The U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has raised concerns about Tesla's public messaging on its "Full Self-Driving" system. Photo via tesla.com

The U.S. government's highway safety agency says Tesla is telling drivers in public statements that its vehicles can drive themselves, conflicting with owners manuals and briefings with the agency saying the electric vehicles need human supervision.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is asking the company to “revisit its communications” to make sure messages are consistent with user instructions.

The request came in a May email to the company from Gregory Magno, a division chief with the agency's Office of Defects Investigation. It was attached to a letter seeking information on a probe into crashes involving Tesla's “Full Self-Driving” system in low-visibility conditions. The letter was posted Friday on the agency's website.

The agency began the investigation in October after getting reports of four crashes involving “Full Self-Driving" when Teslas encountered sun glare, fog and airborne dust. An Arizona pedestrian was killed in one of the crashes.

Critics, including Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, have long accused Tesla of using deceptive names for its partially automated driving systems, including “Full Self-Driving” and “Autopilot,” both of which have been viewed by owners as fully autonomous.

The letter and email raise further questions about whether Full Self-Driving will be ready for use without human drivers on public roads, as Tesla CEO Elon Musk has predicted. Much of Tesla's stock valuation hinges on the company deploying a fleet of autonomous robotaxis.

Musk, who has promised autonomous vehicles before, said the company plans to have autonomous Models Y and 3 running without human drivers next year. Robotaxis without steering wheels would be available in 2026 starting in California and Texas, he said.

A message was sent Friday seeking comment from Tesla.

In the email, Magno writes that Tesla briefed the agency in April on an offer of a free trial of “Full Self-Driving” and emphasized that the owner's manual, user interface and a YouTube video tell humans that they have to remain vigilant and in full control of their vehicles.

But Magno cited seven posts or reposts by Tesla's account on X, the social media platform owned by Musk, that Magno said indicated that Full Self-Driving is capable of driving itself.

“Tesla's X account has reposted or endorsed postings that exhibit disengaged driver behavior,” Magno wrote. “We believe that Tesla's postings conflict with its stated messaging that the driver is to maintain continued control over the dynamic driving task."

The postings may encourage drivers to see Full Self-Driving, which now has the word “supervised” next to it in Tesla materials, to view the system as a “chauffeur or robotaxi rather than a partial automation/driver assist system that requires persistent attention and intermittent intervention by the driver,” Magno wrote.

On April 11, for instance, Tesla reposted a story about a man who used Full Self-Driving to travel 13 miles (21 kilometers) from his home to an emergency room during a heart attack just after the free trial began on April 1. A version of Full Self-Driving helped the owner "get to the hospital when he needed immediate medical attention,” the post said.

In addition, Tesla says on its website that use of Full Self-Driving and Autopilot without human supervision depends on “achieving reliability" and regulatory approval, Magno wrote. But the statement is accompanied by a video of a man driving on local roads with his hands on his knees, with a statement that, “The person in the driver's seat is only there for legal reasons. He is not doing anything. The car is driving itself,” the email said.

In the letter seeking information on driving in low-visibility conditions, Magno wrote that the investigation will focus on the system's ability to perform in low-visibility conditions caused by “relatively common traffic occurrences.”

Drivers, he wrote, may not be told by the car that they should decide where Full Self-Driving can safely operate or fully understand the capabilities of the system.

“This investigation will consider the adequacy of feedback or information the system provides to drivers to enable them to make a decision in real time when the capability of the system has been exceeded,” Magno wrote.

The letter asks Tesla to describe all visual or audio warnings that drivers get that the system “is unable to detect and respond to any reduced visibility condition.”

The agency gave Tesla until Dec. 18 to respond to the letter, but the company can ask for an extension.

That means the investigation is unlikely to be finished by the time President-elect Donald Trump takes office in January, and Trump has said he would put Musk in charge of a government efficiency commission to audit agencies and eliminate fraud. Musk spent at least $119 million in a campaign to get Trump elected, and Trump has spoken against government regulations.

Auto safety advocates fear that if Musk gains some control over NHTSA, the Full Self-Driving and other investigations into Tesla could be derailed.

Musk even floated the idea of him helping to develop national safety standards for self-driving vehicles.

“Of course the fox wants to build the henhouse,” said Michael Brooks, executive director of the Center for Auto Safety, a nonprofit watchdog group.

He added that he can't think of anyone who would agree that a business mogul should have direct involvement in regulations that affect the mogul’s companies.

“That’s a huge problem for democracy, really,” Brooks said.

