Know Your State Laws

[The Smart Ped`aleck]

Note: An edited version of this is posted on EBR Guides. This is the un-edited version.

Know Your State Laws
I. Federal vs. State
II. The Urge to Fly Under the Radar
III. Is Classification the Future?
IV. Unexpected Liabilities

Introduction
The laws governing the production and sales of electric bicycles seem to resemble an ant hill. If you live in the ant colony, life is very busy with a bustling of new work, ideas of expanse, product that continues to improve and push the limits of performance and the law. But to the average Joe walking by, it's just an ant hill. Life under the hill has been good for the past 15 years, since electric bikes (ebikes) arose from the promise of evolving battery technology (Lead acid-NiMH-Lithium), and congress was lobbied and passed the first and only bill to define ebikes in federal law. In 2001, the U. S. Congress passed Public Law 107-319, which exempts electric bikes under 750 watts and limited to 20 mph (with operating pedals) from the legal definition of a motor vehicle.2 Inevitably, the joys and secrets under the hill are becoming real world issues, followed by local and state laws arising without any boundaries except the US law itself. In the real life human colony of New York City, electric bike rights have been targeted and prohibited due to young delivery guys riding ebikes like Ant Man (tm) on wheels. This article will help you understand current law, the impact on the individual and to the ebike community.

Federal vs. State
Folks who are considering the purchase of an electric bicycle may have questions about their legal limits and those who already own one, are likely asking if they are relevant. Before one makes a judgment about the fairness or efficacy of the law, let's dissect what the laws says, and gain a foothold of understanding.
Federal law defines the limits of a low speed electric bike, equating it to a bicycle, and bypassing the definition of a motor vehicle only "For purposes of motor vehicle safety standards..." which means that the manufacturers of these bicycles don't have to meet federal equipment requirements, and are instead governed by the manufacturing requirements of the Consumer Product Safety Act. There is no mention of exemption from other federal, state, and local traffic laws, or exemption from the definition of a motor vehicle for other purposes. 3 This means the law applies to the manufacturer's product and sale, avoiding federal safety requirements applying to a motor vehicle such as brake lights, turn signals and braking specifications. The goal of the law was to give businesses a legal framework to define and sell low speed electric bikes without the more stringent Federal classification of a motor vehicle. Ebikes that meet the criteria are considered a "bicycle", do not meet the definition of a motor vehicle, and will be regulated by the Consumer Product Safety Commission. The law also grants the commission authority to add safety requirements to this product. The Federal law supersedes all state laws that equate bicycles to ebikes where the state law is more stringent (lower limits) on power and speed.

Here is a link to the law, you can read it yourself:
http://www.eco-wheelz.com/docs/fed-regulation.pdf

How do the State Laws relate to the 2001 Federal Law? This is a difficult question to answer and know how they apply to you individually. From the Federal Law, one would hope that your purchased ebike is simply classified as a bicycle, with all the rights and privileges allotted to a normal cyclist. However, State Laws are confusing because they may be more restrictive in parts and add other requirements. About 30 U.S. states still have confusing regulations around them. Either the bikes are technically classified as mopeds or motor vehicles, or they have equipment, licensing or registration requirements that cause problems for riders. Thanks to the People-For-Bikes/Bicycle Product Suppliers Association partnership with local advocacy groups, they have been able to make the case for streamlining state regulations so that e-bikes are essentially treated like regular bicycles. 4

For a Newbie to the electric bike world, with a dozen questions about the practical consequence of this 15 year old law, here is the skinny on ebike laws: What you are allowed to purchase and How they can be used?

1. Play it Safe, Make it Easy - E-bike manufacturers will offer you a large variety of styles, types, colors and utility, but the base specifications will be a bike producing less than 750 watts of power (1 horsepower = 746W) , and have its speed limited to 20mph on motor power alone. The majority of US ebikes meet that specification. Manufacturers do this for their own liability. Going this route assures you that your bike was built and sold legally. As a result, you will have about every privilege that a normal bicycle can expect. However, state and local laws may dictate reduced speeds and limited access to bike paths.

2. State and Local Laws dictate your use, but cannot constitutionally supersede the federal law - Any ebike purchased within the 750W/20mph limits has no fear of being under federal motor vehicle classification, nor can any state classify them a motor vehicle. The ebike is considered a 'bicycle' for consumer purposes. However, the State Laws on local bike paths and local thruways may prohibit or limit ebike access. When bike path signs use word such as 'motor vehicles' and 'motorbikes' , the laws are likely referring to gas-ICE motorbikes/dirt bikes/scooters, and not ebikes. Other references to 'motorized bicycles' or 'motorized vehicles' sounds more inclusive and probably are intended for either ebikes or gas mopeds. If in doubt, you always have the option to pedal non-assisted. Even though Federal law grant ebikes a bicycle status, the common consensus found in my research allows local and state law to add additional regulation to pathway and road access, just because "it has a motor". So the Federal laws protects the consumer from the burden of motor vehicle requirements, but not the restrictions to local and state right of ways enjoyed by all non-motored bicycles.
Your local state may have very definite rules as to what is an e-bike, what is a moped, and what is a motorcycle. While ebikes enthusiast don't want the motor vehicle label, it is certain that each state will define some power level and speed where that classification will apply. Your best source of information is to go directly to your state motor vehicle department website, and get a copy of the your local state vehicle codes, with NO EDITING. Only a recently updated official state vehicle codes will contain all the latest changes to the laws. 1 For a link to your state MVA, look here:2
http://eco-wheelz.com/electric-bike-laws.php

3. Can I legally buy/build and ride an ebike that's faster than 20 mph? Yes you can, but you need to know that the ebike is no longer considered equivalent to a bicycle and is subject to other state vehicular classifications. The definitions for electric bikes spanning 20-30mph, and 1-2 horsepower ranges, will vary from state to state, resulting in a no-man's-land consensus about limits for motor vehicle definition. The common label for a 20-30mph, 2-wheeled vehicle with active pedals is a Moped. Other MVA labels include motor scooter, motorbike and dirt bike which may have equivalent power and speed performance, but do not have pedals to assist and move the vehicle.
State laws tend to intermix the source of power as either gasoline ICE or electric drive. This is unfortunate because that neutralizes the environmental advantage of an ebike over an ICE moped. It also misrepresents the contrast in power output levels between an ICE and electric motor system. 50cc gas mopeds/scooters have a 2.5-4 HP rating, while the 20+ mph electric bikes will be 1-2hp, and ride much closer to a normal bicycle compared to a gas powered, 2.5hp moped. E-mopeds will weigh 55-70lbs. Gas mopeds and scooters are typically over 120lbs. E-mopeds are still electric bikes that get valuable power assist from human pedal effort.

