Regualtion of Event Recording Devices in Vehicles

You asked for a comparison of Senate Bill 592 to laws in other states that regulate the retrieval of information recorded by event recording devices (ERD) in vehicles, especially regarding access by law enforcement.

SUMMARY

Connecticut's bill, SB 592, allows law enforcement access to information recorded on an ERD under three circumstances: (1) with the owner's written consent, (2) after obtaining a search warrant, or (3) where the owner has signed a subscription agreement disclosing that the data may be stored or transmitted. At least six states currently have laws regulating the retrieval of ERD data, including Arkansas, California, New York, Nevada, North Dakota, and Texas. All six laws, like SB 592, prohibit retrieval of ERD data by anyone other than the owner, except under limited circumstances. But the exceptions under SB 592 are narrower. The current laws all allow disclosure of ERD data under the circumstances in SB 592, but most additionally allow retrieval for: (1) diagnosing, servicing, or repairing the vehicle; (2) providing emergency medical service; or (3) improving vehicle safety.

The Arkansas statute is the only law that explicitly addresses circumstances where law enforcement may obtain ERD data.

REGULATION OF ERD DATA

Generally

ERDs can record a vehicle's speed, direction, location, steering performance, or seat belt status for retrieval or transmission if the vehicle is involved in an accident or is stolen.

Arkansas, California, New York, Nevada, North Dakota, and Texas have laws regulating the retrieval of ERD data. All six laws, like SB 592, prohibit retrieval of ERD data by anyone other than the owner, except under limited circumstances. Unlike SB 592, all six states require manufactures or sellers of vehicles sold or leased in that state to disclose to purchasers or lessees the presence and capabilities of an ERD in the vehicles.

Law Enforcement

Based on our conversations with legislative committee clerks in those states, it does not appear that anyone representing law enforcement publicly testified in opposition to the regulation of ERDs in any of these states. The Arkansas law is the only one that explicitly addresses circumstances where law enforcement may obtain ERD data.

Owner Consent

All six states allow retrieval of ERD data when the owner gives consent. Arkansas law, like SB 592, requires written consent. Arkansas also requires that when data is retrieved with the owner's consent, the identity of the owner must not be disclosed in connection with the data retrieved.

Subscription Service

The laws in all six states, like SB 592, also have an exception when the owner purchases a subscription service. The service allows a driver to access traffic, weather, navigation, and other features. Also, if an accident occurs and an airbag deploys, the ERD data is transmitted to the subscription services provider who will contact emergency assistance to give the car's location. In addition, if the car is stolen, law enforcement can track it using this service.

Court Order versus Search Warrant

While SB 592 allows retrieval of ERD data with a search warrant, the other states have an exception under court order. “Court order,” as opposed to “search warrant,” allows retrieve of information under broader circumstances — both civil and criminal. The standard of proof required would depend on the type of order.

Other Exceptions

Other exceptions found in most laws that are absent from the Connecticut bill include retrieval: (1) by a new owner or automotive technician for the purpose of diagnosing, servicing, or repairing the vehicle; (2) to facilitate emergency medical treatment; and (3) for the purpose of improving motor vehicle safety, security, or traffic management where the identity of the driver is not disclosed in connection with the retrieved data.

Table 1 shows exceptions in each state to the general rule that only a vehicle's owner can retrieve ERD data. The table shows those exemptions that explicitly appear in the plain language of the statutes. There is no case law yet interpreting the language of these laws.

Table 1: Exceptions to Ban on Retrieval of ERD Data

	*Connecticut* *(SB 592)*	*Arkansas* *(Ark. Code § 27-37-103)*	*California* *(C. A. Vehicle Code* *§ 9951)*	*North Dakota (N. D. Cent. Code* *§ 51-07-28)*	*Nevada* *(Nev. Rev. Stat.* *§ 484. 638)*	*New York (N. Y. Vehicle and Traffic Law § 416-b)*	*Texas* *(Tex. Transportation Code § 547. 615)*
Court Order/ Search Warrant	Search warrant	Court order or probable cause at an accident*	Court order	Court order or stipulation of parties	Court order	Court order from judicial or admin. authority	Court order
Owner Consent	Written	Written consent of all owners*	Yes	Yes (for limited purpose)*	Yes	Yes	Yes
Subscription Service w/disclosure	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Improve Vehicle Safety	No	Yes*	Yes*	Yes*	Yes*	Yes*	Yes*
Diagnostic, Service, Repair	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Emergency Medical Service	No	Yes	No	No	No	Yes	Yes
Other		Allows limited access by Highway and Transportation Department			Violation is a misdemeanor


April 3, 2006		2006-R-0267
REGULATION OF EVENT RECORDING DEVICES IN VEHICLES

By: Natalie Wagner, Legislative Fellow