Existing law regulates vehicles, including autonomous vehicles and autonomous technology in vehicles. Under existing federal statute and regulation, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) issued the Third Amended Standing General Order 2021-01, effective June 16, 2025, that requires specified vehicle and equipment manufacturers and operators of autonomous driving systems and Level 2 advanced driver assistance system (ADAS) vehicles to report crashes to NHTSA, as specified. A violation of the Vehicle Code is an infraction.

This bill would require a manufacturer of a Level 2 ADAS vehicle to report a crash involving its Level 2 ADAS vehicle to the Department of Motor Vehicles, including reporting the crash, as defined, within 5 days of the crash, as specified, if specified conditions pertaining to the crash are met. The bill would require the department to post this crash data on its internet website, as specified, and to transmit this data to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the National Transportation Safety Board, as specified. The bill would prohibit the department from publishing any proprietary business information, including any personally identifiable information, when posting crash data on its internet website and would make this information confidential and not subject to disclosure under certain public records provisions. The bill would impose a civil penalty of $27,874 per violation per day on a manufacturer that fails to report a crash pursuant to these provisions. The bill would be operative only if the Third Amended Standing General Order 2021-01 is repealed and not replaced with another general order, a federal statute, or a federal regulation that is consistent with the repealed General Order, as determined by the Director of Motor Vehicles.

Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest.

This bill would make legislative findings to that effect.

By expanding the application of a crime, this bill would create a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law regulates vehicles, including autonomous vehicles and autonomous technology in vehicles. Under existing federal statute and regulation, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) issued the Second Third Amended Standing General Order (General Order) 2021-01, effective May 15, 2023, June 16, 2025, that requires specified vehicle and equipment manufacturers and operators of autonomous driving systems and Level 2 advanced driver assistance system (ADAS) vehicles to report crashes to NHTSA, as specified. A violation of the Vehicle Code is an infraction.

This bill would require a manufacturer of a Level 2 ADAS vehicle to report a crash involving its Level 2 ADAS vehicle to the Department of Motor Vehicles, including reporting the crash, as defined, within one or five 5 days of the crash, as specified, if specified conditions pertaining to the crash are met. The bill would require the department to post this crash data on its internet website, as specified, and to transmit this data to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the National Transportation Safety Board, as specified. The bill would prohibit the department from publishing any proprietary business information, including any personally identifiable information, when posting crash data on its internet website and would make this information confidential and not subject to disclosure under certain public records provisions. The bill would impose a civil penalty of $26,315 $27,874 per violation per day on a manufacturer that fails to report a crash pursuant to these provisions. The bill would be operative only if a specified condition is met, including the Third Amended Standing General Order 2021-01 is repealed and not replaced with another general order, a federal statute, or a federal regulation that is consistent with the policy goals of General Order 2021-01 or is substantially amended, the repealed General Order, as determined by the Director of Motor Vehicles.

Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest.

This bill would make legislative findings to that effect.

By expanding the application of a crime, this bill would create a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law regulates vehicles, including autonomous vehicles and autonomous technology in vehicles. Under existing federal statute and regulation, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) issued the Second Amended Standing General Order (General Order) 2021-01, effective May 15, 2023, that requires specified vehicle and equipment manufacturers and operators of autonomous driving systems and Level 2 advanced driver assistance system (ADAS) vehicles to report crashes to NHTSA, as specified. A violation of the Vehicle Code is an infraction.

This bill would require a manufacturer of a Level 2 ADAS vehicle to report a crash involving its Level 2 ADAS vehicle to the Department of Motor Vehicles, including reporting the crash, as defined, within one or five days of the crash, as specified, if specified conditions pertaining to the crash are met. The bill would require the department to post this crash data on its internet website, as specified, and to transmit this data to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the National Transportation Safety Board, as specified. The bill would prohibit the department from publishing any proprietary business information, including any personally identifiable information, when posting crash data on its internet website and would make this information confidential and not subject to disclosure under certain public records provisions. The bill would impose a civil penalty of $26,315 per violation per day on a manufacturer that fails to report a crash pursuant to these provisions. The bill would be operative only if a specified condition is met, including General Order 2021-01 is repealed and not replaced with another general order, a federal statute, or a federal regulation that is consistent with the policy goals of General Order 2021-01 or is substantially amended, as determined by the Director of Motor Vehicles.

By expanding the application of a crime, this bill would create a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law requires a dealer or manufacturer that sells any new passenger vehicle that is equipped with a partial driving automation feature, as defined, or that provides any software update or vehicle upgrade that adds a partial driving automation feature, to provide the buyer or owner with a consumer notice that describes the functions and limitations of those features.

This bill would make technical, nonsubstantive changes to those provisions.

Date of Hearing: August 20, 2025

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Buffy Wicks, Chair

SBPCA Bill Id:SB 572

Author:(Gonzalez) – As Amended Ver:July 3, 2025

Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: Yes Reimbursable: No

SUMMARY:

This bill requires, contingent on repeal of an applicable federal order, a manufacturer of a vehicle with specified advanced driver assistance system (ADAS) technology to report accident data to Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV).

The bill specifies its provisions will become operative only if the federal National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s (NHTSA) Third Amended Standing General Order 2021-01 (“General Order 2021-01”) is repealed and is not replaced with a consistent order, as determined by the director of DMV.

Subject to that condition, this bill, among other provisions:

1. Requires a manufacturer of a Level 2 ADAS vehicle (“covered manufacturer”) to report information about a qualifying accident to DMV within five calendar days upon receipt of notice of the accident. Requires a covered manufacturer to provide DMV an updated report if materially new or materially different information is discovered about an accident.
2. Requires DMV to post and update accident reporting data received from covered manufacturers on its website, and requires DMV to submit the received accident data to the NHTSA and the National Transportation Safety Board on a bimonthly basis.
3. Prohibits DMV from publishing proprietary business information when posting accident reporting data on its website, and requires DMV to ensure the data does not include any personally identifying information.
4. Makes a manufacturer that fails to report a crash as required by the bill liable to DMV for a civil penalty of $27,874 per violation per day.

FISCAL EFFECT:

1. Costs (Motor Vehicle Account) to DMV, possibly in the hundreds of thousands of dollars annually. DMV anticipates costs of $300,000 annually for consulting services to create, modify, and maintain a crash reporting system and dashboard tool, plus $200,000 annually for a mechanical engineer to review and evaluate the reported data. DMV notes the bill provides no cost recovery to the MVA. It is not clear when DMV will incur the costs associated with this bill. Although the bill’s provisions are contingent on repeal of a federal order, DMV may incur costs immediately upon enactment of the bill to establish the infrastructure needed to collect and publish data reports, while DMV likely would not incur costs for staffing for data review unless the federal order is repealed and the bill’s provisions become operative.

According to the Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO), the MVA – the main funding source for the DMV – is expected to fully exhaust its reserves and become insolvent in fiscal year 2025‑26.  The LAO further warns that the MVA, absent corrective action, such as revenue increases or spending reductions, will experience a negative fund balance of $1.4 billion in fiscal year 2028‑29.

1. Possible cost pressures (Trial Court Trust Fund, General Fund) of an unknown amount to the courts to adjudicate enforcement actions. The bill contains little detail about DMV’s enforcement of the data reporting requirement but authorizes a civil penalty. Presumably, DMV would need to file a civil action to enforce a violation and collect the penalty. Actual court costs will depend on the number of actions filed and the amount of court time needed to resolve each case. It generally costs approximately $1,000 to operate a courtroom for one hour. Although courts are not funded on the basis of workload, increased pressure on the Trial Court Trust Fund may create a demand for increased funding for courts from the General Fund. The fiscal year 2025-26 state budget provides $82 million ongoing General Fund to the Trial Court Trust Fund for court operations.

COMMENTS:

1. Background. NHTSA is a federal agency responsible for, among other things, issuing regulations and guidance about autonomous vehicles. There are six levels of autonomous vehicles, from Level 0 (a vehicle in which a human does all the driving) to Level 5 (a vehicle in which ADAS does all the driving without human intervention, and humans in the vehicle are merely riders). In a Level 2 ADAS vehicle, ADAS features can control steering, braking, and acceleration under some circumstances, but a human drives the vehicle and must constantly supervise the ADAS features. For example, Tesla’s Autopilot and Cadillac’s Super Cruise are Level 2 ADAS technologies. NHTSA’s General Order 2021-01 establishes mandatory accident reporting requirements for vehicles equipped with ADAS Level 1 and 2 technology. Federal regulators and policymakers use this data to evaluate ADAS technology, detect accident patterns, and inform safety recalls and regulations.
2. Purpose. According to the author:

Officials within the federal government have signaled they may consider ending the NHTSA requirement that manufacturers report collisions involving Level 2 ADAS vehicles and Level 3-5 autonomous vehicles…there is currently no state reporting requirement for Level 2 ADAS vehicles. Without NHTSA’s data, California will be left in the dark about the potential dangers of driver support technologies. We must establish safeguards to ensure that if the federal government vacates their responsibility to regulate road and vehicle safety, California consumers, regulators, and public safety officials will maintain access to this critical data.

If the federal government rescinds General Order 2021-01 and fails to replace it with a comparable regulation (as determined by the director of DMV) this bill requires covered manufacturers to submit to DMV accident data involving Level 2 ADAS vehicles, ensuring continuity of data reporting about accidents in California. However, this technology is not licensed or regulated by DMV – DMV’s role in this space is limited to data collection, and the department may not pursue broader regulation or enforcement based on the data affected by this bill.

1. Prior Legislation. AB 3061 (Haney), of the 2023-24 Legislative Session, would have required autonomous vehicle manufacturers to report data related to collisions and disengagements to DMV. The Governor vetoed AB 3061, citing the bill’s infeasible timeline for implementation and ongoing DMV regulations that address similar issues.

