NHTSA, Zoox, Grant of Temporary Exemption From Portions of Various Requirements of the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, 91 FR 48494 (July 31, 2026)
Summary
Federal Register notice of Friday, July 31, 2026 (Vol. 91, No. 146) in which NHTSA grants Zoox, Inc. an exemption to manufacture and deploy a passenger car equipped with an Automated Driving System that does not comply with certain requirements in eight Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. The exemption is effective July 31, 2026, and Zoox may manufacture vehicles under it for two years, provided not more than 2,500 exempted vehicles are introduced into interstate commerce for commercial deployment in any 12-month period. Zoox stated that it will not sell the robotaxi but will maintain ownership. The page also carries the end of a decision granting a Mercedes-Benz inconsequentiality petition and a Sunshine Act notice of a meeting on August 5, 2026.
Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used
Cited in: Zoox
Archived web capture. Preserved source — captured from www.govinfo.gov; archived 2026-09-26.
Cite this document
“NHTSA, Zoox, Grant of Temporary Exemption From Portions of Various Requirements of the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, 91 FR 48494 (July 31, 2026).”
Original at www.govinfo.gov. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/nhtsa-zoox-grant-of-temporary-exemption-from-portions-of-various-requi-4e528884cb/
, SHA-256 93d414ecacb7d3a4a6aa311b47ef0118887aaba419bfcff12eb85be23c7e336b.Full text
48494 Federal Register / Vol. 91, No. 146 / Friday, July 31, 2026 / Notices
NHTSA does not consider the absence While reviewing this petition, NHTSA of the prohibitions on the sale, offer for
of complaints or injuries to show that contacted Mercedes to find out if there sale, or introduction or delivery for
the issue is inconsequential to safety. were additional warnings messages that introduction into interstate commerce of
‘‘Most importantly, the absence of a triggered along with the brake indicator. the noncompliant vehicles under their
complaint does not mean there have not Mercedes provided several screenshots control after Mercedes-Benz notified
been any safety issues, nor does it mean that show supplemental warning them that the subject noncompliance
that there will not be safety issues in the messages that activate along with brake existed.
future.’’ 3 ‘‘[T]he fact that in past indicator and help convey the required (Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120;
reported cases good luck and swift brake warnings to the driver. Taking delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.95 and
reaction have prevented many serious into consideration all the information 501.8.)
injuries does not mean that good luck provided and the oversized height of the
will continue to work.’’ 4 additional information, the Agency Otto G. Matheke III,
agrees with Mercedes-Benz that this Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
Arguments that only a small number
of vehicles or items of motor vehicle noncompliance will not have an adverse [FR Doc. 2026–15459 Filed 7–30–26; 8:45 am]
equipment are affected have also not effect on vehicle safety. Despite the BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
justified granting an inconsequentiality letter height of the braking indicators
being slightly smaller than the 3.2 mm
petition.5 Similarly, NHTSA has DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
requirement, the overall height of the
rejected petitions based on the assertion
adjacent ABS and Parking Brake ISO
that only a small percentage of vehicles National Highway Traffic Safety
symbols is more than 3.2 mm.
or items of equipment are likely to Administration
Additionally, the location of the braking
actually exhibit a noncompliance. The
indicators within the electronic [Docket No. NHTSA–2025–0523]
percentage of potential occupants that
instrument cluster are positioned within
could be adversely affected by a
the driver’s direct field of vision as they Zoox—Grant of Temporary Exemption
noncompliance does not determine the
are situated adjacent to the speedometer From Portions of Various
question of inconsequentiality. Rather,
and therefore always remain visible. Requirements of the Federal Motor
the issue to consider is the consequence The aforementioned factors make it very Vehicle Safety Standards for an
to an occupant who is exposed to the unlikely for a driver to fail to read and Automated Driving System-Equipped
consequence of that noncompliance.6 understand the meaning of the braking Vehicle
These considerations are also relevant indicators. Because the symbols are
when considering whether a defect is accurately depicted and are displayed in AGENCY: National Highway Traffic
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. the correct colors, consistent with Safety Administration (NHTSA),
FMVSS No. 101, Table 1, there should Department of Transportation
35355 (June 12, 2013) (finding noncompliance had not be any confusion about the meaning (Department or DOT).
no effect on occupant safety because it had no effect ACTION: Notice of grant of application for
on the proper operation of the occupant of the indicators, and the standard
classification system and the correct deployment of symbol that is displayed continues to temporary exemption from portions of
an air bag); Osram Sylvania Prods. Inc.; Grant of convey the intended meaning of the eight Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Petition for Decision of Inconsequential indicator. Standards (FMVSS).
Noncompliance, 78 FR 46000 (July 30, 2013)
(finding occupant using noncompliant light source
VII. NHTSA’s Decision: In
consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA SUMMARY: NHTSA is granting an
would not be exposed to significantly greater risk
than occupant using similar compliant light finds that Mercedes-Benz has met its exemption to Zoox, Inc. (Zoox) to allow
source). burden of persuasion that the subject it to manufacture and deploy
3 Morgan 3 Wheeler Limited; Denial of Petition for
FMVSS No. 135 noncompliance in the commercially a passenger car, which is
Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 81 FR
affected vehicles is inconsequential to equipped with an Automated Driving
21663, 21666 (Apr. 12, 2016). System (ADS), that does not comply
4 United States v. Gen. Motors Corp., 565 F.2d motor vehicle safety. Accordingly,
754, 759 (D.C. Cir. 1977) (finding defect poses an Mercedes-Benz’s petition is hereby with certain requirements in the Federal
unreasonable risk when it ‘‘results in hazards as granted, and Mercedes-Benz is Motor Vehicle Safety Standards
potentially dangerous as sudden engine fire, and consequently exempted from the (FMVSS). Specifically, NHTSA grants
where there is no dispute that at least some such Zoox an exemption for its Zoox sedan
hazards, in this case fires, can definitely be obligation of providing notification of,
expected to occur in the future’’). and a free remedy for that from certain requirements in eight
5 See Mercedes-Benz, U.S.A., L.L.C.; Denial of noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 FMVSS: FMVSS No. 103, Windshield
Application for Decision of Inconsequential and 30120. defrosting and defogging systems;
Noncompliance, 66 FR 38342 (July 23, 2001) NHTSA notes that the statutory FMVSS No. 104, Windshield wiping
(rejecting argument that noncompliance was and washing systems; FMVSS No. 108,
inconsequential because of the small number of
provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
vehicles affected); Aston Martin Lagonda Ltd.; 30120(h) that permit manufacturers to Lamps, reflective devices, and
Denial of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential file petitions for a determination of associated equipment; FMVSS No. 111,
Noncompliance, 81 FR 41370 (June 24, 2016) inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to Rear visibility; FMVSS No. 135, Light
(noting that situations involving individuals vehicle brake systems; FMVSS No. 201,
trapped in motor vehicles—while infrequent—are
exempt manufacturers only from the
consequential to safety); Morgan 3 Wheeler Ltd.; duties found in section 30118 and Occupant protection in interior impact;
Denial of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential 30120, respectively, to notify owners, FMVSS No. 205, Glazing materials; and
Noncompliance, 81 FR 21663, 21664 (Apr. 12, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or FMVSS No. 208, Occupant crash
2016) (rejecting argument that petition should be protection. NHTSA is granting Zoox’s
noncompliance and to remedy the
khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with NOTICE
granted because the vehicle was produced in very
low numbers and likely to be operated on a limited defect or noncompliance. Therefore, this application on the basis that compliance
basis). decision only applies to the subject with these requirements would prevent
6 See Gen. Motors Corp.; Ruling on Petition for vehicles that Mercedes-Benz no longer Zoox from selling, or otherwise
Determination of Inconsequential Noncompliance, controlled at the time it determined that commercially deploying, a motor
69 FR 19897, 19900 (Apr. 14, 2004); Cosco Inc.;
Denial of Application for Decision of
the noncompliance existed. However, vehicle with an overall safety level at
Inconsequential Noncompliance, 64 FR 29408, the granting of this petition does not least equal to the overall safety level of
29409 (June 1, 1999). relieve vehicle distributors and dealers a vehicle that complies with all
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:23 Jul 30, 2026 Jkt 268001 PO 00000 Frm 00131 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\31JYN1.SGM 31JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 91, No. 146 / Friday, July 31, 2026 / Notices 48495
applicable FMVSS. NHTSA grants Zoox the vehicle. The Zoox robotaxi can be would prevent the manufacturer from
an exemption subject to certain operated with input by a remote selling a motor vehicle with an overall
specified terms and conditions, assistant.2 Such inputs include requests safety level at least equal to the overall
including the application of an to pull over, contextual scene safety level of nonexempt vehicles.
enhanced oversight condition. Under information, a suggested path, or help The Zoox robotaxi is the first
this condition, NHTSA will issue with assessing a scenario. It also can be passenger-carrying ADS-equipped
Operational Authorizations that may remotely driven,3 if necessary, at low vehicle to be granted an exemption
update and expand as Zoox’s ADS speeds within line of sight using a under NHTSA’s general exemption
technology matures. handheld controller. Zoox stated that it authority.5 It is also the first exemption
DATES: NHTSA grants Zoox’s exemption will not sell the robotaxi but will to be issued since NHTSA introduced
effective from July 31, 2026 through July instead maintain ownership and be process improvements under the
31, 2028. responsible for daily operations, Department’s Automated Vehicle (AV)
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: including fleet management, Framework.6 These process
For legal issues: Callie Roach, Office maintenance and repair, fleet routing improvements have been made in
of the Chief Counsel, callie.roach@ and optimization, remote operations accordance with the AV Framework’s
dot.gov. support, and customer service. three core principles: (1) prioritize the
For technical issues: Emily Shull, NHTSA is granting Zoox an safety of ongoing AV operations on
Rulemaking Office of Automation exemption on the basis that public roads; (2) unleash innovation by
Safety, emily.shull@dot.gov. Mailing ‘‘compliance with the standard would removing unnecessary regulatory
address: National Highway Traffic prevent the manufacturer from selling a barriers; and (3) enable the commercial
Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey motor vehicle with an overall safety deployment of AVs to enhance safety
Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590. level at least equal to the overall safety and mobility for the American public.7
level of nonexempt vehicles.’’ 4 Under As described in more detail in Section
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
this exemption, Zoox is permitted to V, NHTSA’s new approach for
I. Executive Summary
manufacture vehicles that do not need processing part 555 exemptions for
II. Authority and Procedures for General
Exemptions to comply with portions of: FMVSS No. ADS-equipped vehicles enhances the
III. Zoox’s Application 103, Windshield defrosting and agency’s ability to process applications
IV. Receipt Notice, Request for Additional defogging systems; FMVSS No. 104, efficiently and exercise appropriate
Information From Zoox, and Comment Windshield wiping and washing oversight of the exempt vehicles.
