A Repeat Regulation / Law Question...

[Ken M]

I understand that the subject of assist and speed comes a lot and there are a lot of opinions. I want to focus the question on Federal vs State differences and which really has president.

The federal law does state the rated motor must be less than 750W (pretty much implies that the motor actually can not be "rated" over 749W but that is not the subject I want to explore in this thread).

There is no assist speed limit mentioned in the federal ebike definition (the law that allows all compliant ebikes to be sold as a bike equivalent) besides the requirement that under throttle power alone the speed must not exceed 20mph (pretty clear the reason why "class 2" ebikes stop assisting at 20mph so the new Class system is consistent with the federal definition of "ebike"). There is some acknowledgment of pedelecs but there is no assist speed limit stated if the rider is required to pedal to get assist. The states that have adopted the Class System (mainly originated from EU and the Bike supplier network wanting to sell the same bikes worldwide) which sets the assist limit at 28mph.

There is a lot of legal information that the Federal Regulation in this case supersedes state laws such that states can not tighten the performance but they can control "usage" of all bikes.

OK my question is simple but complex: If the federal law does not set an upper assist limit on pedelecs can the states actually enforce the Class 3 regulations that many are adopting?

Note: I understand they can adopt the regulation but are they going to be able to enforce if if say someone is ticketed for riding a pedelec at 30mph in a bike lane with a higher posted speed limit for motor vehicles?

 

[Ken M]

Comment I was assuming that the pedelec assist was still active at 30mph.

I do understand that the power limit doesn't exactly provide much assist to sustain a 28mph or faster speed but does the assist have to cut-off entirely just because some states are adopting Class regulations?

 

[Mr. Coffee]

Unless otherwise specified by law, states are free to impose more stringent laws on a particular subject than the federal government imposes.

As for precedence, it was pretty clearly settled in the 1860s that federal law is supreme if there is a conflict.

 

[rich c]

You think the FBI or US Marshals are going to patrol your bike path? You also forgot about local municipalities. They can set the law with local zoning laws on local bike paths and local park lands. The only place the Feds get involved is in Federal Parks and Forests.

 

[J.R.]

The federal regulation in place is a Consumer Product Safety Commission regulation. It doesn't regulate ebikes, it deregulated ebikes under 750 watts, 20 mph to be sold as bicycles and not motor vehicles. Sold, not used. It's not a law that legalizes ebikes. If it were a law, federal land managers wouldn't be allowed to put in place regulations keeping ebikes off bicycle paths and trails on federal land. Federal agencies cannot override federal laws.

The CPSC ebike regs have nothing to do with the use of ebikes.

 

[Ken M]

To me this is confusing. If the Federal "definition/regulation" is that an ebike under 750W and not capable of sustaining a speed over 20mph under throttle power alone is the equivalent of a bike an not a motor vehicle then I don't understand "usage" regulations that can define a compliant ebike as not the equivalent of a bike.

I do understand that usage and operation of a bike is under state law but if they say a bike can ride this path/sidewalk/bike lane then it seems to me that a compliant ebike is assured to be legal on those paths/sidewalks/bike lanes by the federal definition/regulation/law.

If the Federal Law says that a compliant ebike is the equivalent of a traditional bike, then how can the states and local municipalities say they are not and have distinct usage and operation laws. I am specifically talking about federally compliant ebikes.

 

[Ken M]

Here's an example of why I bring this up. I live in Colorado where in general all federally compliant ebikes are treated as bikes but there is a clear implication they can be parsed by usage/operation regulations.

(I) a person may ride a class 1 or class 2 electrical assisted bicycle on a
bike or pedestrian path where bicycles are authorized to travel.
(II) A local authority may prohibit the operation of a class 1 or class 2
electrical assisted bicycle on a bike or pedestrian path under its
jurisdiction.

There just seems to be an inherent disconnect between federal and state and I think the federal law would prevail in court - that a compliant ebike is the equivalent of a bike and not a motor vehicle.

 

[Ken M]

Federal regulation/law HB 727, amended the Consumer Product Safety Commission definition of bikes. The law defined a low-speed electric bicycle as “A two- or three-wheeled vehicle with fully operable pedals and an electric motor of less than 750 watts (1 h.p.), whose maximum speed on a paved level surface, when powered solely by such a motor while ridden by an operator who weighs 170 pounds, is less than 20 mph.” The federal law permits e-bikes to be powered by the motor alone (a “throttle-assist” e-bike), or by a combination of motor and human power (a “pedal-assist” e-bike). Significantly, the federal law only specifies the maximum speed that the e-bike can travel under motor power alone.