Analysis Prepared by: Annika Carlson / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing: July 14, 2025

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION

Lori D. Wilson, Chair

SBPCA Bill Id:SB 572

Author:(Gonzalez) – As Amended Ver:July 3, 2025

SENATE VOTE: 29-5

SUBJECT: Vehicles: advanced driver assistance system: crash reports

SUMMARY: Requires the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to compile and publish crash data that manufacturers of vehicles with advanced driver assist technology (ADAS) report to the DMV. Specifically, this bill:

1. Requires a manufacturer of a Level 2 ADAS vehicle to report an accident involving a Level 2 ADAS vehicle to DMV within five calendar days upon receipt of notice of the accident, if the vehicular crash met all of the following conditions:
2. Is on a publicly accessible road in California;
3. Level 2 ADAS feature was engaged any time 30 seconds prior to the accident, as specified;
4. Accident results in a fatality, any individual being transported to a hospital for medical treatment, an air bag deployment, or impact with a vulnerable road user; and,
5. Accident occurs 10 or more calendar days from the enactment of this measure.
6. Requires the abovementioned vehicular crash reports submitted to DMV to provide all applicable information consistent with the requirements of the Third Amended General Order 2021-01, as specified.
7. Requires a manufacturer of a Level 2 ADAS vehicle that was involved in a crash and submitted an initial report to DMV, to provide an updated report to DMV by the 15^th of the subsequent month of the initial report if substantially new information was discovered or substantially changed in one of a variety of reporting fields, as specified.
8. Requires DMV to post accident reporting data, pursuant to the provisions specified in this bill, onto the department’s internet website and update the data on a bimonthly basis, as specified. Further requires DMV to submit the received accident data to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the National Transportation Safety Board on a bimonthly basis.
9. Prohibits DMV from publishing any proprietary business information, as specified, or personally identifying information when posting the abovementioned accident reporting data on its internet website.
10. Makes a manufacturer that fails to report a crash as required by the bill liable to the department for a civil penalty of $27,874 per violation per day, as specified.
11. Provides that the reporting provisions specified in this measure will become operative only if the Third Amended Standing General Order 2021-01 is repealed and not replaced with another General Order, federal statute, or federal regulation that is consistent with this General Order published as of June 16, 2025.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Authorizes the operation of an autonomous vehicle (AV) on public roads for testing purposes by a driver who possesses the proper class of license for the type of vehicle operated, if specified requirements are satisfied. (Vehicle Code Section (VEH) 38750 (b).)
2. Defines “autonomous vehicle” to mean a vehicle equipped with technology that makes it capable of operation that meets the definition of Levels 3, 4, or 5 of the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) International's Taxonomy and Testing of Autonomous Vehicles Definitions for Terms Related to Driving Automation Systems for On-Road Motor Vehicles, standard J3016 (APR 2021). (VEH 38750 (a)(2).)
3. Requires the DMV to adopt regulations providing requirements for submitting evidence of insurance, surety bond, or self-insurance requirements, submitting and approving an application to operate an autonomous vehicle, and processes related to notices of autonomous vehicle noncompliance. (VEH (d)(1).)
4. Authorizes the DMV to establish additional requirements through regulations that the DMV determines, in consultation with the Department of the California Highway Patrol, are necessary to ensure the safe operation of autonomous vehicles on public roads. (VEH 38750 (d)(3).)

FISCAL EFFECT: According to Senate Appropriations Committee:

• DMV anticipates ongoing annual costs of approximately $500,000 annually, including $300,000 for consulting services to create, modify, and maintain a crash reporting system and dashboard, and $200,000 for 1.0 PY of workload to review and evaluate the reported data. Staff notes that the bill’s requirements would only be operative, and these costs would only be incurred, to the extent that the federal General Standing Order is repealed and not replaced with a similar federal general order, statute, or regulation. (Motor Vehicle Account)

COMMENTS: SB 1298 (Padilla), Chapter 570, Statutes of 2012 permitted AVs to be operated on public roads for testing purposes by a driver under certain conditions. In 2014, DMV released regulations to allow for the testing of AVs with a test driver, and in April 2018, DMV finalized regulations for the testing and deployment of AVs on public roads without a driver, with certain limitations. 58 companies currently have a testing permit with a driver, and eight companies have received a testing permit without a driver. One company has received a deployment permit.

SAE International is a U.S. based professional association of engineers. SAE International’s Taxonomy and Definition for Terms Related to Driving Automation Systems for On-Road Motor Vehicles have become the accepted engineering definitions for the different levels of automation with NHTSA and DMV. SAE has designated six different levels of Automated Vehicles (AVs):

Level 0: The human driver does all the driving.

Level 1: An advanced driver assistance system (ADAS) on the vehicle can sometimes assist the human driver with either steering or braking/accelerating, but not both simultaneously. An example includes adaptive cruise control.

Level 2: ADAS on the vehicle control both steering and braking/accelerating simultaneously under some circumstances.  The human driver must pay full attention (“monitor the driving environment”) at all times and perform the rest of the driving task. Examples include Tesla’s Autopilot and Cadillac Super Cruise.

Level 3: An ADAS on the vehicle performs all aspects of the driving task under some circumstances.  In those circumstances, the human driver must be ready to take back control at any time when the ADAS requests the human driver to do so.  In all other circumstances, the human driver performs the driving task.

Level 4: ADAS on the vehicle performs all driving tasks and monitors the driving environment – essentially, does all the driving – in certain circumstances.  The human need not pay attention in those circumstances.

Level 5: ADAS on the vehicle does all the driving in all circumstances.  The human occupants are passengers and do not need to be involved in driving.

Both the federal and state law define AVs as vehicles with automated technology of Levels 3-5.

Level 2 and Level 3 systems relieve the driver of some or all of the dynamic driving task, while still requiring the driver to pay active attention to the road.

Research at Virginia Tech University sponsored by General Motors (GM) and the Federal Highway Administration found similar results. Twelve drivers were given vehicles with adaptive cruise control that handled a car’s steering and breaking and put on a test track. Drivers were provided reading material, food, drinks and entertainment media. A passenger joined them and was watching a DVD during the test drive. 58% of drivers watched the DVD for some time during the three hour trip. 25% of the drivers read--increasing their risk of a car crash by 3.4 times. Overall, drivers were estimated to be looking away from the road about 33% of the time during the course of the three-hour trip.

NHTSA General Order 2021-01. NHTSA’s General Order 2021-01 establishes mandatory vehicular crashes reporting requirements for vehicles equipped with ADAS Level 1 and 2 technology. Specifically, the Order requires manufacturers to report vehicular crashes involving ADAS Level 1-equipped vehicles involved in a crash if the ADAS technology was active within 30 seconds of the incident; and to report whether the incident resulted in property damage or injury. For Level 2 ADAS, manufacturers and must report vehicles involved in crashes if ADAS was active within 30 seconds and involved a vulnerable user, a fatality occurred, a passenger was hospitalized, the vehicle was towed off, or an airbag was deployed.

Reports have indicated that the Trump administration may end the reporting of car crashes to the NHTSA under General Order 2021-01. Reuters reported in December 2024 that ending this disclosure “would particularly benefit Tesla, which has reported most of the crashes – more than 1,500 – to federal safety regulators under the program. 845 of those crashes occurred in California. The Biden Administration had proposed making this General Standing Order permanent prior to the November 2024 election. In June 2025, NHTSA extended the general standing order until June 2028. The updated general standing order changed several reporting requirements, including increasing the threshold for reporting property damage crashes, allowed for less severe crashes to be reported monthly instead of within five days, and removing reporting requirements if there is nothing to report.

Tesla has been targeted in NHTSA investigations, including three stemming from the data. According to a December 2024 Reuters story, the Trump administration had initially proposed scrapping the reporting rule altogether. According to Reuters, “Crash reporting data serves a crucial consumer protection function as the data has allowed the NHTSA to ‘detect crash patterns’ and pursue investigations and safety recalls. NHTSA said it has received and analyzed data on more than 2,700 crashes since the agency established the rule in 2021. The data has influenced 10 investigations into six companies, NHTSA said, as well as nine safety recalls involving four different companies.”

According to the author. “Officials within the federal government have signaled they may consider ending the NHTSA requirement that manufacturers report collisions involving Level 2 ADAS vehicles and Level 3-5 autonomous vehicles. California has more Level 2 ADAS vehicles – which are vehicles that have driver support features including lane centering and adaptive cruise control but require a driver at all times – than any other state, as well as the most collisions involving these vehicles. While the DMV is already pursuing regulations for autonomous vehicles, there is currently no state reporting requirement for Level 2 ADAS vehicles. Without NHTSA’s data, California will be left in the dark about the potential dangers of driver support technologies. We must establish safeguards to ensure that if the federal government vacates their responsibility to regulate road and vehicle safety, California consumers, regulators, and public safety officials will maintain access to this critical data. SB 572 will require manufacturers of Level 2 ADAS vehicles to report collisions involving these vehicles to the DMV, and require the DMV to post this information on their website. This will provide the transparency and accountability from manufacturers that Californians deserve as vehicle technologies advance.”

The California Professional Firefighters (CPF), writing in support of this bill, argue “In recent years, CPF members have responded to incidents involving vehicles using autonomous driving technology. When these incidents occur the primary focus of firefighters is to effectively stabilize patients and get them safely to definitive care. While this is the primary focus of our members, it is also critical to collect information on any accidents involving this technology in order to understand the incidents and identify opportunities to reduce the likelihood of an accident reoccurring in the future.

Currently, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) Standing General Order (General Order) 2021-01 requires vehicle and equipment manufacturers and operators of autonomous driving systems (ADS) and Level 2 ADAS system vehicles to report collisions under specified conditions. NHTSA makes this data publicly available on their website and can use data to respond to crashes that raise safety concerns about the technology through further investigation and enforcement. According to NHTSA data, California has the most crashes involving Level 2 ADAS vehicles – 747, which is over 500 more crashes than any other state. As of February 2025, NHTSA had six pending investigations into Tesla’s ADAS system, which is marketed as full self-driving technology, prompted by numerous crashes that occurred when the technology was engaged.

However, changes at the federal level have put crash reporting requirements at risk. If the federal government ceases collecting and reporting this important public safety data, SB 572 will require manufacturers to report collisions involving Level 2 ADAS vehicles that meet specific criteria to the DMV, and require the DMV to make the data public to ensure that consumers, regulators, and stakeholders have access to this critical information.

Should the federal government roll back safeguards, SB 572 will ensure oversight of driver assistance technology and improve transparency, accountability, and vehicle safety. For these reasons, we are proud to support this important measure.”

The bill has no formal opposition. Tesla writes the following about its “concerns” with the bill:

“We remain concerned about the bill’s operative provisions if NHTSA adopts and repeals a subsequent version of the Standing General Order (SGO) to keep pace with the rate of technology improvement or public safety needs, such as an Eighth Amended SGO five years from now for example. In this scenario, SB 572 would automatically require the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to enforce reporting aligned with the Third Amended SGO, which may differ significantly from future iterations and be outdated. Additionally, we remain concerned that the reporting obligations fail to sufficiently protect proprietary and confidential business information. Within NHTSA’s SGO incident reporting form, there is an option to allow reporting entities to identify data as confidential via a check box. While SB 572 states that the DMV shall not publish any proprietary business information, explicit legislative text is recommended to ensure reporting entities are able to inform the DMV at time of submission when and which data is proprietary, mirroring the SGO’s reporting form.”

Committee comments: This bill indefinitely requires DMV to collect crash data for ADAS systems should the federal government stop collecting the data. When this bill was introduced, there were indicated that the new administration planned on removing the data collection requirement altogether, removing valuable data that a future administration may have used to develop regulations for safety requirements for ADAS systems or issue recalls because of the lack of safety of existing systems. This bill was intended to remove pressure from automakers on the federal government who wanted the general standing order repealed because of the potential damage to their stock value( in June of 2025 Tesla filed a lawsuit against NHTSA over making the crash reporting public out of concerns for potential trade secrets being released).