The federal law will not prohibit a motor vehicle label and additional restrictions given by the state. States will typically define e-mopeds in the 1000W range (1.5 hp) and speeds attainable to 30mph, and include a few requirements such as a helmet, eye protection, and a driver's license. States may also require title, registration, and insurance for mopeds.

The higher power/speed ebikes will be sold under the following three categories:
Off-Road ebikes - Ebikes made and sold as "off road use only" are legal on private land and in off road trails, but may not technically legal to ride on the road.

DIY Kit ebikes - Ebikes that are home built with a DIY kit, and exceed the 750W/20mph definition, are also allowed to be bought, build, and ridden. DIY kits are throttle activated. Some of the newer systems have PAS options. Ebike kits are not unilaterally prohibited or assigned motor vehicle status, but again, legal classification and road use falls under state law.

Speed Pedelec ebikes - A new classification of bikes called 'Speed Pedelecs' have emerged which technically meet the bicycle definition for a 20 mph ebike. These ebikes are designed to max out at 28 mph. Pedelecs are pedal activated vs throttle activated. The weasel words within the definition says, "20mph on motor alone". Thus, a person who adds their leg power to the motor assist and happens to cruise at 28mph is NOT doing it by motor alone, and therefore the bike is considered to be compliant with the Federal Law. If the rider stops pedaling, the speed pedelec cannot maintain speed. Speed Pedelecs are becoming more popular in Europe and America, which means more models are being offered.

State laws defining electric bikes, mopeds and motorizied bikes vary across the nation. The Wiki link below summarizes the eye-opening differences.7
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_bicycle_laws#United_States

In summary, federal law trumps all States’ laws. That is true with bicycle law, too. States cannot constitutionally pass legislation that reduces or eliminates Federal laws, they can only pass legislation that enacts additional (tighter) restrictions on its people. States can’t define an ebike a bicycle if greater than 750W/20mph, nor can they define an ebike a motor vehicle if less than the Federal Government’s limit of 750 Watts and a top electric-powered speed of 20 MPH.3 This is the Federal definition of a low speed electric bike, which equates it to a bicycle.

The Urge to Fly Under the Radar
A new ebike cyclist will likely experience two conflicts of thought: 1). Will the general public accept my use of this power assist technology, or Will they ridicule and reject me a lazy? 2). Will I stand out to law enforcement by the look of my bike or riding a bit faster than other cyclist on hills and roads? Grappling with these two thoughts will tempt most folks to try and remain unnoticed and ride more responsibly. After I became an advocate of e-transportation on two wheels, enjoying the benefits of power assist commuting, I eventually was a bit put off by this federal law, especially the 20mph limitation. Is 20 mph really practical and justified? Is it not true that many active young people on typical road bicycles are able to actively ride in the 20-25mph range? I discovered that ebikes, with larger tires and disk brakes can comfortably and safety cruise in that range of speed. The standard 2001 Federal law of 20mph, eventually became a practical limitation for an ebike commuter of over 20 miles a day, and caused me to get a bike beyond the federal limits, and making me more aware when riding in the presence of the police. I also ride about a ½ mile section of bike path prohibiting motor vehicles.

I have been able to find ebikes of all speeds, and after years of riding and a reflective posture for the law, I see that lawmakers were thinking less about me and my practical wants as the user, and more about the mass motor vehicle driving public, their perceptions and expectations of 'typical bicycle speeds’ on the roads and paths. So the laws were made to bicycle NORMS, not the potential performance limits for the users.

In my research about ebikes and the law, I cannot begin to justify how often articles about the laws evolved into the various ways and techniques to sneak around public notice and be stealth with the your ebike. The goal is to ride fast and fun, stay away from public awareness, and 'Fly under the Radar'. I have been there and I get the drift. But times are changing. Life under the ant hill is starting to produce more and bigger ants, some on steroids. Sales and production is up. Electric bike kits, DIY enthusiast, long distance commuters, and general drive for value is raising the desire for more options for consumers, wanting speed for fun and function, while developing amnesia for the law. People want to ride their new ebikes, but have the same access to safe pathways as they did the week before on their 100% human bike.

The ebike market is growing steady and moreso, technology is driving performance up and costs down. The market for a green, lifestyle friendly, transportation technology, with GPS, theft ID, cell service and probably skim lattes is now and driving an emerging market. Not to be over obligatory about being legal and duty oriented, but I do call on my fellow ebikers to ride legal, whether ebike, moped or other. Go ahead and build the 1200W ebike of your dreams, but get it insured and licensed if you must. Such compliance will set the precedence for public acceptance of ebikes in general, and build a track record for expansion and mainstreaming of moped-speed ebikes for commuter value driven needs of the future.

The urge to 'Fly under the Radar' can be counter acted with a trendsetting, in the open approach of being fast, cool, and legal, while promoting the technology with pride and legal confidence. Acceptance of a new technology and change to bike culture will never be without resistance, and proven benefits. IMO, it is best for enthusiast to engage the bike culture, lawmakers, environmental advocates, and build some common ground to make transition via the laws an easier path.
If you are a person who enjoys riding a bike casually at a typical bike path speed (10-15mph), and you like the idea of an ebike push up a hill, or relieving a sore knee, then your market for a fully legally defined ebike is very broad and your practical use have few limitations. Most ebikes will meet your needs and expectation. I would estimate that 85% of the electric bikes on the market are 100% compliant meeting the federal definition,. I encourage you to take the plunge and get a good quality ebike and ride more with assist. Do so with the confidence that electric bikes are here to stay, and coexisting with pedestrians and other cyclist will become a normal part of cycling life.

Is Classification the Future?
Efforts to update the current laws are already underfoot. In the fall of 2015, California Gov. Jerry Brown signed into law a bill that modernizes e-bike regulations and ensured that they are treated like traditional bicycles instead of mopeds.6 California established three classes of ebikes:

• Class 1: 750W/20mph max, pedal activated only.
• Class 2: 750W/20mph max, throttle activated only.
• Class 3: 750W/28mph max, pedal activated only. (Speed Pedelec)

Under the Guide Section of EBR, Court has written a full article, dedicated to the new classification approach, which was initiated by the BPSA (Bicycle Product Suppliers Association), supported by PeopleForBikes, and then Calbikes. The initiative was meant to be pro-active with ebike legislation, to establish self-imposed, measureable, distinct classes of electric bikes before states start hearing about anecdotal problems and call the exterminator to spray the whole ant colony.
The hard work to enact this new legislation has been done. Time will tell what amendments will be added. However, a framework for legal definition has been set and ebike producers can promote and sell with confidence.

