Connect with us
tesla-logo (1) tesla-logo (1)

News

Petition for Tesla vehicle fire investigation rejected by the NHTSA

Credit: @JasemAsh via Tesla Owners Wisconsin/Twitter

Published

on

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has effectively rejected a petition that called for an investigation into Tesla vehicle fires and how they may be related to its over-the-air software updates. According to the NHTSA, it is unlikely that a probe would find a safety defect in Tesla’s vehicles. 

The petition, which was filed back in 2019, alleged that Tesla’s over-the-air software updates ended up cutting battery range. The petition also claimed that the strategy was a response to battery fires across the globe. The NHTSA noted in documents posted in the Federal Register that there were fires in China after Teslas were charged at Superchargers. 

No such incidents were identified in the United States, however. The agency also stated that three of the non-crash fires outside of China cited in the 2019 petition actually did not start in the battery, nor were they related to fast charging. Two of the incidents listed in the petition were not in the United States, either. 

Ultimately, the NHTSA concluded that it would not be opening a formal investigation into the fires and Tesla’s over-the-air software updates. Considering the available data, it could be noted that noncrash battery fires in Teslas are actually rare events

Advertisement

“The available data indicate that noncrash battery fires in Tesla vehicles are rare events. It is unlikely that an order concerning the notification and remedy of a safety-related defect would be issued due to any investigation opened as a result of granting this petition,” the agency noted. 

Elaborating further, the NHTSA stated that it looked into data from the 2019 petition and from Tesla itself. It also examined field data from vehicle fires that were not caused by a crash. The 2019 petition covered about 255,000 Tesla Model S and Model X that from the 2012 to 2019 model years.

“NHTSA is authorized to issue an order requiring notification and remedy of a defect if the Agency’s investigation shows a defect in the design, construction, or performance of a motor vehicle that presents an unreasonable risk to safety. Given the absence of any incidents in the United States related to fast charging, and the absence of any such incidents globally since May 2019, it is unlikely that an order concerning the notification and remedy of a safety-related defect would be issued due to any investigation opened as a result of granting this petition. Therefore, upon full consideration of the information presented in the petition, and the potential risks to safety, the petition is denied,” the NHTSA wrote on its ODI resume. 

Tesla Vehicle Fire Nhtsa by Simon Alvarez on Scribd

Advertisement

Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to tips@teslarati.com to give us a heads up. 

Simon is an experienced automotive reporter with a passion for electric cars and clean energy. Fascinated by the world envisioned by Elon Musk, he hopes to make it to Mars (at least as a tourist) someday. For stories or tips--or even to just say a simple hello--send a message to his email, simon@teslarati.com or his handle on X, @ResidentSponge.

Advertisement
Comments

News

Tesla sues California DMV over Autopilot and FSD advertising ruling

The complaint seeks to remove the agency’s conclusion that Tesla falsely promoted the capabilities of Autopilot and Full Self-Driving.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla has filed a lawsuit against the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) in an effort to overturn a prior ruling that found the automaker engaged in false advertising related to its driver-assistance systems. 

The complaint seeks to remove the agency’s conclusion that Tesla misled customers about the capabilities of Autopilot and Full Self-Driving.

Tesla’s legal action follows a decision by California’s Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH), which concluded that Tesla’s earlier marketing of “Autopilot” and “Full Self-Driving” violated state law, as noted in a CNBC report. 

While the DMV opted not to suspend Tesla’s license after determining the company had updated its marketing language for its advanced driver-assistance systems, Tesla is asking the court to go further and reverse the agency’s conclusion.

Advertisement

In its Feb. 13 complaint, Tesla’s attorneys argued that the DMV “wrongfully and baselessly” labeled the company a “false advertiser” for its Autopilot and FSD systems. The filing argued that regulators failed to demonstrate that consumers were actually misled about the capabilities of Tesla’s systems.

According to Tesla’s complaint, the DMV “never proved consumers in the state had been confused about whether its cars were safe to drive without a human at the wheel.”

Tesla’s legal team further stated: “It was impossible to buy a Tesla equipped with either Autopilot or Full Self-Driving Capability, or to use any of their associated features, without seeing clear and repeated statements that they do not make the vehicle autonomous.”