Summary systems; FMVSS No. 108, Lamps, There are currently no requirements
V. Framework for Analyzing Zoox’s reflective devices, and associated under the Safety Act that prohibit the
Application equipment; FMVSS No. 111, Rear operation of ADS-equipped vehicles on
VI. FMVSS-Specific Analysis of Zoox’s visibility; FMVSS No. 135, Light vehicle public roads if the vehicle has been self-
Application
brake systems; FMVSS No. 201, certified by its manufacturer that it
VII. Compliance With the FMVSS From
Which Zoox Seeks Exemption Would Occupant protection in interior impact; complies with all applicable FMVSS
Prevent Zoox From Selling the Robotaxis FMVSS No. 205, Glazing materials; and and the system does not present an
VIII. Analysis of Whether Granting Zoox’s FMVSS No. 208, Occupant crash unreasonable risk to motor vehicle
Application Is in the Public Interest and protection. Zoox is permitted to safety. NHTSA’s analysis of whether
Consistent With the Objectives of the manufacture vehicles pursuant to this Zoox’s vehicle provides an overall
Safety Act exemption for two years, provided that safety level at least equal to the overall
IX. Conclusion not more than 2,500 exempted vehicles safety level of a vehicle that complies
X. Terms and Conditions are introduced into interstate commerce with all applicable FMVSS compares
I. Executive Summary for commercial deployment in any 12- Zoox’s vehicle to a vehicle that would
month period. be identical except for compliance with
NHTSA is granting an application As discussed below, NHTSA finds
submitted by Zoox for an exemption the standards for which Zoox sought
that a Zoox robotaxi that does not exemption. NHTSA finds that requiring
from certain requirements in eight comply with the FMVSS for which this
FMVSS for its ‘‘Zoox sedan’’ model compliance with the portions of the
exemption is being granted would standards listed above is unnecessary to
(referred to as the ‘‘Zoox robotaxi’’). The provide an equivalent level of safety to
Zoox robotaxi is a passenger car that is achieve an overall level of safety at least
a nonexempt vehicle. Further, NHTSA equal to that of a nonexempt vehicle
equipped with an ADS 1 and lacks finds that requiring compliance with
manually operated driving controls. In because most of those provisions require
those specific requirements would certain features to be provided to assist
its application, Zoox stated that the render Zoox unable to deploy
robotaxi was designed specifically for a human and do not provide a safety
commercially a motor vehicle with an benefit in a vehicle designed never to be
autonomous ride hailing. The vehicle is overall safety level at least equal to that
symmetrical longitudinally, meaning its driven by a human occupant. The
of a nonexempt vehicle. In view of the remaining provisions require certain
front and rear are identical. The interior terms and conditions discussed in this
is configured in a carriage-style notice and to which this exemption is 5 The first exemption under this authority for an
arrangement with two rows of seating subject, NHTSA also finds that granting ADS-equipped vehicle was granted to Nuro for an
facing each other toward the center of this exemption is consistent with the occupantless low-speed delivery vehicle. See 85 FR
Safety Act, which requires a finding that 7826.
1 For purposes of this Grant Notice, the term 6 See June 13, 2025 letter to manufacturers at
the exemption is in the public interest
khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with NOTICE
Automated Driving System and the abbreviation https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/2025-
‘‘ADS’’ are used as defined in SAE International
and that compliance with the standard 06/part-555-letter-june-2025.pdf.
J3016, ‘‘Taxonomy and Definitions for Terms 7 See U.S. Dept. of Transp., Trump’s
2 For purposes of this Grant Notice, the terms
Related to On-Road Motor Vehicle Automated Transportation Secretary Sean P. Duffy Unveils
Driving Systems’’ (April 2021), available at https:// ‘‘remote assistant’’ and ‘‘remote assistance’’ are New Automated Vehicle Framework as Part of
www.sae.org/standards/j3016_202104-taxonomy- used as defined in SAE J3016. Innovation Agenda (Apr. 24, 2025), available at
3 For purposes of this Grant Notice, the term
definitions-terms-related-driving-automation- https://www.transportation.gov/briefing-room/
systems-road-motor-vehicles. This standard is ‘‘remote driving’’ is used as defined in SAE J3016. trumps-transportation-secretary-sean-p-duffy-
hereafter referred to as ‘‘SAE J3016.’’ 4 49 U.S.C. 30113 (b)(3)(B)(iv). unveils-new-automated-vehicle-framework.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:23 Jul 30, 2026 Jkt 268001 PO 00000 Frm 00132 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\31JYN1.SGM 31JYN1
48496 Federal Register / Vol. 91, No. 146 / Friday, July 31, 2026 / Notices
features and performance that are Authorization in the docket for this portions of eight FMVSS for its ADS-
unnecessary or do not accommodate the notice. equipped robotaxi. Zoox cited two bases
Zoox robotaxi’s novel design. for exemption, section 30113(b)(3)(B)(iv)
II. Authority and Procedures for
NHTSA’s safety equivalency analysis and section 30113(b)(3)(B)(ii), stating
General Exemptions
is limited to the specific requirements that compliance with these FMVSS
The National Traffic and Motor would prevent Zoox from offering a
under the FMVSS for which Zoox Vehicle Safety Act (Safety Act), codified
sought an exemption. In processing motor vehicle ‘‘with an overall safety
at 49 U.S.C. ch. 301, et seq., provides level at least equal to the overall safety
Zoox’s application, NHTSA has not the Secretary of Transportation with
made any conclusions regarding level of nonexempt vehicles’’ and that
broad authority to exempt motor granting the exemption would permit
whether the vehicle otherwise complies vehicles from an FMVSS or bumper
with all other applicable FMVSS Zoox to introduce new motor vehicle
standard on a temporary basis, under safety features ‘‘providing a safety level
requirements. It remains the specified circumstances, and on terms
manufacturer’s responsibility to perform at least equal to the safety level of the
the Secretary deems appropriate. This standard.’’
a complete analysis of the vehicle’s authority is set forth at 49 U.S.C. 30113.
compliance with FMVSS requirements. Zoox requested an exemption from
The Secretary has delegated the portions of the following FMVSS:
Although NHTSA did not consider authority for implementing this section • FMVSS No. 103: Windshield
Zoox’s ADS in its safety equivalency to NHTSA.9 defrosting and defogging systems.
analysis beyond functional performance In exercising this authority, NHTSA • FMVSS No. 104: Windshield
that may be directly related to a must look comprehensively at the wiping and washing systems.
particular exemption, NHTSA has request for exemption and find that an • FMVSS No. 108: Lamps, reflective
considered the safety and maturity of exemption would be consistent with the devices, and associated equipment.
public interest and with the objectives
Zoox’s ADS in its determination of • FMVSS No. 111: Rear visibility.
of the Safety Act.10 In addition, NHTSA
whether granting the exemption would • FMVSS No. 135: Light vehicle brake
be in the public interest and consistent must make at least one of the following
systems.
more-focused findings, which NHTSA
with the objectives of the Safety Act. • FMVSS No. 201: Occupant
This consideration informed commonly refers to as the ‘‘basis’’ for
protection in interior impact.
the exemption:
development of operational oversight
(i) compliance with the standard[s] • FMVSS No. 205: Glazing materials.
conditions for this exemption.
[from which exemption is sought] • FMVSS No. 208: Occupant crash
NHTSA is granting this exemption would cause substantial economic protection.
subject to several terms and conditions hardship to a manufacturer that has Zoox’s application provided an
that provide increased transparency of tried to comply with the standard[s] in overview of the robotaxi, a description
operations and allow NHTSA to good faith; of each of the specified FMVSS
exercise increased oversight, including (ii) the exemption would make easier requirements for which Zoox is seeking
to ensure that the exempted vehicles do the development or field evaluation of an exemption, and its arguments
not undermine the public’s interest in a new motor vehicle safety feature supporting the required statutory
safe operations. In its June 13, 2025 providing a safety level at least equal to findings. NHTSA notes that any of the
letter to manufacturers, NHTSA stated the safety level of the standard; descriptions provided in this section of
that it was adopting a more dynamic (iii) the exemption would make the its application are Zoox’s
and flexible approach to evaluating and development or field evaluation of a characterizations and do not necessarily
overseeing exemptions for ADS- low-emission motor vehicle easier and reflect the views of NHTSA. The
equipped vehicles.8 NHTSA has used would not unreasonably lower the application included Zoox’s claims
this new approach to process Zoox’s safety level of that vehicle; or regarding the safety of the Zoox robotaxi
application. In granting Zoox’s (iv) compliance with the standard compared to nonexempt vehicles and its
exemption, NHTSA is establishing a would prevent the manufacturer from arguments that granting this exemption
permanent term that subjects the selling a motor vehicle with an overall would be in the public interest.12 In
exempted vehicles to continued safety level at least equal to the overall addition, Zoox’s application stated that
operational oversight implemented safety level of nonexempt vehicles.11 it anticipates it will comply with all
through Operational Authorizations. NHTSA established 49 CFR part 555, applicable FMVSS at the end of the
Operational Authorizations prescribe Temporary Exemption from Motor exemption period based on future
specific operating conditions for Vehicle Safety and Bumper Standards, anticipated regulatory changes that
exempted vehicles and may be tailored to implement the statutory provisions account for ADS-equipped vehicles.13
to different operating environments. The concerning temporary exemptions. The Zoox describes the robotaxi as a
Operational Authorizations offer requirements in 49 CFR 555.5 state that purpose-built, fully autonomous, all-
flexibility because they allow NHTSA to the applicant must set forth the basis of electric vehicle optimized for ride
oversee more dynamically the the application by providing the hailing in cities. It is classified as a
information required under 49 CFR passenger car and has a top speed of 75
operations of the exempted vehicles by
555.6, and the reasons why the mph. The vehicle seats a maximum of
allowing the agency to modify or
exemption would be in the public four passengers and has a gross vehicle
expand the authorizations as
interest and consistent with the weight rating (GVWR) of 3,000
appropriate. The first Operational
objectives of the Safety Act. kilograms (6,614 pounds). Zoox states
Authorization is being issued
khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with NOTICE
concurrently with this decision notice III. Zoox’s Application that its ADS is developed entirely in-
and is tailored to Zoox, its robotaxi, and house and consists of the hardware and
On August 22, 2025, Zoox submitted
the ADS’s existing capabilities. NHTSA an application for exemption from 12 Redacted versions of Zoox’s application and
is placing a copy of the Operational supporting documents are available in the docket
9 49 CFR 1.95.
(https://www.regulations.gov/docket/NHTSA-2025-
8 https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/ 10 49 U.S.C. 30113(b)(3)(A). 0523).
2025-06/part-555-letter-june-2025.pdf. 11 49 U.S.C. 30113(b)(3)(B). 13 49 CFR 555.6(d)(3).
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:23 Jul 30, 2026 Jkt 268001 PO 00000 Frm 00133 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\31JYN1.SGM 31JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 91, No. 146 / Friday, July 31, 2026 / Notices 48497
software collectively capable of ‘‘remote’’ control.15 Zoox also states that was added to the docket.20 Because
performing the entire dynamic driving other Zoox personnel (‘‘TeleGuidance Zoox’s application was made available
task and fallback on a sustained basis tacticians’’) can provide remote in September 2025 and the emailed
within a specified operational design guidance to the ADS, and the ADS then comment from the Transportation
domain (ODD), without any expectation determines when and how it is Trades Department did not reference the
that a passenger will need to intervene. appropriate to execute that guidance. extension request nor needing
Zoox states that, therefore, their system Zoox states that the tacticians do not additional time for review, NHTSA did
meets the description of a Level 4 ADS have direct control of the motion of the not extend or re-open the comment
under SAE J3016: Taxonomy and robotaxi.16 period.
Definitions for Terms Related to Driving Zoox’s arguments and rationale NHTSA received comments both in
Automation Systems for On-Road Motor supporting granting their exemption are support and in opposition to granting
Vehicles (April 2021). discussed in the relevant sections Zoox’s application for exemption.
Unlike conventional human-driven below. NHTSA identified several recurring
cars, the Zoox robotaxi is symmetrical, themes among the supportive
IV. Receipt Notice, Request for comments, including discussion of
meaning its front and rear are identical.
