Last month, a U.S. House panel heard praise and concern from trade groups representing industry sectors that are top stakeholders in present and future developments of autonomous vehicle legislation.

John Bozzella, CEO of the newly formed Alliance for Automotive Innovation, addressed lawmakers at the Feb. 11 hearing, held by the Consumer Protection and Commerce Subcommittee.

Officials representing automakers and tech companies have been stuck in legislative standby mode since 2018, when efforts to craft a federal framework and pass legislation that could clear the way for wider testing and deployment of AVs on public roads stalled in the Senate.

In written testimony, Bozzella recommended Congress establish a regulatory framework that enables safe testing and deployment of AV technologies, reinforces and clarifies the roles of federal, state and local authorities, and enacts a federal framework with safety authorities that can be fine-tuned and adjusted over time.

Bozzella, 58, previously was CEO of Global Automakers, the auto lobbying group that merged with the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers. He spoke with Staff Reporter Audrey LaForest about the status of AV legislation and the alliance’s new role in an evolving auto industry. Here are edited excerpts.

Q: When do you want Congress to act on AV legislation?

A: Congress has been working on this for the better part of three years now and has made a lot of progress. We fell just short of the goal line in the last Congress, so I think we created a lot of momentum at [the] hearing. The time is right. Let’s get it done.

Is AV legislation something that can be further developed, refined and altered as needed, especially as the technology evolves?

Absolutely. And that’s a very, very important point. This bill — once it passes and is signed into law — is not the last word on automated vehicle policy in the United States. In fact, it’s the first word. What it really does is it sets a national framework that will allow regulators, the public and the industry to work together to safely deploy highly automated vehicles on public roads. That’s really what this is all about.

NHTSA gave self-driving vehicle startup Nuro permission over the next two years to deploy up to 5,000 low-speed delivery vehicles on public roads. How do these exemptions fit into AV legislation?

Under the current law, only 5,000 vehicles can enter the market under that exemption process over two years. The problem with that limitation is it doesn’t provide the agency with enough data to effectively rewrite the [Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards]. The agency is a data-driven agency. They make their decisions about what those standards should be based on data. And so, what the legislation does — the Self Drive Act and also the Senate version — is it increases the available number of exemptions that a manufacturer could receive if NHTSA agrees that their product is as safe or safer.

That’s really what we’re talking about here: A greater number of exemptions allows the agency to get more data, and with more data, the agency can more quickly update the rules. All of this is done with safety first and foremost in mind.

One hurdle is the automakers, technology manufacturers and tech startups want federal rules so they can test their self-driving vehicles, but trial lawyers such as Daniel Hinkle of the American Association for Justice, who testified at the hearing, are concerned about issues of liability.

I’m a little bit confused about what the concerns are of the plaintiffs bar because the Self Drive Act that passed the Congress unanimously — passed the House unanimously on a voice vote — did not change the current product liability landscape in the United States as it relates to motor vehicles. We heard Mr. Hinkle testify about a manufacturer defect case and the role of the plaintiffs bar in pursuing remedies to that particular manufacturer defect case. That process remains in effect under the Self Drive Act.

The Self Drive Act does nothing to change the balance that currently exists to protect automotive safety and to provide consumers with remedies. It continues to support an agency that has significant investigation authority, significant recall and defect investigation authority, and it continues to protect and respect tort law.

Does the merger of Global Automakers and the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers give you more influence on Capitol Hill?

It is really the recognition and realization of what the industry looks like today. What you see is a growing number of partnerships and alliances between automotive companies and other automotive companies, between automotive companies and tech companies, between established companies and new entrants to the space. As the industry starts to change and continues to change, we need a trade association that reflects that change.

We’re seeing a lot of collaboration and investment among automakers, suppliers and tech startups. Why is this important to your mission and as it relates to AV technology and, ultimately, legislation?

We operate at the intersection of automotive innovation and public policy. In order to be effective in developing and advocating for public policies that support the transformation that will allow lifesaving technologies and low-emission technologies into the marketplace, we need to take a broader point of view. And we need to make sure that our policy development discussions and our engagements with policymakers reflect the industry broadly.