If the feds say this is the equivalent of a bike, how then can state or local municipalities usage/operations law say it is not? I fully understand they can say that no "bikes" are allowed on this path, but can they say "bikes" are allowed and "compliant ebikes" are not when the feds are saying they are sold as equivalent.


I personally think this is crystal clear (the feds say they are the same) so the states really need to treat them as equivalent in their usage and operations laws. Any path/bike lane/sidewalk/road a bike can be ridden on a complaint ebike can be ridden on.

Is there any lawyers out there that will actually contribute their assessment outside a court of law on this? Usually lawyers shy away for having "unpaid" opinions.

 

[Ken M]

I view the states parsing the federal "equivalence" as like saying on this road only cars with less than 200hp can be driven. If the feds say that a motor vehicle is compliant then the states treat them as equivalent in their usage/operations laws. For example a 1000hp car still must obey the same speed limit a 100hp car must obey.

 

[J.R.]

I view the states parsing the federal "equivalence" as like saying on this road only cars with less than 200hp can be driven. If the feds say that a motor vehicle is compliant then the states treat them as equivalent in their usage/operations laws. For example a 1000hp car still must obey the same speed limit a 100hp car must obey.

We pay a lot of money to police roadways in the US. If the general public is offered a choice of paying real money to police bike paths or just banning ebikes altogether, what do you think they'd choose?

Multi use paths are designed for walkers and slow moving bikes. Many have speed limits of less than 15 mph and only posted at trail heads. While in Philly I saw speed limits on one path of 9 mph! If you promote this, the public will demand slower and "safer" speeds on bike paths. It's coming without us demanding acceptance of our 20 and 28 mph plus bikes. I, for one, am not looking forward to speed enforcement on bike paths. I'd rather pay for more miles of paths than law enforcement.

These are the good old days. Enjoy them!

 

[Mr. Coffee]

*sigh*

Dude, it really isn't that complicated.

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_bicycle_laws#United_States:

The federal Consumer Product Safety Act defines a "low speed electric bicycle" as a two or three wheeled vehicle with fully operable pedals, a top speed when powered solely by the motor under 20 mph (32 km/h) and an electric motor that produces less than 750 W (1.01 hp). The Act authorizes the Consumer Product Safety Commission to protect people who ride low-speed electric vehicles by issuing necessary safety regulations.[63] The rules for e-bikes on public roads, sidewalks, and pathways are under state jurisdiction, and vary.

In conformance with legislation adopted by the U.S. Congress defining this category of electric-power bicycle (15 U.S.C. 2085(b)), CPSC rules stipulate that low speed electric bicycles[64] (to include two- and three-wheel vehicles) are exempt from classification as motor vehicles providing they have fully operable pedals, an electric motor of less than 750W (1 hp), and a top motor-powered speed of less than 20 miles per hour (32 km/h) when operated by a rider weighing 170 pounds.[65] An electric bike remaining within these specifications is subject to the CPSC consumer product regulations for a bicycle. Commercially manufactured e-bikes exceeding these power and speed limits are regulated by the federal DOT and NHTSA as motor vehicles, and must meet additional safety requirements. The legislation enacting this amendment to the CPSC is also known as HR 727.[66] The text of HR 727 includes the statement: "This section shall supersede any State law or requirement with respect to low-speed electric bicycles to the extent that such State law or requirement is more stringent than the Federal law or requirements." (Note that this refers to consumer product regulations enacted under the Consumer Product Safety Act. Preemption of more stringent state consumer product regulations does not limit State authority to regulate the use of electric bicycles, or bicycles in general, under state vehicle codes.)

Italics are mine.

 

[Ken M]

*sigh*

Dude, it really isn't that complicated.

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_bicycle_laws#United_States:



Italics are mine.

This information confirms that federally compliant ebikes are bike "equivalent" per my interpretation. But that would mean that they can't be regulated differently at the state level. I'm just hoping to get absolute clarification on this question/debate.

 

[Ken M]

You think the FBI or US Marshals are going to patrol your bike path? You also forgot about local municipalities. They can set the law with local zoning laws on local bike paths and local park lands. The only place the Feds get involved is in Federal Parks and Forests.

I misused the word "president" ... meant precedence.

I understand that states will enforce the regulation on bikes and ebikes, but who has precedence to define what is a legal ebike. I just don't think the states can define tighter product regulations than what the federal regulations declare. Hoping for some clarification on this.

 

[Nutella]

You're kidding right?

https://www.complianceonline.com/ca...ate-requirements-webinar-training-701899-prdw

 

[Ken M]

You're kidding right?

https://www.complianceonline.com/ca...ate-requirements-webinar-training-701899-prdw

Actually I was aware that California has tighter environmental standards and they even had special requirements for motor vehicles sold in that state for a while (I think they are consistent with federal requirements now).