Additional Information From Zoox, and transportation infrastructure,
Rather than forward-facing rows, the
Comment Summary accessibility and inclusivity, economic
Zoox robotaxi’s seats are configured in
a carriage-style arrangement where benefit, safety, American technological
NHTSA published a Notice of Receipt advancement, data gathering, and
seated occupants face the center of the of Zoox’s application in the Federal
cabin. Zoox states that the primary overcoming regulatory hurdles. Some
Register on September 25, 2025.17 The commenters expressed support for
difference between the Zoox robotaxi Notice of Receipt stated that NHTSA
and a nonexempt vehicle is that the granting the exemption if subject to
had received an application for certain conditions, such as a variety of
Zoox robotaxi is not capable of being exemption from Zoox and listed the
driven by a human.14 Instead, the Zoox safety reporting requirements,
FMVSS containing the requirements for limitations on the number of vehicles,
robotaxi is equipped with lidar, radar, which Zoox sought an exemption. The and oversight of the operational domain.
cameras, long-wave infrared cameras, notice told the public that NHTSA made Some organizations and individuals
microphones, and other sensors that a copy of Zoox’s application available in opposed granting Zoox’s application,
perceive the environment with custom the docket and that it would separately with comments focused on occupant
perception software. This information is publish a notice seeking public safety, crashworthiness concerns,
then fed into planner and control comment on Zoox’s application after vehicle testing, limited transparency,
systems which plan and execute the determining that the agency had and Zoox’s failure to meet statutory
driving maneuvers autonomously. Zoox received adequate information to requirements. More detailed discussion
explains that, therefore, the Zoox consider the merits of the request. of specific comments is included in the
robotaxi is not equipped with:
After conducting an initial evaluation relevant sections that follow.
• Manually operated driving controls of Zoox’s application and requesting
as defined by 571.3 (i.e., ‘‘system of V. Framework for Analyzing Zoox’s
and receiving additional information
controls that are used by an occupant Application
from Zoox, NHTSA published a notice
for real-time, sustained, manual requesting public comment on March NHTSA’s determination of whether to
manipulation of the motor vehicle’s 11, 2026, and noted that copies of grant a part 555 exemption application
heading (steering) and/or speed Zoox’s application, appendices, and relies on two analyses: (1) an analysis of
(accelerator and brake)’’); responses to NHTSA’s questions were whether at least one of the four statutory
• Manually operated ‘‘non-driving’’ placed in the docket, with redactions of bases for an exemption is met; and (2)
controls (i.e., a turn signal operating information for which Zoox sought an analysis of whether granting the
unit that is capable of ‘‘cancellation by confidential treatment.18 exemption would be in the public
a manually operated control,’’ a interest and consistent with the
NHTSA received 119 public
headlamp beam switching device that is objectives of the Safety Act.
comments in response to the request for
‘‘designed and located so that it may be comment. NHTSA received one request A. Selection of Statutory Basis on Which
operated conveniently by a simple to extend the 30-day comment period To Analyze Zoox’s Application
movement of the driver’s hand or foot,’’ from the Transportation Trades Zoox cited two bases for exemption in
or a parking brake control that ‘‘may be Department,19 which requested a 90-day its application, section
either a hand or foot control’’); or extension. Before responding to the 30113(b)(3)(B)(iv) and section
• Human driver visibility aids (i.e., request, NHTSA received a comment 30113(b)(3)(B)(ii), stating that
windshield wipers and defrosters, sun from the Transportation Trades compliance with the specified FMVSS
visors, abrasion-resistant glazing, Department submitted via email one day would prevent Zoox from offering a
rearview and side mirrors, or a rearview after the comment period closed, which motor vehicle ‘‘with an overall safety
image display). level at least equal to the overall safety
15 NHTSA considers operation via the ‘‘remote’’
Although the Zoox robotaxi lacks level of nonexempt vehicles’’ and that
control to be remote driving as defined in SAE
manually operated driving controls, J3016. granting the exemption would permit
Zoox personnel (‘‘the Zoox Support 16 NHTSA considers this remote guidance to be Zoox to introduce new motor vehicle
khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with NOTICE
Team’’) are capable of limited, manual, remote assistance as defined in SAE J3016 and safety features ‘‘providing a safety level
low-speed operation of the robotaxi, understands Zoox’s remote assistants can initiate at least equal to the safety level of the
the vehicles to stop, remain stopped, or pull over,
with direct and constant line of sight, as well as provide suggested paths or contextual
standard.’’ NHTSA has decided to
through an industrial handheld scene information. consider only the first of these bases.
17 90 FR 46300. Although Zoox’s ADS is a new vehicle
14 In the context of this statement, we understand 18 91 FR 04730.
Zoox to be referring to the vehicle not being able 19 Transportation Trades Department, Docket No. 20 Transportation Trades Department, Docket No.
to be driven by a human occupant. NHTSA–2025–0523–0064. NHTSA–2025–0523–0130.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:23 Jul 30, 2026 Jkt 268001 PO 00000 Frm 00134 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\31JYN1.SGM 31JYN1
48498 Federal Register / Vol. 91, No. 146 / Friday, July 31, 2026 / Notices
feature that may perform functions exemption. As explained above, NHTSA and operational design domains are
related to the exemptions sought, believes the statutory analysis of updated over the lifespan of a particular
NHTSA does not believe they are whether the EOS finding is met should vehicle or generation of vehicles.
replacement for those features because be based on the impacts of the specific NHTSA announced process
almost all those features are provided to exemptions sought. Because a compliant
improvements in June 2025, one of
assist a human driver performing the vehicle may be operated on public roads
which is the adoption of a dynamic
driving task.21 In the Zoox robotaxi, the with Zoox’s ADS, presuming that it is
free from safety-related defects, approach for evaluating exemptions for
ADS is replacing the human driver, not
the features designed to assist human NHTSA’s consideration of the ADS’s ADS-equipped vehicles. This approach
drivers. Instead, the ADS renders those performance is limited. In light of this, includes an improved oversight
features superfluous. In this situation, NHTSA believes that the maturity of the structure that provides needed
because the ADS is not performing the Zoox robotaxi’s ADS is best considered flexibility and can be applied when
same safety function as the features in the context of an adaptable oversight NHTSA believes that such oversight is
required by the FMVSS for which they condition. necessary or appropriate. This oversight
are seeking an exemption, NHTSA structure would be established via a
B. New Approach to Processing
believes the equivalent overall level of permanent term or condition in the
Exemption Applications for ADS-
safety (‘‘EOS’’) basis is the appropriate Grant Notice, which subjects the
Equipped Vehicles
standard under which to evaluate exempted vehicles to continued
Zoox’s application. The Safety Act grants the Secretary, as operational oversight as outlined in
To examine the effects of the delegated to NHTSA, discretion to operational terms and conditions in
requested exemptions and make the condition the grant of an exemption ‘‘on permission letters.
EOS finding, NHTSA compared the terms [NHTSA] considers
appropriate.’’ 22 Historically, NHTSA NHTSA determined that it would be
Zoox robotaxi to a nearly identical appropriate to apply the operational
compliant vehicle. NHTSA believes this has applied terms and conditions to the
grant of a General Exemption oversight structure to Zoox’s exemption
is the appropriate comparison for an
infrequently and, when it did so, only if granted and evaluated the merits of
EOS analysis based on its interpretation
established a single set of static terms Zoox’s application with this in mind.
of the statute. NHTSA interprets the
and conditions that would apply for the Zoox’s application is the first to be
EOS statutory finding to be narrowed to
an analysis of the impact on features lifespan of exempted vehicles. However, evaluated since NHTSA announced the
and performance directly related to the the statute does not require the terms process improvements in June 2025 and,
exemption requested. In this case, issued by NHTSA to be static nor as predicted, NHTSA has found that the
NHTSA views the appropriate prescribe how those terms must be application of the dynamic oversight
comparison vehicle to be a hypothetical implemented. Instead, the statute structure allows the agency to process
compliant version of the Zoox robotaxi, affords NHTSA discretion to apply and evaluate applications more
which is also designed to be exclusively ‘‘appropriate’’ terms and conditions. efficiently and effectively.
driven by an ADS during normal These terms and conditions are Within the oversight structure,
operations. Many of the exemptions applied on a case-by-case basis and
Operational Authorizations are tailored
sought by Zoox pertain to features and tailored to the particular exempted
to the individual manufacturer and the
performance that assist a human driver vehicles. When evaluating the merits of
ADS’s existing capabilities. If an
in performing the driving task. Because an application, NHTSA may consider
whether applying terms and conditions exemption is granted, the manufacturer
the comparison compliant vehicle is able to begin manufacturing and/or
would also be driven exclusively by an are appropriate to ensure that granting
the exemption is in the public interest commercially deploying vehicles
ADS during normal operations, the immediately consistent with the terms
absence of those features or that or to ensure that the statutory basis on
which the exemption is granted is met. and conditions of the Operational
performance would not impact safety if Authorization, which may be modified
the only safety benefit of the To enable both better oversight and a
quicker assessment of the threshold via subsequent Authorizations, such as
requirements is derived from assisting a after a manufacturer requests a change.
human driver. question of whether to grant an
exemption, NHTSA is adopting a more This approach gives NHTSA flexibility
Although not part of its EOS analysis,
dynamic and flexible approach to to change operational terms quickly,
NHTSA did consider the information
applying terms and conditions. such as by expanding the scope of the
provided by Zoox about its ADS’s
ability to perform the function of a Because ADS-equipped vehicles are operational permission as the ADS
human driver as it relates to each of the capable of changing performance and continues to develop.
requested exemptions as part of the extending operational design domains This approach also enables NHTSA to
agency’s determination of whether over time, NHTSA has found that process General Exemption applications
granting the exemption is in the public establishing a single set of static terms more quickly by allowing the agency to
interest. The Agency notes, however, and conditions for such vehicles rely on an adaptable oversight
that there are no performance throughout their lifespan is often framework. In turn, NHTSA’s initial
requirements for an ADS that is impractical and inefficient. Static terms
review can focus on the current
replacing a human driver performing also do not always effectively promote
capabilities of the vehicles, rather than
the dynamic driving task and NHTSA motor vehicle safety because they
needing to develop specific terms and
khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with NOTICE
has no authority to require a higher cannot account for the dynamic nature
of ADS technologies. Particularly at an conditions that anticipate possible
level of safety performance in the future changes. This process
context of deciding whether to grant an early stage in the development of an
ADS, capabilities can improve improvement also builds on processes
dramatically as the technology improves that have proven effective for ADS in
21 Zoox is also seeking exemption from
Special Exemptions issued under
requirements on the basis that the design of the
vehicle renders those requirements unnecessary or 22 49 U.S.C. 30113(b)(1) (delegation of authority at NHTSA’s Automated Vehicle
inapplicable. 49 CFR 1.95). Exemption Program.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:23 Jul 30, 2026 Jkt 268001 PO 00000 Frm 00135 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\31JYN1.SGM 31JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 91, No. 146 / Friday, July 31, 2026 / Notices 48499
VI. FMVSS-Specific Analysis of Zoox’s robotaxi has an overall safety level designed and located so that it may be
Application equivalent to a nonexempt vehicle. operated conveniently by a simple
Zoox also provided additional movement of the driver’s hand or foot.
