News
As OK’s anti-Tesla bill moves forward, its author believes a compromise is possible
The electric vehicle community in the United States took a collective gasp earlier this month when a proposed House Bill in Oklahoma unanimously passed a committee vote. The bill in question, HB 3994, aims to update and change parts of existing Oklahoma statutes related to the state’s auto industry. Now, this may sound harmless enough, but a look at the 70-page bill shows that companies like Tesla could lose out heavily if HB 3994 becomes law.
Tesla is already not allowed to directly sell its cars to consumers in Oklahoma, but HB 3994 could give the company even more headaches. What is particularly alarming with HB 3994’s language is the fact that it could be interpreted as a means to prevent automakers like Tesla from delivering and servicing vehicles in the state. This may result in Oklahoma-based Tesla owners being required to travel out of state just to have their vehicles serviced.
Tesla takes the bill very seriously, with the company urging owners on its Engage page to vote “No” to HB 3994. “If passed, this bill could force Tesla to close its existing locations in Oklahoma and prevent Tesla from shipping cars to anyone in the state, which would force locals to travel out-of-state to service their cars or pick up their new Tesla vehicles. Oklahoma should focus on increasing revenue and jobs in the state, not stifling competition and limiting consumer choice,” Tesla noted on its Engage page.
Oppositions and Risks
To state that Oklahoma-based Tesla owners are passionately trying to prevent HB 3994 from progressing further would be an understatement. Tesla owners are currently lobbying against the bill, with some even heading to the capitol last week to speak with the bill’s author, Representative Mike Dobrinski, who has an extensive background in the state’s auto sector. As per Dobrinski’s LinkedIn page, he was the Owner/Dealer of Dobrinski Chevrolet, Inc. until March 2017, and he was the Dealer/Owner of Dobrinski of Kingfisher, Inc., a Chevrolet-Buick-GMC dealership, until October 2018.
The Tesla owners’ talk with the Representative at the capitol last week was brief, according to information shared with Teslarati. Dobrinski highlighted the idea that HB 3994 is a way to protect Tesla owners in Oklahoma because if the EV maker refuses to cover its customers under warranty, then consumers will have no backup. Such a scenario seems unlikely, however.
-->
Senator Mary B. Boren (Credit: Oklahoma Senate)
It’s not just Tesla owners in the state who are against HB 3994. Oklahoma Senator Mary B. Boren, who drives a Tesla Model 3 herself, has openly criticized the bill. In a short conversation with Teslarati, Senator Boren noted that Oklahoma must let the product and the market decide if the state wants innovation to flourish. Initiatives such as HB 3994, which could result in automakers with no dealerships getting the short end of the stick, are counterproductive.
The Senator’s statements could very well ring true. Just recently, reports emerged that Tesla battery partner Panasonic has decided to acquire a factory site in the United States for the production of high-capacity lithium-ion batteries. Panasonic has reportedly shortlisted its preferred US locations to Oklahoma and Kansas. Senator Boren remarked that the presence of bills like HB 3994 could potentially discourage companies like Panasonic from investing in Oklahoma.
“If you have capitalistic laws being passed to protect a particular industry and their business model and to insulate them from the market demands that require them to adjust, then any innovative industry related to EVs will notice that — and they will notice that cronyism is at play. They will find friendlier environments,” Sen. Boren said.
Insights from HB 3994’s Author
The fact that HB 3994 unanimously passed a committee vote earlier this month shows that the bill is also seeing substantial support, despite its harsh repercussions on companies like Tesla and its local electric vehicle owners. When asked by Teslarati about the rationale behind the controversial bill, Rep. Dobrinski explained that HB 3994 is a request bill from the Oklahoma Auto Dealer Association.
“A request bill from the Oklahoma Auto Dealer Association, it seeks to strengthen the position of franchised dealers from the ever-increasing demands and requirements of their legacy manufacturers. Doing so requires addressing Direct Shippers, including Tesla, that are not currently regulated by the Oklahoma Motor Vehicle Commission like franchised dealers are. Proper legislation and regulation will ensure that existing service facilities may remain open and consumers will have additional protections,” Dobrinski noted.
Representative Mike Dobrinski (Credit: Oklahoma State Legislature)
Interestingly enough, the Representative admitted that while HB 3994 includes provisions that may be used to force Tesla into closing its service centers in the state, he does not expect that part of the bill to make it to HB 3994’s final iteration. “I do not expect that provision to be included in the (bill’s) final language,” Dobrinski later stated.
The Representative deserves praise for his honesty with HB 3994, though one may wonder why the controversial bill’s most heavy-handed provisions were included in the first place. When confronted by Tesla owners online, Dobrinski has maintained that HB 3994 is far from finished, but it has already opened the doors for communication among automotive businesses in the state.
