According to techcrunch, cruise, GM's autonomous vehicle division, has finally got the green light to start charging for its driverless robot taxi service in San Francisco** The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) voted on Thursday to issue cruise a driverless deployment license, which is the last obstacle for the company to start commercializing its self driving taxi service.
Cruise will operate its passenger service on certain streets of San Francisco at a maximum speed of 30 miles per hour between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m., adding another hour and a half to its current service. According to a spokesman for cruise, the company also needs state approval before it can charge the public for driverless driving in other parts of the city. According to the CPUC draft resolution, these prerequisites are part of Cruise's "passenger safety plan", which limits services to night and does not include the city's dense urban core.
A cruise spokesman told techcrunch, "in the coming months, we will expand our operating areas, our operating hours, and our ability to charge the public for driverless rides until we achieve all-weather rides throughout the city."
Since February, cruise has been using its own Chevrolet bolts to provide free driverless ride services to the public in San Francisco between 10:30 p.m. and 5:00 a.m. In 2020, the company began to test its self driving vehicles in the city for the first time. There was no driver in the front seat, and in June 2021, the company began to allow passengers to test ride for free. Last October, cruise obtained the driverless deployment license issued by the California motor vehicle administration (DMV), which means that it can start charging for autonomous vehicle services, such as delivery. Crucially, the license of DMV is limited to the charging of robot taxis.
With the license of CPUC, cruise is the only autonomous driving company in the city that can operate commercial driverless taxi service. Waymo is Cruise's biggest competitor and the autonomous driving department under alphabet. Recently, waymo has also obtained the permission from CPUC to charge robot taxis, provided that human safety operators are present during the ride. Waymo has been providing fully autonomous commercial ride services in Phoenix since 2020 and has recently expanded its driverless program in the city.
Although Cruise's CPUC license allows the fleet to own up to 30 all electric autonomous vehicle, cruise has been sparing no effort to publicize its plan to rapidly expand its scale in the near future. Last year, former CEO Dan Ammann elaborated Cruise's plan to increase its specially built origin autonomous vehicle fleet to thousands or even tens of thousands in the next few years.
Last week, some agencies in San Francisco -- including the city's municipal and county transportation departments, the fire department, the mayor's office for the disabled and the San Francisco police department -- expressed concern about the lack of clarity in the CPUC draft resolution on Cruise's restrictions on expanding the size of its fleet.
The draft resolution points out that cruise must submit an updated passenger safety plan in the form of a tier 2 recommendation letter before modifying "any change in the time, geography, road type, speed range or weather conditions cruise intends to operate".
It is worth noting that if cruise wants to increase the size of its fleet, the language does not require cruise to appeal to CPUC. Stakeholders in San Francisco believe that in view of Cruise's "current passenger carrying mode", this difference will "increase the negative impact of unmanned cruise autopilot deployment", which is another concern of the city for the draft resolution.
The comment said: "Cruise's current passenger transfer mode, even when there are empty seats on the roadside, is completely stopped in the lane, which is lower than the expected level of human drivers." It was emphasized in the comments that the growing fleet of autonomous vehicles parking in the carriageway may pose a danger to vulnerable road users, such as emergency workers, the disabled, the elderly and cyclists.
As part of its comments, the city provided a list of recommendations for CPUC to include in its final decision, including:
-Clarification of the increase in fleet size and vehicle models requires cruise to submit an opinion, because Cruise's goal is not only to rapidly expand its fleet size, but also to use a new, specially built vehicle.
-CPUC staff are required to publish on their website the geographical areas in which cruise AVS is authorized to operate driverless vehicles. Cruise told techcrunch that it currently provides driverless ride services to the public in about 70% of the cities. This is detailed in the CEO Kyle Vogt's recent rough map on twitter, but it did not provide the specific area where it will charge passengers for driverless ride. However, CPUC's agenda includes a photo of Cruise's original service area, including some streets that are not within the geographical fence, which is likely to be the place where the company will start to collect ride fees. The region extends from north to south, from Richmond to sunset, and northeast into the Pacific highlands and Kohl.
-Convene a regular working group to address data collection issues surrounding the transfer of customers and the interaction of autonomous vehicles with first responders and street workers in San Francisco.
-Collect data on wheelchair accessibility.
CPUC's decision to grant cruise a deployment license has set a precedent for the state to continue to regulate commercial autonomous driving services in the future, so public feedback is crucial. However, it is not clear whether any of the city's recommendations will be adopted in the final decision.
"(the draft resolution) adopts the same 'wait and see' approach used by the Committee in the regulation of transport network companies (TNCs)," the comment wrote. "This approach undermines San Francisco's climate goals, reduces transportation options for wheelchair users, and significantly increases congestion and travel time delays in San Francisco's streets used for strong public transport services. Unless the problems identified in these comments are resolved, these results may reappear."