C. has become a test case for Uber’s broader robotaxi strategy.
A proposed bill that would allow autonomous vehicles to operate in Washington, D.C. has become a test case for Uber’s broader robotaxi strategy. Instead of simply partnering with, and investing in, robotaxi developers, Uber is also trying to shape the rules that govern them, an effort that puts it in direct opposition with its business partner, Waymo. Uber, which opposes the bill, argues the proposed rule would displace for-hire human drivers and hand Waymo a de facto monopoly. It has lobbied instead for a system that would require robotaxis to operate on a ride-hailing network that also uses human drivers, according to public records viewed by TechCrunch and interviews with industry and company sources. “We have already seen in other jurisdictions how a flawed, first-party only regulatory approach can disrupt a city,” Javi Correoso, who leads U.S. policy and federal affairs for Uber, said in May during a D.C. Council roundtable on a separate, existing statute regulating for-hire drivers. Correoso argued at the time that robotaxis create congestion by idling or cruising empty, cannot provide the kind of physical assistance to older or disabled adults that human drivers can, and cited data that states one AV displaces roughly four drivers. When asked about the hybrid model, Correoso shared Uber’s regulatory vision. “Hybrid model means that consumers should have the ability to access both. If a consumer is on the app, they should be able to choose,” he said, according to a publicly available recording and transcript. “I would go a step further: I think it should be part of the regulatory framework for the industry. There should be a requirement for consumers to be able to take an Uber that’s driven by a human.” Alphabet-owned Waymo contends the bill, which it backs, will allow for the safe deployment of autonomous vehicles while supporting public transit, equitable access, and workers without restricting companies like Uber. The two companies will pitch their positions on Monday during a day-long hearing. The bill’s passage is not imminent — many parties told TechCrunch they hope legislation is approved before the end of the year, and before Washington D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser leaves office in January. Still, the arguments and lobbying efforts surrounding the bill reflect a broader debate that stretches beyond Washington D.C. The proposed AV bill The bill, which was introduced by Councilmember Charles Allen in May, would update the existing Autonomous Vehicle Act of 2012 to allow for driverless testing and commercial driverless operations within the district. Today, companies like Waymo and Zoox can test autonomous vehicles, but only with a human safety operator behind the wheel. The proposed bill would give the District Department of Transportation (DDOT) the authority to issue driverless testing and deployment permits to AV developers that meet certain requirements. Such requirements include holding a minimum of $5 million in liability insurance, and agreeing to report crash data within either 8 hours or 72 hours, depending on whether the vehicle is part of a commercial fleet or a privately owned AV (which doesn’t yet exist in the market). The bill would also charge robotaxi operators a $0.15 per mile tax, a proposal that robotaxi advocates have argued is too expensive. Revenue from the “vehicles miles traveled” (VMT) tax would be split, with 50% going towards public transit and the remaining used to support education and workforce development for ride-share and taxi drivers at risk of losing their jobs to robot cars. Uber and Waymo are not the only parties interested in the bill. Numerous organizations and companies, including representatives from Tesla, Lyft, the Teamsters and Service Employees International Union labor unions, disability rights and accessibility advocacy groups, local business and industry groups, highway safety proponents, government officials, and think tanks are all scheduled to speak during M
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) Administrator Jonathan Morrison issued a directive Wednesday to autonomous vehicle (AV) developers, stating that it is unacceptable for their vehicles to interfere with first responders or law enforcement. Morrison noted in the letter that the agency has “identified a clear pattern of driverless AVs interfering with law enforcement and other first responders,” citing instances in which these vehicles drove into active emergency scenes, blocked the paths of ambulances and firefighters, or failed to recognize and respond to basic safety conditions like flashing lights, flares, smoke, fire, and traffic cones. The agency has demanded that AV developers present their “solutions” to this problem by the end of the month. “Let me be clear: the inability to detect and appropriately respond to such situations represents a functional insufficiency,” Morrison’s letter reads. “Emergency scenes are not rare or extreme ‘edge cases.’ As such, NHTSA is today issuing a call to action for AV developers and operators to immediately focus their resources on fixing this issue.” The agency doesn’t explicitly call out any particular company in the letter; however, the details suggest it is directed at robotaxi operators like Waymo. TechCrunch has reached out to Waymo for comment and will update the article once the company responds. A previous TechCrunch investigation found that Waymo — which operates the largest robotaxi fleet in the United States, with vehicles in cities including Los Angeles, Phoenix, and San Francisco — has had repeated run-ins with first responders. In at least six incidents identified by TechCrunch through March of this year, first responders had to take control of Waymo vehicles and move them out of traffic during emergency situations. In one instance, an officer was in the middle of responding to a mass shooting. In June, an officer