This section provides a detailed
information that is relevant to NHTSA’s In supplemental information submitted
discussion of Zoox’s application for
determination of whether granting the by Zoox on May 6, 2026, Zoox
exemption from specific portions of
application is in the public interest and explained that it has developed and
eight FMVSS, Zoox’s arguments of
consistent with the objectives of the implemented autonomous beam
safety equivalency, relevant public
Safety Act. Zoox states that the vehicle’s switching.
comments, NHTSA’s analyses, and
exterior-mounted sensors serve as the
NHTSA’s determinations regarding foundation of the ADS’s visibility and NHTSA did not receive any specific
safety equivalency for each of the that the vehicle is equipped with sensor comments regarding Zoox’s request for
requirements for which an exemption is cleaning and clearing systems that exemption from the requirements in
sought. Seven of the eight FMVSS for remove water, debris, and frost from the FMVSS No. 108.
which Zoox requested exemptions critical viewing surfaces of the sensors.
assume the presence of a human driver NHTSA finds that granting an
Zoox asserts that the performance exemption from these requirements
and the availability of manually requirements for the sensor systems
operated driving controls. In each would not impact safety because the
were derived from the performance requirements for manually operated
FMVSS-specific section, NHTSA also requirements of FMVSS Nos. 103 and
discusses any related issues that were turn signals and manually operated
104 and exceeds these standards, stating
considered in NHTSA’s analysis of beam switching devices do not provide
that their system must clean or clear the
whether granting Zoox’s exemption is in a safety benefit in a vehicle that would
entire critical sensing surface whereas
the public interest and consistent with FMVSS Nos. 103 and 104 only require never be driven by a human occupant.
the objectives of the Safety Act. cleaning or clearing of a percentage of Therefore, NHTSA finds that the Zoox
the critical area. In assessing the robotaxi has an overall safety level
A. Analysis of Zoox’s Request for
performance of the sensor cleaning and equivalent to a nonexempt vehicle.
Exemption From the Windshield
Defrosting and Defogging Systems clearing system, Zoox stated that it used C. Analysis of Zoox’s Request for
Requirements in FMVSS No. 103 and the test procedures and conditions Exemption From Various Portions of
the Windshield Wiping and Washing specified in FMVSS Nos. 103 and 104 FMVSS No. 111 That Require Interior
Systems Requirements in FMVSS No. and SAE Recommended Practice J942
and Exterior Mirrors and Rearview
104 (1965) with the only modification being
Image Display
the pass/fail criteria (100% clearance for
Zoox sought exemption from the Zoox). NHTSA reviewed test reports
windshield defrosting and defogging Zoox sought exemptions from
provided by Zoox regarding defogging, requirements in sections 5.1.1 and 5.2.1
systems requirements in FMVSS No. defrosting, and cleansing for critical
103 and the windshield wiping and of FMVSS No. 111, which require that
sensor areas and found the performance all passenger cars be equipped with a
washing systems requirements in to be indicative of performance that
FMVSS No. 104. Section 4.1 of FMVSS unit-magnification inside rearview
serves a safety purpose analogous to the
No. 103 requires each vehicle to have mirror providing a 20-degree horizontal
safety purpose of requirements in
windshield defrosting and defogging FMVSS Nos. 103 and 104 for which field of view and a unit-magnification
systems. Sections 4.1 and 4.2.1 of Zoox sought an exemption. driver’s side outside mirror, both of
FMVSS No. 104 require each vehicle to which must utilize a film-based or
have a power-driven windshield wiping B. Analysis of Zoox’s Request for silvered-glass reflective surface meeting
system and a windshield washing Exemption From Various Portions of specified reflectance criteria to ensure
system that meets the requirements of FMVSS No. 108 That Reference Turn image clarity and minimize glare.
SAE Recommended Practice J903a and Signal Operating Units and Headlamp
Beam Switching Devices Zoox also sought exemption from
J942, respectively. The Zoox robotaxi is requirements in section 5.5 of FMVSS
not equipped with any windshield Zoox sought exemption from Section No. 111 which requires that all
defrosting, defogging, wiping, or 9.1.1 of FMVSS No. 108, which requires
passenger cars display a rearview image
washing system because the vehicle is that all vehicles be equipped with a turn
meeting requirements for field of view,
designed to be operated exclusively by signal operating unit that is self-
an ADS, which perceives the driving canceling by steering wheel rotation and size, response time, linger time,
environment through exterior-mounted capable of cancellation by a manually deactivation, default view, and
sensors rather than through a operated control. Zoox states that there durability.
windshield as a human driver would. is no need for a manually operated (i.e., In its application, Zoox states that the
NHTSA did not receive any specific human operated) turn signal operating safety problem addressed by FMVSS
comments regarding Zoox’s request for unit. Instead, based on the vehicle’s No. 111 (i.e., that the ‘‘driver does not
exemption from the requirements in location and trajectory, the ADS’s have a clear and reasonably
FMVSS Nos. 103 and 104. Consistent planning system sends a command unobstructed view to the rear’’) does not
with the agency’s position expressed in requesting the activation or deactivation exist in the Zoox robotaxi. Instead, the
the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking of a turn signal. If a command from a Zoox robotaxi is equipped with a sensor
(NPRM) on modernizing FMVSS Nos. remote assistant requires the suite, including multiple cameras, lidar,
103 and 104 to accommodate ADS- (de)activation of a turn signal, the ADS
khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with NOTICE
and radar, that creates a 360-degree field
equipped vehicles, NHTSA finds that will (de)activate the turn signal as of view with redundancy that, according
granting an exemption from these appropriate once the ADS has to Zoox, exceeds the field of view
requirements would not have a confirmed a path. specified by FMVSS No. 111 Sections
substantive adverse safety effect.23 Zoox also sought exemption from
S9.4, which requires each vehicle to 5.1.1, 5.2.1, and 5.5 and provides much
Therefore, NHTSA finds that the Zoox
have a means of switching between better total visibility than a human
23 91 FR 12537 (March 16, 2026). lower and upper beam headlamps would have in any vehicle.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:23 Jul 30, 2026 Jkt 268001 PO 00000 Frm 00136 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\31JYN1.SGM 31JYN1
48500 Federal Register / Vol. 91, No. 146 / Friday, July 31, 2026 / Notices
The Advocates for Highway and Auto Additionally, an audio prompt reminds AAA 27 expressed concern with the
Safety 24 (‘‘Advocates’’) commented on occupants to check for traffic once they lack of sufficient public details
the lack of evidence in terms of test arrive at their drop-off location. In regarding system behavior under
results or analyses about how the Zoox addition, because the doors pop out cascading failures, performance in
robotaxi perceives and responds to slightly and slide along the body of the degraded environments, and robustness
pedestrians within the target range for a robotaxi, occupants can look both ways of fallback strategies in dense urban
sensor or camera used for compliance with the doors open before exiting the settings. NHTSA notes that FMVSS No.
with FMVSS No. 111’s rear visibility vehicle. 135 prescribes minimum foundational
requirements. The Advocates cited brake performance requirements. Zoox’s
NHTSA’s recognition that in order for After considering the information application asserts that the Zoox
the requirement to meet the need for provided by Zoox and the public robotaxi has been tested and complies
safety the driver needed to both comments, NHTSA finds that the Zoox with the equipment, performance, and
perceive and respond appropriately robotaxi provides an equivalent level of warning requirements in FMVSS No.
before impact with the pedestrian. safety to a vehicle that complies with 135, specifically the requirements in
Although the Advocates are correct the rear visibility requirements in S5.1, S5.2, S5.4, S5.5, S5.6, and S7.
that NHTSA established the sections 5.1.1 and 5.2.1, as well as Consistent with the agency’s position
requirement for a rear-view image based section 5.5. First, NHTSA finds that expressed in the NPRM on modernizing
on information about how human mirrors do not address the safety FMVSS No. 135 to accommodate ADS-
drivers would respond to the presence problem of drivers not having a clear equipped vehicles,28 NHTSA finds that
of objects within the field of view, the and reasonably unobstructed view to the requiring manual controls for the
standard itself does not require a rear in vehicles that will never be driven activation of the service and parking
particular response. Although the ADS by a human. Likewise, NHTSA also brakes is unnecessary for operation of a
in the Zoox robotaxi will be performing finds that displaying a rearview image vehicle by ADS. Accordingly, NHTSA
the dynamic driving task, NHTSA has finds that a Zoox robotaxi exempt from
that meets the requirements for size,
not regulated that aspect of motor the manual brake control requirements
response time, linger time, deactivation,
vehicle performance. Accordingly, in FMVSS No. 135 would have an
NHTSA cannot require a higher level of and default view do not provide a safety overall safety level equivalent to a
vehicle safety performance in the benefit for a vehicle that will not be nonexempt vehicle.
context of evaluating whether to grant driven by a human occupant. We note
that Zoox provided test reports E. Analysis of Zoox’s Request for
an exemption simply because a vehicle
demonstrating that their vehicle’s Exemption From the Sun Visor
is being operated by an ADS as opposed
cameras meet certain requirements in Requirements in FMVSS No. 201
to a human driver.
NHTSA also received a comment from sections 5.2.1 and 5.5. However, Section 5.4 of FMVSS No. 201
the American Automobile Association because Zoox requested exemption from requires each front outboard designated
(AAA) 25 expressing concern with the sections 5.2.1 and 5.5 in their entirety, seating position to be provided with a
lack of outside mirrors, stating that NHTSA evaluated each as such and sun visor that is constructed of or
passengers’ exiting the vehicle may have found that the vehicle’s rearview image covered with energy-absorbing material.
limited visibility of approaching cyclists provides an overall safety level The sun visors must also be designed
or vehicles. equivalent to a nonexempt vehicle. and mounted such that they do not
In the Nuro, Inc. grant notice, NHTSA Further, while not required for an present sharp edges or rigid projections
identified potential ancillary benefits that could increase the risk of injury
exemption, NHTSA finds that Zoox’s
that mirrors provide, such as providing during an occupant’s head impact.
approach to ensuring safe passenger In a notice from 1982 that granted an
a warning to vehicle occupants exiting
unloading, by unloading curb side and exemption from the requirement to
vehicles (or opening doors) about
approaching traffic and persons in the providing reminders to passengers can provide sun visors, NHTSA stated that
vicinity of the vehicle. An example even substitute for the ancillary benefit sun visors function as an occupant
would be a passenger exiting a vehicle provided by exterior mirrors. protection device by providing impact
without mirrors while also failing to D. Analysis of Zoox’s Request for absorbing material in the windshield
look both ways to avoid an oncoming Exemption From the Manual Brake header area in addition to keeping the
cyclist. Although the outside mirror can sun from interfering with the vision of
Control Requirements in FMVSS No.
serve a potential ancillary purpose for the operator.29 Zoox’s application
135
exiting passengers and oncoming addresses both of these purposes.
cyclists, FMVSS No. 111 was not Section 5.3.1 of FMVSS No. 135 Regarding the occupant protection
designed or drafted with this in mind. requires the service brakes to be function of sun visors, Zoox states that
NHTSA considers these ancillary activated by means of a foot control. In it believes rationale for the sun visor
benefits important, but notes that other addition, the control of the parking requirements is to ‘‘minimize the risk of
features may also provide these benefits. injury from contacting the sun visor’’
brake must be independent of the
In supplemental information and argues that because the Zoox
service brake control and may be either
submitted by Zoox on January 28, robotaxi is not equipped with sun
2026,26 Zoox stated that it addresses a hand or foot control. The Zoox ADS visors, there is no need to protect the
safe passenger loading and unloading by uses control functions, carried out occupants from the sun visors.
opening only the doors on the side through actuators and their associated Regarding the purpose of reducing sun
khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with NOTICE
closest to the road edge (e.g., curb). control systems, to activate the service glare for human drivers, Zoox notes that
and parking brakes. The ADS then uses
24 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, a series of electronic messages that are 27 American Automobile Association, Docket No.
Docket No. NHTSA–2025–0523–0104 at 4. relayed to the brake controller to request NHTSA–2025–0523–0121 at 3.