Investigators will look into the ability of “Full Self-Driving” to “detect and respond appropriately to reduced roadway visibility conditions, and if so, the contributing circumstances for these crashes." Photo courtesy of Tesla

US to probe Texas-based Tesla's self-driving system after pedestrian killed in low visibility conditions

eyes on the road

The U.S. government's road safety agency is investigating Tesla's “Full Self-Driving” system after getting reports of crashes in low-visibility conditions, including one that killed a pedestrian.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said in documents that it opened the probe last week after the company reported four crashes when Teslas encountered sun glare, fog and airborne dust.

In addition to the pedestrian's death, another crash involved an injury, the agency said.

Investigators will look into the ability of “Full Self-Driving” to “detect and respond appropriately to reduced roadway visibility conditions, and if so, the contributing circumstances for these crashes.”

The investigation covers roughly 2.4 million Teslas from the 2016 through 2024 model years.

A message was left Friday seeking comment from Tesla, which has repeatedly said the system cannot drive itself and human drivers must be ready to intervene at all times.

Last week Tesla held an event at a Hollywood studio to unveil a fully autonomous robotaxi without a steering wheel or pedals. Musk, who has promised autonomous vehicles before, said the company plans to have autonomous Models Y and 3 running without human drivers next year. Robotaxis without steering wheels would be available in 2026 starting in California and Texas, he said.

The investigation's impact on Tesla's self-driving ambitions isn't clear. NHTSA would have to approve any robotaxi without pedals or a steering wheel, and it's unlikely that would happen while the investigation is in progress. But if the company tries to deploy autonomous vehicles in its existing models, that likely would fall to state regulations. There are no federal regulations specifically focused on autonomous vehicles, although they must meet broader safety rules.

NHTSA also said it would look into whether any other similar crashes involving “Full Self-Driving” have happened in low visibility conditions, and it will seek information from the company on whether any updates affected the system’s performance in those conditions.

“In particular, this review will assess the timing, purpose and capabilities of any such updates, as well as Tesla’s assessment of their safety impact,” the documents said.

Tesla reported the four crashes to NHTSA under an order from the agency covering all automakers. An agency database says the pedestrian was killed in Rimrock, Arizona, in November of 2023 after being hit by a 2021 Tesla Model Y. Rimrock is about 100 miles (161 kilometers) north of Phoenix.

The Arizona Department of Public Safety said in a statement that the crash happened just after 5 p.m. Nov. 27 on Interstate 17. Two vehicles collided on the freeway, blocking the left lane. A Toyota 4Runner stopped, and two people got out to help with traffic control. A red Tesla Model Y then hit the 4Runner and one of the people who exited from it. A 71-year-old woman from Mesa, Arizona, was pronounced dead at the scene.

The collision happened because the sun was in the Tesla driver's eyes, so the Tesla driver was not charged, said Raul Garcia, public information officer for the department. Sun glare also was a contributing factor in the first collision, he added.

Tesla has twice recalled “Full Self-Driving” under pressure from NHTSA, which in July sought information from law enforcement and the company after a Tesla using the system struck and killed a motorcyclist near Seattle.

The recalls were issued because the system was programmed to run stop signs at slow speeds and because the system disobeyed other traffic laws. Both problems were to be fixed with online software updates.

Critics have said that Tesla’s system, which uses only cameras to spot hazards, doesn’t have proper sensors to be fully self driving. Nearly all other companies working on autonomous vehicles use radar and laser sensors in addition to cameras to see better in the dark or poor visibility conditions.

Musk has said that humans drive with only eyesight, so cars should be able to drive with just cameras. He has called lidar (light detection and ranging), which uses lasers to detect objects, a “fool's errand.”

The “Full Self-Driving” recalls arrived after a three-year investigation into Tesla's less-sophisticated Autopilot system crashing into emergency and other vehicles parked on highways, many with warning lights flashing.

That investigation was closed last April after the agency pressured Tesla into recalling its vehicles to bolster a weak system that made sure drivers are paying attention. A few weeks after the recall, NHTSA began investigating whether the recall was working.

NHTSA began its Autopilot crash investigation in 2021, after receiving 11 reports that Teslas that were using Autopilot struck parked emergency vehicles. In documents explaining why the investigation was ended, NHTSA said it ultimately found 467 crashes involving Autopilot resulting in 54 injuries and 14 deaths. Autopilot is a fancy version of cruise control, while “Full Self-Driving” has been billed by Musk as capable of driving without human intervention.