Below is a figure showing the California bike classes.
https://electricbikereview.com/wp-content/assets/2014/10/electric-bicycle-classes-law-in-california-670x453.jpg

Highlights and comments on the classification:
• The classifications cover both production and labeling of the ebikes by the manufacturer, and the implemented use and access for the riders. The result is that all ebikes owners will officially no longer have the universal access to all fairways that traditional cyclist now enjoy.
• Class 1 makes great inroads to establish set boundaries for off road/natural surface trail access for eMountain bikes. There is fierce resistance from mountain biking purist to allow ebikes on trails. BPSA and IMBA have done good work to justify the impact of class 1 ebikes on natural surface trails, and eliminate the wear-n-tear argument, though IMBA members are not 100% on board.
• Class 2 re-established the 2001 federal definition for an ebike.
• Class 3 expands the interpretation of the Federal Law and pushes opportunity for growth and practical use.
• DIY enthusiasts, with tens of thousands of converted bikes using throttle-only, 20+ mph kits, are now officially labeled Moped class. While these bikes handle and pedal-ride just as safely as the class 3 speed pedelecs, our DIY brothers will be officially kicked out of the ant colony and left on their own for advocacy and legal acceptance in California.
• I would like to see a distinct class 4 for e-mopeds, and remove them from ICE mopeds.
• The corresponding Bikeway Access classification within the chart seems confusing and incomplete. Where is the unique application for class 1 and natural surface riding?
• Maybe the most confusing legal issue facing the e-bike rider is the difference between a bike lane and bike path. A bike lane is a marked section of roadway shared with motor vehicles. Bike paths pretty much universally prohibit the use of motorized vehicles. Still, you will need to research your area. As an example: “A path near our office specifically says “no motorized bicycles.” Yet, when we tracked down an employee who claimed to work enforcement on the path, he said that our e-bike was allowed.” 8
It should be obvious that any transition to new laws and classifications will be imperfect and have growing pains. As an ebike rider and consumer, just be aware that the freedom to come and go will largely be dictated by the class of bike your purchase or decide to build.

Unexpected Liabilities
If a car is at fault in an accident with a bicycle or ebike, their motor vehicle insurance will cover your cost for repair and hopefully few medical expenses. But what happens if YOU are at fault? What happens if you are at fault, and are technically riding an ebike that meets a moped or state motor vehicle definition, and you do not have the vehicle insured, or registered and riding illegally?

So here is where I must give the perfunctory DISCLAIMER, and say nothing I say or advocate in this article should be used for legal advice, but the individual but seek their own legal counsel.

That said, bicyclist and ebike riders alike are bound to the rules of the road, and when followed, everything goes well most of the time. Accidents happen and it is usually the fault of the car, vs the cyclist, and their auto insurance will apply. However, ebikes are new to the road and to the driver’s eye. E-mopeds as means of commuting, and speed pedelecs will be at speeds that raise the risk of accidents. So I would advocate you ride legal within the laws of your state. I would also look into some kind of liability rider with your home owner’s policy, which covers your liability and theft. Get your bike registered; wear your helmet, eye protection, whatever is required by state law so that if an accident occurs and you are at fault, there is no legal recourse. Even if you own a 750W/20mph ebike that meets the definition of a bicycle, any at-fault cyclist may still be denied coverage by stingy insurance companies who want to support their clients. Your health insurance will cover your medical bills, but the costs of an expensive ebike may be lost.

For many ebike owners, doing their ebike thing usually becomes more than a hobby and good exercise on the weekend with the riding club. It becomes a lifestyle, a utility machine, a darn fun piece of technology on two wheels. As the industry grows and becomes more popular, these unique bikes will be a daily part of many lives and mold into the framework of legal society. The ant farm will become the homestead.

Good Rides Y’All,
Ridan E. Bieke
The Smart Ped`aleck

References:
1. Eric Hicks, Is My E-Bike Legal? USA EBIKE Law (April 23, 2013), https://www.electricbike.com/electric-bike-law/
2. ECO WHEELZ, Electric Bike Laws & Regulations, http://eco-wheelz.com/electric-bike-laws.php
3. Morgan Lommele, e-bikes campaigns manager, Clearing up e-bike legislation in the U.S., May 26, 2015, http://www.peopleforbikes.org/blog/entry/clearing-up-e-bike-legislation-in-the-u.s
4. Doug McClellan, California governor signs law modernizing electric bike regulations, October 8, 2015 ,
http://www.bicycleretailer.com/north-america/2015/10/08/california-governor-signs-law-modernizing-e-bike-regulations#.VtfYxOZ_XX4
5. PA Electrics, Electric Bike Specialist, Legislation, Laws and Regulations, Electric Vehicles
http://www.paelectrics.com/legislation.html
6. Electric-Bikes.com, Electric Bicycles: Legal Issues, http://www.electric-bikes.com/bikes/legal.html
7. Wikipedia , Electric bicycle laws, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_bicycle_laws#United_States
8. Electric Bike Action Magazine , Pedal-assisted bicycles and the Law,
February 20, 2014 , http://www.electricbikeaction.com/e-bike-laws/
9. Electric-Bikes.com, 10 E-bike Laws,
August 6, 2015, http://www.electricbikeaction.com/e-bike-laws/
10. Alex Logemann and Morgan Lommele, New e-bike law passes in California
October 07, 2015, http://www.peopleforbikes.org/blog/entry/new-e-bike-law-passes-in-california

 

[dogman dan]

One point glaringly wrong. Other than that one point, great writing.

No state can supersede the federal law,, that's true. But that law pertains ONLY to selling e bikes, and calling them a "bike". That law has nothing whatsoever to do with use of said bike.

The state motor vehicle statues can do any damn thing they want to regulate all vehicles using the public roadway. And they do. States rights.

So you do have to know your own states motor vehicle statutes for e bikes, or mopeds if there is no bike law at all in your state.

The prime example is the state of New York, where even now, all bicycles with a motor of any kind are illegal to ride on public road. Not enforced much, but there it is. You can sell ebikes all you want in NY, and call them bikes if they meet the fed law. Can't ride that bike in NY legal, unless you are on private property.

A lot of states do have an e bike law, that more or less mirrors the federal law. Some require pedals, some don't. California just revamped their law, and there is political push to have similar law in other states, particularly New York.

When you look for your states law,,, get your information from an official state website. There is so much misinformation out there on other sites, some just wrong from the start, others outdated now that a law got changed last year, etc.