25 American Automobile Association, Docket No. 28 91 FR 38593 (June 26, 2026).
negative torque, similar to a human
NHTSA–2025–0523–0121 at 4. 29 47 FR 34071 (August 5, 1982), Anden Holdings
26 https://www.regulations.gov/document/ driver applying the brake pedal or Ltd., Grant of Petition for Temporary Exemption
NHTSA-2025-0523-0004 at 8. pressing a parking brake button. From Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:23 Jul 30, 2026 Jkt 268001 PO 00000 Frm 00137 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\31JYN1.SGM 31JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 91, No. 146 / Friday, July 31, 2026 / Notices 48501
the ADS is not affected by the presence testing criteria based on the glazing’s since the robotaxi is not equipped with
or absence of a sun visor because it does location and designation as a particular sun visors, the vehicle cannot comply
not view the roadway through a ‘Item’ type. The purpose of FMVSS No. with the requirements of the standard.
windshield. 205 is to reduce injuries (e.g., Instead, Zoox argued that since an air
NHTSA did not receive any public lacerations) resulting from impact to bag warning label is conspicuously
comments regarding Zoox’s request for glazing surfaces, to ensure a necessary located adjacent to each seating
exemption from the sun visor degree of transparency in motor vehicle position, the vehicle provides an
requirement. After consideration, windows for driver visibility, and to equivalent level of safety to a
NHTSA believes that the Zoox robotaxi minimize the possibility of occupants nonexempt vehicle. Zoox’s approach to
provides an overall level of safety equal being thrown through the windows in the air bag warning label content and
to that of a vehicle that is not exempt collisions. Zoox is requesting an pictogram strays slightly from what is
from the sun visor requirement because exemption from the requirements for required by 4.5.1(b), but Zoox argued
of the positioning of the seats in the their vehicle’s windshields to be AS1 that the differences more accurately
Zoox robotaxi. Because the seating glazing. represent the design of the vehicle. For
positions are facing inward, toward the Zoox states that none of the glazing in example, the Zoox air bag warning label
center of the vehicle, the header area in the robotaxi is necessary for driving references the Zoox App containing the
which the sun visors would be installed visibility as there is no driver seat and Rider Manual rather than the owner’s
is behind the passengers’ heads and the ADS views the world through the manual,30 and the pictogram displays
head restraints. Based on the design sensors mounted on the exterior of the the Zoox bespoke air bag design
configuration of the vehicle, NHTSA vehicle, not through the windows. Zoox compared to traditional air bags.
finds that providing sun visors would states that the glazing at either end of NHTSA agrees that Zoox’s approach of
not provide an occupant protection the robotaxi (referred to as ‘‘service relocating the air bag warning labels to
benefit. Regarding the secondary bays’’ by Zoox) is marked ‘‘AS4’’ and a location at each seating position, as
function of sun visors, NHTSA finds satisfies the associated requirements for well as altering the contents of the
that there is no safety need to block sun Item 4 glazing. In addition, Zoox states warning label to represent the unique
glare for a human driver for a vehicle that the glazing was tested and met the vehicle design accurately while still
that will never be driven by a human occupant safety tests for AS1 glazing. conveying safety information to the
occupant. Therefore, NHTSA finds that Zoox submitted test reports indicating occupants, adequately addresses the
the Zoox robotaxi provides an that the glazing used in the service bays safety need met by S4.5.1(b). Therefore,
equivalent level of safety to a vehicle on the robotaxis meets the requirements NHTSA finds that the Zoox robotaxi
that complies with the sun visor for AS4 glazing as well as tests 9, 12, provides an equivalent level of safety to
requirement. Inasmuch as the padding and 26 for AS1 glazing. a vehicle that complies with the sun
on a sun visor may provide additional NHTSA did not receive any public visor labeling requirements in FMVSS
occupant protection when the sun visor comments about Zoox’s request for No. 208.
is in certain positions, the level of exemption from the requirements for
energy absorption and volume padding windshields to use AS1 glazing. VII. Compliance With the FMVSS From
in an FMVSS No. 201-compliant sun After considering the information Which Zoox Seeks Exemption Would
visor is not defined and will vary with provided by Zoox, NHTSA finds that Prevent Zoox From Selling the
different vehicles, different occupant glazing used for the service bays is not Robotaxis
sizes, the positioning of the sun visor requisite for driving visibility. As noted above, NHTSA evaluated
and various other factors. We note that Accordingly, NHTSA finds that Zoox’s application on the statutory basis
there have been significant exempting the Zoox robotaxi from the that the manufacturer would be
improvements in motor vehicle safety requirements for AS1 glazing that relate otherwise unable to sell a motor vehicle
since the requirement was first issued, to driving visibility would not have an with an overall level of safety at least
including improvements to FMVSS No. adverse impact on safety. However, equal to that of a nonexempted vehicle.
201 issued in 1995 that established because NHTSA believes that the Although the statutory language for
performance requirements for impact glazing in the service bays should still equivalent overall safety states that
area inclusive of the area in which sun provide the same level of occupant NHTSA must find that compliance with
visors are stowed, thus reducing any protection as a compliant windshield, the FMVSS would prevent Zoox from
incremental benefit associated with NHTSA is conditioning Zoox’s ‘‘selling’’ the robotaxi, this language
providing energy-absorbing sun visors. exemption from the requirement that does not limit the application of the
Zoox stated that the robotaxi has been windshields be comprised of AS1 statutory basis to only vehicles that will
tested and complies with all other glazing on the glazing meeting AS4 be offered for sale (which Zoox states
relevant components required by requirements as well as tests 9, 12, and the robotaxi will not). Rather, to grant
FMVSS No. 201. For the same reasons, 26 for AS1 glazing. Subject to this an exemption under the equivalent
NHTSA believes granting Zoox and condition, NHTSA finds that the Zoox overall safety basis, NHTSA must find
exemption from portions of FMVSS No. robotaxi would provide an equivalent that compliance with the standard
201 is in the public interest. level of safety to a nonexempt vehicle. would prevent Zoox from selling the
F. Analysis of Zoox’s Request for G. Analysis of Zoox’s Request for robotaxi regardless of whether Zoox
Exemption From the Windshield Exemption From the Air Bag Warning actually intends to sell the robotaxi.
Abrasion Resistance and Deviation and Label Requirements in FMVSS No. 208 Section 30113 of the Vehicle Safety Act
khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with NOTICE
Distortion Requirements in FMVSS No. does not require that a vehicle exempted
Section 4.5.1 of FMVSS No. 208
205 requires each vehicle to have a label 30 Because Zoox will maintain ownership of its
Section 5.1 of FMVSS No. 205 permanently affixed to either side of the vehicles under this exemption, as stated in Zoox’s
requires that glazing materials used in sun visor at each front outboard seating application and in this Grant Notice, certain
information often found in an owner’s manual that
motor vehicles conform to the ANSI/ position equipped with an inflatable is relevant to the occupants of the exempted
SAE Z26.1–1996 standard, which restraint and the content must conform vehicles will be provided in a Rider Manual which
dictates specific performance and with the standard. Zoox reasoned that is accessible via Zoox’s website and app.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:23 Jul 30, 2026 Jkt 268001 PO 00000 Frm 00138 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\31JYN1.SGM 31JYN1
48502 Federal Register / Vol. 91, No. 146 / Friday, July 31, 2026 / Notices
under the equivalent overall safety basis A. Zoox’s Public Interest Argument safety risks and provide enhanced
enter interstate commerce only through Zoox argued that granting its oversight to respond to issues that may
a sale, and NHTSA declines to read application for exemption for the arise.
such a limitation into the statute. robotaxi is consistent with the public B. Public Interest Issues Raised by
Accordingly, we have determined that interest and the objectives of the Safety Commenters
Zoox may introduce the robotaxi into Act for several reasons. Zoox stated that
interstate commerce by means other NHTSA requested comment from the
introducing an automated robotaxi that public on the merits of Zoox’s
than selling, even if the vehicle is meets or exceeds the performance of a application and potential terms and
exempted under this basis. human driver would enhance the conditions that should be applied to the
Based on its expertise and the overall safety of the transportation exemption, if granted.
information available to it, NHTSA system and would directly support the
finds that granting Zoox’s application U.S. economy by supporting existing (1) Supportive Comments
for its robotaxi would result in a vehicle businesses and offering consumers An overwhelming majority of the
that has an overall level of safety additional transportation mobility. Zoox public comments supported NHTSA
equivalent to a nonexempt version of also argued the exemption would be in granting Zoox’s exemption, particularly
the vehicle. As discussed above, the public interest as it would further as it relates to public interest, though
advance and solidify U.S. standing and many commenters did not elaborate on
NHTSA has evaluated each of the
leadership in AI and automated vehicle their reasoning for certain supportive
exemptions sought and has determined
technology, as well as signal to the comments. Although NHTSA
that exempting the Zoox robotaxi from
industry and global competitors this appreciates public participation and
those requirements would not decrease
administration’s commitment to takes such comments into
safety. Although evaluated individually ensuring American companies can consideration, the agency will not
above, NHTSA also finds that the Zoox achieve and maintain the lead in respond to non-substantive comments
robotaxi, as exempt from those automated vehicle innovation. Specific in this notice.
requirements, provides an overall to the Safety Act, Zoox argued that In terms of safety benefits, the
equivalent level of safety to an safety is maintained because the Southern Nevada Bicycle Coalition 31
otherwise identical compliant vehicle robotaxi provides at least an overall noted that automated vehicles have the
that is also operated by an ADS. Most level of safety equivalent to nonexempt potential to eliminate common causes of
of the exemptions sought are for features vehicles. In addition, Zoox asserted that crashes (e.g., distraction, speeding) due
designed to assist human drivers and the standards from which it seeks to advanced sensing, situational
therefore are unnecessary for a vehicle exemptions are predicated on the awareness, predictive algorithms, and
that will not be operated by a human presence of physical controls and adherence to traffic laws. Transform 32
occupant, with the remaining equipment intended for use by a human and the California Bicycle Coalition 33
exemptions being sought for driver and, therefore, do not improve expressed similar sentiments in terms of
requirements that are incompatible or the safety of a vehicle designed to be safety benefits for vulnerable road users.
unnecessary for the Zoox robotaxi’s operated exclusively by an ADS. Zoox In addition, some commenters 34
carriage seating design. also contended that, notwithstanding agreed that granting Zoox’s exemption
the absence of such driver-related was in the public interest because of
VIII. Analysis of Whether Granting equipment, the robotaxi satisfies the NHTSA’s oversight authority,
Zoox’s Application Is in the Public underlying performance objectives and specifically citing that exempting 2,500
Interest and Consistent With the safety functions embodied in the vehicles per year for two years allows
Objectives of the Safety Act standards for which exemptions are NHTSA to monitor operations closely
sought. while allowing Zoox to run a
The Safety Act and its implementing
More specifically, allowing for the commercial service.
regulations provide the Secretary and,
introduction of the robotaxi as it has
by delegation, NHTSA with broad (2) Child Ridership
been designed by Zoox to optimize its
authority and discretion in determining S.D. Thomas LLC 35 suggested several
performance as a highly automated
whether granting the application for passenger car could further the reporting requirements, primarily
temporary exemption is consistent with development of new and innovative related to child ridership. For example,
the public interest and objectives of the vehicle automation technologies, which reporting on the presence of observed
Safety Act. Here, NHTSA finds that may in turn lead to future benefits for children generally and who are
granting Zoox’s exemption is consistent vehicle safety and the economy. incorrectly restrained in a child restraint
with the public interest and 49 U.S.C. Although NHTSA cannot fully predict or booster seat was suggested, as well as
Chapter 301 because doing so furthers the extent to which these benefits will requiring Zoox to provide instructions
the Federal Government’s interest in materialize in the future and, more on properly attaching a child restraint to
facilitating the safe development and specifically, the effect that granting this the vehicle and properly restraining a
deployment of innovative transportation exemption would have on those child in a child restraint seat. At the
technologies, which is enabled through benefits, the agency recognizes that
NHTSA’s oversight authority and development of the ADS technology 31 Southern Nevada Bicycle Coalition, Docket No.
conditions the agency is placing on NHTSA–2025–0523–0029 at 1.
necessary to make these potential 32 Transform, Docket No. NHTSA–2025–0523–
Zoox. Given the innovative nature of the benefits possible is supported by use on
khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with NOTICE
0041 at 1.