Should this administration decide in 2028 not to extend the general standing order, DMV would be required to collect ADAS crash data consistent with the rules established by the general standing order (DMV already collects crash data for automated vehicles (SAE levels 3-5), which is has the ability to regulate. DMV has no regulatory authority for level 2 systems.

According to the Legislative Analyst Office (LAO), the Motor Vehicle Account (MVA), the primary funding source for DMV, is expected to fully exhaust its reserves and become insolvent in 2025-26. The LAO recommends the Legislature should consider MVA cost pressures when evaluating new proposals. LAO argues that “Until a plan is put in place to address MVA’s structural deficit, we recommend the Legislature set a high bar for considering approval of any proposals that create additional MVA cost pressures and accelerate the risk of insolvency.”

In the Governor’s proposed 2025-2026 budget, the Governor warned that “Given the projected fiscal constraints in the MVA by 2025-26, the Administration will continue to prioritize fiscal discipline and will set a high bar for any new workload or initiatives beyond the DMV’s existing operational priorities. By focusing on core operational priorities, the DMV will focus on serving Californians while navigating the MVA’s fiscal constraints.”

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety
California Bicycle Coalition
California Professional Firefighters
California Safety and Legislative Board of Smart – Transportation Division
California Walks
Center for Auto Safety
Consumer Attorneys of California
Consumer Watchdog
Consumers for Auto Reliability & Safety
Public Citizen
Streets for All
Teamsters California

Opposition

None on file

Analysis Prepared by: David Sforza / TRANS. / (916) 319-2093

Date of Hearing: July 1, 2025

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY

Ash Kalra, Chair

SBPCA Bill Id:SB 572

Author:(Gonzalez) – As Amended Ver:May 23, 2025

As Proposed to be Amended

SENATE VOTE: 29-5

SUBJECT: VEHICLES: ADVANCED DRIVER ASSISTANCE SYSTEM: CRASH REPORTS

KEY ISSUE: SHOULD THE DMV BE REQUIRED TO COMPILE AND PUBLISH CRASH DATA ABOUT CERTAIN SELF-DRIVING VEHICLES; SHOULD CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION SUBMITTED TO DMV BE EXEMPT FROM PUBLIC DISCLOSURE; AND SHOULD THE DMV BE AUTHORIZED TO SEEK A CIVIL PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS BY MANUFACTURERS WHO FAIL TO REPORT CRASH DATA, AS REQUIRED?

SYNOPSIS

NHTSA General Order 2021-01, issued by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in 2021, establishes mandatory accident (vehicular crashes) reporting requirements for vehicles equipped with ADAS Level 2 technology. Specifically, the Order requires manufacturers and operators to report vehicular accidents involving ADAS Level 2 technologies to NHTSA. Reports have indicated that the Trump administration may end the reporting of car crashes to the NHTSA under General Order 2021-01. Reuters reported in December 2024 that ending this disclosure “would particularly benefit Tesla, which has reported most of the crashes – more than 1,500 – to federal safety regulators under the program.”

This bill seeks to ensure that crash data about certain self-driving vehicles continues to be collected by government regulators and made available to the public (except to the extent that the information is confidential and exempt from disclosure to the public). Ensuring that data continues to be available is important to the state, given that the vast majority of crashes involving vehicles equipped with ADAS Level 2 technology have occurred in California. Most relevant to the jurisdiction of this Committee, the bill exempts any confidential information within the data DMV collects from being disclosed to the public, including in DMV’s data publication of crash data. The bill also provides for a civil penalty payable to DMV for manufacturers who fail to report their data to DMV. The fine is purely administrative and not enforceable by means of civil action. Should the bill be approved by this Committee, it will be referred to the Assembly Committee on Transportation, which has primary jurisdiction over the bill, notwithstanding that the bill is being heard first in the Committee on Judiciary for mutually convenient scheduling purposes.

The bill in print arguably is unclear about how the civil penalty for a violation is recovered. The author has agreed to resolve this with a minor technical amendment that clarifies that the manufacturer is liable “to the department.” The amendment is included in the Summary of the bill, below, and explained in the analysis. The bill is supported by labor organizations, consumer groups, and advocates for pedestrians and bicyclists. It has no opposition on file.

SUMMARY: Requires the DMV to compile and publish crash data about certain self-driving vehicles; makes confidential information submitted to DMV be exempt from public disclosure; and authorizes DMV to seek a civil penalty for violations. Specifically, this bill:

1. Requires a manufacturer of a Level 2 ADAS vehicle to report an accident involving a Level 2 ADAS vehicle to DMV within five calendar days upon receipt of notice of the accident, if the vehicular crash met all of the following conditions:
   1. Is on a publicly accessible road in California;
   2. The Level 2 ADAS feature was engaged any time 30 seconds prior to the accident, as specified;
   3. The accident results in a fatality, any individual being transported to a hospital for medical treatment, an air bag deployment, or impact with a vulnerable road user; and,
   4. The accident occurs 10 or more calendar days from the enactment of this measure.
2. Requires the abovementioned vehicular crash reports submitted to DMV to provide all applicable information consistent with the requirements of the Third Amended General Order 2021-01, as specified.
3. Requires a manufacturer of a Level 2 ADAS vehicle that was involved in a crash and submitted an initial report to DMV, to provide an updated report to DMV by the 15^th of the subsequent month of the initial report if substantially new information was discovered or substantially changed in one of a variety of reporting fields, as specified.
4. Requires DMV to post accident reporting data, pursuant to the provisions specified in this bill, onto the department’s internet website and update the data on a bimonthly basis, as specified. Further requires DMV to submit the received accident data to NHTSA and the National Transportation Safety Board on a bimonthly basis.
5. Prohibits DMV from publishing any proprietary business information, as specified, or personally identifying information when posting the abovementioned accident reporting data on its internet website.
6. Makes a manufacturer that fails to report a crash as required by the bill liable to the department for a civil penalty of $27,874 per violation per day, as specified.
7. Provides that the reporting provisions specified in this measure will become operative only if the Third Amended Standing General Order 2021-01 is repealed and not replaced with another General Order, federal statute, or federal regulation that is consistent with this General Order published as of June 16, 2025.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Provides that the people have the right of access to information concerning the conduct of the people’s business and, therefore, the writings of public officials and agencies shall be open to public scrutiny. Specifies that any law or rule that limits the public right of access shall be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation. (California Constitution, art. I, Section 3.)
2. Provides that, in enacting the California Public Records Act (CPRA), the Legislature, mindful of the right of individuals to privacy, finds and declares that access to information concerning the conduct of the people’s business is a fundamental and necessary right of every person in this state. (Government Code Section 7921.000. All further statutory references are to this code, unless otherwise indicated.)
3. Provides that public records are open to inspection at all times during the office hours of a state or local agency and every person has a right to inspect any public record, exempted as otherwise provided; and that any reasonably segregable portion of a record shall be available for inspection by any person requesting the record after deletion of the portions that are exempted by law. (Section 7922.525.)
4. Requires a public agency to justify withholding any record by demonstrating that the record in question is exempt under express provisions of this division, or that on the facts of the particular case the public interest served by not disclosing the record clearly outweighs the public interest served by disclosure of the record. (Section 7922.000.)
5. Sets Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. (49 C.F.R. Part 571.)
6. Authorizes the operation of an autonomous vehicle (AV) on public roads for testing purposes by a driver who possesses the proper class of license for the type of vehicle operated, if specified requirements are satisfied. (Vehicle Code Section 38750 (b).)
7. Defines “autonomous vehicle” to mean a vehicle equipped with technology that makes it capable of operation that meets the definition of Levels 3, 4, or 5 of the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) International's Taxonomy and Testing of Autonomous Vehicles Definitions for Terms Related to Driving Automation Systems for On-Road Motor Vehicles, standard J3016 (APR 2021). (Vehicle Code Section 38750 (a)(2).)
8. Requires the DMV to adopt regulations providing requirements for submitting evidence of insurance, surety bond, or self-insurance requirements, submitting and approving an application to operate an autonomous vehicle, and processes related to notices of autonomous vehicle noncompliance. (Vehicle Code Section 38750 (d)(1).)
9. Authorizes the DMV to establish additional requirements through regulations that the DMV determines, in consultation with the Department of the California Highway Patrol, are necessary to ensure the safe operation of autonomous vehicles on public roads. (Vehicle Code Section 38750 (d)(3).)

FISCAL EFFECT: As currently in print this bill is keyed fiscal.

COMMENTS: This bill seeks to ensure that crash data about certain self-driving vehicles continues to be collected by government regulators and made available to the public (except to the extent that the information is confidential and exempt from disclosure to the public). Ensuring that data continues to be available is important to the state, given that the vast majority of crashes involving vehicles equipped with ADAS Level 2 technology have occurred in California. According to the author:

Officials within the federal government have signaled they may consider ending the NHTSA requirement that manufacturers report collisions involving Level 2 ADAS vehicles and Level 3-5 autonomous vehicles. California has more Level 2 ADAS vehicles – which are vehicles that have driver support features including lane centering and adaptive cruise control but require a driver at all times – than any other state, as well as the most collisions involving these vehicles. While the DMV is already pursuing regulations for autonomous vehicles, there is currently no state reporting requirement for Level 2 ADAS vehicles. Without NHTSA’s data, California will be left in the dark about the potential dangers of driver support technologies. We must establish safeguards to ensure that if the federal government vacates their responsibility to regulate road and vehicle safety, California consumers, regulators, and public safety officials will maintain access to this critical data. SB 572 will require manufacturers of Level 2 ADAS vehicles to report collisions involving these vehicles to the DMV, and require the DMV to post this information on their website. This will provide the transparency and accountability from manufacturers that Californians deserve as vehicle technologies advance.

Most relevant to the jurisdiction of this Committee, the bill exempts any confidential information within the data DMV collects from being disclosed to the public, including in DMV’s data publication of crash data. The bill also provides for a civil penalty payable to DMV for manufacturers who fail to report their data to DMV. The fine is purely administrative and not enforceable by means of civil action. Should the bill be approved by this Committee, it will be referred to the Assembly Committee on Transportation, which has primary jurisdiction over the bill, notwithstanding that it is being heard first in the Committee on Judiciary for scheduling purposes.

