NHTSA revises exemption process for vehicles without driver controls
This story was originally published on Automotive Dive. To receive daily news and insights, subscribe to our free daily Automotive Dive newsletter.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has streamlined its 'Part 555' exemption process, which permits manufacturers to sell up to 2,500 motor vehicles a year that do not fully comply with current Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy announced in a June 13 press release.
The streamlined application process, the framework of which was announced in April, extends to commercial robotaxis and other autonomous vehicles built without steering wheels, pedals or mirrors, which is a requirement for all passenger vehicles. The revisions are designed to expand mobility options in the U.S. and foster innovation in the development of self-driving technology.
The revised Part 555 exemption also includes internal changes at the NHTSA to expedite application processing time, improve transparency and increase engagement, which includes notifying companies of what to expect during the process.
Dive Insight:
In a letter to stakeholders announcing the updates, the NHTSA said the previous Part 555 exemption was intended for traditional vehicles and was not well suited for vehicles with autonomous driving capabilities. It added that the streamlined application process would expedite deployment of robotaxis and autonomous trucks carrying fright.
The NHTSA anticipates that the changes will reduce application processing times for exempt vehicles from years to months.
'The Part 555 exemption process has been rightly criticized for taking years – bogging developers down in unnecessary red tape that makes it impossible to keep pace with the latest technologies,' Duffy said in a statement. 'We've streamlined this process to remove another barrier to transportation innovation in the United States, ensure American AV companies can out-compete international rivals, and maintain safety.'
Although the changes allow manufacturers to sell up to 2,500 vehicles each year, companies still must demonstrate to the NHTSA that their vehicles provide an equivalent safety level as FMVSS compliant passenger vehicles and that the exemption is in the public interest, according to the release.
The previous Part 555 exemption process for AVs hindered innovation and stifled progress, per the NHTSA, as deploying and testing these types of vehicles on public roads in the U.S. is a necessary safety step, especially for those intended to carry passengers.
In 2020, the NHTSA granted one of the first exemptions to AV startup Nuro to deploy its compact R2, a low-speed, electric delivery vehicle which was not designed to carry passengers and could operate on sidewalks.
In 2022, General Motors requested the NHTSA revise its Part 555 exemption for vehicles it planned to use for its former Cruise robotaxi service in San Francisco. The automaker sought to deploy a fleet of Chevrolet Bolt AVs built without steering wheels or pedals, as well as the multi-passenger Cruise Origin autonomous shuttle built in collaboration with Honda Motor Co. and not equipped with any human driver controls. GM has since abandoned its robotaxi plans and its subsidiary Cruise now develops autonomous driving technology for its passenger vehicles.
'This next step in NHTSA's AV Framework will advance innovation by supporting the commercial deployment of purpose-built automated vehicles that can satisfy safety requirements,' NHTSA Chief Counsel Peter Simshauser said in the release. 'The agency continues working to modernize the FMVSS for automated vehicles, and in the meantime Part 555 exemptions will play an integral role in enabling the ongoing advancement of our domestic AV industry.'
The NHTSA also amended its Standing General Order on Crash Reporting effective June 16 for vehicles equipped with advanced driver assistance systems and other autonomous driving technology. Among the changes, it requires that companies submit a report to the NHTSA within five days of any serious crashes with airbag deployment if a vehicle's automated driving system was engaged.
The NHTSA's Part 555 exemption updates are supported by various trade groups, including the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, American Trucking Associations, Autonomous Vehicle Industry Association, Intelligent Transportation Society of America and the Zero Emission Transportation Association.
The group of companies sent a letter to Duffy in March urging that the agency to make policy changes to accelerate the deployment of AVs and help the U.S. remain a global leader in the technology.