Zoox robotaxi and the agency’s vehicles that are designed to be 33 California Bicycle Coalition, Docket No.
determination that the exemption will automated. NHTSA–2025–0523–0073 at 1.
not lower the safety of the robotaxi as However, the agency recognizes some 34 Robo Shepherd Inc, Docket No. NHTSA–2025–
compared to a nonexempt version of the of the concerns raised by some 0523–0015 at 1; Corporation for Automated Road
Transportation Safety, Docket No. NHTSA–2025–
vehicle, the agency believes that these commenters about ADS and passenger 0523–0061 at 2.
reasons are more than sufficient to safety, and has imposed conditions 35 S.D. Thomas LLC, Docket No. NHTSA–2025–
justify this finding. upon this exemption grant to mitigate 0523–0124 at 8.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:23 Jul 30, 2026 Jkt 268001 PO 00000 Frm 00139 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\31JYN1.SGM 31JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 91, No. 146 / Friday, July 31, 2026 / Notices 48503
time of granting Zoox’s exemption, AAA 40 expressed concern over the condition to this exemption, the agency
riders under the age of eight are not lack of side mirrors and the implication encourages the development of safety
permitted. Therefore, NHTSA expects to on passenger safety during loading and measures designed to enable safe
review relevant materials from Zoox and unloading. Although Zoox does not transportation of people with physical
consider incorporating conditions into have side mirrors, the vehicle and other disabilities, including
Operational Authorizations, should incorporates several precautionary wheelchair securement mechanisms.
Zoox seek to expand eligible ridership. measures to support safe loading and AAA 45 and the Service Employees
Although ridership is currently unloading. At a pick-up/drop-off, only International Union 46 argued that
restricted to certain ages, NHTSA the door closest to the road edge will be Zoox’s safety claims should be
acknowledges that the seat belts in the opened. When a pick-up/drop-off occurs supported by scenario-based evaluations
robotaxi may not properly fit all outside a parking spot or parking lane, and independent validation rather than
children ages 8 and above. Zoox’s Rider the hazard warning signal flasher is internal metrics. NHTSA notes that
Manual states that parents and activated, causing the required turn Zoox provided a significant amount of
guardians are responsible for ensuring signals to flash providing a visual Zoox’s crash test data, which were
that children riding with them are safely indicator to external parties the redacted because Zoox claimed those
and properly belted, using a booster seat presence of a vehicular hazard and to data constitute confidential business
if necessary. use caution. Finally, upon exiting the information (CBI). Although the specific
robotaxi, an auditory prompt reminds information cannot be shared with the
(3) Passenger Egress
passengers to check for traffic. public, the CBI provided to NHTSA
Several commenters 36 raised addressed the concerns raised by public
(4) Workforce Requirements
concerns about the safety of the Zoox commenters in sufficient detail for
robotaxi. One common theme among NHTSA received several comments NHTSA to find equivalent or greater
safety concerns was passenger egress.37 expressing concern over the overall safety.
Specifically, SMART–TD 38 and the qualifications and training of remote A comment submitted by S.D.
Transportation Trades Department 39 operators. Particularly, the Advocates 41 Thomas LLC 47 asked numerous
expressed concern over passenger egress and SMART–TD 42 questioned the questions concerning Zoox’s seating
since the robotaxi does not have manual sufficiency of remote operator training configurations and crash testing.
door controls. NHTSA notes that, while and qualifications as details were not However, most questions were
the emergency door handle (EDH) provided in the public-facing materials. addressed previously in Zoox’s
equipped on the robotaxi is not a Specifically, both commenters materials while others were out of scope
traditional handle commonly seen in expressed concern over the lack of in finding equivalent overall safety. The
conventional vehicles, the robotaxi has detail provided on workforce training commenter questioned whether Zoox
two methods to open the doors and certification standards, had any additional information on
manually. For passengers, a lever is communication requirements, location, equivalent performance evaluations for
located on either side of the interior and latency. NHTSA has evaluated several crashworthiness standards. Zoox
that, while pulled, allows passengers to Zoox’s materials on these matters and confirmed in its application that the
push the door open. If air bags are has found them to be sufficient. Further, Zoox robotaxi met all requirements for
deployed, the passenger-facing side of NHTSA has placed certain conditions in the remaining applicable FMVSSs.
the horseshoe air bag provides the Grant Notice and Operational Accordingly, the company is not
instructions for locating and using the Authorization for these reasons. required to provide additional
EDH. For first responders located (5) Crashworthiness Testing information related to the requirements
outside the vehicle, an exterior door for the standards which they did not
button is available. In the event of a Another common theme among seek exemptions. The commenter also
severe crash resulting in a non- commenters was Zoox’s lack of asked whether the robotaxis meet
functioning door button, instructions crashworthiness testing and data. The certain requirements 48 unrelated to the
are shown on the exterior of the Consortium for Constituents with applicable FMVSS, but such
horseshoe air bag instructing first Disabilities 43 and the American requirements are not relevant to the
responders where to break the glass to Foundation for the Blind 44 both noted requisite FMVSS-specific safety
access the EDH. that they would like to see testing for equivalence determination.
people with disabilities, as both
36 Cristina Perez Hesano, Docket No. NHTSA–
passengers and pedestrians, before the C. Additional Issues Raised by
2025–0523–0034 at 1; Donald Slavik, Docket No. exemption is granted. Although the Commenters
NHTSA–2025–0523–0035 at 1; Delaney Howard, Americans with Disabilities Act does (1) Confidential Business Information
Docket No. NHTSA–2025–0523–0052 at 1; not require accessibility for passenger
Anonymous, Docket No. NHTSA–2025–0523–0083 Claims
at 1; Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety,
vehicles not operating on a fixed route,
NHTSA strongly supports the use of Several commenters expressed
Docket No. NHTSA–2025–0523–0104 at 3–4;
Transport Workers Union of America, Docket No. automated driving system technologies disagreement with Zoox’s CBI claims,
NHTSA–2025–0523–0105 at 3; SMART–TD, Docket to expand mobility for people with commonly stating that an application
No. NHTSA–2025–0523–0107 at 3; American
disabilities. While not included as a seeking exemption for noncompliance
Automobile Association, Docket No. NHTSA–2025– should be scrutinized by the public, and
0523–0121 at 4; Transportation Trades Department,
Docket No. NHTSA–2025–0523–0130 at 2. 40 American Automobile Association, Docket No. that the lack of transparency in Zoox’s
khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with NOTICE
37 SMART–TD, Docket No. NHTSA–2025–0523– NHTSA–2025–0523–0121 at 4.
41 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, 45 American Automobile Association, Docket No.
0107 at 3; American Automobile Association,
Docket No. NHTSA–2025–0523–0121 at 4; Docket No. NHTSA–2025–0523–0104 at 4. NHTSA–2025–0523–0121 at 3.
Transportation Trades Department, Docket No. 42 SMART–TD, Docket No. NHTSA–2025–0523– 46 Service Employees International Union, Docket
NHTSA–2025–0523–0130 at 2. 0107 at 3–4. No. NHTSA–2025–0523–0103 at 2.
38 SMART–TD, Docket No. NHTSA–2025–0523– 43 Consortium for Constituents with Disabilities, 47 S.D. Thomas LLC, Docket No. NHTSA–2025–
0107 at 3. Docket No. NHTSA–2025–0523–0120 at 3. 0523–0124 at 5–7.
39 Transportation Trades Department, Docket No. 44 American Foundation for the Blind, Docket No. 48 DOT HS 813 716; DOT HS 813 755; 2026–01–
NHTSA–2025–0523–0130 at 2. NHTSA–2025–0523–0126 at 3. 0578; and 2026–01–0576.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:23 Jul 30, 2026 Jkt 268001 PO 00000 Frm 00140 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\31JYN1.SGM 31JYN1
48504 Federal Register / Vol. 91, No. 146 / Friday, July 31, 2026 / Notices
application and supplemental materials evaluates all part 555 applicants on a safety basis to a maximum of 2,500
prevents such scrutiny. Further, case-by-case basis. Therefore, all vehicles to be sold in any 12-month
commenters 49 recommended that vehicles are evaluated against the basis, period.54 Consistent with this statutory
NHTSA require full public disclosure as or bases, chosen by the applicant. provision, NHTSA is granting Zoox an
a condition, including remote Several commenters 52 argued that exemption to manufacture and
operations requirements and training, NHTSA should prioritize the introduce into interstate commerce for
performance tests supporting the development of standards applicable to commercial deployment up to 2,500
equivalent level of safety claims, and ADS-equipped vehicles like the Zoox vehicles. However, the total number of
incident data. robotaxi instead of considering exempted vehicles that may be
Zoox has requested that the individual exemptions on a case-by-case simultaneously operated is limited to
information in question be treated as basis. NHTSA acknowledges the need to the maximum number of vehicles
CBI. Federal law requires NHTSA to amend its standards to apply to permitted in the initial Operational
protect CBI, including trade secrets. See innovative designs and is in the process Authorization, which may be modified
49 U.S.C. 30167(a). See also 5 U.S.C. of modernizing several FMVSSs to
in subsequent Authorizations.
552(b)(4); 18 U.S.C. 1905; Food account for the lack of manually
Marketing Institute v. Argus Leader operated driving controls in such (2) Oversight Condition
Media, 139 S. Ct. 2356 (2019). NHTSA vehicles. The agency notes the Vehicle
regulations afford entities like Zoox an Safety Act was designed to provide The terms of this exemption are
opportunity to request that certain flexibility for manufacturers developing designed in consideration of the public
material submitted to the agency be vehicles with advancing technology interest and include both grant and
afforded CBI status. See 49 CFR part through exemptions that allow for operational conditions. The grant
512. These regulations require NHTSA limited deployments of non-conforming conditions are considered fixed
to keep such information confidential vehicles. Such exemptions are not conditions because they contributed to
until the agency makes a determination intended to provide a permanent NHTSA’s overall safety finding and
regarding its confidentiality. See 49 CFR deployment pathway, which requires therefore cannot be changed without a
512.20. Thus far, NHTSA has not rulemaking. modification to this exemption. Zoox
reached any determination that the The Advocates 53 raised concern over must comply with the grant conditions
information subject to Zoox’s request is Zoox’s lack of compliance in the past, for the life of the exempted vehicles.
not entitled to confidential treatment or citing Zoox’s claims of self-certification They are detailed in Section X of this
otherwise necessary to disclose. See id. and NHTSA’s Special Order and Audit Grant Notice.
See also 49 U.S.C. 30167. Thus, the Query. NHTSA notes that a part 555
In addition, NHTSA anticipates that
statutes, regulations, and Supreme Court exemption allows NHTSA to maintain
Zoox’s operations, ODD, and use case
precedent governing the agency prohibit enhanced oversight over the exempted
the disclosure of this information. will change over time. Therefore,
vehicles and operations.