The investigation that was opened Thursday enters new territory for NHTSA, which previously had viewed Tesla's systems as assisting drivers rather than driving themselves. With the new probe, the agency is focusing on the capabilities of “Full Self-Driving" rather than simply making sure drivers are paying attention.

Michael Brooks, executive director of the nonprofit Center for Auto Safety, said the previous investigation of Autopilot didn't look at why the Teslas weren't seeing and stopping for emergency vehicles.

“Before they were kind of putting the onus on the driver rather than the car,” he said. “Here they're saying these systems are not capable of appropriately detecting safety hazards whether the drivers are paying attention or not.”

Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Blackstone clears major step in acquisition of TXNM Energy

power deal

A settlement has been reached in a regulatory dispute over Blackstone Infrastructure’s pending acquisition of TXNM Energy, the parent company of Texas-New Mexico Power Co. , which provides electricity in the Houston area. The settlement still must be approved by the Public Utility Commission of Texas.

Aside from Public Utility Commission staffers, participants in the settlement include TXNM Energy, Texas cities served by Texas-New Mexico Power, the Texas Office of Public Utility Counsel, Texas Industrial Energy Consumers, Walmart and the Texas Energy Association for Marketers.

Texas-New Mexico Power, based in the Dallas-Fort Worth suburb of Lewisville, supplies electricity to more than 280,000 homes and businesses in Texas. Ten cities are in Texas-New Mexico Power’s Houston-area service territory:

  • Alvin
  • Angleton
  • Brazoria
  • Dickinson
  • Friendswood
  • La Marque
  • League City
  • Sweeny
  • Texas City
  • West Columbia

Under the terms of the settlement, Texas-New Mexico Power must:

  • Provide a $45.5 million rate credit to customers over 48 months, once the deal closes
  • Maintain a seven-member board of directors, including three unaffiliated directors as well as the company’s president and CEO
  • Embrace “robust” financial safeguards
  • Keep its headquarters within the utility’s Texas service territory
  • Avoid involuntary layoffs, as well as reductions of wages or benefits related to for-cause terminations or performance issues

The settlement also calls for Texas-New Mexico Power to retain its $4.2 billion five-year capital spending plan through 2029. The plan will help Texas-New Mexico Power cope with rising demand; peak demand increased about 66 percent from 2020 to 2024.

Citing the capital spending plan in testimony submitted to the Public Utility Commission, Sebastian Sherman, senior managing director of Blackstone Infrastructure, said Texas-New Mexico Power “needs the right support to modernize infrastructure, to strengthen the grid against wildfire and other risks, and to meet surging electricity demand in Texas.”

Blackstone Infrastructure, which has more than $64 billion in assets under management, agreed in August to buy TXNM Energy in a $11.5 billion deal.

Neal Walker, president of Texas-New Mexico Power, says the deal will help his company maintain a reliable, resilient grid, and offer “the financial resources necessary to thrive in this rapidly changing energy environment and meet the unprecedented future growth anticipated across Texas.”

Constellation and Calpine's $26B clean energy megadeal clears final regulatory hurdle

big deal

Baltimore-based nuclear power company Constellation Energy Corp. received final regulatory clearance this month to acquire Houston-based Calpine Corp. for a net purchase price of $26.6 billion.

The acquisition has the potential to create America’s “largest clean energy provider,” the companies reported when the deal was first announced in January.

The Department of Justice approved the acquisition contingent on Calpine divesting several assets, including one in the Houston area.

The company agreed to divest the Jack Fusco Energy Center natural gas-fired combined cycle facility in Richmond, Texas; four generating assets in the Mid-Atlantic region; and other natural gas plants in Pennsylvania and Corpus Christi, Texas.

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the Public Utility Commission of Texas and the New York Public Service Commission previously approved the deal. The companies can move toward closing the acquisition once the court finalizes the stipulation and order.

"We are very pleased to reach a settlement that allows us to bring together two magnificent companies to create a new Constellation with unprecedented scale, talent and capability to better serve our customers and communities while building the foundation for America’s next great era of growth and innovation," Joe Dominguez, president and CEO of Constellation, said in a news release. "We thank the Department for its professionalism and tireless work reviewing this transaction through these many months. It’s now time for us to complete the transaction, welcome our new colleagues from Calpine, and together begin our journey to light the way to a brilliant tomorrow for all."

Andrew Novotny, CEO of Calpine, will continue to lead the Calpine business and Constellation's fleet of natural gas, hydro, solar and wind generation, according to the company. He will report to Dominguez and also serve as senior executive vice president of Constellation Power Operations.

