Massachusetts ebike legislation
- Thread starter Dewey
- Start date
Seriously you want to just have the state recognize HR727 as a compliant bike. 3-class legislation is simply poorly thought out. It makes lawmakers feel like they are doing something but it actually is never going to enforceable (stickers really?). The CPSC requires LSEBs to be compliant to HR727 and it simply is one simply definition that worked for over 12 years in almost every state.
tomjasz
Well-Known Member
- Region
- USA
- City
- Minnesnowta
Didn’t your state make mopeds and/or <50cc scooters motor vehicles subject to licensing and insurance.
I’m not a fan of that silly system. But at my age it’s not likely I’ll see and impingement on my builds. Although I do think 28mph is fast enough but there are ZERO safety standards. “Coming to a nanny state near you.” Dewey, that’s comment is NOT in response to you. Just the cynic/curmudgeon me.
I’m not a fan of that silly system. But at my age it’s not likely I’ll see and impingement on my builds. Although I do think 28mph is fast enough but there are ZERO safety standards. “Coming to a nanny state near you.” Dewey, that’s comment is NOT in response to you. Just the cynic/curmudgeon me.
There are safety standards in 1512 that apply to both bikes and ebikes. Recently a new standard was created for the drive systems but I can't remember the document number.
Here are the rules passed on 8/12:
https://www.massbike.org/ebikes
Interesting to note that there is no Class 3 designation in this, although it is potentially to be addressed in the near (?) future.
https://www.massbike.org/ebikes
Interesting to note that there is no Class 3 designation in this, although it is potentially to be addressed in the near (?) future.
Dewey
Well-Known Member
- Region
- USA
- City
- Arlington, Virginia
Yes, this is similar to how the recent New York ebike legislation set its own arbitrary lower speed limit definition for Class 3, but better in that it doesn't ban all ebikes from most state roads with >35mph speed limits as NY does. I doubt this will stop Class 3 sales in Massachusetts
I had a conference call with the CPSC on the federal definition of a "low speed electric bicycle" (LSEB) and the state 3-class "ebike" legislation. In my opinion it was crystal clear that the 3-class legislation was an interstate commerce violation, especially given the Preemptive Clause in HR727 - more stringent state laws than the HR727 definition are supposed to be preempted by default. What they explained to me is that an "LSEB" is not the same as a state defined "ebike" in any of the classes. I specifically ask them then is an LSEB the equivalent of a bike by federal definition (the feds control what is legal for 1st sale and the states are only supposed to regulated "use" of the products compliant to the federal definitions when they exist.
So in my opinion any ebike that is compliant with HR727 (this actually includes all 3 ebike classifications) can be considered the same as a bike for use on all public infrastructure. Obviously this will not be totally clarified until there is a precedent lawsuit but I see no way an HR727 LSEB is not considered a bike.
Flannel Guy
Active Member
- Region
- USA
Better off keeping the motorized bicycle laws currently on the books -ambiguity is currently working in our favor. Only thing these laws really gets us is ability to ride non-adjacent bike paths. Would rather they keep the $25 fine as written for breaking the regs they aren't enforcing. The new law just brings unwanted attention by every town that will feel empowered to say where ebikes can and can't go with enforcement surely to follow.
According to federal law HR727 the defined "low speed electric bicycle" is supposed to be the equivalent of a bike. Not just for safety regulations but for "use" regulation by the states - review of the records does indicate that was the intent of that bill that passed one vote short of full congressional consensus (pretty much unheard of even in 2002 when it passed).
Similar threads
