AN ACT relating to school district use of autonomous vehicles.
Summary
HB379 amends Kentucky law governing fully autonomous vehicles and adds a specific restriction for school districts. The bill allows operation of fully autonomous vehicles on state highways without a human driver if the vehicle’s automated driving system is engaged and the vehicle meets safety and compliance conditions, including the ability to reach a minimal risk condition if the system fails, compliance with traffic and motor vehicle laws when reasonable, and required federal certification labeling when applicable.
The bill also creates a temporary requirement for heavier autonomous vehicles: from July 15, 2024 through July 31, 2026, any fully autonomous vehicle over 62,000 pounds must have a properly credentialed human driver present to monitor the vehicle and intervene if needed. Before operating a driverless autonomous vehicle on Kentucky highways, an operator must submit a law enforcement interaction plan to the Transportation Cabinet and Kentucky State Police describing emergency communication, roadside removal and towing procedures, how officers can tell whether the automated system is engaged, and any other safety information the owner or manufacturer considers necessary. Finally, the bill prohibits school districts from using fully autonomous vehicles as school buses or for any student transportation purpose.
Impact
HB379 would amend KRS 186.763 to clarify the conditions under which fully autonomous vehicles may operate on Kentucky highways and to impose a new planning requirement for driverless operations. It would also create a categorical prohibition in the school transportation context by barring school districts from using autonomous vehicles to transport students, including as school buses under KRS 156.153. The bill affects autonomous vehicle operators, manufacturers, fleet owners, the Transportation Cabinet, Kentucky State Police, and school districts.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text alone and the absence of committee transcripts or recorded votes, the available context does not show formal debate or a documented vote pattern. The bill’s structure suggests a generally permissive approach to autonomous vehicle deployment, paired with safety-focused guardrails and a clear restriction on student transportation. The school-district prohibition and the temporary human-driver requirement for very heavy autonomous vehicles indicate a cautious posture toward higher-risk uses.
Contention
The most likely points of contention are the limits placed on school districts and the requirement that certain heavy autonomous vehicles retain a human driver through mid-2026. Supporters of broader autonomous vehicle use may view the school transportation ban and the weight-based driver requirement as overly restrictive, while opponents may argue they are necessary public-safety protections. Another possible area of concern is the law enforcement interaction plan requirement, which could be seen as adding operational burdens but is intended to address emergency response and roadside safety.