WeVote

Bill

Bill

HB 25-1122

Automated Driving System Commercial Motor Vehicle

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Jennifer Bacon and 18 co-sponsors

HB 25-1122 would regulate ADS-equipped commercial trucks, setting safety rules, operator duties, and state oversight - vetoed, so it won't become law unless overridden.

Governor Vetoed
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 25-1122

Summary — HB 25‑1122: Automated Driving System Commercial Motor Vehicle

Status: Governor vetoed (2025‑05‑29)
Introduced: 2025‑01‑28 (House)
Primary Sponsors: Chris Richardson; Sheila Lieder; Larry Liston; Tom Sullivan (plus multiple cosponsors)

Note: The bill text was not provided. The summary below identifies the bill’s stated subject and—where the bill text is not available—describes the typical scope, likely provisions, affected parties, and procedural history based on the bill title, sponsor information, and legislative actions.

Purpose / Intent

By title, HB 25‑1122 concerns the operation, regulation, or integration of Automated Driving Systems (ADS) on Commercial Motor Vehicles (CMVs). The apparent intent is to create or update state rules governing how ADS-equipped commercial trucks and other CMVs may operate on public roads — including definitions, safety/operational requirements, responsibilities of vehicle owners/operators, and oversight or reporting obligations.

Key provisions likely included (based on subject)

Because the bill text is not provided, the exact language is unknown. Bills addressing ADS for CMVs commonly include some or all of the following elements:

  • Definitions for key terms (e.g., "Automated Driving System," "commercial motor vehicle," "dynamic driving task").
  • Conditions under which a CMV may operate under ADS control (e.g., permitted routes, operational design domain, time-of-day or weather limitations).
  • Operator and carrier responsibilities (e.g., required monitoring, fallback plans, training or certification requirements for remote operators or safety supervisors).
  • Equipment, software, and maintenance standards (e.g., data logging, cybersecurity, fail‑safe behavior).
  • Insurance and financial responsibility requirements specific to ADS‑operated CMVs.
  • Marking, disclosure, or notice requirements (e.g., conspicuity or placarding to identify ADS operation).
  • Reporting and data‑sharing to state transportation or safety agencies after incidents or periodically.
  • Enforcement mechanisms and penalties for noncompliance.
  • Preemption or interaction with federal regulations (FAA/DOT) and possible authorization/delegation to state agencies for rulemaking.

Who would be affected

  • Motor carriers and fleet operators deploying ADS‑equipped CMVs.
  • Vehicle manufacturers and ADS developers.
  • CMV drivers and related workforce (roles may shift from in‑vehicle drivers to remote supervisors).
  • Insurance companies offering liability coverage for ADS operation.
  • State transportation and safety agencies responsible for oversight and enforcement.
  • Road users and the general public (safety, traffic operation, and economic impacts on freight movement).

Procedural history (selected)

  • 2025‑01‑28: Introduced in House; assigned to Transportation, Housing & Local Government.
  • 2025‑02‑19: Referred (amended) to Appropriations.
  • 2025‑04‑22/23: Passed House (committee amendments noted).
  • 2025‑04‑24: Introduced in Senate; assigned to Transportation & Energy.
  • 2025‑04‑28 to 05‑06: Passed through Senate committees and third reading (no amendments on final passage).
  • 2025‑05‑14: Signed by the President of the Senate and Speaker of the House; sent to Governor.
  • 2025‑05‑29: Governor vetoed the bill.

No override action is recorded. If the legislature wishes to pursue enactment after a veto, it would need to follow the state’s override process (typically a supermajority vote in each chamber).

Impact and considerations

  • If enacted, the bill would have shaped how commercial ADS deployments occur in the state—potentially accelerating adoption by clarifying legal and operational frameworks or, conversely, creating additional regulatory requirements for industry.
  • The veto halts those changes unless the legislature overrides or reintroduces a revised bill.
  • Stakeholders (carriers, manufacturers, insurers, labor groups, safety advocates, and state agencies) would likely have strong interest in technical definitions, liability allocation, and oversight provisions—areas that commonly produce policy debate.

For precise obligations, definitions, and fiscal impacts, consult the official bill text and any fiscal note or committee reports available on the legislature’s website.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.