The California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) recently suspended Cruise LLC’s permits to test and deploy driverless vehicles on public roads. The company, a subsidiary of General Motors, had violated several regulatory codes, including those related to the safety of autonomous vehicles and the transparency of safety-related information. The DMV also cited Cruise’s failure to provide critical information about a recent hit-and-run incident, raising concerns about the company’s commitment to safety.
Decoding the DMV’s Decision
The DMV’s decision to suspend Cruise’s permits revolves around multiple violations of regulatory codes. These include 13 CCR §228.20 (b) (6), which concerns the safety of autonomous vehicles for public use, and 13 CCR §228.20 (b) (3), which pertains to the misrepresentation of safety-related information regarding the autonomous technology in these vehicles. The DMV also cited 3 CCR §227.42 (b)(5) as a basis for suspension, indicating that Cruise or its agents’ actions or omissions posed unreasonable risks to public safety during autonomous vehicle testing on public roads. Moreover, 13 CCR §227.42 (c) grants the DMV the authority to suspend permits when immediate action is required for public safety.
Subsequent to the DMV’s announcement, Cruise opted to suspend operations of their autonomous vehicles within San Francisco. In their statement, the company underlined their core mission of developing and deploying autonomous vehicles with the primary aim of saving lives. Cruise had come under increased scrutiny following the California Public Utilities Commission’s (CPUC) decision to permit the company and its rival, Waymo, to expand their testing of robotaxis in San Francisco.
Given instances of vehicles making improper turns, stopping on highways, and delaying the work of first responders, city officials have voiced their reservations about the expansion and urged a more cautious approach. After being involved in two crashes, including one involving an emergency vehicle, Cruise has voluntarily cut its robotaxi fleet in the city by half in accordance with the CPUC’s ruling.
The Last Straw: The Hit-and-Run Incident
Cruise found itself under further scrutiny after a recent hit-and-run incident in downtown San Francisco, where a human driver struck a woman, leading her to collide with a robotaxi, causing serious injuries. The investigation into the hit-and-run driver’s identity is ongoing. In their statement regarding the incident, Cruise highlighted their autonomous vehicle’s efforts to prevent further harm.
The DMV’s statement reveals that Cruise did not provide crucial information until October 13, 2023, after the DMV’s request. This raises concerns about transparency and commitment to safety on Cruise’s part. If Cruise withholds pertinent information about a significant incident, it calls into question their dedication to the safe operation of autonomous vehicles.
The DMV’s findings also have broader implications for the regulation of autonomous vehicles. If transparency and openness become a concern with autonomous vehicle companies, regulators may find themselves compelled to take a more proactive role in overseeing their operations.
Federal Scrutiny & City Support
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has also opened an investigation into Cruise, and the company is facing pressure from regulators and the public to improve its safety record. Cruise has suspended operations in San Francisco and is working to develop a comprehensive safety plan to satisfy the DMV’s requirements.
In response to the suspension, experts like Phil Koopman from Carnegie Mellon University raised questions about the practice of testing autonomous technology without a safety driver. He argued that having a safety driver in place doesn’t hinder progress and suggested that removing safety drivers is more about managing public perception and investor expectations than enhancing safety. Leading up to the suspension, labor groups, including the Teamsters, persistently voiced concerns about safety and employment associated with Cruise’s operations. They believe that if their warnings had been heeded earlier, the outcome might have been different.
What’s Ahead for Cruise LLC?
The DMV has set forth a clear set of guidelines for Cruise to follow should they seek to reinstate their suspended permits, including creating a safety plan, providing evidence of implementation, cooperating with investigations, and paying associated fees and fines.
Reinstatement, however, hinges on Cruise fulfilling the department’s requirements to their satisfaction. The fate of Cruise’s autonomous vehicle permits now hangs in the balance, with the company confronting both technical and regulatory challenges in the ever-evolving autonomous transportation landscape.
