Concerning a requirement that a commercial motor vehicle have a human present when the commercial motor vehicle is being driven by an automated driving system, and, in connection therewith, making an appropriation.
Summary
HB26-1286 would restrict the use of automated driving systems on Colorado highways for commercial motor vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating or gross combination weight rating of 26,001 pounds or more. Under the bill, a person may not use an automated driving system to drive such a commercial vehicle unless a qualified commercial driver’s license holder is physically present in the cab, monitors the vehicle, and intervenes when necessary to prevent illegal or unsafe driving. If the vehicle is transporting hazardous materials, the CDL holder must be seated in the driver’s seat.
The bill creates a class A traffic infraction for violations and sets escalating penalties: $1,000 for a first conviction, $2,000 for a second conviction, and doubled penalties for later convictions, plus a $150 surcharge. It excludes light-duty vehicles and truck-mounted attenuators, preserves other existing duties under Colorado law, and includes a repeal date of September 1, 2031. It also requires the Colorado State Patrol to study the law’s effects and report recommendations to legislative committees by November 1, 2030. The bill includes a small appropriation to the Department of Revenue to support implementation.
Impact
The bill would add a new section to Colorado law governing automated driving systems for commercial motor vehicles and would amend the existing automated driving systems safe-harbor statute to make clear that commercial vehicles are subject to the new restriction. It would also create new enforcement penalties under traffic law and direct state agencies to use a modest appropriation from the Colorado DRIVES vehicle services account to cover administrative and technology-related implementation costs. The measure would affect commercial trucking operators, drivers with CDL endorsements, and carriers transporting hazardous materials, while leaving light-duty vehicles outside its scope.
Sentiment
The available context suggests the bill was treated as a public-safety measure focused on ensuring human oversight of heavy commercial vehicles using automated driving technology. Its structure—requiring a licensed driver in the cab, imposing penalties, and mandating a later safety review—indicates an intent to allow limited use of automation while maintaining human control. The bill ultimately was vetoed by the governor, but no committee transcripts or recorded votes are provided here to show detailed debate or formal support/opposition levels.
Contention
The main point of contention appears to be the degree to which automated driving systems should be allowed to operate large commercial vehicles without a human driver physically present. Supporters likely viewed the bill as necessary to reduce safety risks, especially for hazardous materials transport and high-weight vehicles, while critics may have seen it as overly restrictive or premature given evolving autonomous trucking technology. The requirement that a CDL holder be in the cab, and in the driver’s seat for hazardous materials, is the most significant operational constraint and would be the central issue for carriers, technology developers, and transportation safety advocates.