Senate Transportation, 4/21/26, 1:30pm

Good afternoon. I'd like to call this meeting of the Senate Transportation Committee to order. The time is 1:33 PM. We are in Butchvich Room 205 in the nation's most beautiful capital city of Juneau, Alaska. Today is Tuesday, April 21st, 2026.

Members present today are Senator Rauscher and Senator Bjorkman. Senator Tobin is away at a bill hearing, and Senators Keel and Steadman are up in Senate Finance. We don't have a quorum, but we are still able to have a hearing on this most excellent bill, Senate Bill 148, about autonomous vehicles. Before we do that, please join me in welcoming our recording secretary Heather Ramseth and our LIO moderator Doug Bridges. Also, please turn off our silencer cell phones.

To present Senate Bill 148, autonomous vehicles, we have the Honorable Senator Robert Myers and his staff, Teresa Wollstad. Welcome to Senate Transportation. We're glad you're here. Please put yourselves on the record and begin your presentation of the bill. Thank you, Mr.

Chair. For the record, Robert Myers, Senator for District Q, representing North Pole in the eastern part of the Fairbanks Borough. Uh, Mr. Chair, thank you for hearing the bill today. This is SB 148, an act regulating autonomous vehicles.

Joining me today is Teresa Wollstad, my legislative aide. Before she heads through the sectional analysis, I just want to talk a little bit about the sponsor statement, the intent behind the bill. Autonomous vehicles are no longer a future concept. They are already operating on public roads across the country. A clear example can be found in San Francisco, where fully autonomous taxis are are currently navigating city streets.

And for the last few years, there have been autonomous trucks hauling containers between Houston and Dallas in Texas. As this technology continues to develop, states are being forced to answer some basic questions. How do we ensure safety while allowing innovation to continue? How does liability work without a driver? And what happens to the millions of people employed as drivers whose careers could be upended?

In Alaska, we've not yet answered these questions. There are currently no statutes that specifically regulate autonomous vehicles or clearly define liability. When something goes wrong. That leaves a gap in both safety and legal clarity. SB 148 is intended to close that gap in a measured and practical way.

First, we create definitions in statute of what autonomous technology in vehicles do. Everything from automated emergency braking on the low end up to fully autonomous driving on the high end. These definitions are based on industry standards so that we can start regulation from an appropriate baseline. We then have language around legal liability. We need to clarify in statute how both traffic accidents and traffic citations are handled if the driver is not the one responsible.

And while the bill as drafted provides some starting points, uh, talking with industry over the last year has led to some suggested amendments that we'll be bringing to the committee if we move forward. And finally, safety. Alaska presents conditions that are very different from the environments where most autonomous vehicles are currently being tested. Snow, ice, and extreme weather introduce variables that these systems have not been widely proven to handle just yet. Because of that, SB 148 takes a cautious approach by requiring a human operator to be present in a commercial vehicle at all times and responsible for its safe operation.

This ensures there is always someone capable of intervening if the technology fails or encounters conditions it cannot manage. While we don't want to stifle innovation, we also recognize that the safety implications for larger commercial vehicles require the ability of human intervention— ability of human intervention. For now, SB 148 allows for the continued development and use of autonomous vehicle technology, but it does so with reasonable guardrails in place. It prioritizes the safety of Alaskans while still leaving room for innovation and future growth in this space. In short, Mr.

Chair, this bill establishes a clear, balanced framework for autonomous vehicles in Alaska by addressing liability, ensuring human oversight, and recognizing the realities of our state's driving conditions. And with that, Ms. Wohlstedt can walk through the sectional analysis of SB 148. Excellent. With your permission, uh, my name is Theresa Wohlstedt, for the record, and I'm going to go ahead and proceed with the sectional. So, relatively straightforward bill, and only has 2 sections.

Section 1 adds a new section actually to Alaska Statute 28.90. This section provides definitions and sets standards for autonomous vehicles in the state of Alaska. It establishes that autonomous vehicles are subject to normal federal and state laws. It disallows transportation of interstate commerce with the exceptions for personal use or transportation that occurs in an operator physically present in the vehicle. Autonomous vehicle operations are subject to both federal and state regulations, the same as non-autonomous vehicles.

