The U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has asked Tesla to provide a detailed legal and technical explanation proving that its autonomous Cybercab vehicle is eligible for sale in the United States. The request came in the form of an official Special Order issued on September 10, containing 21 requests that the company must answer under oath by September 30, 2026.
The agency is focusing on the fact that the Cybercab was designed without a steering wheel, pedals, or conventional mirrors, while a number of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) were written on the basis of a human driver controlling the vehicle. Tesla began commercial Cybercab service in Austin, Texas, on September 3, days before the order was issued, after self-certifying that the vehicle complied with all applicable safety standards.
Why did the review become a legal demand?
The United States does not normally use a system of prior approval for the design of every vehicle; manufacturers self-certify that their vehicles comply with the standards, while NHTSA verifies that compliance afterward. The agency opened what is known as Audit Query 26002 on September 4, an initial request for information. The new special order represents a legal escalation because it requires a sworn statement and addresses Tesla’s legal officials directly.
The order reminds the company that anyone who submits a compliance certification while knowing, or supposed to know through the exercise of reasonable care, that it is materially false or misleading may be held liable. Financial penalties for failing to respond fully and truthfully may reach $139 million, while falsifying or withholding information could result in a fine or imprisonment for up to 15 years.
The brake standard is the most prominent point of dispute
NHTSA is asking Tesla to explain how the Cybercab complies with FMVSS No. 135, which requires service brakes to be operated by a foot-operated control. The vehicle has no brake pedal. The agency points out that it has previously stated that a vehicle lacking foot-operated service brakes cannot be certified by its manufacturer as complying with this standard.
The agency is also examining whether Tesla used temporary, installable controls during compliance testing and then removed them before delivering the vehicles. This relates to the prohibition against “making safety equipment inoperative,” since a vehicle is not supposed to be certified with required equipment present and then have that equipment removed before delivery.
Other standards and the exemption pathway
The request covers standards concerning controls and indicators, transmission position display, turn signals, mirrors and rear visibility, and electronic stability control indicators. NHTSA is also asking how the Cybercab can be sold without an exemption under Part 555, after noting in a rule issued in 2022 that additional amendments to the safety standards would likely be necessary before vehicles operating exclusively under an automated driving system could be sold.
This highlights a direct comparison with Amazon’s Zoox. In July, NHTSA granted the company a temporary exemption under Part 555 covering eight standards, including the brake and mirror standards, allowing its autonomous vehicles to operate for-hire through 2028, with a maximum of 2,500 vehicles annually. According to the article, Tesla took a different path by considering the Cybercab compliant in advance and beginning service without requesting an exemption or a similar cap.
What changes in practice?
The order alone does not mean that NHTSA has banned the Cybercab, but it places the basis for its sale and commercial operation under a direct official review. It also makes clear that the regulator’s desire to update standards for autonomous vehicles does not mean that the current rules have ceased to apply. Until the issue is resolved, Cybercab service remains limited to specified geographic operating areas and lower speeds, while avoiding railroad crossings, according to the source article.
The open questions remain tied to Tesla’s own response: Will it argue that the current standards apply to a vehicle without a driver, or will it request a regulatory exemption, and how will it explain its compliance with the brake standard and the restrictions concerning the removal of temporary controls?