was recorded moving a Waymo to unblock a roadway for first responders headed to a natural gas explosion at an apartment building. The agency’s letter to AV developers doesn’t say what the consequences would be if the request is ignored. Nor does it outline what the acceptable solutions would be. But the agency does imply it would hold companies accountable, just as it does human drivers who impede law enforcement. “Every second matters when law enforcement officers, firefighters, or paramedics are answering a call because lives are on the line,” the letter states. “That is why human drivers who impede these operations are subject to fines and even jail time.” The agency also noted in a press release accompanying the letter that it’s making progress on updating Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) requirements, which govern vehicle design and equipment requirements. These proposed changes could help autonomous vehicle companies like Tesla and Zoox, which are developing vehicles without steering wheels, pedals, or other features required on human-driven cars. The agency has already proposed rules that would eliminate the need for windshield wipers, sun visors, defogging systems, and tire placards. The agency released a new 2026 Regulatory Plan and Unified Agenda last week, outlining its proposals. When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence. Kirsten Korosec is a reporter and editor who has covered the future of transportation from EVs and autonomous vehicles to urban air mobility and in-car tech for more than a decade. She is currently the transportation editor at TechCrunch and co-host of TechCrunch’s Equity podcast. She is also co-founder and co-host of the podcast, “The Autonocast.” She previously wrote for Fortune, The Verge, Bloomberg, MIT Technology Review and CBS Interactive. You can contact or verify outreach from Kirsten by emailing kirsten.korosec@techcrunch.com or via encrypted message at kkorosec.07 on Signal. View Bio
Forterra, a US builder of autonomous vehicles, revealed today that more than 100 of its self-driving ATVs have been deployed in conflict zones in Ukraine for the past nine months, in what the company believes is the largest deployment of autonomous ground vehicles in combat by any US defense tech company. “I believe this to be true of every defense technology that’s ever been created—until you hit the realities of combat, you’re just not going to know,” Scott Sanders, Forterra’s chief growth officer and a former US Marine officer, told TechCrunch. Funded by US defense dollars, the mission is part of growing effort to transform the US military through its support of Ukrainian resistance to Russian invaders. While aerial drones have garnered much of the attention in the fight, the dynamics they’ve created — extensive no-go zones where surveillance can lead to death from above — have led Ukrainian strategists to seek ground-based autonomy as well. “There’s nowhere to hide,” Sergeant Major Corey Wilkens, who leads a program developing autonomous vehicles and tactics for the US Army, explained. “You become very, very vulnerable to be able to be attacked by [first-person view drones], other sorts of drones dropping munitions, artillery, mortar, the full range of things that they have.” Ukraine is already building its own uncrewed ground vehicles (UGVs) to help move supplies and munitions, or evacuate wounded soldiers, but they are typically battery-powered and can only carry up to 250 kilograms, according to a soldier in the Ukrainian army who has worked with the vehicles and who TechCrunch won’t identify for security reasons. Forterra’s Lancer vehicles, based on Polaris ATVs and equipped with a custom-built sensor and compute stack, are gas-powered and can carry 750 kilograms of cargo, making them more versatile and useful. “The bottom line is that this UGV for logistics and just maintaining our defense is the most important UGV in Ukraine,” the soldier said. “It’s fucking fantastic, and we are dying to get more.” They didn’t feel that way at first. The Ukranian Armed Forces have had have mixed experiences with Western contractors bringing new tech to the battle, and at first Forterra’s offerings felt a little too geared for the high-end requirements of the US Army. Modifying the vehicle for the situation—particularly, by adding a Starlink satellite internet antenna—made it a huge value add. Since arriving in Ukraine last October, the vehicles have driven more than 2,500 miles across more than 1,100 missions, carrying 777,440 pounds of total weight and completing 52 casualty evacuations. Some has been lost in combat, particularly if they get stuck in deep mud or other terrain where Russian forces can target them at leisure. A Forterra Lancer that met its end on the battlefield in Ukraine. Image Credits:Forterra / Forterra Forterra has learned some useful lessons — about electronic warfare, updating their software from afar, how to maneuver in challenging conditions, and ensuring their vehicles don’t break down. The company, which has raised more than $500 million in venture funding from funds like XYZ Venture Cpaital and Moore Strategic Partners, is now better positioned to compete for lucrative national security contracts. They’ve also seen the limits of autonomy: For now, Ukranian soldiers have mainly been teleoperating the vehicles in combat zones, in part because they’re too valuable to lose and in part because autonomous vehicles aren’t quite ready for the realities of war. While, for example, the vehicles can navigate autonomously across diverse terrain, they’re not quite at the point where they can identify unexpected enemy forces and react appropriately. “We actually need to be able to respond to the enemy threats, live, while it’s in front of the enemy, which the autonomy doesn’t know how to do yet,” the Ukrainian soldier explained. Forterra, which began work on autonomous vehicles 20 years ago, is working on h
Discussion (0)