Background – the Federal National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). Currently, NHTSA provides a variety of regulations and policy guidance pertaining to self-driving of automated or autonomous vehicles (AVs) equipped with automated control features based upon the level of vehicle autonomy. NHTSA and DMV utilize the same levels of autonomy, which have been developed by Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) and graded from Level 0 to Level 5. California’s statutes and regulations regulate AV Levels 3 through 5. Levels 1 and 2 provide features that offer assistance to a human driver, such as lane-keeping assistance, adaptive cruise control, and automatic emergency braking. Levels 0-2 technologies are intended to assist the human driver. The vehicle require human supervision, and the driver remains responsible for vehicle operation. On the other hand, higher Level 3-5 AVs have Automated Driver-Assistance Systems (ADS) technology that is designed to perform the entire dynamic driving task without a human driver. Under Levels 3 through 5, the ADS system takes full control of the vehicle and any human in the AV is not responsible for its operation (i.e. self-driving vehicles). Existing law requires DMV to collect crash data about ADS-equipped vehicles. Thus, Level 3-5 AVs are not included in or addressed by this bill.

NHTSA General Order 2021-01. NHTSA’s General Order 2021-01 establishes mandatory accident (vehicular crashes) reporting requirements for vehicles equipped with ADAS Level 1 and 2 technology. Specifically, the Order requires manufacturers to report vehicular accidents involving ADAS Level 1-equipped vehicles involved in an accident if the ADAS technology was active within 30 seconds of the incident; and to report whether the incident resulted in property damage or injury. For Level 2 ADAS, manufacturers and must report vehicles involved in accidents if ADAS was active within 30 seconds and involved a vulnerable user, a fatality occurred, a passenger was hospitalized, the vehicle was towed off, or an airbag was deployed.

Reports have indicated that the Trump administration may end the reporting of car crashes to the NHTSA under General Order 2021-01. Reuters reported in December 2024 that ending this disclosure “would particularly benefit Tesla, which has reported most of the crashes – more than 1,500 – to federal safety regulators under the program. Tesla has been targeted in National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) investigations, including three stemming from the data.” (Renshaw, Levey & Kirkham, Reuters, Exclusive: Trump team wants to scrap car-crash reporting rule that Tesla opposes, (Dec. 17, 2024), available at https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/trump-transition-recommends-scrapping-car-crash-reporting-requirement-opposed-by-2024-12-13/.) Crash reporting data serves a crucial consumer protection function as the data has allowed the NHTSA to “detect crash patterns” and pursue investigations and safety recalls. (Ibid.) “NHTSA said it has received and analyzed data on more than 2,700 crashes since the agency established the rule in 2021. The data has influenced 10 investigations into six companies, NHTSA said, as well as nine safety recalls involving four different companies.” (Ibid.)

Background – California Public Records Act (CPRA). Public Access to Public Records. Access to information concerning the conduct of the people’s business is a fundamental and necessary right of every person in this state. (Section 7921.000.) In 2004, the right of public access was enshrined in the California Constitution with the passage of Proposition 59 (Nov. 3, 2004, statewide general election), placed on the ballot by a unanimous vote of both houses of the Legislature. SCA 1 (Burton, Ch. 1, Stats. 2004) amended the California Constitution to specifically protect the right of the public to access and obtain government records: “The people have the right of access to information concerning the conduct of the people’s business, and therefore . . . the writings of public officials and agencies shall be open to public scrutiny.” (Cal. Const., art. I, sec. 3 (b)(1).) In 2014, voters approved Proposition 42 (Jun. 3, 2014, statewide direct primary election), placed on the ballot by a unanimous vote of both houses of the Legislature, (SCA 3 (Leno, Ch. 123, Stats. 2013), to further increase public access to government records by requiring local agencies to comply with the CPRA and the Ralph M. Brown Act, and with any subsequent statutory enactment amending either act, as provided. (Cal. Const., art. I, sec. 3 (b)(7).)

Under the California Public Records Act (CPRA), public records are open to inspection at all times during the office hours of a public agency for inspection by the public, unless exempted. (Section 7922.525.) A public record is defined as any writing containing information relating to the conduct of the public’s business prepared, owned, used, or retained by any public agency regardless of physical form or characteristics. (Section 7920.530.) Despite the CPRA’s general rule that public records are open to inspection and subject to disclosure, the CPRA provides exceptions providing that a document, or a portion thereof, is not subject to public disclosure. An exemption can be explicit in the CPRA itself, pursuant to another law, or justified by the agency’s determination that, based on the facts of the particular case, the public interest served by not disclosing the record clearly outweighs the public interest served by disclosure of the record. (See Sections 7922.000, 7922.525, 7922.530.)

This bill seeks to ensure that crash data about certain self-driving vehicles continues to be collected by government regulators and made available to the public. Most relevant to the jurisdiction of this Committee, the bill (1) exempts any confidential information within the data DMV collects from being disclosed to the public, including in DMV’s data publication of crash data; and (2) provides for a civil penalty for manufacturers who fail to report their data to DMV. The fine is purely administrative and not enforceable by means of civil action.

CPRA exemption. The bill requires - if the federal government ceases requiring crash reporting of Level 2 ADAS vehicles - the DMV to post accident reporting data, pursuant to the provisions specified in this bill, onto the department’s internet website and update the data on a bimonthly basis. It further requires DMV to submit the received accident data to NHTSA and the National Transportation Safety Board on a bimonthly basis. It prohibits DMV from publishing any proprietary business information, however, or personally identifying information when posting the abovementioned accident reporting data on its internet website.

Existing law makes corporate financial records, corporate proprietary information including trade secrets, provided by a private company to a public agency exempt from mandatory disclosure in response to a CPRA request. (Section 7927.605 (a).) A number of statutes in existing law exempt “personal identifying information” from public disclosure. For example, subdivision (e) of Section 5096.520 provides that personal identifying information shall not be posted on the Resource Agency’s central public registry of all conservation easements held or required by the state. And dozens of statutes make such information confidential in various circumstances. Therefore these exemptions are consistent with existing law.

Civil Penalty. The bill imposes a “civil penalty” on a manufacturer for failing to report an accident as required by the bill of $27,874 per violation per day. The bill in print is somewhat ambiguous about how the penalty is assessed (in a civil action, or in an administrative proceeding).

Tesla’s “Concerns” with the bill. The bill has no formal opposition. Nevertheless, Tesla (which is the subject of numerous NHTSA investigations) writes the following about its “concerns” with the bill:

We remain concerned about the bill’s operative provisions if NHTSA adopts and repeals a subsequent version of the SGO to keep pace with the rate of technology improvement or public safety needs, such as an Eighth Amended SGO five years from now for example. In this scenario, SB 572 would automatically require the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to enforce reporting aligned with the Third Amended SGO, which may differ significantly from future iterations and be outdated. Additionally, we remain concerned that the reporting obligations fail to sufficiently protect proprietary and confidential business information. Within NHTSA’s SGO incident reporting form, there is an option to allow reporting entities to identify data as confidential via a check box. While SB 572 states that the DMV shall not publish any proprietary business information, explicit legislative text is recommended to ensure reporting entities are able to inform the DMV at time of submission when and which data is proprietary, mirroring the SGO’s reporting form.

Minor technical and clarifying amendment. The bill in print arguably is unclear about how the civil penalty for a violation is recovered. The author has agreed to resolve the ambiguity as follows:

(c) A manufacturer that fails to report a crash pursuant to this section to the department shall be liable to the department for a civil penalty of twenty-seven thousand, eight hundred seventy-four dollars ($27,874) per violation per day.

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: Public Citizen writes that it supports the bill:

If the federal government ceases collecting this important public safety data, SB 572 will require manufacturers to report collisions involving Level 2 ADAS vehicles that meet specific criteria to the DMV, and require the DMV to make the data public to ensure that consumers, regulators, and stakeholders have access to this critical information.

As the federal government threats to roll back safeguards, SB 572 will ensure oversight of driver assistance technology and improve transparency, accountability, and vehicle safety. For these reasons, Public Citizen supports SB 572.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety
California Bicycle Coalition
California Professional Firefighters
California Safety and Legislative Board of Smart – Transportation Division (SMART – TD)
California Teamsters Public Affairs Council
California Walks
Center for Auto Safety
Consumer Attorneys of California
Consumer Watchdog
Consumers for Auto Reliability & Safety
Public Citizen
Streets for All
Teamsters California

Opposition

None on file

Analysis Prepared by: Alison Merrilees / JUD. / (916) 319-2334

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: SB 572

Author: Gonzalez (D)

Amended: 5/23/25

Vote: 21

SENATE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE: 11-1, 4/22/25

AYES: Cortese, Archuleta, Arreguín, Blakespear, Cervantes, Gonzalez, Grayson, Limón, Menjivar, Richardson, Umberg

NOES: Seyarto

NO VOTE RECORDED: Strickland, Dahle, Valladares

SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: 12-0, 4/29/25

AYES: Umberg, Niello, Allen, Arreguín, Ashby, Caballero, Durazo, Laird, Stern, Wahab, Weber Pierson, Wiener

NO VOTE RECORDED: Valladares

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 5-1, 5/23/25

AYES: Caballero, Cabaldon, Grayson, Richardson, Wahab

NOES: Seyarto

NO VOTE RECORDED: Dahle

SUBJECT: Vehicles: advanced driver assistance system: crash reports

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST:

This bill authorizes the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to collect certain accident data from manufacturers of vehicles with specific types of advanced driver assistance system (ADAS) capabilities, as specified.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Defines “autonomous vehicle” (AV) to mean a vehicle equipped with technology that makes it capable of operation that meets the definition of Levels 3, 4, or 5 of the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) International's Taxonomy and Testing of Autonomous Vehicles Definitions for Terms Related to Driving Automation Systems for On-Road Motor Vehicles, standard J3016 (APR 2021).
2. Authorizes the operation of an AV on public roads for testing purposes by a driver who possesses the proper class of license for the type of vehicle operated, if specified requirements are satisfied. 
3. Prohibits the operation of an AV on public roads until the manufacturer submits an application to DMV and is approved, as specified.

1. Requires DMV to adopt regulations setting forth requirements for the submission and approval of an application, including, among other things, any testing, equipment, and performance standards DMV concludes are necessary to ensure the safe operation of autonomous vehicles on public roads, as specified.
2. Establishes, at the federal level the Federal Vehicle Safety Standards (FVSS) administered by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to set vehicle safety standards in areas such as vehicle design, construction, performance, and durability, as specified. NHTSA further provides regulatory guidance for AVs, including, but not limited to, levels of automation, as specified. Lastly, requires AVs or vehicles with level 2 ADAS to report crashes within five calendar days, as specified.

