An Act to amend and reenact § 22.1-205 of the Code of Virginia, relating to driver education; dangers of reckless driving, including driving at excessive speeds.
HB1352 amends Virginia’s driver education statute to expand and update the required content of public school driver education programs. The bill adds or reinforces instruction on alcohol and drug abuse, aggressive driving, distracted driving, speeding, reckless driving, motorcycle awareness, organ and tissue donation, fuel-efficient driving, and traffic stops, including how drivers should interact with law enforcement during a stop. It also requires an additional minimum 90-minute parent/student driver education component as part of the classroom curriculum, with exemptions for students who are at least 18, emancipated minors, and certain unaccompanied minors.
The bill further specifies how the parent/student component must be delivered. In Planning District 8, it must be offered in person and parent or guardian participation is required unless the student is exempt; outside that district, the component may be offered in person or online, and parent participation is encouraged but not mandatory. The instruction is to emphasize parental responsibilities, juvenile driving restrictions, the dangers of underage drinking and intoxicated driving, and the risks of distracted driving, speeding, and reckless driving. The bill also encourages school boards to offer behind-the-wheel training during or outside school hours and allows the Board of Education to approve local surcharges to help recover program costs, with fee waivers available for students who cannot pay.
HB1352 changes § 22.1-205 of the Code of Virginia by expanding the required curriculum for school-based driver education and by creating a more detailed framework for parent/student participation. It affects the Board of Education, local school boards, driver training schools, students enrolled in driver education, and parents or guardians, especially in Planning District 8 where participation requirements are stricter. The bill also reinforces local authority to offer behind-the-wheel instruction and to seek additional cost recovery through surcharges, while preserving fee-waiver discretion for students with financial need.
The available record shows no committee transcript or recorded vote breakdown, so there is no documented floor debate or formal opposition in the provided materials. Based on the bill text, the measure appears to have been presented as a safety-focused update to driver education, with an emphasis on teen driving risks, parent involvement, and practical instruction for new drivers. The enacted chapter status suggests the bill ultimately received sufficient support to become law.
The most notable points of potential contention are the mandatory parent/student component, the special in-person requirement and required parent participation in Planning District 8, and the authority to assess surcharges for behind-the-wheel training. These provisions could raise concerns for families about access, scheduling, and cost, while supporters would likely view them as necessary to improve teen driver safety and parental engagement. The bill also touches on law-enforcement interactions during traffic stops, which could be sensitive for some stakeholders, though no specific objections are documented in the provided record.