 

[MadRhino]

The farmer asked the legislator:

-Cows and horses and sheep all eat the same grass, yet they are making very different shit. How can that be ?

-I don't know, there must be some physiological reason.

-How can I trust and obey your law, if you don't know shit ?

 

[The Smart Ped`aleck]

One point glaringly wrong. Other than that one point, great writing.

No state can supersede the federal law,, that's true. But that law pertains ONLY to selling e bikes, and calling them a "bike". That law has nothing whatsoever to do with use of said bike.

The state motor vehicle statues can do any damn thing they want to regulate all vehicles using the public roadway. And they do. States rights.

So you do have to know your own states motor vehicle statutes for e bikes, or mopeds if there is no bike law at all in your state.

The prime example is the state of New York, where even now, all bicycles with a motor of any kind are illegal to ride on public road. Not enforced much, but there it is. You can sell ebikes all you want in NY, and call them bikes if they meet the fed law. Can't ride that bike in NY legal, unless you are on private property.

A lot of states do have an e bike law, that more or less mirrors the federal law. Some require pedals, some don't. California just revamped their law, and there is political push to have similar law in other states, particularly New York.

When you look for your states law,,, get your information from an official state website. There is so much misinformation out there on other sites, some just wrong from the start, others outdated now that a law got changed last year, etc.

Dogman,

I looked at these laws and mulled over them a long time. If you noticed, your article is my first reference. Understanding the nuance can be taken differently, so I'll respond with an open mind.

What I hear you stating is that the Federal law applied only to the SALES of ebikes, and that the 20/750W definition is guarantees the label of a low-speed electric bike, for sales in the states. The federal law also refers to regulating them as normal BICYCLES. There has to be a bridge from the consumer safety/sales side, to the regulation/MVA/motor vehicle side of the states.

The phase, Federal supersedes state law means what?
- States cannot allow bikes to be sold at a 30/1000W rating and call them a low-speed ebike with bicycle rights? - true
- Can a state classify a 10/100W ebike as a motor vehicle and deny the rights as a normal bicycle? - I don't think so. While some states may do that, I think it can be argued in court because the federal law says it supersedes where state law is "more stringent" , and because the federal law specifies it to be regulated as a bicycle. There has to be a "LINE" between a motor vehicle and a bicycle in state law. I interpret the Federal to say the line is at 20/750W,and anything less is essentially a bicycle.
- So my take on state rightss is more about access, to trails/paths/street, and not motor vehicle definition.
- Note that SALES implies safety standards, defining a level of road worthiness of the product. The federal law, by extension, prevents states from defining 20/750W ebikes as motor vehicles, because federal law has already defined motor vehicle safety standards to the states, and these 20/750W ebikes are not required to meet them.

Here is section (d).
(d) This section shall supersede any State law or requirement with respect to lowspeed
electric bicycles to the extent that such State law or requirement is more
stringent than the Federal law or requirements referred to in subsection (a).

Note is says "ANY state law" that is more stringent, OR requirements per part (a), which is about the consumer safety requirements.

However, you are right... States make and enforce their own various laws for anything not under the motor vehicle classification. So technically, you would have to agree that states could outlaw all bicycles from roadways if they want? My point is that if bicycles have rights, so do 20/750W ebikes by extension.

 

[Ykick]

I’ve yet to see a published state/federal statute which would easily convince a beat officer one way or the other. It’s so convoluted and up to “interpretation” and while you might prevail in a court case that does nothing to help in the moment of a traffic stop.

What I suggest to anybody riding eBikes in a grey area - bank up a war chest in the event you ever need to post arrest bonds, impound fees and ultimately legal representation for court.

With the 10 yrs of MTA fees I’ve saved riding eBikes in NYC, I’ll gladly take the litigation route with a high priced Manhattan lawyer as my advocate. In fact, that's probably the only way this continuing BS will ever be settled.

 

[gogo]

This document spells it out better than anything else I've come across:
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CRPT-107hrpt5/html/CRPT-107hrpt5.htm

Section 1 of the Federal law pertains to:

… the standards by which they are produced …

The Federal law told States that the defined devices are not considered motor vehicles by the Feds for the purposes of regulation of the standards by which they are produced. The States are free to regulate, or prohibit the use of said devices in public.

Section 2. Motor vehicle safety standards

Section 2 clarifies that in transferring jurisdiction over
low-speed electric bicycles to the Consumer Product Safety
Commission, those bicycles will no longer be regulated as motor
vehicles subject to the jurisdiction of the Department of
Transportation and the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration.

The States can't make laws more stringent than the Fed laws concerning the safety standards of [Fed defined] ebikes offered for sale to the public. The States can define ebikes and regulate their use any way they wish. The States can regulate the use of a 20/750 ebike, which was sold subject to CSPC ebike safety regulation, as a motor vehicle.

 

[teklektik]

So here is where I must give the perfunctory DISCLAIMER, and say nothing I say or advocate in this article should be used for legal advice, but the individual but seek their own legal counsel.

+1

This subject has been hashed and rehashed many times. There is nothing confusing about HR727 - the CPSC deals with product safety - that is their only purview. Please read their mandate. They took control of low powered electric bicycles to take them out of the reach of the NHTSA and motor vehicle classification with regard to consumer product safety - not USE. There is no 'bridge' or 'extension' between federal product safety regulations and statutes pertaining to USE - which are exclusively the purview of the individual states.

Beyond that - HR727 simply defines the classification of 'low power electric bicycle' for the purposes of applicability of other regulations - this establishes an unambiguous meaning to that term - the act of classifying a product is meaningless without other supporting regulations that refer to that specific definition and term exactly.

The failure to understand the complete dichotomy in terminology and jurisdiction between the State and Federal regulations is what causes so much erroneous reasoning about 'extensions', 'superseding', and 'trumping'. Unless your State statutes say something to the effect of "'low power electric bicycle' is as defined in Federal statute HR727", then the federal definitions for unrelated purposes in unreferenced documents by unrelated agencies in unrelated branches of the government cannot possibly be construed to apply.

Simply put: there are are NO federal rules regarding USE nor do they or can they provide 'default' USE legality at the state level. Or - more to the point: no beat cop enforces Federal product manufacturing safety regulations and as a user you will absolutely NEVER be cited for violating HR727. By the same token HR727 does not give you the 'right' to ride an ebike of any power under any condition. Unrelated.

Please see this commentary by a product safety attorney for a legal view:
Legal analysis: Confusion over electric bike regulations - in particular:

The other problem is that these federal regulations only affect the manufacture and first sale of these devices, not where, when, how, who and under what other conditions (age limits, licenses, insurance, registration etc.) they can be operated. The federal law has no “preemptive effect” over such state laws.