This bill:

1. Requires a manufacturer of a level 2 ADAS vehicle to report an accident involving a level 2 ADAS vehicle to DMV within five calendar days upon receipt of notice of the accident, if the vehicular crash met all of the following conditions:
   1. Is on a publicly accessible road in California;
   2. The level 2 ADAS feature was engaged any time 30 seconds prior to accident, as specified;
   3. The accident results in a fatality, any individual being transported to a hospital for medical treatment, an air bag deployment, or impact with a vulnerable road user; and,
   4. The accident occurs 10 or more calendar days from the enactment of this measure.
2. Requires the abovementioned vehicular crash reports submitted to DMV to provide all applicable information consistent with the requirements of the Third Amended General Order 2021-01, as specified.
3. Requires a manufacturer of a level 2 ADAS vehicle that was involved in a crash and submitted an initial report to DMV, to provide an updated report to DMV by the 15^th of the subsequent month of the initial report if substantially new information was discovered or substantially changed in one of a variety of reporting fields, as specified.
4. Requires DMV to post accident reporting data, pursuant to the provisions specified in this bill, onto the department’s internet website and update the data on a bimonthly basis, as specified. Further requires DMV to submit the received accident data to NHTSA and the National Transportation Safety Board on a bimonthly basis.
5. Prohibits DMV from publishing any proprietary business information, as specified, or personally identifying information when posting the abovementioned accident reporting data on its internet website.
6. Imposes a civil penalty on a manufacturer for failing to report an accident as specified in this measure to DMV of $27,874 per violation per day, as specified.
7. Provides that the reporting provisions specified in this measure will become operative only if the Third Amended Standing General Order 2021-01 is repealed and not replaced with another General Order, federal statute, or federal regulation that is consistent with this General Order published as of June 16, 2025.

Comments

1. Purpose of this bill. According to the author, “Officials within the federal government have signaled they may consider ending the NHTSA requirement that manufacturers report collisions involving Level 2 ADAS vehicles and Level 3-5 autonomous vehicles. California has more Level 2 ADAS vehicles – which are vehicles that have driver support features including lane centering and adaptive cruise control but require a driver at all times – than any other state, as well as the most collisions involving these vehicles. While the DMV is already pursuing regulations for autonomous vehicles, there is currently no state reporting requirement for Level 2 ADAS vehicles. Without NHTSA’s data, California will be left in the dark about the potential dangers of driver support technologies. We must establish safeguards to ensure that if the federal government vacates their responsibility to regulate road and vehicle safety, California consumers, regulators, and public safety officials will maintain access to this critical data. SB 572 will require manufacturers of Level 2 ADAS vehicles to report collisions involving these vehicles to the DMV, and require the DMV to post this information on their website. This will provide the transparency and accountability from manufacturers that Californians deserve as vehicle technologies advance.”
2. NHTSA. Currently, NHTSA provides a variety of regulations and policy guidance pertaining to AVs. First, FVSS applies to all manufacturers and vehicles to provide across the board consistency and direction on vehicle specifications and safety standards. Additionally, NHTSA provides / offers guidance for AVs and AV manufacturers including, but not limited to, standardized levels of automation, an automated vehicle safety framework, and the automated driving systems (ADS)-equipped Vehicle Safety, Transparency, and Evaluation (AV STEP) Program. With respects to level of vehicle autonomy, NHTSA and DMV utilize the same SAE standards (i.e. Level 0-Level 5) with California statutes and regulations considering an AV levels 3 through 5.

1. Advanced driver-assistance systems (ADAS) and ADS. Under SAE AV definitions, there are key differences between each level of vehicular autonomy. Levels 1 and 2 provide ADAS features that offer assistance to a human driver such as lane-keeping assistance, adaptive cruise control, and automatic emergency braking. Ultimately, under levels 0-2, these technologies are intended to assist the human driver, require human supervision, and the driver remains responsible for vehicle operation. Under existing law and regulations, levels 0-2 vehicles are not considered AVs. On the other hand, ADS are technologies designed to perform the entire dynamic driving task without a human driver. ADS equipped vehicles can operate autonomously under a variety of conditions and are considered vehicles in levels 3 through level 5. Under levels 3 through 5, the ADS system takes full control of the vehicle and the human(s) in the vehicle is / are not responsible for the operation of the vehicle.
2. NHTSA General Order 2021-01. NHTSA’s General Order 2021-01 (Order herein through) establishes mandatory accident (vehicular crashes) reporting requirements for vehicles equipped with ADS or level 2 ADAS. Specifically, the Order requires manufacturers and operators to report vehicular accidents involving ADS or level 2 ADAS technologies to NHTSA. For example, for ADS-equipped vehicles involved in an accident, the manufacturer / operator is required to be reported if ADS was active within 30 seconds of the incident and resulted in property damage or injury. For level 2 ADAS, manufacturers / operators must report vehicles involved in accidents if ADAS was active within 30 seconds and involved a vulnerable user, a fatality occurred, a passenger was hospitalized, the vehicle was towed off, or an airbag was deployed.
3. Safety assurances. The provisions specified in this bill would not go into effect unless the Order is repealed and not replaced with another General Order, federal statute, or federal regulation that is consistent with this General Order published as of June 16, 2025. As the author of this bill points out, it is unclear under the current federal administration if the Order is at risk of being repealed or no longer enforced at some future date. As a result, this measure aims to ensure that level 2 ADAS vehicles involved in accidents will continue to report accidents to DMV under certain conditions if NHTSA stops mandating / collecting accident data under the Order; and in turn, providing DMV the necessary data to make well-informed decisions on future regulations.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: Yes

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:

• DMV anticipates ongoing annual costs of approximately $500,000 annually, including $300,000 for consulting services to create, modify, and maintain a crash reporting system and dashboard, and $200,000 for 1.0 personnel year of workload to review and evaluate the reported data. Staff notes that the bill’s requirements would only be operative, and these costs would only be incurred, to the extent that the federal General Standing Order is repealed and not replaced with a similar federal general order, statute, or regulation. (Motor Vehicle Account)

SUPPORT: (Verified 5/23/25)

Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety
California Bicycle Coalition
California Professional Firefighters
California Safety and Legislative Board of Smart – Transportation Division
California Teamsters Public Affairs Council
California Walks
Center for Auto Safety
Consumer Attorneys of California
Consumer Watchdog
Consumers for Auto Reliability & Safety
Streets for All

OPPOSITION: (Verified 5/23/25)

Tesla

Prepared by: Manny Leon / TRANS. / (916) 651-4121

5/27/25 11:17:19

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Senator Anna Caballero, Chair

2025 - 2026 Regular Session

SB 572 (Gonzalez) - Vehicles: advanced driver assistance system: crash reports

Bill Summary:

SB 572 would, contingent upon specified federal actions, require manufacturers of motor vehicles equipped with a Level 2 advanced driver assistance system (ADAS) to report specified information related to a crash involving those vehicles to the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). The bill would also require DMV to post this crash data on its website, update the data every other month, and transmit the data to specified federal transportation entities.

*********** ANALYSIS ADDENDUM – SUSPENSE FILE ***********

The following information is revised to reflect amendments

adopted by the committee on May 23, 2025

Fiscal Impact:

• DMV anticipates ongoing annual costs of approximately $500,000 annually, including $300,000 for consulting services to create, modify, and maintain a crash reporting system and dashboard, and $200,000 for 1.0 PY of workload to review and evaluate the reported data. Staff notes that the bill’s requirements would only be operative, and these costs would only be incurred, to the extent that the federal General Standing Order is repealed and not replaced with a similar federal general order, statute, or regulation. (Motor Vehicle Account)

Author Amendments:

Align reporting requirements with the Third Amended Standing General Order 2021-01, which goes into effect on June 16, 2025, by doing the following:

• Removing the requirement that manufacturers report collisions involving a vehicle tow-away.
• Requiring manufacturers to report all incidents within five days, rather than one or 10 days in specified circumstances.
• Deleting certain monthly reporting requirements.
• Specifying data and information that must be reported for each crash incident.

The amendments would also increase the civil penalty for failure of a manufacturer to report a crash from $26,315 to $27,874 per violation per day, and delete a provision requiring reporting requirements to go into effect if there is a substantial amendment to the General Standing Order, or if it ceases to be enforced by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON

Senator Anna Caballero, Chair

2025 - 2026 Regular Session

SB 572 (Gonzalez) - Vehicles: advanced driver assistance system: crash reports

Bill Summary:

SB 572 would, contingent upon specified federal actions, require manufacturers of motor vehicles equipped with a Level 2 advanced driver assistance system (ADAS) to report specified information related to a crash involving those vehicles to the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). The bill would also require DMV to post this crash data on its website, update the data every other month, and transmit the data to specified federal transportation entities.

Fiscal Impact:

• DMV anticipates ongoing annual costs of approximately $500,000 annually, including $300,000 for consulting services to create, modify, and maintain a crash reporting system and dashboard, and $200,000 for 1.0 PY of workload to review and evaluate the reported data. See Staff Comments. (Motor Vehicle Account)

Background:

Currently, The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) provides a variety of regulations and policy guidance pertaining to autonomous vehicle technology. NHTSA administers the Federal Vehicle Safety Standards (FVSS), which applies to all manufacturers and vehicles to provide consistency and direction on vehicle specifications and safety standards. Additionally, NHTSA provides specified guidance for autonomous vehicles (AVs) and AV manufacturers, including standardized levels of automation, an automated vehicle safety framework, and the ADS-equipped Vehicle Safety, Transparency, and Evaluation (AV STEP) Program.

Under definitions established by the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE), there are key differences between each level of vehicular autonomy, with Levels 1 and 2 providing ADAS features that offer assistance to a human driver such as lane-keeping assistance, adaptive cruise control, and automatic emergency braking. These technologies are intended to assist the human driver, require human supervision, and the driver remains responsible for vehicle operation. Under existing law and regulations, levels 0-2 vehicles are not considered AVs. On the other hand, automated driving systems (ADS) are technologies designed to perform the entire dynamic driving task without a human driver (levels 3-5).

NHTSA’s General Order 2021-01 establishes mandatory accident (vehicular crashes) reporting requirements for vehicles equipped with ADS or level 2 ADAS. Specifically, the General Order requires manufacturers and operators to report vehicular accidents involving ADS or level 2 ADAS technologies to NHTSA. For ADS-equipped vehicles involved in an accident, the manufacturer / operator is required to be reported if ADS was active within 30 seconds of the incident and resulted in property damage or injury. For level 2 ADAS, manufacturers / operators must report vehicles involved in accidents if ADAS was active within 30 seconds and involved a vulnerable user, a fatality occurred, a passenger was hospitalized, the vehicle was towed off, or an airbag was deployed.