Defines liability in case of an accident or establishes any order of liability to include the operator, modifier, programmer, and manufacturer of the vehicle. Contains definitions for terms such as autonomous vehicle, non-autonomous vehicle, conditions driving automation, driver, Dynamic driving task, dynamic driving task fallback, full driving automation, high driving automation, operational design domain, and physically present. And then Section 2, establish an immediate effective date.

Very good. Are there any questions for the bill sponsor or staff?

Senator Rauscher. Thank you. Through the chair, um, Senator Meyer, so line 20— line 9 on page 1, it says, uh, I guess you got to preface it with B, an autonomous vehicle registered in the state may be engaged in transport— may not be engaged in transport of interstate commerce goods or passengers unless It's the transport is for personnel non-commercial use. So basically this bill has nothing to do with passenger cars. Is that what we're saying?

Through the chair, Senator Rauscher. So this portion of it that you're referencing does not. Later on, the definitions, the liability, those portions of it do. In there, we're not trying to prohibit anything. We're just trying to create some statutory definitions as the beginning of a framework for future regulation.

But in that section that you're referencing, yes, we're talking strictly about larger commercial vehicles. So we're talking about commercial trucks. We're talking about buses. In the House companion version of the bill, they went ahead and added in the commercial definition. Which I thought was a good addition just for clarity.

But yes, if you have a, you know, for example, if you have a commercial truck and it has autonomous technology in it, you can't use it to be transporting interstate commerce without a driver sitting in the seat ready to take over in case the technology has a problem. So if you happen to own that truck and you're, You've taken that truck and for some odd reason you've decided to make your grocery run with it, well, you can engage the autonomous technology. But you can't engage the autonomous technology without a driver in the seat as a backup for those large commercial vehicles. Follow-up. Senator Rauscher.

Thank you. So, are non-commercial vehicles goods or whatever allowed, like a passenger car? Through the chair, Senator Rauscher, yes. We are not— if you've got, you know, there's some Teslas out right now that have some self-driving features. We're not banning those.

We're not attempting to, you know, like a Waymo taxi. We're not necessarily— we're not banning those. Those are just— again, we're addressing those in the sense that we're trying to define them and provide a regulatory framework. But we're not banning them in any way, shape, or form. We're recognizing there's a big difference between, say, a Waymo taxi going down the road at 20 miles an hour through town and a 90,000-pound truck going down the road at 50— going down the highway at 55.

Senator Rauscher. So thank you, through the chair. I was wondering, so So I'm trying to understand whether an autonomous vehicle, which you just spoke of, is one that I can engage but keep my hands on the wheel every 15 seconds— I think it is, I don't know, but those are the ones I've rented— or I don't have to be in the car. What are we talking about? Uh, through the chair, Senator Rauscher.

So we're, we're trying to, to talk about Both as far as the, the prohibition of using the autonomous technology without a driver in the driver's seat and, and ready to engage. So you can't just be sitting in the driver's seat and taking a nap. You got to be up and, and paying attention to things going on around you. That prohibition is only for commercial vehicles. So larger trucks and buses.

You can still get in a car and sit in the passenger seat of a car that has autonomous driving technology in it. And we're not banning that. We're simply saying, uh, we, we, we are attempting to define it in statute so that it's a, it's, uh, readily available in case something else comes down the line 5, 10 years from now that we need to address. We've already got the framework in place. But we're not banning that technology from being used.

So, through the chair, can I add banning that to your bill? And let me qualify why. I mean, you're talking about a very large vehicle, a truck with a very large payload, possibly may or may not have one. It doesn't matter. But you see that as being able to cause a lot of damage, and I get that totally.

I don't even want to see a car that's automatically driving itself, which doesn't understand what an icy road does, and hitting another car, causing another car— I don't want to see a car running down the road and doesn't realize that the gate did not go down at the train track intersection, and now is— And I could probably just think of maybe a dozen others sitting here, I haven't, but seems to me that bothers me just as much as a big truck going down the highway unattended somewhat at the wheel. That's the reason I'm asking the question, not because I'm being smart, but because I see a real reason for wanting to just get rid of this idea. Through the chair, Senator Rauscher. So in crafting the bill, we were trying to strike a balance. We wanted to recognize, okay, this, this is not yet ready.

