The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has begun a preliminary investigation into the aftermarket driver-assistance devices produced by comma.ai and the openpilot software after identifying five crashes in which vehicles using the system struck stopped or slow-moving vehicles in the same lane. Two crashes resulted in the deaths of three people, while 11 others were injured in four crashes, some seriously.
The investigation, numbered PE26007, was opened by the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) on September 21, 2026. It covers the company’s three latest generations of devices, comma three, comma 3X, and comma four, as well as openpilot, the open-source software that runs these devices. NHTSA estimates that approximately 30,000 devices are covered.
What Did the Agency Observe?
The agency relied on crash reports submitted under its Standing General Order, a consumer complaint, and information collected through communication with police. It confirmed that a comma system was present or activated in several crashes, and its preliminary review indicates that openpilot may not have detected vehicles in the lane or may not have responded to them appropriately.
The available data show a recurring pattern: highway speeds and a stopped vehicle directly ahead. In February 2026, a 2022 Toyota RAV4 equipped with a comma device struck a stopped vehicle belonging to emergency responders in Ascension Parish, Louisiana, and the crash was fatal. comma stated in its report that the device appeared to be running third-party software, meaning a version derived from openpilot.
In September 2025, a 2020 Honda Accord struck a stopped vehicle on a highway in Missouri at 82 miles per hour, while openpilot was activated according to the records. A 2021 Toyota Corolla also struck a stopped passenger vehicle near Mona, Utah, in July 2026, with a crash speed of 56 miles per hour.
The Responsibility Gap Between the Device and the Vehicle
The case draws attention to the tension between how the system is marketed and the limits of responsibility presented by the company. The marketing materials cited by NHTSA refer to “hands-free driving” and the software’s ability to drive for hours without intervention, while the terms state that the driver must remain alert and ready to take over driving at any time.
In the crash reports, comma said it was providing the information without agreeing to NHTSA’s interpretations or acknowledging that it was required to respond to the Standing General Order. It also answered “unknown” to a question determining whether the vehicle was operating within the system’s designed operating domain, and stated in the Honda crash that the manufacturer’s system performed the adaptive cruise-control function.
The scope of the investigation is not necessarily limited to the official version of openpilot. NHTSA explained that it would examine modified versions when they are associated with a crash, while considering the components they share with openpilot. This environment includes community versions such as sunnypilot and FrogPilot, which are built on the same driving model and codebase.
Why Does This Investigation Matter?
comma claims that its devices have driven more than 400 million miles and are used in more than 30,000 vehicles. It also says that comma four, which it launched last November at a price of $999, supports more than 350 models. Therefore, any regulatory action could go beyond reviewing a specific device to broader questions about software updates, the company’s responsibility for derivative versions, and how to conduct a recall for a system that can be copied and modified through GitHub.
The pattern of crashes involving stopped vehicles resembles a problem that previously prompted NHTSA to investigate Tesla’s Autopilot system in 2021, with that case ending in a recall of approximately two million vehicles to add driver alerts. But the outcome of the comma investigation remains open; the preliminary evaluation could end without action, or escalate into an engineering analysis and then a recall. In either case, the agency will determine the extent of the company’s responsibility for the product as it markets it and for the software that runs on top of it.