Proposed Law:

SB 572 would require a manufacturer of a level 2 ADAS vehicle to report a crash involving such a vehicle to the DMV, and require the department to post crash data submitted by manufacturers, with certain exceptions, on its website. Specifically, this bill would:

• Require a manufacturer of a level 2 ADAS vehicle to report an accident involving a level 2 ADAS vehicle to the DMV within one calendar day of receiving notice of a crash, and to provide DMV with an updated report within 10 calendar days of receiving the notice if the crash meets all of the following conditions:
  • The crash is on a publicly accessible road in California.
  • The level 2 ADAS feature was engaged any time 30 seconds prior to accident, as provided.
  • The accident results in a fatality, an individual being hospitalized, or involves a vulnerable road user.
  • The accident occurs 10 or more calendar days from the operational date of the bill’s provisions.
• Require a manufacturer of a level 2 ADAS vehicle to report an accident involving a level 2 ADAS vehicle to the DMV within five calendar days of receiving notice of a crash, if the crash meets all of the following conditions:
  • The crash is on a publicly accessible road in California.
  • The level 2 ADAS feature was engaged any time 30 seconds prior to accident, as provided.
  • The accident results in a vehicle being towed or the air bags are deployed, and it does not result in a fatality or serious injury, as specified.
  • The accident occurs 10 or more calendar days from the operational date of the bill’s provisions.
• Require the report submitted to DMV to provide all applicable information consistent with the requirements of General Order 2021-01.
• Require a manufacturer of a level 2 ADAS vehicle to provide the DMV with a monthly report consistent with the requirements specified in General Order 2021-01.
• Require DMV to post accident reporting data onto its website and update the data on a bimonthly basis, as provided. DMV must also submit the accident data to NHTSA and the National Transportation Safety Board on a bimonthly basis.
• Prohibit DMV from publishing any proprietary business information, as specified, when posting the data on its website, and require DMV to ensure the data does not include any personally identifying information. The bill provides that this information is confidential and not subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act.
• Impose a civil penalty on a manufacturer in an amount of $26,315 per violation per day for failing to report an accident, pursuant to the requirements above.
• Provide that the bill’s requirements only become operative if General Order 2021-01 is repealed and not replaced with a similar order, statute, or regulation, as specified, or is substantially amended or ceases to be enforced, as determined by the Director of DMV, as specified.

Related Legislation:

AB 1777 (Ting), Chap. 682/2024, made an autonomous vehicle (AV) manufacturer responsible for traffic citations for violations that occur when autonomous technology is engaged, and imposed other safety requirements on AV manufacturers, as specified.

AB 3061 (Haney), which was vetoed by Governor Newsom last year, would have required the manufacturers of AVs to report to the DMV any vehicle collision, traffic violation, or disengagement that occurs when operating in autonomous mode, beginning on July 31, 2025. The veto message notes that the timelines imposed by the bill are “infeasible for the DMV to implement these new requirements and address the associated operational challenges involved. The DMV recently released a new set of draft regulations, which are open for public input until October 14, 2024, to address many of the concerns raised in this bill.”

Staff Comments:

This bill provides that its requirements only become operative if General Order 2021-01 is repealed and not replaced with a similar order, statute, or regulation, or is substantially amended or ceases to be enforced, as specified. As such, the costs noted above would only appear to occur to the extent that the requirements of the General Order cease to become operational. Staff notes, however, that the reporting requirements become operative once the Director of DMV determines that the General Order is no longer in effect. As such, the administrative infrastructure must be established as soon as practical following the bill’s enactment, so the initial contracting costs would likely be incurred in 2026, while the ongoing staff and consulting costs would likely be delayed until the bill’s provisions become operative.

The Motor Vehicle Account (MVA) is the primary funding source for the California Highway Patrol and DMV. The Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) published a report last year as part of its analysis of the Governor’s proposed 2024-25 Budget entitled “Insolvency Risks for Environmental and Transportation Special Funds” that includes an evaluation of the MVA. The report notes that between 2018-19 and 2023-24, MVA revenues have increased by $714 million while expenditures have increased by about $1 billion, and since 2021-22, annual expenditures have exceeded yearly revenues, resulting in a structural imbalance.

The MVA is expected to fully exhaust its reserves in in 2025-26, with expenditures expected to exceed available resources by roughly $140 million. Staff notes that the Governor’s proposed 2025-26 Budget would address the issue on a one-time basis by transferring $85 million from the Air Pollution Control Fund and $81 million from the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund to the MVA to support the California Air Resources Board's Mobile Source Program, which has received MVA support in the past. Absent further actions to address the MVA fund condition, approving any new proposals that would increase MVA expenditures would exacerbate the current structural imbalance of the fund. The Budget Summary published for the May Revision of the 2025-26 Budget notes that “Given the ongoing fiscal constraints in the MVA, the Administration will continue to prioritize fiscal discipline. This means limiting new workload or initiatives, including those with delayed implementation dates that would create additional cost pressures over time. By focusing on core operational priorities, the DMV can serve Californians while staying within available MVA resources.”

-- END --

SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE

Senator Thomas Umberg, Chair

2025-2026 Regular Session

Bill No: SB 572 (Author:Gonzalez)

Version: March 26, 2025

Hearing Date: April 29, 2025

Fiscal: Yes

Urgency: No

Consultant: AM

SUBJECT

Vehicles: advanced driver assistance system: crash reports

DIGEST

This bill requires a manufacturer of a Level 2 advanced driver assistance system (ADAS) to report a crash involving its Level 2 ADAS vehicle to the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) within one or five days of the crash if certain conditions pertaining to the crash exist. The bill imposes a civil penalty of $26,315 per violation per day on a manufacturer that fails to report a crash. The bill’s proposed reporting requirement would only be operative if certain conditions are met, including that federal General Order 2021-01 issued by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is repealed.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Reports have indicated that the Trump administration may end the reporting to the NHTSA of car crashes for Level 2 ADAS vehicles under General Order 2021-01. This crash reporting data provides important consumer protections by allowing the NHTSA to detect crash patterns, which helps to inform investigations and safety recalls. The author seeks to ensure that, should the federal reporting requirement be weakened, California will still get the same data currently reported to the NHTSA under General Order 2021-01. The bill is author sponsored. The bill is supported by various consumer safety and protection organizations. The Committee received no timely opposition. The bill passed the Senate Transportation Committee on a vote of 11 to 1.

PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE LAW

Existing federal law:

1. Sets Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FVSS). (49 C.F.R. Part 571.)
2. Requires manufacturers of Level 2 ADAS systems and manufacturers and operators of automated driving systems (ADS)to report any crashes in which the technology was engaged during the 30 seconds prior to the crash and that resulted in a fatality, resulted in a person being transported to the hospital, or involved a vulnerable road user, such as a pedestrian, within one day and other crashes involving a vehicle tow-away or airbag deployment within five days.
   1. Additionally, manufacturers and operators of ADS must report all other crashes in which the ADS was engaged during the 30 seconds prior to the crash occurring on public roads by the fifteenth day of the month following the month in which they receive notice of the crash. (Standing General Order 2021-01)

Existing state law:

1. Authorizes the operation of an autonomous vehicle (AV) on public roads for testing purposes by a driver who possesses the proper class of license for the type of vehicle operated, if specified requirements are satisfied. (Veh. Code § 38750(b).)
2. Defines “autonomous vehicle” to mean a vehicle equipped with technology that makes it capable of operation that meets the definition of Levels 3, 4, or 5 of the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) International's Taxonomy and Testing of Autonomous Vehicles Definitions for Terms Related to Driving Automation Systems for On-Road Motor Vehicles, standard J3016 (APR 2021). (Veh. Code § 38750(a)(2).)
3. Requires the DMV to adopt regulations providing requirements for submitting evidence of insurance, surety bond, or self-insurance requirements, submitting and approving an application to operate an autonomous vehicle, and processes related to notices of autonomous vehicle noncompliance. (Veh. Code § 38750(d)(1).)
   1. Authorizes the DMV to establish additional requirement through regulations that the DMV determines, in consultation with the Department of the California Highway Patrol, are necessary to ensure the safe operation of autonomous vehicles on public roads. (Veh. Code § 38750(d)(3).)

This bill:

1. Requires a manufacturer of a level 2 ADAS vehicle to report an accident involving a level 2 ADAS vehicle to the DMV no later than one calendar day upon receipt of notice of the accident, and further provide the DMV with an updated report no later than 10 calendar days upon notice of receipt if the accident met all of the following conditions:
   1. is on a publicly accessible road in California;
   2. the level 2 ADAS feature was engaged any time 30 seconds prior to accident, as provided;
   3. the accident results in a fatality, an individual being hospitalized, or involves a vulnerable road user; and
   4. the accident occurs 10 or more calendar days from the enactment of this bill.
2. Requires a manufacturer of a level 2 ADAS vehicle to report an accident involving a level 2 ADAS vehicle to the DMV no later than five calendar day upon receipt of notice of the accident if the accident meets all of the following conditions:
   1. is on a publicly accessible road in California;
   2. the level 2 ADAS feature was engaged any time 30 seconds prior to accident, as provided;
   3. the accident results in a vehicle being towed or the air bags are deployed, and it does not result in a fatality or serious injury, as specified; and
   4. the accident occurs 10 or more calendar days from the enactment of this bill.

1. Requires the reports submitted to the DMV pursuant to 1) and 2), above, to provide all applicable information consistent with the requirements of General Order 2021-01.
2. Requires a manufacturer of a level 2 ADAS vehicle to provide the DMV with a monthly report consistent with the requirements specified in General Order 2021-01.
3. Requires the DMV to post accident reporting data onto the DMV’s website and update the data on a bimonthly basis, as provided. Requires the DMV to submit the received accident data to NHTSA and the National Transportation Safety Board on a bimonthly basis.
4. Imposes a civil penalty on a manufacturer for failing to report an accident as required under 1) or 2), above, in an amount of $26,315 per violation per day.
5. Provides that the reporting provisions in the bill become operative only if General Order 2021-01 is repealed and not replaced with a similar order, statute, or regulation, as specified, or is substantially amended or ceases to be enforced, as specified.

COMMENTS

1. Stated need for the bill

The author writes:

Officials within the federal government have signaled they may consider ending the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s (NHTSA) requirement that manufacturers report collisions involving Level 2 advanced driver assistance system (ADAS) vehicles and Level 3-5 autonomous vehicles. California has more Level 2 ADAS vehicles – which are vehicles that have driver support features including lane centering and adaptive cruise control but require a driver at all times – than any other state, as well as the most collisions involving these vehicles. While the DMV is already pursuing regulations for autonomous vehicles, there is currently no state reporting requirement for Level 2 ADAS vehicles. Without NHTSA’s data, California will be left in the dark about the potential dangers of driver support technologies. We must establish safeguards to ensure that if the federal government vacates their responsibility to regulate road and vehicle safety, California consumers, regulators, and public safety officials will maintain access to this critical data. SB 572 will require manufacturers of Level 2 ADAS vehicles to report collisions involving these vehicles to the DMV, and require the DMV to post this information on their website should the federal government stop collecting this data. This will provide the transparency and accountability from manufacturers that Californians deserve as vehicle technologies advance.

1. Advanced driver assistance system (ADAS)

The Senate Transportation Committee analysis of this bill provides useful background on AVs, ADAS, and General Order 2021-01:

NHTSA provides a variety of regulations and policy guidance pertaining to AVs. First, [federal vehicle safety standards] FVSS applies to all manufacturers and vehicles to provide across the board consistency and direction on vehicle specifications and safety standards. Additionally, NHTSA provides / offers guidance for AVs and AV manufacturers including, but not limited to, standardized levels of automation, an automated vehicle safety framework, and the ADS-equipped Vehicle Safety, Transparency, and Evaluation (AV STEP) Program. With respects to level of vehicle autonomy, NHTSA and DMV utilize the same SAE standards (i.e. Level 0-Level 5) with California statutes and regulations considering an AV levels 3 through 5.