Recommended Reading
NHTSA seeks to fast-track AV deployment
Melden Sie sich an, um Ihr Portfolio aufzurufen.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
SoftBank founder proposes $1trn AI and robotics hub in US
SoftBank Group founder Masayoshi Son is pursuing a plan to establish a $1trn industrial complex in Arizona, the US, to create a major hub for AI and robotics manufacturing, reported Bloomberg. The Japanese investment firm has approached Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing (TSMC) to play a key role in the project, though the specifics of TSMC's potential involvement remain unclear. The proposed complex, dubbed 'Project Crystal Land,' envisions a high-tech manufacturing hub akin to China's Shenzhen, individuals familiar with the plan told the publication. The park could include production lines for AI-powered industrial robots, they said, though the discussions remain private. SoftBank has also engaged with Samsung Electronics executives to gauge interest, alongside a range of other technology companies, the report added. SoftBank officials have held discussions with US federal and state government officials, including US Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick, to explore potential tax incentives for companies investing in the industrial park. Son has compiled a list of SoftBank Vision Fund portfolio companies, such as robotics firm Agile Robots SE, that could establish production facilities at the site. The project's feasibility depends on support from the Trump administration and state authorities. While the envisioned cost could reach $1trn, as previously reported by the Nikkei, the actual scale will hinge on participation from major technology firms, Bloomberg's report said. If successful, Son has suggested the possibility of developing additional advanced industrial parks across the US. TSMC, which has already begun mass production at its first Arizona factory as part of a $165bn US investment, indicated that SoftBank's project does not impact its existing plans in Phoenix. Representatives from SoftBank, TSMC, and Samsung declined to comment, and the US Commerce Department did not immediately respond to Bloomberg's inquiries. In March 2025, SoftBank agreed to acquire Ampere Computing, a US-based semiconductor design company, for $6.5bn. As per the deal, Ampere Computing will be acquired by SBG through its subsidiary Silver Bands 6 (US) Corp. Ampere Computing is engaged in developing high-performance, energy-efficient processors tailored for cloud computing and AI workloads. The company currently employs approximately 1000 engineers. "SoftBank founder proposes $1trn AI and robotics hub in US" was originally created and published by Verdict, a GlobalData owned brand. The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
How to ask for a raise: 6 mistakes that can hurt your chances — and what to do instead
Only 13% of full-time employees requested a raise in 2023, but 66% of those who did received one, according to a May 2024 Federal Reserve survey. It goes to prove the old saying right: Ask, and you shall receive. Still, asking for a raise at work can be a stressful conversation for many employees. If you ask at the wrong time or in the wrong way, you could hurt your chances. From asking too soon to giving ultimatums, even minor missteps can work against you. In many ways, it's a skill of its own. Here are six mistakes to avoid, along with practical tips to approach salary discussions with confidence and increase your odds of success. Before asking for a raise, it's essential to establish a strong relationship with your manager. Otherwise, the conversation won't go far. 'Before giving a raise, I would want to know what my employee is doing and have a regular cadence where we're meeting consistently,' says Patrice Williams-Lindo, a career coach and manager of five. 'If it's the first time we're meeting, it's impractical to ask for a raise then and there. It's like asking someone to marry you on the first date,' she explains. Set up regular one-on-one meetings with your manager if you haven't already done so. Use that time to keep them updated on your progress, share your wins and make sure you're aligned on goals, including earning a salary increase. It will also give your manager a clear understanding of how you and your work contribute to the team. Do you work for a great organization? Nominate it as one of America's Top Workplaces. Even after you've established a relationship with your manager, avoid requesting a raise in an arbitrary one-on-one meeting, via email or during a casual conversation. Your manager should know the conversation is coming. 'It shouldn't be an ambush,' Williams-Lindo says. 'When you book the meeting, say, 'I'd like to talk about compensation and share the results I've driven,'' she advises. Schedule a dedicated meeting and clearly state its purpose. That way, your manager has time to prepare and come to the conversation with the right mindset. Timing can significantly impact whether your raise request is granted. If you're unsure when your company typically handles raises or promotions, bring it up during your one-on-ones, then use the intervening time to work toward that raise. 