 

[gogo]

Would this sum it up?:

The States can't prevent you from buying CPSC compliant ebikes, but they can require stricter safety regulation for ebikes that you operate upon their roads.

 

[teklektik]

Yep - in terms of the safety equipment.

More importantly, the State can simply deny you right to operate it on the roads and ways at all - regardless of safety equipment. This is the unfortunate state of affairs in NY.

The CPSC tries to ensure that you are protected as a consumer from buying unsafe products, but it doesn't and can't force the states to allow you to use them.

• The Principle of Separation of Powers: State and Federal...
  They both use the word 'bicycle' but the agencies involved are concerned about 'bicycles' in very different and non-overlapping ways. Further, (and here's the part that fries people's brains) to the the extent that there are differing pragmatic considerations relating to the different purposes of the agencies, the Federal and State agencies may actually have different definitions of 'bicycle'. This may be confusing, but it is not contradictory -- there are no Terminology Police that insist all definitions must be the same...

Seeing now the actual role of the CPSC and HR727, this statement is worth mentioning:

3. Can I legally buy/build and ride an ebike that's faster than 20 mph? Yes you can, but you need to know that the ebike is no longer considered equivalent to a bicycle and is subject to other state vehicular classifications.

This flatly states that there is a clear relationship between riding an ebike that can go faster than 20mph and the State classification of the vehicle as a 'bicycle'. This is simply not true in the general case.

Each state has it's own definition of bicycle, power-driven cycle, moped, or whatever AS THEY PERTAIN TO USE - the CPSC consumer protection definition of 20mph/750W relating to manufacture and sale has no bearing. It makes no difference if you build it or buy it - or if it can go 50mph or has 3000W - it's exclusively the specific definition of 'bicycle' by each state that matters. Obviously, if your state has a 20mph limit, then the statement is true - but because of state statute - not HR727.

 

[dogman dan]

Furthermore, any city can also regulate even stricter laws, for bike paths, trails, sidewalks, etc.

Thanks guys, for backing me up, the fed law is only for product safety law. So when you get sued for selling one, it's not a motor vehicle. Doesn't have to pass moped standards, just bike standards.

But it's really confusing, when misinformed vendors of ebikes post that law on their website, and try to convince customers that the bike is legal to ride on the street because of that. It depends on state and local laws, where you can ride it.

 

[The Smart Ped`aleck]

Great input all. I was about to admit full defeat and stand corrected....but...to clarify and question...

This was an awesome link gogo;
This document spells it out better than anything else I've come across:
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CRPT-107hrpt5/html/CRPT-107hrpt5.htm

teklekik:
We agree that USE is defined by the states and local communities?

We agree that the law protects 20/750 bikes from motor vehicle definitions per the federal definition, and puts regulation of performance to the federal safety commission?

I concede to be true, that fed definition of LSEB does NOT equate to a bicycle...that is up to the states if they allow the same access and use for both. The fed definition of LSEB applies to the section of the fed statute.

My issue is the "prevented DEFINITION" of motor vehicle: a federal to state BRIDGE, which does carry over to the states.

I contend that the fed law not only supercedes/disallows lesser safety requirements for ebikes by the states, but it alone defines what a motor vehicle ebike is not, anything less than 20/750 limit.

Could an ebike rider win a fight in any state court, based upon the fed law, if he was given a motor vehicle violation for a 20/750 bike? I think so.

I suppose this is mostly a red herring since ebikes will be classified/regulated by the states as "electric bikes, LSEB, Mopeds" etc, which are not motor vehicles.

It becomes a battle over words if on the bike path....

I stand corrected.

 

[teklektik]

This was an awesome link gogo;
This document spells it out better than anything else I've come across:
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CRPT-107hrpt5/html/CRPT-107hrpt5.htm

Not to be unduly snippy, but it is frankly staggering that you could write that entire article without actually having read the Federal regulation which you were discussing.
It's good you find it interesting.

We agree that the law protects 20/750 bikes from motor vehicle definitions per the federal definition, and puts regulation of performance to the federal safety commission?

The mention of 20mph/750W is simply a means to categorize a particular kind of bicycle by the CPSC. How it would otherwise be classified by other agencies is not relevant.

I concede to be true, that fed definition of LSEB does NOT equate to a bicycle...that is up to the states if they allow the same access and use for both. The fed definition of LSEB applies to the section of the fed statute.

NO!
Wow.
HR727 absolutely makes 'low speed electric bicycles' a kind of 'bicycle' - that is whole point of HR727!

Again - I don't want to be harsh, but have you bothered to look at any of the regulations? Please see "Title 16, part 1512" of CPSC regulations relating to bicycle safety regulations. HR727 put low speed electric bicycles in this pre-existing group of regulations - as a kind of bicycle. All the various safety requirements for braking, seats, etc that apply to bicycles thus apply to electric bikes. Again - the simple definition of 20mph/750W is a categorization of the vehicle that in itself is meaningless as a regulation - it simply allows the OTHER EXISTING bicycle regulations to be brought to bear because that kind of vehicle is now a 'bicycle'.

You seem to have some issue grasping the idea that different agencies have different definitions for the same term or word as appropriate for their mandate. This definition of bicycle - be it low speed electric or not - only has meaning within the context of the CPSC regulations. Like state traffic statutes, there is a 'definitions' section that categorizes vehicles by identifiable attributes so that the word 'bicycle', 'moped', motor vehicle' can be used unambiguously in the rest of the statutes or regulations (and they are the substantive elements of the regulations - not the few words in the categorization). So - in state traffic statutes you will find a specific definition of 'bicycle' and 'motor vehicle' in the 'definitions' section. That definitions section is implicitly - and sometimes explicitly - referenced in the other regulations, but it is nonsense to assume that magically the word 'bicycle' in a state statute with its own definition somehow references a definition by some Federal agency.

Be it state or federal the included definitions have scope only in the regulations or statutes in which they reside in order to make the documents self-contained and unambiguous - precisely to avoid the kind of cross-governmental references you are claiming.

My issue is the "prevented DEFINITION" of motor vehicle: a federal to state BRIDGE, which does carry over to the states.

I contend that the fed law not only supercedes/disallows lesser safety requirements for ebikes by the states, but it alone defines what a motor vehicle ebike is not, anything less than 20/750 limit.