-->“This bill, as introduced, is far from the finished product. It is forcing engagement from franchise auto dealers, legacy manufacturers, and new EV manufacturers, including Tesla. These folks are all talking now for the first time ever to work on a plan of regulation going forward that ensures competition and improves customer satisfaction under the purview of the Oklahoma Motor Vehicle Commission,” Dobrinski wrote.
A Price for Compromise?
Considering the statements of HB 3994’s author, it appears that the bill could partly be seen as a way to achieve a compromise of sorts between companies like Tesla, electric vehicle owners, and the state’s franchised auto dealerships. However, existing Tesla owners in Oklahoma fear that if HB 3994 passes into law, it could adversely affect not only their ownership experience but also their daily lives.
Cristen Winter Huber, a Tesla owner and a foster mother, is one of them. Being a foster mother, Huber is unable to take her foster children outside Oklahoma without a judge’s permission. According to Huber, the harsher portions of HB 3994 could effectively disrupt her family dynamic, and it might motivate her to leave the state.
“It’s not feasible for my family to drive out of state frequently. I’m a parent and foster parent. I have to get approval from a judge to take my foster child out of state. If I have to leave the state to service my car, I might as well move to a state that welcomes growth and innovation,” Huber said.
Jochen Hoppert, the President of the Tesla Owners Club of Oklahoma, noted that HB 3994 is not only a step in the wrong direction — it can have repercussions far beyond Tesla. The Tesla Club President also stated that so far, the EV maker’s service centers in Oklahoma City and Tulsa are proving that Tesla is serious about supporting its customers.
-->
“Tesla is still not permitted to sell or deliver vehicles from those locations. We hope that will change in the future, yet this anti-competitive bill is clearly a step in the opposite direction. It’s worth noting that this move would not only negatively affect Tesla and the local Tesla community but other up-and-coming electric vehicle manufacturers wishing to do business in the state.
“Rep. Mike Dobrinski, the creator of this bill… has shared his perspective, which includes the notion that this bill would provide benefit to the consumer by allowing the state to manage the presence of warranty, service, and other such things for the consumer as required features of the electric vehicle marketplace. The Tesla service centers in Oklahoma City and Tulsa already demonstrate Tesla’s desire to provide its customers with such services,” Hoppert said.
Following its unanimous committee approval, House Bill 3994 has now advanced to the House Floor. But before the bill could become a law, the Oklahoma Governor would have to approve it first. With this in mind, Tesla owners and electric vehicle advocates still have some time to fight against the bill, or at least lobby for significant changes. Rep. Mike Dobrinski himself has been consistent with the idea that HB 3994 is still open for edits, so it may be a good idea for Tesla owners in the state to push their efforts even more from this point forward.
Those interested in speaking up and supporting Tesla’s efforts against Oklahoma’s HB 3994 could click here.
A copy of Oklahoma HB 3994 could be viewed below.
Hb3994 Int by Simon Alvarez on Scribd
-->
Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to simon@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.
Elon Musk
SpaceX’s Starship FL launch site will witness scenes once reserved for sci-fi films
A Starship that launches from the Florida site could touch down on the same site years later.
The Department of the Air Force (DAF) has released its Final Environmental Impact Statement for SpaceX’s efforts to launch and land Starship and its Super Heavy booster at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station’s SLC-37.
According to the Impact Statement, Starship could launch up to 76 times per year on the site, with Super Heavy boosters returning within minutes of liftoff and Starship upper stages landing back on the same pad in a timeframe that was once only possible in sci-fi movies.
Booster in Minutes, Ship in (possibly) years
The EIS explicitly referenced a never-before-seen operational concept: Super Heavy boosters will launch, reach orbit, and be caught by the tower chopsticks roughly seven minutes after liftoff. Meanwhile, the Starship upper stage will complete its mission, whether a short orbital test, lunar landing, or a multi-year Mars cargo run, and return to the exact same SLC-37 pad upon mission completion.
“The Super Heavy booster landings would occur within a few minutes of launch, while the Starship landings would occur upon completion of the Starship missions, which could last hours or years,” the EIS read.
This means a Starship that departs the Florida site in, say, 2027, could touch down on the same site in 2030 or later, right beside a brand-new stack preparing for its own journey, as noted in a Talk Of Titusville report. The 214-page document treats these multi-year round trips as standard procedure, effectively turning the location into one of the world’s first true interplanetary spaceports.
-->Noise and emissions flagged but deemed manageable
While the project received a clean bill of health overall, the EIS identified two areas requiring ongoing mitigation. Sonic booms from Super Heavy booster and Starship returns will cause significant community annoyance” particularly during nighttime operations, though structural damage is not expected. Nitrogen oxide emissions during launches will also exceed federal de minimis thresholds, prompting an adaptive management plan with real-time monitoring.
Other impacts, such as traffic, wildlife (including southeastern beach mouse and Florida scrub-jay), wetlands, and historic sites, were deemed manageable under existing permits and mitigation strategies. The Air Force is expected to issue its Record of Decision within weeks, followed by FAA concurrence, setting the stage for rapid redevelopment of the former site into a dual-tower Starship complex.