Nevertheless, at various places in this NHTSA believes the public interest is
D. Discussion of Conditions best served through a condition that
notice, NHTSA has sought to describe
confidential information more broadly NHTSA grants this exemption subject requires continuing NHTSA oversight of
to help the public understand the to a number of terms, violation of which the operation of the exempted vehicles.
general nature of the withheld enables the agency to take appropriate This oversight is most consistent with
information. action, up to and including a the public interest when exercised
determination that the exemption is no through a set of operational conditions
(2) Regulatory Structure of Part 555 longer in the public interest, which is a that can be updated over time to remain
Several commenters 50 expressed ground for the agency to terminate the relevant to Zoox’s evolving technology
concern with NHTSA’s handling of exemption under 49 CFR 555.8(d). and operational use case. These
Zoox’s exemption more generally. The NHTSA may also take appropriate conditions are set forth in an
most common theme mentioned was enforcement action under its broad Operational Authorization. The
that, if granted, Zoox’s exemption may defect authorities. Further, NHTSA operational conditions are intended to
be interpreted as a de facto safety may—and has—established terms that be adaptable to the changing ADS and
standard for future automated continue to apply to the vehicles operations and therefore, may be
vehicles.51 NHTSA notes that it throughout their service life where it modified, added, or removed
determines such continued application throughout the lifecycle of the vehicle.
49 Ross Templeton, Docket No. NHTSA–2025–
is necessary, considering the public The operational conditions must be
0523–0108 at 2–5; S.D. Thomas LLC, Docket No.
NHTSA–2025–0523–0124 at 2. interest and the objectives of the Safety followed by Zoox and all parties
50 Cristina Perez Hesano, Docket No. NHTSA– Act. involved.
2025–0523–0034; Donald Slavik, Docket No.
NHTSA–2025–0523–0035; Delaney Howard, Docket
(1) Number of Vehicles NHTSA notes that many of the terms
No. NHTSA–2025–0523–0052 at 1; Anonymous, The Safety Act limits exemptions the agency has involved in this Grant
Docket No. NHTSA–2025–0523–0083 at 1;
granted under the equivalent level of Notice and the Operational
Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, Docket No. Authorization are similar to those
NHTSA–2025–0523–0104 at 2; Transport Workers
Union of America, Docket No. NHTSA–2025–0523– 0523–0108 at 1; S.D. Thomas LLC, Docket No. NHTSA has previously imposed on the
0105 at 2; SMART–TD, Docket No. NHTSA–2025– NHTSA–2025–0523–0124 at 2; Transportation importation of noncompliant ADS
0523–0107 at 2–3; Ross Templeton, Docket No. Trades Department, Docket No. NHTSA–2025– vehicles under 49 CFR part 591, though,
khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with NOTICE
NHTSA–2025–0523–0108 at 1; S.D. Thomas LLC, 0523–0130 at 2.
52 Transport Workers Union of America, Docket
consistent with the differing
Docket No. NHTSA–2025–0523–0124 at 2;
Transportation Trades Department, Docket No. No. NHTSA–2025–0523–0105 at 1; SMART–TD, requirements of part 591, Zoox’s
NHTSA–2025–0523–0130 at 2. Docket No. NHTSA–2025–0523–0107 at 3; Ross exemption will allow for commercial
51 Cristina Perez Hesano, Docket No. NHTSA– Templeton, Docket No. NHTSA–2025–0523–0108 at deployment, rather than only testing
2025–0523–0034 at 1; Transport Workers Union of 1; Transportation Trades Department, Docket No.
NHTSA–2025–0523–0130 at 2.
and demonstration.
America, Docket No. NHTSA–2025–0523–0105 at 2;
SMART–TD, Docket No. NHTSA–2025–0523–0107 53 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety,
at 2–3; Ross Templeton, Docket No. NHTSA–2025– Docket No. NHTSA–2025–0523–0104 at 2. 54 49 U.S.C. 30113(d).
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:23 Jul 30, 2026 Jkt 268001 PO 00000 Frm 00141 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\31JYN1.SGM 31JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 91, No. 146 / Friday, July 31, 2026 / Notices 48505
(3) Labeling interest to provide information to Zoox’s coordination plans prior to
Under 49 CFR 555.9(b), a consumers via alternative means. Zoox expansion to new operational areas. The
manufacturer of an exempted vehicle suggested the inclusion of language in Advocates 60 also suggested NHTSA
must securely affix to the windshield or their Rider Manual and NHTSA agrees condition Zoox’s exemption on making
side window of each exempted vehicle that would be appropriate and would all exempted vehicles readily and
a label containing a statement that the better fulfill the purpose of the individually identifiable. However,
vehicle meets all applicable FMVSS in requirement in § 555.9(b). Accordingly, NHTSA has determined this condition
effect on the date of manufacture NHTSA is establishing a condition that to be unnecessary as the robotaxis are
‘‘except for Standard Nos. [Listing the would require Zoox to provide the currently labeled clearly with Zoox
standards by number and title for which required language in its Rider Manual markings, license plates, and VINs on
and include brief, plain language either end of the vehicle.
an exemption has been granted]
descriptions of the requirements from Several commenters also suggested
exempted pursuant to NHTSA
which the Zoox robotaxi is exempt. that NHTSA implement certain
Exemption No. __.’’ This label is
NHTSA is also requiring Zoox to reporting requirements. The Transport
intended to notify prospective Workers Union of America,61 SMART–
provide sample language for its Rider
purchasers about the exemption and its TD,62 and Ross Templeton 63 suggested
Manual within 30 days of publication of
subject. Under § 555.9(c)(2), this Zoox be required to report on the
this Grant Notice.
information must also be included on number of personnel employed, both by
the vehicle’s certification label. (4) Conditions Suggested by Zoox and contractors, including the
The text of § 555.9 does not expressly Commenters location of workers, relevant
indicate how the required statement on Several commenters 55 recommended qualifications, and total hours spent
the two labels should read in situations conditions that NHTSA should put in performing duties. Certain aspects of
in which an exemption covers a portion place before granting Zoox’s part 555 this request are incorporated into Zoox’s
of an FMVSS. In this case, NHTSA exemption. NHTSA incorporated a reporting requirements at the time of
believes that a blanket statement that number of commenters’ suggestions into granting (see Condition X.I), while other
the vehicle has been exempted from Zoox’s initial set of conditions. aspects like total hours spent
each of the standards in its entirely, However, NHTSA also determined performing duties are unnecessary for
without an indication that the many of the commenters’ suggestions to compliance with other conditions
exemption is limited to specific be out of scope for the purpose of this relevant to safety performance which
provisions, could lead to confusion exemption or already addressed in are included in the initial Operational
about the nature of Zoox’s exemption. Zoox’s application and supplemental Authorization (e.g., remote assistance
Accordingly, with regard to the materials. performance, fleet operations personnel
requirement in 49 CFR 555.9(c), NHTSA The Advocates,56 SMART–TD,57 and roles and responsibilities). Additional
is adding a condition that Zoox must the Transportation Trades Department 58 suggested reporting requirements
affix to each exempt Zoox robotaxi a suggested NHTSA require full public included the number of ‘‘floaters’’ who
label that meets all applicable disclosure of various aspects of Zoox’s may be reassigned or called upon to do
requirements of 49 CFR part 567 and operation, including incident data and remote operations duties, the total
that ends with the phrase ‘‘except for workforce management. Although number of exempted vehicles removed
specific requirements within Standard NHTSA has determined it unnecessary from service due to safety-related
No. 103—Windshield defrosting and for Zoox to disclose all aspects of its maintenance issues, median hourly
defogging systems; Standard No. 104— operations, Zoox has said it intends to compensation and employee benefits,
Windshield wiping and washing disclose aspects of its safety clearance and the annualized turnover rate.
systems; Standard No. 108—Lamps, process in the future. NHTSA does not believe details like
reflective devices, and associated The Advocates 59 recommended these are necessary for the agency’s
equipment; Standard No. 111—Rear NHTSA require Zoox to coordinate with safety-focused operational oversight at
visibility; Standard No. 135—Light State and local authorities and the time of granting this exemption. In
vehicle brake systems; Standard No. communicate effectively with the public the future, reporting requirements may
201—Occupant protection in interior in all localities where Zoox operates. be added should NHTSA deem them
impact; Standard No. 205—Glazing NHTSA agrees with the value of public necessary.
materials; and Standard No. 208— disclosure and has included Condition Finally, three commenters 64
Occupant crash protection, exempted X.J in this Grant Notice to require suggested NHTSA place a condition on
pursuant to NHTSA Exemption No. disclosure of Zoox’s operating areas. In Zoox’s exemption prohibiting any use
2026–01.’’ addition, NHTSA expects to request that would require additional
Further, because the Zoox robotaxi exemptions from Federal agencies and
will not be sold to consumers but will 55 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety,
from marketing for use by public
instead be operated by Zoox for ride Docket No. NHTSA–2025–0523–0104 at 4–5; transportation agencies, though they did
Transport Workers Union of America, Docket No.
hailing services, NHTSA is adding a NHTSA–2025–0523–0105 at 4–5; SMART–TD, not specify the reasons for such
condition that would require Zoox to Docket No. NHTSA–2025–0523–0107 at 4–5; Ross
provide language about Zoox’s Templeton, Docket No. NHTSA–2025–0523–0108 at 60 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety,
exemption in its Rider Manual in lieu of 2–5; S.D. Thomas LLC, Docket No. NHTSA–2025– Docket No. NHTSA–2025–0523–0104 at 5.
0523–0124 at 8–9; Transportation Trades 61 Transport Workers Union of America, Docket
affixing a temporary label to the Department, Docket No. NHTSA–2025–0523–0130 No. NHTSA–2025–0523–0105 at 4–5.
windshield or side window as specified
khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with NOTICE
at 3. 62 SMART–TD, Docket No. NHTSA–2025–0523–
in § 555.9(b). The purpose of the 56 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety,
0107 at 2–5.
requirement to affix a label to the Docket No. NHTSA–2025–0523–0104 at 5. 63 Ross Templeton, Docket No. NHTSA–2025–
57 SMART–TD, Docket No. NHTSA–2025–0523–
window or side window is to inform 0523–0108 at 2–5.
0107 at 4. 64 Transport Workers Union of America, Docket
prospective purchasers about a vehicle’s 58 Transportation Trades Department, Docket No.
