California halts testing of driverless Uber cars

Vehicle registrations revoked one week after declaring latest program

Aweeklong clash between California regulators and Uber over the company’s self-driving cars culminated Wednesday with officials revoking the vehicles’ registrations after the state deemed them to be operating illegally. That move put a halt to Uber’s testing of autonomous vehicles in San Francisco, at least until the company agrees to obtain permits required by the state.

The bumpy week saw accusations that Uber’s self-driving cars broke basic traffic laws and complaints from cyclists that the cars were unsafe additions to the roadway.

Uber formally announced its selfdriving program in San Francisco on Dec. 14, though the company has been testing the cars on roads for a month. The self-driving cars included an engineer and safety driver to control of the vehicle if necessary.

Uber began testing self-driving cars in Pittsburgh in September.

Compared with Pittsburgh, San Francisco presented Uber with a new set of challenges for its self-driving technology. For one, it is a smaller city with major traffic congestion. It also has a strong culture for alternative transportation, meaning the car would share the road with a bevy of cyclists, street cars and buses.

But the program was public for less than a day before the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) told the company to shut it down.

If Uber did not comply, the DMV threatened legal action that would force the company to do so.

California law requires entities that test self-driving technology on public roads to obtain a special permit and provide proof that they are financially and legally responsible for any issues that arise. Those companies must also disclose when selfdriving cars are involved in accidents or when a human driver must take control of them.

“These requirements serve to build public trust in the safety of the tech- nology and to foster confidence in allowing autonomous vehicles on public streets,” Brian Soublet, the department’s deputy director and chief counsel, wrote in a letter.

Uber disagreed and debuted in San Francisco without obtaining permits.

“It was determined that the registrations were improperly issued for these vehicles because they were not properly marked as test vehicles,” regulators said in a statement.

“Concurrently, the department invited Uber to seek a permit so their vehicles can operate legally in California.”

Those permits have already been issued to 20 other companies testing autonomous vehicles in the state, regulators said, including Google, Ford, General Motors and Honda, among others. Once an application is submitted, permits are typically issued within three days.

“The department stands ready to assist Uber in obtaining a permit as expeditiously as possible,” regulators said Wednesday.

Uber does not have immediate plans to obtain a California permit.

“We are open to having the conversation about applying for a permit, but Uber does not have plans to do so,” a company spokesperson said.

Uber maintains that its cars do not meet California’s legal definition for autonomous vehicles because they require a human driver to be present at all times. The company also accused regulators of inconsistent enforcement of the permit requirement because Tesla’s cars equipped with driver assist technology do not require permits. (Tesla Motors is listed among the companies that have obtained permits from the state.)

An Uber spokesperson said the company “is now looking at where we can redeploy these cars but remain 100-per-cent committed to California and will be redoubling our efforts to develop workable statewide rules.” It could take its vehicles to one of the other states that allow testing of autonomous driving, or use them to expand its self-driving program in Pittsburgh. The company did not specify where the cars might be used in the near term.