Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Autonomous Vehicles topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Senate State Affairs advances bill that would require human safety operators in commercial autonomous vehicles

Senate State Affairs Committee · May 16, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Senate State Affairs Committee on May 16 reported out House Bill 217, which would require a human safety operator in autonomous vehicles used commercially. Industry witnesses called the provision a de facto ban on driverless deployments and urged the committee to consider DOT's suggested alternatives.

The Senate State Affairs Committee on Wednesday voted by unanimous consent to report House Bill 217 out of committee with individual recommendations and an attached fiscal note, advancing legislation that would require a human safety operator to be present in autonomous vehicles when they operate commercially in Alaska. The committee, chaired by Vice Chair Bjorkman, heard industry witnesses who urged rejection of the measure, arguing it would block testing and deployment in the state.

Griffin Succau, staff to the House Transportation Committee who presented the bill on behalf of sponsor Rep. Ashley Kerrick, summarized HB 217 as a regulatory framework for autonomous vehicles "as it relates to the movement of commerce, goods and passengers" and said the bill would require a human safety operator when an autonomous vehicle is running in Alaska.

Industry witnesses urged the committee to vote against the bill. Kurt Augustine, senior director of state affairs at the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, said HB 217 "would effectively ban autonomous light duty vehicles for commercial use," and cautioned that states that make deployment difficult tend to lose testing and investment. "If we start banning technologies, it's not gonna come to the state," Augustine said, urging the committee to consider a letter from the Alaska Department of Transportation that he said offers a "viable path forward."

Daniel Gough, vice president of external affairs at Kodiak AI, said his company has driven "over 3,000,000 autonomous miles" with backup safety drivers and described Kodiak's systems and testing experience as evidence the state could adopt rules that permit testing and eventual deployment. "If this bill passes, Kodiak and our colleagues in the industry will have no interest in testing in Alaska without a path to deployment," Gough said, and he asked the committee to vote no.

Renee Gibson, vice president of government affairs at the Autonomous Vehicle Industry Association, similarly described a broad body of industry experience and safety miles, saying the bill "would amount to a ban on commercial AVs, shutting the door for companies to invest in the state and denying Alaska's access to its safety and economic benefits." Gibson said AVs reduce risks tied to distracted, impaired or fatigued driving.

Rich Steiner, vice president of government relations at Gatik, said his company operates fleets in multiple U.S. states and Canada and warned that an in-vehicle human-operator requirement "would effectively ban autonomous truck deployments in Alaska" and therefore prevent communities from realizing safety, supply-chain and workforce benefits.

After closing public testimony, the committee discussed a written letter submitted by the Alaska Department of Transportation with suggested informational improvements to the bill. Senator Tilton said he appreciated the work on the bill but that the DOT letter arriving in written form only recently meant the bill "could use a little bit more work," noting concerns about how exemptions for personal ownership and certain commercial uses are structured.

A committee member moved to report CS HB 217 (v.3-4-LS0950) out of the Senate State Affairs Committee with individual recommendations and the attached fiscal note; there was no objection and the motion carried by unanimous consent. Committee members were asked to remain after adjournment to sign the committee report. The committee adjourned at 3:56 p.m.; it may reconvene May 19 to hear additional bills.