An Act to amend and reenact §§ 9.1-102 and 32.1-111.5 of the Code of Virginia, relating to driver communication improvement program for drivers diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder; education for law-enforcement officers and emergency medical services providers; educational materials for driver training schools.
HB1097 amends Virginia law to create and support a driver communication improvement program for drivers diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder and to expand related education and outreach. The bill directs the Department of Criminal Justice Services and other relevant agencies to incorporate autism-related communication training into law-enforcement and emergency medical services education, and it requires driver training schools to receive educational materials to help them better prepare students and instructors for interactions involving autistic drivers.
The measure also updates existing training provisions in § 9.1-102 and related law-enforcement education requirements so that officers and emergency responders are better equipped to recognize and communicate with individuals with autism spectrum disorder. In addition, the bill amends § 32.1-111.5 to support the distribution of educational materials for driver training schools, making the program part of Virginia’s broader public safety and driver education framework.
The bill changes Virginia’s Code by amending §§ 9.1-102 and 32.1-111.5, adding autism-spectrum-disorder-related driver communication and training components to existing public safety and driver education statutes. Its practical effect is to require or authorize training and educational materials for law-enforcement officers, emergency medical services providers, and driver training schools, with the goal of improving interactions with drivers diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder and reducing misunderstandings during traffic stops, emergencies, or driver instruction.
The available record suggests the bill was generally viewed positively and moved to enactment without recorded opposition in the provided materials. The caption and statutory changes indicate a public-safety and accessibility focus, and the absence of committee transcript objections or recorded votes in the supplied context suggests broad or at least uncontroversial support for the measure.
No specific points of contention are documented in the provided committee transcripts or voting history. Based on the bill’s subject matter, any potential concerns would likely have centered on implementation details such as the scope of required training, agency workload, and how educational materials would be developed and distributed, but none of those issues are shown in the supplied record.