SpaceX Starship Environmental Impact Statement by Simon Alvarez
News
Tesla Full Self-Driving (FSD) testing gains major ground in Spain
Based on information posted by the Dirección General de Tráfico (DGT), it appears that Tesla is already busy testing FSD in the country.
Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (Supervised) program is accelerating across Europe, with Spain emerging as a key testing hub under the country’s new ES-AV framework program.
Based on information posted by the Dirección General de Tráfico (DGT), it appears that Tesla is already busy testing FSD in the country.
Spain’s ES-AV framework
Spain’s DGT launched the ES-AV Program in July 2025 to standardize testing for automated vehicles from prototypes to pre-homologation stages. The DGT described the purpose of the program on its official website.
“The program is designed to complement and enhance oversight, regulation, research, and transparency efforts, as well as to support innovation and advancements in automotive technology and industry. This framework also aims to capitalize on the opportunity to position Spain as a pioneer and leader in automated vehicle technology, seeking to provide solutions that help overcome or alleviate certain shortcomings or negative externalities of the current transportation system,” the DGT wrote.
The program identifies three testing phases based on technological maturity and the scope of a company’s operations. Each phase has a set of minimum eligibility requirements, and applicants must indicate which phase they wish to participate in, at least based on their specific technological development.
-->
Tesla FSD tests
As noted by Tesla watcher Kees Roelandschap on X, the DGT’s new framework effectively gives the green flight for nationwide FSD testing. So far, Tesla Spain has a total of 19 vehicles authorized to test FSD on the country’s roads, though it would not be surprising if this fleet grows in the coming months.
The start date for the program is listed at November 27, 2025 to November 26, 2027. The DGT also noted that unlimited FSD tests could be done across Spain on any national route. And since Tesla is already in Phase 3 of the ES-AV Program, onboard safety operators are optional. Remote monitoring would also be allowed.
Tesla’s FSD tests in Spain could help the company gain a lot of real-world data on the country’s roads. Considering the scope of tests that are allowed for the electric vehicle maker, it seems like Spain would be one of the European countries that would be friendly to FSD’s operations. So far, Tesla’s FSD push in Europe is notable, with the company holding FSD demonstrations in Germany, France, and Italy. Tesla is also pushing for national approval in the Netherlands in early 2026.
News
Tesla FSD V14.2.1 is earning rave reviews from users in diverse conditions
Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (Supervised) software continues its rapid evolution, with the latest V14.2.1 update drawing widespread praise.
Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (Supervised) software continues its rapid evolution, with the latest V14.2.1 update drawing widespread praise for its smoother performance and smarter decision-making.
Videos and firsthand accounts from Tesla owners highlight V14.2.1 as an update that improves navigation responsiveness, sign recognition, and overall fluidity, among other things. Some drivers have even described it as “more alive than ever,” hinting at the system eventually feeling “sentient,” as Elon Musk has predicted.
FSD V14.2.1 first impressions
Early adopters are buzzing about how V14.2.1 feels less intrusive while staying vigilant. In a post shared on X, Tesla owner @LactoseLunatic described the update as a “huge leap forward,” adding that the system remains “incredibly assertive but still safe.”
Another Tesla driver, Devin Olsenn, who logged ~600 km on V14.2.1, reported no safety disengagements, with the car feeling “more alive than ever.” The Tesla owner noted that his wife now defaults to using FSD V14, as the system is already very smooth and refined.
Adverse weather and regulatory zones are testing grounds where V14.2.1 shines, at least according to testers in snow areas. Tesla watcher Sawyer Merritt shared a video of his first snowy drive on unplowed rural roads in New Hampshire, where FSD did great and erred on the side of caution. As per Merritt, FSD V14.2.1 was “extra cautious” but it performed well overall.
-->Sign recognition and freeway prowess
Sign recognition also seemed to show improvements with FSD V14.2.1. Longtime FSD tester Chuck Cook highlighted a clip from his upcoming first-impressions video, showcasing improved school zone behavior. “I think it read the signs better,” he observed, though in standard mode, it didn’t fully drop to 15 mph within the short timeframe. This nuance points to V14.2.1’s growing awareness of temporal rules, a step toward fewer false positives in dynamic environments.
FSD V14.2.1 also seems to excel in high-stress highway scenarios. Fellow FSD tester @BLKMDL3 posted a video of FSD V14.2.1 managing a multi-lane freeway closure due to a police chase-related accident. “Perfectly handles all lanes of the freeway merging into one,” the Tesla owner noted in his post on X.
FSD V14.2.1 was released on Thanksgiving, much to the pleasant surprise of Tesla owners. The update’s release notes are almost identical to the system’s previous iteration, save for one line item read, “Camera visibility can lead to increased attention monitoring sensitivity.”
SpaceX’s Starship FL launch site will witness scenes once reserved for sci-fi films
Tesla Full Self-Driving (FSD) testing gains major ground in Spain