Under SAE AV definitions, there are key differences between each level of vehicular autonomy. Levels 1 and 2 provide ADAS features that offer assistance to a human driver such as lane-keeping assistance, adaptive cruise control, and automatic emergency braking. Ultimately, under levels 0-2, these technologies are intended to assist the human driver, require human supervision, and the driver remains responsible for vehicle operation. Under existing law and regulations, levels 0-2 vehicles are not considered AVs. On the other hand, automated driving systems (ADS) are technologies designed to perform the entire dynamic driving task without a human driver. ADS equipped vehicles can operate autonomously under a variety of conditions and are considered vehicles in levels 3 through level 5. Under levels 3 through 5, the ADS system takes full control of the vehicle and the human(s) in the vehicle is / are not responsible for the operation of the vehicle.

NHTSA’s General Order 2021-01 (Order herein through) establishes mandatory accident (vehicular crashes) reporting requirements for vehicles equipped with ADS or level 2 ADAS. Specifically, the Order requires manufacturers and operators to report vehicular accidents involving ADS or level 2 ADAS technologies to NHTSA. For example, for ADS-equipped vehicles involved in an accident, the manufacturer / operator is required to be reported if ADS was active within 30 seconds of the incident and resulted in property damage or injury. For level 2 ADAS, manufacturers / operators must report vehicles involved in accidents if ADAS was active within 30 seconds and involved a vulnerable user, a fatality occurred, a passenger was hospitalized, the vehicle was towed off, or an airbag was deployed.^[1]

1. Issue this bill seeks to address

Reports have indicated that the Trump administration may end the reporting of car crashes to the NHTSA under General Order 2021-01. Reuters reported in December 2024 that ending this disclosure “would particularly benefit Tesla, which has reported most of the crashes – more than 1,500 – to federal safety regulators under the program. Tesla has been targeted in National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) investigations, including three stemming from the data.”^[2] This crash reporting data serves a crucial consumer protection function as the data has allowed the NHTSA to “detect crash patterns” and pursue investigations and safety recalls.^[3] “NHTSA said it has received and analyzed data on more than 2,700 crashes since the agency established the rule in 2021. The data has influenced 10 investigations into six companies, NHTSA said, as well as nine safety recalls involving four different companies.”^[4]

This bill seeks to ensure that the reporting requirements under General Order 2021-01 would still remain in place if the federal reporting standards are weakened. The bill seeks to have the same data reported to NHTSA under General Order 2021-01 reported to the DMV.

The bill provides that its provisions only become operative if any of the following occur:

• • • • General Order 2021-01 is repealed and not replaced with another general order, a federal statute, or a federal regulation that is consistent with the policy goals of General Order 2021-01 as of December 31, 2024, as determined by the Director of Motor Vehicles.
      • General Order 2021-01 is substantially amended in a manner that it is inconsistent with the policy goals of General Order 2021-01 as of December 31, 2024, as determined by the Director of Motor Vehicles.
      • The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ceases enforcing General Order 2021-01 or ceases updating its internet website in a manner that is consistent with the policy goals of General Order 2021-01, as of December 31, 2024, as determined by the Director of Motor Vehicles.

The Director of Motor Vehicles is required to inform the Legislature if they make a determination pursuant to the above.

1. Civil Penalty

The bill provides for enforcement in the same manner as the federal government, which is a civil penalty. (49 U.S.C. § 578.6(a)(1); 30165(a)(1).) The bill sets the civil penalty at $26,315 per violation per day, which is the max penalty per violation per day the federal government can assess.(Ibid.)

1. Confidentiality concerns

The bill requires the DMV to post crash data submitted on its website every month. Concerns have been raised about the posting requirement not including any protections for proprietary business information or personally identifying information, which are provided at the federal level. To address this issue the author may wish to amend the bill to specifically provide that the DMV is prohibited from publically disclosing any proprietary business information or trade secrets. Additionally, the author may wish to amend the bill to specify that the posted data cannot disclose any personally identifying information about any individuals.

These amendments will act as a limitation on the access to public records pursuant to the California Public Records Act. California generally recognizes that public access to information concerning the conduct of the people’s business is a fundamental and necessary right.^[5] At the same time, the state recognizes that this right must be balanced against the right to privacy.^[6] The general right of access to public records may, therefore, be limited when records include personal information or proprietary business information. In order to balance the need for consumer protection against protecting the privacy of proprietary business information and personally identifying information contained in crash report data, limiting access to public records in this instance seems warranted.

1. Amendment

The specific amendment to address the issues raised above regarding privacy and confidentiality of proprietary business information and personally identifying information that may be contained in the data provided to the DMV is below. Additionally, the author has proposed making some clarifying changes to terms used in the bill—changing “incident” to “crash”— and specifies that the Director of DMV is to report to the Chair of the Senate Transportation Committee and the Chair of the Assembly Transportation Committee in writing, instead of the Legislature, regarding the Director’s determination if the bill’s provision have become operative.

The specific amendments are: ^[7]

SECTION 1. Division 16.65 (commencing with Section 38800) of the Vehicle Code is amended to read:

DIVISION 16.65. Advanced Driver Assistance System

38800. (a) (1) (A) A manufacturer of a Level 2 ADAS vehicle shall report a crash involving its Level 2 ADAS vehicle to the Department of Motor Vehicles not later than one calendar day after receipt of notice of an incident a crash and an updated report on the 10th calendar day after receipt of notice of the incident, crash, if the incident crash meets all of the following conditions:

(i) The Level 2 ADAS vehicle is involved in a crash on a publicly accessible road in California.

(ii) The Level 2 ADAS in the vehicle was engaged at any time during the period from 30 seconds immediately prior to the commencement of the crash through the conclusion of the crash.

(iii) The crash results in a fatality or any individual being transported to a hospital for medical treatment, or involves a vulnerable road user.

(iv) The notice of the crash is received 10 calendar days or more after this section becomes operational.

(B) A manufacturer of a Level 2 ADAS vehicle shall report a crash involving its Level 2 ADAS vehicle to the Department of Motor Vehicles not later than five calendar days after receipt of notice of an incident, a crash if the incident crash meets all of the following conditions:

(i) The Level 2 ADAS vehicle is involved in a crash on a publicly accessible road in California.

(ii) The Level 2 ADAS in the vehicle was engaged at any time during the period from 30 seconds immediately prior to the commencement of the crash through the conclusion of the crash.

(iii) The crash results in a vehicle tow-away or an airbag deployment but does not result in a fatality or any individual being transported to a hospital for medical treatment and does not involve a vulnerable road user.

(iv) The notice of the crash is received 10 calendar days or more after this section becomes operational.

(C) The report shall contain all of the applicable information that is requested in the Second Amended Standing General Order 2021-01 (General Order 2021-01) issued by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) as of December 31, 2024.

(D) The report shall be submitted in a format consistent with the requirements of General Order 2021-01.

(2) A manufacturer of a Level 2 ADAS vehicle shall provide a monthly report to the department pursuant to, and in a format consistent with the requirements of, General Order 2021-01.

(3) (A) A manufacturer that reported a crash pursuant to subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) shall provide an updated report by the 15th calendar day of the month following any calendar month in which notice of any new or materially different information about the incident crash is received.

(B) In the absence of an updated report pursuant to subparagraph (A) or any new or materially different information related to a crash reported pursuant to subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1), the manufacturer shall submit a report by the 15th calendar day of each month confirming the lack of any reportable information during the previous calendar month, beginning the calendar month after this section became operational.

(b) (1) The department shall post on its internet website the crash data submitted pursuant to this section and update this data every other month. The department shall transmit this data to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the National Transportation Safety Board every other month.

(2)(A) The department shall not publish any proprietary business information, including trade secrets as defined in Section 3426.1 of the Civil Code, when posting the data on its internet website under paragraph (1).

(B) The department shall ensure that the data posted under paragraph (1) does not include any personally identifying information.

(3) The information in paragraph (2) is confidential and is not be subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act (Division 10 (commencing with Section 7920.000) of Title 1 of the Government Code).

(c) A manufacturer that fails to report a crash pursuant to this section to the department shall be liable for a civil penalty of twenty six thousand three hundred fifteen dollars ($26,315) per violation per day.

(d) (1) “ADAS” means advanced driver assistance system.

(2) “Crash” means any physical impact between the vehicle and another road user, including, but not limited to, a vehicle, pedestrian, or cyclist, or property that results or allegedly results in any property damage, injury, or fatality. The vehicle is involved in a crash if it physically impacts another road user or if it contributes or is alleged to contribute, by steering, braking, acceleration, or other operational performance, to another vehicle’s physical impact with another road user or property involved in that crash.

(3) “Level 2 ADAS” means “Level or Category 2 - Partial Driving Automation” in SAE International’s Taxonomy and Definitions for Terms Related to Driving Automation Systems for On-Road Motor Vehicles, standard J3016 (APRL2021).

(4) “Manufacturer” means a person developing, fabricating, manufacturing, assembling, or importing motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment, including preproduction and prototype motor vehicles and equipment. A manufacturer may also be an operator.

(5) “Motor vehicle” means any preproduction, prototype, or production vehicle driven or drawn by mechanical power and being developed or manufactured primarily for use on public roads.

(6) “Motor vehicle equipment” includes any preproduction, prototype, or production Level 2 ADAS, including software or any other component of such system, that is installed on a motor vehicle, or used to control or operate a motor vehicle.

(7) “Person” means corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships, societies, and joint stock companies, as well as individuals.

(8) “Vulnerable road user” means any person who is not an occupant of a motor vehicle with more than three wheels. This definition includes, but is not limited to, pedestrians, persons traveling in wheelchairs, bicyclists, motorcyclists, and riders or occupants of other transport vehicles that are not motor vehicles, including, but not limited to, all-terrain vehicles and tractors.

(e) (1) This section shall become operative only if any of the following occur:

(A) General Order 2021-01 is repealed and not replaced with another general order, a federal statute, or a federal regulation that is consistent with the policy goals of General Order 2021-01 as of December 31, 2024, as determined by the Director of Motor Vehicles.

(B) General Order 2021-01 is substantially amended in a manner that it is inconsistent with the policy goals of General Order 2021-01 as of December 31, 2024, as determined by the Director of Motor Vehicles.

(C) The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ceases enforcing General Order 2021-01 or ceases updating its internet website in a manner that is consistent with the policy goals of General Order 2021-01, as of December 31, 2024, as determined by the Director of Motor Vehicles.

