Skip to main content

Uber halts autonomous vehicle testing in California

Ride-sharing company Uber Technologies has halted its self-driving car testing in San Francisco just one week the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) revoked registrations for the vehicles, saying the company did not have the necessary state permits for autonomous driving. Uber, which had been testing the cars for just one week, is expanding is self-driving testing in Arizona. It has been testing autonomous cars in Pittsburgh since September. Anthony Levandowski, head of Uber’s Advanced Tech
January 3, 2017 Read time: 2 mins
Ride-sharing company Uber Technologies has halted its self-driving car testing in San Francisco just one week the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) revoked registrations for the vehicles, saying the company did not have the necessary state permits for autonomous driving.

Uber, which had been testing the cars for just one week, is expanding is self-driving testing in Arizona. It has been testing autonomous cars in Pittsburgh since September.

Anthony Levandowski, head of 8336 Uber’s Advanced Technology Group, said in a statement on the company’s website that “we respectfully disagree with the California Department of Motor Vehicles legal interpretation of today’s autonomous regulations; in particular that Uber needs a testing permit to operate its self-driving cars in San Francisco.”

He notes that the regulations apply to autonomous vehicles, which he says are cars defined as being equipped with technology that can “drive a vehicle without the active physical control or monitoring by a human operator.” However, he said the cars Uber has on the roads in San Francisco are not capable of driving “without … active physical control or monitoring”.

He claims that self-driving Ubers operate in the same way as vehicles equipped with advanced driver assist technologies, such as 8534 Tesla auto-pilot and other OEM’s traffic jam assist, which operate in California without any DMV permit at all.

On 13 December, the DMV issued a statement on its website saying, “The California DMV encourages the responsible exploration of self-driving cars. We have a permitting process in place to ensure public safety as this technology is being tested. Twenty manufacturers have already obtained permits to test hundreds of cars on California roads. Uber shall do the same.”

For more information on companies in this article

Related Content

  • Foundation funds research for informed campaigning
    April 29, 2015
    ITS International talks to Professor Stephen Glaister, director of the transport research and lobbying organisation, the RAC Foundation. It is through the eyes of an economist that Professor Stephen Glaister, emeritus professor of transport and infrastructure at Imperial College London and director of the RAC Foundation, views current and future transport problems. Having spent 30 years at the London School of Economics and another 10 at Imperial, the move to the RAC Foundation was a radical departure from
  • Real-world testing is needed in wake of VW emissions scandal, says expert
    November 18, 2015
    As vehicle manufacturers, regulators and governments around the world seek solutions to prevent another emissions cheating scandal similar to the Volkswagen case, a major vehicle emissions inspection company has compiled and analysed on-road emissions data indicating that emissions violations of vehicles under real-world driving conditions may well go far beyond VW diesels. Opus Inspection says a two-pronged approach that continuously monitors real-world emissions is the only effective remedy. Lothar Ge
  • Detroit testing for Mobileye AVs
    September 15, 2022
    All-electric AV using both Lidar and radar will be on roads with safety driver in Michigan
  • New legal basis brings EU wide cross border enforcement
    February 25, 2015
    Pan-EU enforcement is set to become a reality after legislation is revised. In May 2014 the European Court of Justice ruled that European Directive 2011/82/EU, which came into force in November 2013 to facilitate the exchange of information between member states in relation to eight road traffic offences, had been set up on an incorrect legal basis. The regulations had been introduced under police cooperation rules on the prevention of crime, but the Court decided that the measures in the Directive do not c