Constellation is considered one of the top clean energy producers in the U.S. Earlier this month, the company was approved to receive a $1 billion loan from the Department of Energy's Energy Dominance Financing Program to restart its 835-megawatt nuclear reactor in Pennsylvania known as Crane Clean Energy Center.

"Work to restart the reactor comes at a time of unprecedented electric demand growth from electrification and the new data centers needed to support a growing digital economy and to help America win the AI race," a news release from the company reads. "Crane will support grid stability by delivering reliable, around-the-clock electric supply."

States brace for Trump's push to make oil drilling cheap again

Energy news

A Republican push to make drilling cheaper on federal land is creating new fiscal pressure for states that depend on oil and gas revenue, most notably in New Mexico as it expands early childhood education and saves for the future.

The shift stems from the sweeping law President Donald Trump signed in July that rolls back the minimum federal royalty rate to 12.5%. That rate — the share of production value companies must pay to the government — held steady for a century under the 1920 Mineral Leasing Act. It was raised to 16.7% under the Biden administration in 2022.

Trump and Republicans in Congress say the rate reset will boost energy production, jobs and affordability as the administration clears the way for expanded drilling and mining on public lands.

States receive nearly half the money collected through federal royalties, depending on where production takes place. The environment and economics research group Resources for the Future estimates a roughly $6 billion drop in collections over the coming decade.

The stakes are highest in New Mexico, the largest recipient of federal mineral lease payments. The state could could forgo $1.7 billion by 2035 and as much as $5.1 billion by 2050, according to calculations by economist Brian Prest at Resources for the Future.

More than one-third of the general fund budget in the Democratically-led state is tied to the oil and gas industry.

“New Mexico’s impact is way bigger than Wyoming or Colorado or North Dakota,” Prest said, “and that’s just because that’s where the action is on new development.”

The effects will unfold gradually, since federal leases allow a 10-year window to begin drilling and production. Still, state officials say they're already prepping for leaner years.

“It all hurts when you’re losing revenues," said Democratic state Sen. George Muñoz of Gallup, who said lawmakers still hope to invest more in mental health care and support Medicaid, even if federal royalty payments decline. “We’ve learned that until the chicken’s got feathers, we’re not even looking at it."

The higher federal royalty rate was in place for roughly three years while leasing activity was muted, Prest said. New Mexico budget forecasters never tallied the additional income.

New Mexico's nest-egg strategy

A nearly five-fold surge in local oil production since 2017 on federal and state land in New Mexico delivered a financial windfall for state government, helping fund higher teacher salaries, tuition-free college, universal free school meals and more.

The state set aside billions of dollars in investment trusts for future spending in case the world’s thirst for oil falters, including a early childhood education fund to help expand preschool, child care subsidies and home wellness visits for pregnancies and infants.

The state's investment nest egg has grown to $64 billion, second only to Alaska's Permanent Fund. Earnings from the trusts are New Mexico's second-biggest source for general fund spending.

That sturdy financial footing shaped a defiant response to this year’s federal government shutdown, when lawmakers voted to subsidize the state’s Affordable Care Act exchange, cover food assistance and backfill cuts to public broadcasting.

But lawmakers reviewing state finances learned that predictable income fell 1.6% — the first contraction since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Muñoz said matters would be worse if the state had not raised its own royalty rates this year to 25%, from 20%, for new leases on prime oil and gas tracts, while ending a sales moratorium, under legislation he co-sponsored this year.

Encouraged in Alaska

After New Mexico, the states receiving the most federal oil and gas royalties are Wyoming, Louisiana, North Dakota and Texas.

Texas, the nation’s top oil producer, shares the bountiful Permian Basin with New Mexico but has far less federal land and therefore less exposure to changes in royalty policy.

In Alaska, state officials say they are encouraged by the royalty cut, seeing potential for increased development in places like the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska, where the massive Willow project — approved in 2023 and now under development — is viewed by some as a catalyst for further activity. The reserve is expected to hold its first lease sales since 2019.

“If reduced federal royalty rates stimulate new leasing, exploration and production, that also could increase other kinds of revenue,” said Lorraine Henry, a spokesperson for Alaska’s Department of Natural Resources.

In North Dakota, federal royalties are split evenly between the state and county governments where drilling occurs. State Office of Management and Budget Director Joe Morrissette said the industry’s future remains difficult to forecast.

“There are so many variables, including timing, price, availability of desirable tracts, and federal policies regarding exploration activities,” Morrissette said.