Given that ebikes are product usually the federal laws define what is considered legal for sale and it seems the ebike regulations say that they are equivalent to a bike so long as the regulation is compliant.

There are comments that state that precedence goes to the federal regulation if there is a conflict and I believe that is true. Doesn't mean the state can't have tighter standards but they may not be enforceable.

 

[harryS]

Hi Ken, We took our ebikes to Colorado in 2017. We start riding around the DiIlon Dam and immediately come up on a pack of Pedego ebikes. Cool. Then I see the sign "No ebikes" ???? Hmm, I didn't really see that sign. I figured no one was going to jail or fine us if we rode with good behavior. No one did, and we saw a few other ebikes.

The main problem was much of those trails goes thru BLM land where ebikes were banned. I had a chance to send some polite comments to Breckenridge last year when the CIty Council asked for opinions on ebikes. This year, I believe most of that area will be ebike friendly and I believe the feds concur.

Clearly, localities can make their own rules. There are no cars allowed on Mackinac Island in Michigan, and I believe they now ban ebikes too,

 

[Nutella]

Since the CPSA is only concerned with defining what can be sold as a "low-speed electric bicycle", there isn't any mention regarding if they are or aren't motor vehicles, or being equivalent to bicycles. The best thing to come out of the Class laws is redefining ebikes as not being a motor vehicle, which enables them to be ridden on bike paths where motor vehicles are prohibited.

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2011-title15/html/USCODE-2011-title15-chap47-sec2085.htm

 

[Ken M]

Since the CPSA is only concerned with defining what can be sold as a "low-speed electric bicycle", there isn't any mention regarding if they are or aren't motor vehicles, or being equivalent to bicycles. The best thing to come out of the Class laws is redefining ebikes as not being a motor vehicle, which enables them to be ridden on bike paths where motor vehicles are prohibited.

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2011-title15/html/USCODE-2011-title15-chap47-sec2085.htm

There is implicit statements in the federal law that equates compliant ebikes as bikes. If they are considered equal the federal level then is goes to reason that compliant ebikes would be treated as traditional bikes at the state level.

I can pretty much tell that everyone has an opinion on this but no one really seems to state unequivocally what the precedent is. My view is that if a federally compliant ebike is not considered a motor vehicle (no serial numbers, reduced safety stds., etc.) and is regulated by bike safety regulations then a compliant ebike is the legal equivalent of a bike.

Does anyone have anything but opinions on this as it sure seems like that is the way the federal law was intended?

 

[J.R.]

There is implicit statements in the federal law that equates compliant ebikes as bikes. If they are considered equal the federal level then is goes to reason that compliant ebikes would be treated as traditional bikes at the state level.

I can pretty much tell that everyone has an opinion on this but no one really seems to state unequivocally what the precedent is. My view is that if a federally compliant ebike is not considered a motor vehicle (no serial numbers, reduced safety stds., etc.) and is regulated by bike safety regulations then a compliant ebike is the legal equivalent of a bike.

Does anyone have anything but opinions on this as it sure seems like that is the way the federal law was intended?

For the federal government to supersede state law it would require an act of Congress in the form of law. Even then it would be taken to the courts. The supreme court has had many cases involving states rights and the 10th amendment.

https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/amendments/amendment-x

A federal agency of beurocrats (CPSC) put the ebike regs in place. Beurocrats (unanswerable to the electorate) cannot overrule elected representative's constitutionally sound law. Yes federal law does override state law, when its constitutional. Congress hasn't passed any ebike laws that I'm aware of.

If you want to challenge laws or regulations for bikes/ebikes, you should contact an advocate group like People for Bikes. I'm sure there are others.

 

[Ken M]

For the federal government to supersede state law it would require an act of Congress in the form of law. Even then it would be taken to the courts. The supreme court has had many cases involving states rights and the 10th amendment.

https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/amendments/amendment-x

A federal agency of beurocrats (CPSC) put the ebike regs in place. Beurocrats (unanswerable to the electorate) cannot overrule elected representative's constitutionally sound law. Yes federal law does override state law, when its constitutional. Congress hasn't passed any ebike laws that I'm aware of.

If you want to challenge laws or regulations for bikes/ebikes, you should contact an advocate group like People for Bikes. I'm sure there are others.

I'm not trying to challenge any ebike laws, I just think congress has a definition of a legal ebike and it's to be treated as a bike. That certainly seems implicit. I believe People for Bikes has statements that indicate they want the Class regulations to mimic / be equivalent to the federal definition.

I'm just looking for clarity because I do worry that some states may just decide a 500W pedelec is a motor vehicle.