What? Goobledegook.
HR727 specifically says that states cannot enact more stringent safety regulations for the purpose of sale and manufacture. A State cannot say "You can't sell ebikes here that are over 100W and go more than 10mph". This would infringe on the power, authority, and responsibility of the CPSC. A state can say anything else they please about using the bike.

Moreover, there is no BRIDGE from Federal to State for 'motor vehicle' as you claim - the States define 'motor vehicle' without any relationship to classifications by the NHTSA. Here is the definition for my state:

“Motor vehicle” means any vehicle propelled or drawn by any nonmuscular power, except aircraft, motor boats, road rollers, baggage trucks used about railroad stations or other mass transit facilities, electric battery-operated wheel chairs when operated by physically handicapped persons at speeds not exceeding fifteen miles per hour, golf carts operated on highways solely for the purpose of crossing from one part of the golf course to another, golf-cart-type vehicles operated on roads or highways on the grounds of state institutions by state employees, agricultural tractors, farm implements, such vehicles as run only on rails or tracks, self-propelled snow plows, snow blowers and lawn mowers, when used for the purposes for which they were designed and operated at speeds not exceeding four miles per hour, whether or not the operator rides on or walks behind such equipment, motor-driven cycles as defined in section 14-286, special mobile equipment as defined in section 14-165, mini-motorcycles, as defined in section 14-289j, and any other vehicle not suitable for operation on a highway;

This is what State statutes mean when they mention 'motor vehicle' - not some definition by a Federal agency associated with safety regulations. No "BRIDGE".

This is so simple: when your butt is parked on an ebike in the showroom, the CPSC is in control. After you buy it and walk it out the door, the State is in control. This is not confusing, there is no room for interpretation. These are two different aspects on 'bikeness' - one relating to SALE, one relating to USE. Simple. State laws define a bicycle, moped, motor vehicle, or whatever, there is no category for 'things that are not'. The statutes reference the definitions in the statutes, not someplace else, or by unstated inference things that are not something in a Federal regulation...

Could an ebike rider win a fight in any state court, based upon the fed law, if he was given a motor vehicle violation for a 20/750 bike? I think so.

Only if the judge and ADA were idiots or just giving you an 'A' for effort. Certainly not based on the law. If there is no State 'use' classification for your motorized vehicle, it's illegal by default and Federal regulation cannot force the States to allow that illegal vehicle on the roads and ways, render it immune from enforcement by officers paid by the State, and immune from consequences resulting from its lack of compliance to State regulations when adjudicated with monies from the State. This wishful thinking sounds like some kind of vehicular diplomatic immunity...

All kinds of silly things happen in traffic court, I have been seriously and unquestionably at fault but the ADA and judge let me off "because I gave then a good laugh on an otherwise tough day". Anecdotes about traffic court are a dime a dozen and certainly provide no compelling precedent. 'I think' I might get off a bike ticket as well - but not based on the law...

I gave you a link to a legal review of the situation above. The discussion there is simple and cohesive and doesn't suffer from self-serving hopeful statements about '...win a fight in any state court... I think' - not exactly a incisive legal argument.

This matter is too straightforward to waste any more time discussing. It's good you finally got to read HR727 and I hope you take the time to read the legal reference above.

 

[dogman dan]

Re definitions, When looking up the state law on mopeds, bike with helper motor, or E bike, whatever they call it.

Start at the definitions section of the state motor vehicle statutes.

Yeper,,, for use,,, States do their own definitions. And they are whatever the state legislature feels like doing.

The Feds have zero control over it, except for the club of holding back fed highway money. So far, they don't use the club for e bikes. Just things like speed limits for cars and trucks on the interstate.

 

[The Smart Ped`aleck]

Tek-

Too bad you had to be a snarky about it. Hey, I try to learn and concede when corrected... I'm sorry I stretch your patience.

This was an awesome link gogo;
This document spells it out better than anything else I've come across:
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CRPT-107hrpt5/html/CRPT-107hrpt5.htm

Not to be unduly snippy, but it is frankly staggering that you could write that entire article without actually having read the Federal regulation which you were discussing.
It's good you find it interesting..

Of course I read the regulation and referenced it in my article. Did you not see that link? My link only has the summary 4 point section and not the full preamble, so I commented and thanked gogo for the link to the full text.

We agree that the law protects 20/750 bikes from motor vehicle definitions per the federal definition, and puts regulation of performance to the federal safety commission?

The mention of 20mph/750W is simply a means to categorize a particular kind of bicycle by the CPSC. How it would otherwise be classified by other agencies is not relevant.?

You really can't bring yourself to even agree on the first sentence, can you?

This is from HR727 (which I did happen to read)
Section 2. Motor vehicle safety standards

Section 2 clarifies that in transferring jurisdiction over
low-speed electric bicycles to the Consumer Product Safety
Commission, those bicycles will no longer be regulated as motor
vehicles subject to the jurisdiction of the Department of
Transportation and the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration.

Just as you advocate, and I AGREE, that an ebike, Low speed electric bike, is defined as a bicycle by the CPSC, and are now regulated by the CPSC, the above paragraph from HR727 say explicitly, " those bicycles will no longer be regulated as motor vehicles subject to the jurisdiction of the Department of Transportation and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration."

I understand this to mean CPSC defined and sold LSEB of 750/20 or less, are NOT under the federal motor vehicle definition and their regulation, but subject to state regulations as something else. "No longer regulated as motor vehicles..." To me, that creates an IMPLICIT bridge to the state regulation.

Can a state regulated a normal bicycle as a motor vehicle? No, they are bicycles. Must the state regulate a LSEB as a bicyle, even though they are equated to bicycles by the CPSC? No. I think we are both saying that ebikes can be regulated by states under something else, other than motor vehicle regulations as defined by NHTSA.

The "bridge/transfer" hang up you seems to advocate is that even though CPSC defines and controls sales of ebikes under "bicycle" guidelines, and are required by the federal law HR727 to equate them to a bicycle, you see no obligation by the states to regulate then like normal bicycles. I conceded that point, but would advocate that the federal requirements are given consideration. It is probably more accurate to say the "bridge has been removed" between federal and state for ebikes per motor vehicle standards.

I concede to be true, that fed definition of LSEB does NOT equate to a bicycle...that is up to the states if they allow the same access and use for both. The fed definition of LSEB applies to the section of the fed statute.

NO!
Wow.
HR727 absolutely makes 'low speed electric bicycles' a kind of 'bicycle' - that is whole point of HR727!.

What I meant by "NOT equate": states are not required to regulate ebikes/LSEB as bicycles.