'If I'm setting myself up for mid-year, then I need to start at the beginning of the year — if not before — building that case,' Williams-Lindo says. Map out what you want to achieve for the year ahead and start gathering proof points early, so by the time you discuss a raise or promotion with your manager, your case will already be well established. Avoid asking for a raise out of fear or personal financial pressure. Instead, keep the focus on your performance and value. Williams-Lindo suggested saying something like, ''It's been X months — here's what I've done, the caliber of my work and the outcomes I've delivered. That's why I believe I'm qualified for X, Y or Z.' That gives off a different energy than, 'Hey, I don't know how I'm going to pay my rent, and I need a raise.'' Center the conversation on your professional achievements and value. Know what the market is paying for your role and what peers in similar roles (even at other organizations) are making. If you can demonstrate the gap, you're more likely to have a productive outcome. Giving an ultimatum when asking for a raise is a major mistake. Even if you do get the raise, this type of communication can antagonize your manager, damage your professional reputation and ultimately undermine your value. 'This might sound like, 'I need a raise, or I'm quitting.' I appreciate that bravado, but for me, it's a bit of a turn-off, because how did we get here?' Williams-Lindo says. Rehearse your talking points. Calm, professional conversations are far more effective than explosive ones. Be open to negotiation and prepared to compromise on the final amount. Even if you've thoroughly prepared and presented your case well, your raise request could still be denied. If you're told "not right now," ask your manager for specific feedback. There may be outside factors influencing the decision or specific goals you'll need to meet to be considered for a raise in the future. A good manager will explain the reason — whether it's because the company is facing a downturn or because there are performance gaps to work on — and then help you to fix them. Set up a follow-up time — in three to six months — to revisit the conversation. This will indicate that you are engaged and goal-oriented. If your manager is dismissive and doesn't provide clear, achievable paths to advancement, it may be time to reassess if this is still the right place for your growth. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: how-to-ask-for-raise
Android Authority
30 minutes ago
- Android Authority
Can we trust Google Maps to get us anywhere anymore?
Andy Walker / Android Authority 🗣️ This is an open thread. We want to hear from you! Share your thoughts in the comments and vote in the poll below — your take might be featured in a future roundup. This past weekend, I was driving home from a wonderful break in the country. I usually use Google Maps to guide me home on longer drives, even if I have driven that route before. It's more of a comfort than a necessity. However, it tried its level best to take me on an unwanted adventure. To get home from the tiny town I visited, I had a choice between a faster toll route or the longer scenic mountain pass that runs alongside it. I selected the 'Avoid tolls' toggle before I left, thinking that the app would suggest I use the pass. After all, it was the best alternative available. That wasn't the case at all. Maps instead suggested two hugely divergent routes that would've taken me two hours north or 90 minutes south of the best route. Absentmindedly, I came so close to taking the suggested deviations. And if I hadn't curiously glanced at my Android Auto display, I would've ended up further from home. This incident opened my eyes to the larger problem affecting Google Maps' navigation reliability, especially on the open road. Having read countless takes online about Maps guiding drivers on obtuse routes, I'd say it's a fairly wide-reaching issue. So, if you have a story to tell, I'd love to hear it. I'm sure other readers would too. Here are the questions: Has Google Maps ever gotten you lost? If so, tell us about the experience. What's the worst place Google Maps has ever taken you? Do you feel that Maps has grown more inaccurate and less reliable over time? What is your preferred navigation app on Android, and why do you pick it? Would you pay a premium for a Google Maps that offers smarter navigation and more contextually aware features? Be sure to vote in the poll below, too! Has Google Maps ever gotten you lost while driving? 0 votes Yes. Google Maps consistently gets me lost. NaN % Yes. Once or twice, but not very often. NaN % No, Google Maps has always been a reliable guide for me. NaN % I don't use Google Maps while driving. NaN % 👇Sound off in the comments with your Google Maps adventure anecdotes and opinions.