This technology is not yet ready for prime time, especially if we're talking about really large vehicles. We were trying to leave some space open for innovation as well by kind of leaving the smaller vehicles alone. I understand there's a policy call there, and I can I totally see your point, and I might be open to that. You know, again, you know, the way that the language is crafted, you wouldn't be banned from having the technology. You would just be required to have a driver in there ready to take over in case the technology had a problem.

So, you know, we still leave some room for innovation. It's a little bit larger than what we had originally envisioned with the bill. I'm not necessarily opposed to it. So I would be willing to have a discussion about exactly where we draw that line. Well, I thank you for the bill anyway.

Appreciate it.

Thank you very much. Anything further that you would like to add before we go to invited testimony? No, thank you, Mr. Chair. I think we are ready for Mr. Fitzgerald.

Most excellent. We will go now to invited testimony. First up we have Mr. Patrick Fitzgerald, if you could please state your name and affiliation for the record and begin your testimony, that would be most excellent.

Good afternoon. My name is Patrick Fitzgerald. I'm the political coordinator for Teamsters Local 959. I'm here to testify in favor of Senate Bill 148, legislation on autonomous vehicles. Firstly, I want to thank Chair Bjorkman and members of the Senate Transportation Committee for hearing this legislation.

I'd also like to thank Senator Myers and his staff, Theresa Wollstedt, for, uh, carrying this legislation as well.

Senate Bill 148 would require a safety operator to be in the driver's seat of any commercial vehicle operating autonomously. This serves mostly as a safety precaution we believe is necessary for any vehicle, uh, of that size to be operating in ports and roadways of our state. The automated automation integration in vehicles is rapidly developing technology The incorporation of autonomous vehicles in the society has becoming a trend nationwide. News stories of automatic vehicles suffering shortages and shutting down crowded roadways, as well as misguided trips to wrong locations, uh, are far too much of a risk for Alaskans to take, especially in a state where road conditions are ever-changing and are at times dangerous for even the most experienced drivers. Senate Bill 148 will ensure there is a safety operator who is fully capable of driving the vehicle, meaning they are certified in commercial driver's license with appropriate endorsements if needed to be behind the wheel of a vehicle to ensure a safety net for any technological shortfalls that may arise.

In summary, Senate Bill 148 requires a vehicle to have a— with any autonomous vehicles with self-driving capability to have a safety operator behind the wheel. Safety operator would only be required to be present in self-driving vehicles being used for commercial purposes, such as freight hauling, passenger, trade and sport, or port vehicles. Meaning personal vehicles with self-driving capabilities, uh, would not be required under this legislation. And, uh, more importantly, SB 148 does nothing to restrict the use of self-driving vehicles in Alaska, just mandates a safety operator who is qualified to operate the vehicle, such as a driver's license, CDL with proper endorsements, etc., to be behind the wheel, uh, while that vehicle is operating. That concludes my testimony.

Uh, please support Senate Bill 148. Thank you very much, and I'm also available for questions. Thank you very much, Mr. Fitzgerald. Are there any questions from committee members?

For him? No. Seeing none, we will now open public testimony on Senate Bill 148. Is there anyone in the room who wishes to testify to this item?

Is there anyone online? Seeing and hearing no one wishing to testify, we will close public testimony. That brings the bill back before the committee. Senator Myers, do you have any closing remarks? Mr.

Chair, appreciate taking the time today. We do want to see this concept move forward. I have a suspicion it's going to be in a different vehicle as the House companion is already in rules on that side. But this is a discussion that we need to have. This is something that, you know, as I said at the beginning, this is technology that's moving forward at a rapid pace, and we want to make sure that we incorporated it properly into our laws for liability definition, safety, the whole nine yards.

Happy to entertain changes to the bill, but this is the beginning of what I anticipate is going to be a long and serious conversation over the next few years in the state. Very good. Well, thank you very much. I appreciate you bringing this forward, and I appreciate the support that it has garnered. So thank you for doing that.

Okay, at this time we will set Senate Bill 148 aside for further consideration at a future meeting. The Senate Transportation Committee will not meet on Thursday of this week. Our agenda for next week will be forthcoming. As those— no, as there is no further business to come before the committee today, we are adjourned at 1:51 PM.