Skip to main content

US Automated Vehicle Framework to 'slash red tape'

NHTSA insists safety will be prioritised and 'unnecessary' regulation removed
By Adam Hill May 7, 2025 Read time: 3 mins
Automated Vehicle Exemption Program - previously open only to imported AVs - will now include US-produced vehicles (© Daniil Peshkov | Dreamstime.com)

Removing regulatory barriers is at the heart of US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)'s new Automated Vehicle (AV) Framework.

"The new framework will unleash American ingenuity, maintain key safety standards, and prevent a harmful patchwork of state laws and regulations," says a statement from US Department of Transportation.

US secretary of transportation Sean Duffy says the country is "in a race with China to out-innovate, and the stakes couldn’t be higher".

“As part of DoT's innovation agenda, our new framework will slash red tape and move us closer to a single national standard that spurs innovation and prioritises safety," he added.

NHTSA’s AV Framework has three principles:  

  • Prioritise safety in AV operations on public roads
  • 'Unleash innovation' by removing unnecessary red tape
  • Enable commercial deployment of AVs 

NHTSA's Standing General Order on Crash Reporting for vehicles equipped with certain advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS) and automated driving systems (ADS) will remain, but will be streamlined "to sharpen the focus on critical safety information while removing unnecessary and duplicative requirements".

The agency will also expand the Automated Vehicle Exemption Program - previously open only to imported AVs - to include US-produced vehicles.  

“By streamlining the SGO for Crash Reporting and expanding an existing exemption programme to domestic vehicles, we are enabling AV manufacturers to develop faster and spend less time on unnecessary process, while still advancing safety,” said NHTSA chief counsel Peter Simshauser. “These are the first steps toward making America a more welcoming environment for the next generation of automotive technology."

In a separate move, Duffy announced that USDoT has "terminated seven woke university grants totaling $54 million". 

“The previous administration turned the Department of Transportation into the Department of Woke," said Duffy. 

USDoT says the university grants which have been cancelled are:

University of California, Davis - National Center for Sustainable Transportation 
$12m for “accelerating equitable decarbonisation” research. 

City College of New York - Center for Social and Economic Mobility for People and Communities through Transportation 
About $9m for “equitable transportation for the disadvantaged workforce” research. 

University of Southern California - Pacific Southwest Region University Transportation Center 
About $9m for research on how “the transportation system creates and perpetuates inequities". 

New York University - Connected Communities for Smart Mobility Toward Accessible and Resilient Transportation for Equitably Reducing Congestion 
$6m for “e-bikes to low-income travellers in transit deserts” research. 

San Jose State University - Mineta Consortium for Emerging, Efficient, and Safe Transportation 
About $6m for research on “intermodal inequities, particularly how improvements to auto travel can benefit higher income, often white drivers, while depressing transit ridership potential and depriving it of revenues necessary to provide comprehensive services to lower income, often Bipoc people and research into using crowdsourcing and collaborative planning to address safety concerns of women and gender non-conforming people using public transportation".

University of New Orleans - Center for Transit Oriented Communities 
$6m for “equitable transit-oriented communities [and] how neighborhood stabilisation efforts support environmental justice” research. 

Johns Hopkins University - Center for Smart Transportation 
$6m for research on “hyperlocal pollution exposure inequalities in New York City, promoting EV usage for low-income gig workers, long distance ride sharing, gentrification” and making climate change the centre of transportation decisions. 

For more information on companies in this article

Related Content

  • Deriving data to tackle tribal road crashes
    June 14, 2017
    David Crawford looks at a new initiative to deal with high crash and fatality rates on America’s tribal roads. According to the US Centres for Disease Control and Prevention, on average two members of the country’s indigenous communities - American Indians or Alaskan Natives (AI/AN) - die every day in motor vehicle crashes. This represents a far higher percentage than that of the country’s general population. Historically, the US states with the worst records are Wyoming, South Dakota, Montana, North Dakot
  • US ushers in reforms with new transportation bill
    November 9, 2012
    On behalf of ITS America, Paul Feenstra maps out implications and opportunities for the ITS industry. A critical milestone was reached last month when the US Congress passed, and President Obama signed, legislation reauthorising the nation’s surface transportation programmes, breaking a nearly three-year log-jam which had stymied critical transportation reforms and delayed much-needed infrastructure projects. The law, numbered P.L. 112-141 but known as MAP-21 (Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century),
  • Gig economy ‘makes congestion better AND worse’, says StreetLight Data
    March 15, 2019
    The gig economy is reshaping the way we think about travel and recreation – but when it comes to whether it increases congestion, there’s no simple answer, finds Adam Hill
  • When weather warnings get hyperlocal
    August 24, 2016
    David Crawford looks at new technologies to cope with the age-old problem of driving in bad weather. On the 10-year average, between 2005 and 2014 bad weather contributed to more than 1.5 million vehicle crashes in the US each year, resulting in more than 800,000 injuries and 7,400 deaths. These were the findings of analysis by Booz Allen Hamilton of NHTSA data which concluded that the loss of life, hospital treatment and damage to assets costs an annual average of $42bn.