Tesla now promotes its driver-assistance system as “Full Self-Driving (Supervised),” a name that overemphasizes the need for active driver attention.

Advertisement

Tesla’s autonomous driving program is a pivotal part of the company’s future, with CEO Elon Musk stating that self-driving technology will truly be the solution that will push Tesla into its full potential. The company is currently operating a Robotaxi pilot in Austin and the Bay Area, and the company recently announced that it has produced the first Cybercab from Giga Texas’ production line. 

Continue Reading

News

Tesla is making two big upgrades to the Model 3, coding shows

According to coding found in the European and Chinese configurators, Tesla is planning to make two big upgrades: Black Headliner offerings and a new 16-inch QHD display, similar to that on the Model Y Performance.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla is making two big upgrades to the Model 3, one of which is widely requested by owners and fans, and another that it has already started to make on some trim levels of other models within the lineup.

The changes appear to be taking effect in the European and Chinese markets, but these are expected to come to the United States based on what Tesla has done with the Model Y.

According to coding found in the European and Chinese configurators, Tesla is planning to make two big upgrades: Black Headliner offerings and a new 16-inch QHD display, similar to that on the Model Y Performance.

These changes in the coding were spotted by X user BERKANT, who shared the findings on the social media platform this morning:

It appears these new upgrades will roll out with the Model 3 Performance and Tesla’s Premium trim levels of the all-electric sedan.

The changes are welcome. Tesla fans have been requesting that its Model 3 and Model Y offerings receive a black headliner, as even with the black interior options, the headliner is grey.

Tesla recently upgraded Model Y vehicles to this black headliner option, even in the United States, so it seems as if the Model 3 will get the same treatment as it appears to be getting in the Eastern hemisphere.

Tesla Model 3 wins Edmunds’ Best EV of 2026 award

Tesla has been basically accentuating the Model 3 and Model Y with small upgrades that owners have been wanting, and it has been a focal point of the company’s future plans as it phases out other vehicles like the Model S and Model X.

Additionally, Tesla offered an excellent 0.99% APR last week on the Model 3, hoping to push more units out the door to support a strong Q1 delivery figure at the beginning of April.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

SpaceX secures FAA approval for 44 annual Starship launches in Florida

The FAA’s environmental review covers up to 44 launches annually, along with 44 Super Heavy booster landings and 44 upper-stage landings.

Published

on

Credit: SpaceX

SpaceX has received environmental approval from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to conduct up to 44 Starship-Super Heavy launches per year from Kennedy Space Center Launch Complex 39A in Florida. 

The decision allows the company to proceed with plans tied to its next-generation launch system and future satellite deployments.

The FAA’s environmental review covers up to 44 launches annually, along with 44 Super Heavy booster landings and 44 upper-stage landings. The approval concludes the agency’s public comment period and outlines required mitigation measures related to noise, emissions, wildlife, and airspace management.

Construction of Starship infrastructure at Launch Complex 39A is nearing completion. The site, previously used for Apollo and space shuttle missions, is transitioning to support Starship operations, as noted in a Florida Today report.

Advertisement

If fully deployed across Kennedy Space Center and nearby Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, Starship activity on the Space Coast could exceed 120 launches annually, excluding tests. Separately, the U.S. Air Force has authorized repurposing Space Launch Complex 37 for potential additional Starship activity, pending further FAA airspace analysis.

The approval supports SpaceX’s long-term strategy, which includes deploying a large constellation of satellites intended to power space-based artificial intelligence data infrastructure. The company has previously indicated that expanded Starship capacity will be central to that effort.

The FAA review identified likely impacts from increased noise, nitrogen oxide emissions, and temporary airspace closures. Commercial flights may experience periodic delays during launch windows. The agency, however, determined these effects would be intermittent and manageable through scheduling, public notification, and worker safety protocols.

Wildlife protections are required under the approval, Florida Today noted. These include lighting controls to protect sea turtles, seasonal monitoring of scrub jays and beach mice, and restrictions on offshore landings to avoid coral reefs and right whale critical habitat. Recovery vessels must also carry trained observers to prevent collisions with protected marine species.

Advertisement
Continue Reading