(2) The director shall inform the Legislature Chair of the Senate Transportation Committee and the Chair of the Assembly Transportation Committee of the determination made by the director pursuant to this subdivision.

SEC. 2. The Legislature finds and declares that Section 1 of this act, which adds Section 38800 of the Vehicle Code, imposes a limitation on the public’s right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies within the meaning of Section 3 of Article I of the California Constitution. Pursuant to that constitutional provision, the Legislature makes the following findings to demonstrate the interest protected by this limitation and the need for protecting that interest:

In order to balance the need for consumer protection against protecting the privacy of proprietary business information and personally identifying information contained in crash report data, it is necessary to limit access to these records.

SEC. 2. 3. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution.

SUPPORT

California Bicycle Coalition

California Walks

Center for Auto Safety

Consumer Attorneys of California

Consumer Watchdog

Streets for All

OPPOSITION

None received

RELATED LEGISLATION

Pending Legislation: None known.

Prior Legislation:

AB 1777 (Ting, Ch. 682, Stats. 2024) placed various safety requirements on manufacturers of AVs by July 1, 2026, and authorized a peace officer to issue a "notice of autonomous vehicle noncompliance" for a violation of the Vehicle Code or a local traffic ordinance to an AV manufacturer.

SB 1298 (Padilla, Ch. 570, Stats. 2012) established standards and regulations for the operation of AVs upon public roadways, as specified.

PRIOR VOTES:

Seante Transportation Committee (11 Ayes, 1 Noes)

**************

1. Sen. Trans. Comm. analysis SB 572 (2025-26 reg. sess.) as amended Mar. 26, 2025 at p. 4. ↑

2. Renshaw, Levey & Kirkham, Reuters, Exclusive: Trump team wants to scrap car-crash reporting rule that Tesla opposes, (Dec. 17, 2024), available at https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/trump-transition-recommends-scrapping-car-crash-reporting-requirement-opposed-by-2024-12-13/. ↑

3. Ibid. ↑

4. Ibid. ↑

5. Cal. Const., art. I, § 3; Gov. Code, § 7921.000. ↑

6. Cal. Const., art. I, § 1. ↑

7. The amendments may also include technical, nonsubstantive changes recommended by the Office of Legislative Counsel. ↑

SENATE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION

Senator Dave Cortese, Chair

2025 - 2026 Regular

Bill No: Hearing Date: 4/22/2025

SUBJECT:

DIGEST: This bill authorizes the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to collect certain accident data from manufacturers of vehicles with specific types of advanced driver assistance system (ADAS) capabilities, as specified.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Defines “autonomous vehicle” (AV) to mean a vehicle equipped with technology that makes it capable of operation that meets the definition of Levels 3, 4, or 5 of the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) International's Taxonomy and Testing of Autonomous Vehicles Definitions for Terms Related to Driving Automation Systems for On-Road Motor Vehicles, standard J3016 (APR 2021).
2. Authorizes the operation of an AV on public roads for testing purposes by a driver who possesses the proper class of license for the type of vehicle operated, if specified requirements are satisfied. 
3. Prohibits the operation of an AV on public roads until the manufacturer submits an application to DMV and is approved, as specified.

1. Requires DMV to adopt regulations setting forth requirements for the submission and approval of an application, including, among other things, any testing, equipment, and performance standards DMV concludes are necessary to ensure the safe operation of autonomous vehicles on public roads, as specified.
2. At the federal level, establishes the Federal Vehicle Safety Standards (FVSS) administered by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to set vehicle safety standards in areas such as vehicle design, construction, performance, and durability, as specified. NHTSA further provides regulatory guidance for AVs, including, but not limited to, levels of automation, as specified. Lastly, requires AVs or vehicles with level 2 ADAS to report crashes within five calendar days, as specified.

This bill:

1. Requires a manufacturer of a level 2 ADAS vehicle to report an accident involving a level 2 ADAS vehicle to DMV no later than one calendar day upon receipt of notice of the accident, and further provide DMV with an updated report no later than 10 calendar days upon notice of receipt if the accident met all of the following conditions:
   1. Is on a publicly accessible road in California;
   2. The level 2 ADAS feature was engaged any time 30 seconds prior to accident, as specified;
   3. The accident results in a fatality, an individual being hospitalized, or involves a vulnerable road user; and,
   4. The accident occurs 10 or more calendar days from the enactment of this measure.
2. Requires a manufacturer of a level 2 ADAS vehicle to report an accident involving a level 2 ADAS vehicle to DMV no later than five calendar day upon receipt of notice of the accident if the accident met all of the following conditions:
   1. Is on a publicly accessible road in California;
   2. The level 2 ADAS feature was engaged any time 30 seconds prior to accident, as specified;
   3. The accident results in a vehicle being towed or air bags are deployed, and does not result in a fatality or seriously injured, as specified; and,
   4. The accident occurs 10 or more calendar days from the enactment of this measure.
3. Requires the abovementioned reports submitted to DMV to provide all applicable information consistent with the requirements of General Order 2021-01, as specified.
4. Requires a manufacturer of a level 2 ADAS vehicle to provide DMV with a monthly report consistent with the requirements specified in General Order 2021-01.
5. Requires DMV to post accident reporting data, pursuant to the provisions specified in this bill, onto the department’s internet website and update the data on a bimonthly basis, as specified. Further requires DMV to submit the received accident data to NHTSA and the National Transportation Safety Board on a bimonthly basis.
6. Imposes a civil penalty on a manufacturer for failing to report an accident as specified in this measure to DMV of $26,315 per violation per day, as specified.
7. Provides that the reporting provisions specified in this bill will become operative only if General Order 2021-01 is repealed and not replaced with a similar order, statute, or regulation, as specified, or is substantially amended, or ceases to be enforced, as specified.

COMMENTS:

1. Purpose of the bill. According to the author, “Officials within the federal government have signaled they may consider ending the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s (NHTSA) requirement that manufacturers report collisions involving Level 2 advanced driver assistance system (ADAS) vehicles and Level 3-5 autonomous vehicles. California has more Level 2 ADAS vehicles – which are vehicles that have driver support features including lane centering and adaptive cruise control but require a driver at all times – than any other state, as well as the most collisions involving these vehicles. While the DMV is already pursuing regulations for autonomous vehicles, there is currently no state reporting requirement for Level 2 ADAS vehicles. Without NHTSA’s data, California will be left in the dark about the potential dangers of driver support technologies. We must establish safeguards to ensure that if the federal government vacates their responsibility to regulate road and vehicle safety, California consumers, regulators, and public safety officials will maintain access to this critical data. SB 572 will require manufacturers of Level 2 ADAS vehicles to report collisions involving these vehicles to the DMV, and require the DMV to post this information on their website. This will provide the transparency and accountability from manufacturers that Californians deserve as vehicle technologies advance.”
2. AV’s in California: In 2012, the Legislature passed SB 1298 (Padilla, Chapter 570) which permitted AVs to operate on public roads for testing by a driver under certain conditions. In 2014, DMV released regulations to allow for testing AVs with a test driver. In April 2018, the DMV finalized regulations for the testing and deployment of AVs on public roads without a driver. Approximately 30 companies currently have a testing permit with a driver and seven companies have received an AV permit for testing without a driver. Only three companies currently have a valid driverless deployment permit.
3. NHTSA. Currently, NHTSA provides a variety of regulations and policy guidance pertaining to AVs. First, FVSS applies to all manufacturers and vehicles to provide across the board consistency and direction on vehicle specifications and safety standards. Additionally, NHTSA provides / offers guidance for AVs and AV manufacturers including, but not limited to, standardized levels of automation, an automated vehicle safety framework, and the ADS-equipped Vehicle Safety, Transparency, and Evaluation (AV STEP) Program. With respects to level of vehicle autonomy, NHTSA and DMV utilize the same SAE standards (i.e. Level 0-Level 5) with California statutes and regulations considering an AV levels 3 through 5.

1. ADAS and ADS. Under SAE AV definitions, there are key differences between each level of vehicular autonomy. Levels 1 and 2 provide ADAS features that offer assistance to a human driver such as lane-keeping assistance, adaptive cruise control, and automatic emergency braking. Ultimately, under levels 0-2, these technologies are intended to assist the human driver, require human supervision, and the driver remains responsible for vehicle operation. Under existing law and regulations, levels 0-2 vehicles are not considered AVs. On the other hand, automated driving systems (ADS) are technologies designed to perform the entire dynamic driving task without a human driver. ADS equipped vehicles can operate autonomously under a variety of conditions and are considered vehicles in levels 3 through level 5. Under levels 3 through 5, the ADS system takes full control of the vehicle and the human(s) in the vehicle is / are not responsible for the operation of the vehicle.
2. NHTSA General Order 2021-01. NHTSA’s General Order 2021-01 (Order herein through) establishes mandatory accident (vehicular crashes) reporting requirements for vehicles equipped with ADS or level 2 ADAS. Specifically, the Order requires manufacturers and operators to report vehicular accidents involving ADS or level 2 ADAS technologies to NHTSA. For example, for ADS-equipped vehicles involved in an accident, the manufacturer / operator is required to be reported if ADS was active within 30 seconds of the incident and resulted in property damage or injury. For level 2 ADAS, manufacturers / operators must report vehicles involved in accidents if ADAS was active within 30 seconds and involved a vulnerable user, a fatality occurred, a passenger was hospitalized, the vehicle was towed off, or an airbag was deployed.
3. Safety assurances. The provisions specified in this bill would not go into effect unless the Order is repealed, substantially changed, or no longer enforced by NHTSA. As the author of this bill points out, it is unclear under the current federal administration if the Order is at risk of being repealed or no longer enforced at some future date. As a result, this measure aims to ensure that level 2 ADAS vehicles involved in accidents will continue to report accidents to DMV under certain conditions if NHTSA stops mandating / collecting accident data under the Order; and in turn, providing DMV the necessary data to make well-informed decisions on future regulations.
4. Double referral. This bill is also referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee and will be heard in that committee should it pass out of this committee.

Related/previous Legislation:

AB 1777 (Ting, Chapter 682, Statues of 2024) – Placed a variety of safety requirements on manufactures of AVs by July 1, 2026 and further authorized a peace officer to issue a "notice of autonomous vehicle noncompliance" for a violation of the Vehicle Code or a local traffic ordinance to an AV manufacturer.

SB 1298 (Padilla, Chapter 570, Statutes of 2012) – Established regulations for the operation of AVs upon public roadways, as specified.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: Yes

POSITIONS: (Communicated to the committee before noon on Wednesday,

April 16, 2025.)

SUPPORT:

California Safety and Legislative Board of Smart – Transportation Division
California Teamsters Public Affairs Council
California Walks
Center for Auto Safety
Consumer Attorneys of California
Consumer Watchdog
Consumers for Auto Reliability & Safety
Streets for All

OPPOSITION:

Tesla INC.

-- END --