what's
saying,
there's
existing
laws
that
address
this
there's
existing
laws
that
address
the
existing
circumstances
of
which
vehicles
are
operated.
P
V
W
I
worry
about
the
human
factor
as
well.
The
drunk
driver,
the
drugged
driver,
but
I
have
concerns
about
this
bill.
I'm
a
yes
today,
but
I
may
not
be
on
the
floor.
Thank
you.
E
C
A
Pass
House
Bill
135
is
reported
with
favorable
expression
with
the
committee's
substitute
attached.
There
are
two
same
should
do
so
on
the
floor.
Thank
you,
Mr
chairman.
Thank
you,
members
of
the
committee.
Thank
you.
All
next
up
is
House
Bill
392
by
rep
Vice,
chair
Dixon.
It's
an
act
relating
to
Motor
Vehicles.
B
I
I
A
A
I
A
Motion
and
a
second
by
representative
Williams,
all
those
in
favor,
say
aye.
All
those
opposed
motion
passed
now
we
can
any
questions.
A
Motion
made
here:
second,
there
got
it
before
we
get
to
the
vote
on
this
representative
Pollock,
because
this
is
a
very
special
resolution
dealing
with
one
of
our
our
own
members,
former
members
here.
Would
you
like
to
speak
about
it
about
your
resolution.
X
Thank
you,
Mr
chairman
committee
I
just
wanted
to
take
just
a
second
to
share
with
you
how
honored
and
specialist
is
for
me
to
sponsor
this
joint
resolution
and
carry
it
in
the
memory
of
my
dear
dear
friend,
John
bam,
Carney,
just
a
huge,
huge
heart
that
served
not
only
in
the
classroom
to
his
students
on
the
basketball
court
as
a
coach,
but
when
he
got
here
in
2009
serving
the
district
51
as
a
house
representative
as
a
floor
leader
and
the
chair
of
the
committees,
as
you
well
know,
if
you
ever
come
across
his
path,
how
how
he
loved
and
loved
to
serve
the
great
Commonwealth
of
Kentucky
and
so
I'll
have
more
to
say
on
the
floor
Mr
chairman,
but
for
now.
A
A
F
A
Aye,
don't
everybody
run
off?
We
still.
Okay,
I
know
everybody's
anxious
to
get
out
of
here.
It's
been
long
house
joint
resolution.
7
is
reported
with
favorable
expression
with
the
committee
substitute
attached.
There
too.
We
have
a
motion
on
the
title
amendment
by
representative
Upchurch,
second
by
representative
Dixon,
all
those
in
favor
say
aye.
A
Those
opposed
title
amendment
is
adopted
if
there's
nothing
else
in
them
to
come
before
this
committee.
Today
we.