... HR727 put low speed electric bicycles in this pre-existing group of regulations - as a kind of bicycle. ... Again - the simple definition of 20mph/750W is a categorization of the vehicle that in itself is meaningless as a regulation - it simply allows the OTHER EXISTING bicycle regulations to be brought to bear because that kind of vehicle is now a 'bicycle'.

... This definition of bicycle - be it low speed electric or not - only has meaning within the context of the CPSC regulations. Like state traffic statutes, there is a 'definitions' section that categorizes vehicles by identifiable attributes so that the word 'bicycle', 'moped', motor vehicle' can be used unambiguously in the rest of the statutes or regulations (and they are the substantive elements of the regulations - not the few words in the categorization). So - in state traffic statutes you will find a specific definition of 'bicycle' and 'motor vehicle' in the 'definitions' section. That definitions section is implicitly - and sometimes explicitly - referenced in the other regulations, but it is nonsense to assume that magically the word 'bicycle' in a state statute with its own definition somehow references a definition by some Federal agency.
Be it state or federal the included definitions have scope only in the regulations or statutes in which they reside in order to make the documents self-contained and unambiguous - precisely to avoid the kind of cross-governmental references you are claiming.

ehemm... of course state and federal agencies will define various vehicles explicitly for the purpose of their said regulations. But I feel you are taking this to an extreme in this case. While the CSPC has a very clear and well detailed definition of a "bicycle" as given by your link, you are being emphatic that this definition means something else to the states, that they don't look at the CPSC and somehow may decide to call it and define it as something else??? I believe the CSPC statute informs the states, and that they bring those definitions into their regulations because they make sense and reflect the products.

... This is so simple: when your butt is parked on an ebike in the showroom, the CPSC is in control. After you buy it and walk it out the door, the State is in control. This is not confusing, there is no room for interpretation. These are two different aspects on 'bikeness' - one relating to SALE, one relating to USE. Simple. State laws define a bicycle, moped, motor vehicle, or whatever .... The statutes reference the definitions in the statutes...

I agree, and the state can't regulate ebikes as motor vehicles per NHTSA standards.

... This matter is too straightforward to waste any more time discussing.

I agree.

 

[dogman dan]

Quite possible NHTSA does apply to vehicle definitions when discussing the interstate system. But the State can still call a bike with a motor a motor vehicle, without losing it's highway funding. New Mexico does this. What the state does, is make bicycles use the shoulder of the interstate. Not the lane. But vehicles unable to travel 45 mph cannot use the lane. Not sure if "mopeds" by NM state definition can use the shoulder of the interstate. But if you look like a bike, chances are they don't care.


ALLWAYS, the state does have complete control over what operates on the public roadway. They can and do regulate the use of any kind of vehicle or behavior of a person on the public roadway. This does not matter if it's an ebike, bike, scooter, moped, motorcycle, car, truck, tractor, horse, horse and wagon, dog cart, farm trailer, mobile home being moved, AND,dude walking. You don't even have to be in a vehicle of any kind, to be regulated by the motor vehicle statutes.

But it's very convenient for retailers to quote the fed law, particularly when the state the customer is in regulates e bikes stricter than the fed definition. Like New York state, where all e bikes are illegal to operate on a public road, sidewalk, or multiple use pathway.

Better still, many a cop has been backed down by whipping out a copy of that fed law. :wink:

When I'm asked about this at work, the reply is that the customer needs to consult his own state motor vehicle statutes.

 

[The Smart Ped`aleck]

Well said Dogman, and I agree in every respect.

Maybe the best thing we can say about the federal law's effects upon States laws is that it can INFORM states that ebikes are being specified and sold under bicycle regulations.

Hopefully your state will regulate the use accordingly.

 

[dogman dan]

Actually, I hope it doesn't. Right now, since I have a drivers license, I can go 30 mph legal, and there is not watt limit on it. I kinda like that. I'm a moped, and they can't be bothered to regulate mopeds.

But since I ride polite and look like a bike, nobody, including cops on bicycles, gives me any shit about riding on multi use trails.

Laid back and mellow is New Mexico style, but don't move here and make it like California.

I bet that 30 mph option will vanish if they pass an ebike law. 750 w is kind of lame, if you are riding in the rocky mountains, so I really like that no watt limit, on a fire road.

 

[gogo]

Here's an pertinent situation in terms of definitions, law enforcement actions, and judicial interpretation. In Nebraska, DUI laws don't pertain to mopeds because they aren't motor vehicles.
http://journalstar.com/news/local/c...cle_0ef1b48e-c510-5d2e-bdd7-c640dea2e759.html

 

[The Smart Ped`aleck]

Actually, I hope it doesn't. Right now, since I have a drivers license, I can go 30 mph legal, and there is not watt limit on it. I kinda like that. I'm a moped, and they can't be bothered to regulate mopeds.

But since I ride polite and look like a bike, nobody, including cops on bicycles, gives me any shit about riding on multi use trails.

Laid back and mellow is New Mexico style, but don't move here and make it like California.

I bet that 30 mph option will vanish if they pass an ebike law. 750 w is kind of lame, if you are riding in the rocky mountains, so I really like that no watt limit, on a fire road.

Man, a guy can't say anything on this forum without being misinterpreted. What I HOPE for is that state's will recognizes ebikes as bicycles and not lists ebikes of 15mph/300W as a motor vehicles, as an example.

Regulation is coming people..... If and when electric drive has mass economic access and has available safe infrastructure, then edrive will explode and regulation will continue to follow.

I do not like CA's new ebike law. It throws the DIY community under the bus. It ignores legit moped range ebikes as legit non-motor vehicle transportation. This too with change. It was crafted by the manufacturers to sell bikes.

I too love to ride 1000W/30mph moped power with a scalable PAS option in wattages to keep it bike-ish for workouts. "Flying under the radar" on ebikes is likely in its golden age. Let's hope technology and freedom advance the options.

 

[teklektik]

Here's an pertinent situation in terms of definitions, law enforcement actions, and judicial interpretation. In Nebraska, DUI laws don't pertain to mopeds because they aren't motor vehicles.
http://journalstar.com/news/local/c...cle_0ef1b48e-c510-5d2e-bdd7-c640dea2e759.html

Good one. The rationale for court's decision is apparent and by example provides an opportunity to demonstrate the error in the OP's claim that Federal law makes it impossible for a state to classify an electric bicycle as a motor vehicle or that the NHTSA is involved in any way.

If you have ever examined state traffic statutes then the path to determining the veracity of the 'moped claim' begins as Dogman stated - with the definitions. Here is a quick rundown of how they hook together - both for our moped friend and ebikes:

Here is the applicable part of the Nebraska statute:

60-123.
Motor vehicle, defined.