No. NHTSA–2025–0523–0105 at 4; SMART–TD,
exemption. Because the Zoox robotaxi NHTSA–2025–0523–0130 at 3. Docket No. NHTSA–2025–0523–0107 at 5;
will not be sold to consumers, NHTSA 59 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, Transportation Trades Department, Docket No.
finds that it would be in the public Docket No. NHTSA–2025–0523–0104 at 5. NHTSA–2025–0523–0130 at 3.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:23 Jul 30, 2026 Jkt 268001 PO 00000 Frm 00142 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\31JYN1.SGM 31JYN1
48506 Federal Register / Vol. 91, No. 146 / Friday, July 31, 2026 / Notices
conditions. NHTSA has included a term S4.1 of FMVSS No. 103; paragraphs S4.1 B. Vehicles Permitted Under the Current
requiring compliance with all Federal, and S4.2.1 of FMVSS No. 104; Exemption
State and Local laws (see Condition X.E) paragraphs S9.1.1 and S9.4 of FMVSS The current exemption applies
and determined additional conditions No. 108; paragraphs S5.1, S5.2.1, and exclusively to the Zoox sedan model
unnecessary as the other agencies have S5.5 of FMVSS No. 111; paragraph vehicle described in Zoox’s application
authority to administer their respective S5.3.1 of FMVSS No. 135; paragraph and supplemental documentation.
exemptions. S5.4 of FMVSS No. 201; the requirement
of FMVSS No. 205 that windshields be C. Labeling
E. Conclusion That Granting Zoox an
Exemption Is in the Public Interest and comprised of AS1 glazing; and In accordance with 49 CFR 555.9(c),
Consistent With the Objectives of the paragraph S4.5.1 of FMVSS No. 208, Zoox must affix to each exempt Zoox
Safety Act subject to the condition provided that sedan vehicle a label that meets all
Zoox complies with the terms described applicable requirements of 49 CFR part
Based upon the Federal government’s in Section X. The exemption shall be
interest in facilitating the safe 567 and that ends with the phrase
effective from July 31, 2026 through July ‘‘except for specific requirements within
deployment of innovative transportation 31, 2028.
technologies, and public interest Standard No. 103—Windshield
arguments raised by Zoox and X. Terms and Conditions defrosting and defogging systems;
commenters, NHTSA has determined Standard No. 104—Windshield wiping
that granting Zoox a temporary The terms set out in this grant notice and washing systems; Standard No.
exemption, subject to the terms and are specific to Zoox’s ‘‘Zoox sedan’’ 108—Lamps, reflective devices, and
conditions established in this notice model, a robotaxi vehicle, based on associated equipment; Standard No.
(Section X) and the Operational information provided by Zoox in its 111—Rear visibility; Standard No. 135—
Authorization letter, is in the public application and supplemental Light vehicle brake systems; Standard
interest. Although Zoox and public information provided to NHTSA. These No. 201—Occupant protection in
commenters offer a variety of reasons for terms include an Operational interior impact; Standard No. 205—
why granting Zoox’s exemption is in the Authorization, which governs the public Glazing materials; and Standard No.
public interest, NHTSA’s analyses road operation of the exempted 208—Occupant crash protection,
primarily turn on questions of motor vehicles. In general, the Operational exempted pursuant to NHTSA
vehicle safety. Authorization describes processes for Exemption No. 2026–01.’’
NHTSA believes that ADS technology reporting changes to vehicle operations In lieu of affixing securely to the
has the potential to improve safety and and capabilities and requesting to windshield or side window of each
mobility in the transportation of both operate under changed conditions. If exempted vehicle a label in the English
people and goods. While these benefits NHTSA finds that a change to the language containing the statement
are still largely aspirational and vehicle affects the overall equivalent required by 49 CFR 567.4(g)(5) and
unquantifiable, they provide reasons to level of safety finding by which this including the language specified above
grant the exemption, especially after exemption was granted, NHTSA may in accordance with § 555.9(c), Zoox may
finding that exempt Zoox robotaxis have require Zoox to request a modification instead provide the required language in
an equivalent or greater level of motor to the exemption, which would require its Rider Manual and include brief,
vehicle safety compared to an otherwise notice and public comment and would plain language descriptions of the
identical FMVSS-compliant vehicle. be processed under 49 CFR 555.8. requirements from which the Zoox
NHTSA also notes that ADS technology Violation of any of the terms included sedan is exempt. Zoox must provide
is being deployed on public roads and in this notice or the associated sample language for its Rider Manual
the agency does not believe that exempt Operational Authorization are grounds within 30 days of publication of this
Zoox robotaxis would pose additional for NHTSA action, up to and including Grant Notice.
risks to motor vehicle safety compared termination of the exemption. D. Equipment Requirement for the
to a compliant vehicle using the same Vehicles
ADS. The difference in safety, however, A. Operational Authorization
between granting or denying Zoox’s The glazing in the Zoox robotaxi’s
application is that with this grant, as Zoox must comply with all terms and ‘‘service bays’’ must meet all
NHTSA has formulated it, NHTSA has conditions in the applicable Operational requirements for AS4 glazing as well as
more direct and tailored oversight. With Authorization(s). The Operational tests 9, 12, and 26 for AS1 glazing.
this increased oversight, NHTSA finds Authorization will govern the operation
of the exempted vehicles on public E. Compliance With Federal, State, and
that granting the exemption would be Local Laws
net positive for safety. Accordingly, roads and may be modified by NHTSA
because of the other benefits associated as appropriate or necessary. NHTSA Zoox, the robotaxis, and their
with facilitating Zoox’s deployment of a may issue additional Operational operation must comply with all Federal,
vehicle with a novel design with Authorizations that contain specific State, and local laws and requirements.
requiring unnecessary features, NHTSA conditions on an operation-to-operation Each vehicle must be duly permitted, if
also finds that, overall, granting Zoox’s basis, and therefore, multiple applicable, and authorized to operate
exemption is consistent with the public Authorizations may exist concurrently upon all roadways traversed in the
interest and the objectives of the Safety depending on operating areas, locations, manner and conditions described in the
or routes. Zoox must be able to access associated Operational Authorization.
khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with NOTICE
Act.
and provide vehicle, ADS, and other Zoox remains responsible for
IX. Conclusion data to NHTSA as required by the communicating, cooperating, and
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. reporting conditions specified in the coordinating with law enforcement
30113(b)(3)(B)(iv), NHTSA is granting Authorization. The Operational personnel as may be necessary in the
Temporary Exemption No. 2026–01 to Authorizations will be made publicly deployment regions. This exemption
Zoox for the production of its ‘‘Zoox available in the docket for this does not supplant or affect any recall or
sedan’’ model vehicle from paragraph exemption notice (NHTSA–2025–0523). reporting obligations that may arise
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:23 Jul 30, 2026 Jkt 268001 PO 00000 Frm 00143 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\31JYN1.SGM 31JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 91, No. 146 / Friday, July 31, 2026 / Notices 48507
under the Safety Act for the subject requirements and procedures. Zoox Proposed Agenda
vehicles. must verify that the chosen geographic I. Call to Order—UCR Plan Governance
distribution ensures all remote Task Force Chair
F. Inspection
personnel remain reachable and legally
The Zoox robotaxis must be made accountable to U.S. law enforcement The UCR Governance Task Force
available for inspection by NHTSA and regulatory bodies. Chair will welcome attendees, call the
upon request. meeting to order, call roll for the task
J. Disclosure of Operating Areas force, confirm whether a quorum is
G. Sale and Transfer of Possession
To ensure transparency regarding present, and facilitate self-introductions.
Zoox must maintain operational where exempted vehicles are operating
control of all vehicles under this II. Verification of Publication of
on public roads, Zoox must publish
exemption for the entire life of the Meeting Notice—UCR Executive
maps of current operating areas
vehicles. Zoox shall not sell, or transfer Director
indicating where the vehicles operate on
possession of, or title to, any vehicle, public roads in each city, county, or The UCR Executive Director will
and shall not license it for use, or State. The maps must be made available verify the publication of the meeting
operate it on the public roads, except to the public on Zoox’s website and notice on the UCR website and
under such terms and conditions must be updated no later than 14 days distribution to the UCR contact list via
authorized by NHTSA. after any substantive change in the email followed by the subsequent
operating area. publication of the notice in the Federal
H. Modification, Suspension, or
Register.
Revocation of an Exemption K. Reporting Manufactured Vehicles
NHTSA may modify, suspend, or III. Review and Approval of Task Force
Zoox must submit an Annual Report
revoke an exemption, in its discretion Agenda and Setting of Ground Rules—
to NHTSA identifying the VINs of all
and as appropriate, including upon UCR Plan Governance Task Force
vehicles manufactured under the
determining that: Chair
exemption. The report should identify,
a. The exemption is no longer by VIN, whether each vehicle is For Discussion and Possible Task Force
consistent with the public interest and continuing to operate on public roads. If Action
the objectives of the Act, for example if none of the vehicles have operated on
NHTSA determines that the robotaxi(s) The Governance Task Force Agenda
public roads for more than two (2) will be reviewed, and the Task Force
or its operation(s) presents an consecutive years, you are no longer
unreasonable risk to safety, which may will consider adoption.
required to submit an Annual Report
include if the robotaxi contains safety- until operation resumes, if applicable. Ground Rules
related defects that NHTSA determines In addition, the Annual Report should ➢ Task Force action only to be taken
cannot be satisfactorily remedied or include a list of the geographic locations in designated areas on agenda
otherwise mitigated; or of all remote assistance centers involved
b. The exemption was granted on the in operation of the vehicles on public IV. Approval of Minutes of the May 27,
basis of false, fraudulent, or misleading roads. 2026, Task Force Meeting—UCR
representation or information. Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30113 and 49 Governance Task Force Chair
I. Location of Personnel Involved in U.S.C. 30166; delegations of authority at For Discussion and Possible Task Force
Safety-Critical Tasks 49 CFR 1.95 and 49 CFR 501.5. Action
Zoox shall ensure that all personnel Issued on July 28, 2026 under authority
delegated in 49 CFR 1.95 and 501.5. Draft Minutes from the May 27, 2026
involved in safety-critical tasks (e.g., UCR Task Force meeting will be
remote assistants) are located in Jonathan Morrison,
reviewed. The Task Force will consider
jurisdictions within the Continental Administrator.
action to approve.
United States such that the location of [FR Doc. 2026–15485 Filed 7–30–26; 8:45 am]
remote personnel does not degrade BILLING CODE 4910–59–P V. Conflict of Interest
system safety, data integrity, or Acknowledgement Form Discussion—
regulatory accountability. To mitigate UCR Governance Task Force Chair
the risks associated with signal UNIFIED CARRIER REGISTRATION For Discussion and Possible Task Force
degradation, Zoox must ensure that PLAN Action
these locations provide a
communication environment where Sunshine Act Meetings The UCR Governance Task Force
geographic distance does not introduce Chair will lead a discussion on a
prohibitive latency or jitter. TIME AND DATE: August 5, 2026, 10:30 proposed UCR Plan Board member
Performance for these operations must a.m.–2:30 p.m., Eastern time. Conflict of Interest Acknowledgement
be validated against Zoox’s safety PLACE: This meeting will be held at the Form. The Task Force may take action
clearance process to ensure that the Residence Inn Downtown Hotel, 100 to recommend to the UCR Plan Board a
vehicle remains within a safe, Sabin Street, Providence, RI 02903. specific Conflict of Interest form and
controllable state at all times, with the STATUS: This meeting will be open to the that the Board require each individual
burden on Zoox to ensure that the public. Board member to read, complete, and
chosen remote architecture maintains a MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: The Unified
sign such form.
khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with NOTICE
level of safety according to its process. Carrier Registration Plan Governance VI. UCR Plan Subcommittee Charters—
Beyond technical performance, the Task Force (the ‘‘Task Force’’) will UCR Governance Task Force Chair
location of remote personnel must allow conduct a meeting to continue its work
the chain of accountability to remain in developing and implementing the For Discussion and Possible Task Force
intact regardless of physical Unified Carrier Registration Plan and Action
jurisdiction. All remote assistants must Agreement. The subject matter of this The UCR Governance Task Force
comply with Zoox’s training meeting will include: Chair will lead a discussion on
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:23 Jul 30, 2026 Jkt 268001 PO 00000 Frm 00144 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\31JYN1.SGM 31JYN1
File and source
- File
- 2026-15485-pdf_1c17396917e4bb0b.pdf
- Size
- 293,295 bytes
- SHA-256
- 93d414ecacb7d3a4a6aa311b47ef0118887aaba419bfcff12eb85be23c7e336b
- Original
- www.govinfo.gov