Motor vehicle means any vehicle propelled by any power other than muscular power.

Motor vehicle does not include

• (1) mopeds,
• (2) farm tractors,
• (3) self-propelled equipment designed and used exclusively to carry and apply fertilizer, chemicals, or related products to agricultural soil and crops, agricultural floater-spreader implements, and other implements of husbandry designed for and used primarily for tilling the soil and harvesting crops or feeding livestock,
• (4) power unit hay grinders or a combination which includes a power unit and a hay grinder when operated without cargo,
• (5) vehicles which run only on rails or tracks,
• (6) off-road designed vehicles not authorized by law for use on a highway, including, but not limited to, golf car vehicles, go-carts, riding lawnmowers, garden tractors, all-terrain vehicles, utility-type vehicles, snowmobiles registered or exempt from registration under sections 60-3,207 to 60-3,219, and minibikes,
• (7) road and general-purpose construction and maintenance machinery not designed or used primarily for the transportation of persons or property, including, but not limited to, ditchdigging apparatus, asphalt spreaders, bucket loaders, leveling graders, earthmoving carryalls, power shovels, earthmoving equipment, and crawler tractors,
• (8) self-propelled chairs used by persons who are disabled,
• (9) electric personal assistive mobility devices, and
• (10) bicycles as defined in section 60-611.

60-637.
Moped, defined.

Moped shall mean a device with fully operative pedals for propulsion by human power, an automatic transmission, and a motor with a cylinder capacity not exceeding fifty cubic centimeters which produces no more than two brake horsepower and is capable of propelling the device at a maximum design speed of no more than thirty miles per hour on level ground.

60-611.
Bicycle, defined.

Bicycle shall mean

• (1) every device propelled solely by human power, upon which any person may ride, and having two tandem wheels either of which is more than fourteen inches in diameter or
• (2) a device with two or three wheels, fully operative pedals for propulsion by human power, and an electric motor with a capacity not exceeding seven hundred fifty watts which produces no more than one brake horsepower and is capable of propelling the bicycle at a maximum design speed of no more than twenty miles per hour on level ground.

The most important thing that I want to call out is that not only are these the actual statutes, but they are written in simple language devoid of legalese. You do not need a law degree to read them and you don't need an ebike shop or anyone else to interpret what they say with twists of logic and homemade legal principles. The whole story is laid out simply in just a few (admittedly very long) sentences.

The structure of this statute is typical of traffic statutes in other states.

1. It begins with the blue part that makes everything on the road with a motor a "Motor Vehicle". This is an unambiguous statement that really can't be misinterpreted. It does not rely on or refer either implicitly or explicitly to any Federal statute or authority. This is the State speaking. This captures in one simple statement every possibility without the legislature needing to imagine all the kinds of vehicles that do or may exist.
2. The next part is a list of exclusions (the red part). These are the things that the legislature has reviewed and represent Use Cases that are specifically NOT motor vehicles and should be exempted from all the laws and restrictions associated with that classification. This is a very detailed and explicit list of vehicles using very specific terms. Those terms (e.g. 'moped') are themselves each defined very specifically in this same 'definitions' section of the statute.
3. Here we find 'moped' listed and the exact term defined. (The green parts.) This is clearly and explicitly excluded from being a motor vehicle (our moped friend could not be charged DUI).
4. Interestingly, we also see that a "bicycle" (the fuchsia part) is also not a "motor vehicle".
5. A critical point here is that the term "bicycle" is very carefully defined by the State (more fuchsia) and not open to interpretation as in the vernacular or any Federal law that also uses the term "bicycle". This definition seems to draw heritage from the CPSC definition but is not exactly the same and it is specifically this State definition NOT the CPSC or NHTSA that gives it the power of law regarding USE (not sales or safety). If this definition was absent - as it is in some states - the vehicle would not be a bicycle, and so not excepted, and so would be a "motor vehicle". Other ebike-excepting clauses in other states may be for vehicles other than "bicycle" such as "motor-assisted cycle", etc, but the motor vehicle exception scheme is the same.

These statutes are the stuff of law which is very specific with explicit references and definitions. Nothing is "implicit". The problem in states like NY is that there is no excepting clause for ebikes so they become illegal as unregistered motor vehicles. This doesn't take special action by the State, the categorization occurs by the very specific and all encompassing State definition of motor vehicle.

• Hypothetically: Even if the CPSC 'low speed electric bicycle' definition was somehow to have visibility in the state statutes (which it doesn't), the fact that the exact term 'low speed electric bicycle' does not appear in the list of motor vehicle exceptions means 'low speed electric bicycles' are not excepted and thus are motor vehicles. So, beyond the issue of separation of power and document scope, the typical structure of traffic statutes makes the mere existence of a CPSC vehicle definition completely meaningless because it is unreferenced by the statutes.

The structure of these statutes allows the beat cop to do his job without a law degree.

• He has a simple checklist:
  • Is it on the road?
  • Does it have a motor?
  • Is it one of the defined exceptions?
  YES?, YES?, NO? Then it's a motor vehicle.
  
  You will find here another statute that says that all motor vehicles must be registered, so the last item on his checklist is:
  • "Does the driver have a registration?"
  NO? Then it's an unregistered motor vehicle. Done. "Here's your ticket - stop whining about the CPSC - why do I care?"

It is the statute requiring motor vehicle registration that is the 'hook' into the realm of the NHTSA and its mandate of vehicle safety - the NHTSA plays no role at all up until the vehicle becomes a motor vehicle by state law and must be registered - at that point it must comply with DMV safety regs developed as a partner with the NHTSA. For ebikers, by the time we get to indirect NHTSA involvement through the DMV, we are already a "motor vehicle" and requiring registration - a place most don't want to go.

Ebikers want their vehicles to be EXCEPTED up front by the very specific state traffic laws so that they don't get near Federal safety standards that come with registration and DMV involvement.

The "confusion" about ebike status comes largely from people who talk about 'the Federal law' and 'the State Law' as single monolithic concepts with little understanding of the separation of power and authority of the various agencies both State and Federal. These folks contrive all sorts of 'principles' to 'prove' the result they want without ever looking at the original statutes and regulations and seeing how they work. Reading a re-statement of a regulation on an ebike website or a simplified version of the statutes on a DMV site is not reading the original law and seeing the mandates and supporting structure. The flip side is the confusion that arises from exclusively reading a single sentence without context and imagining how it 'must logically' be 'bridged' to other agencies that use the same words - regardless of how unrelated they may be in actuality.

The state traffic statutes are written in plain language and their very explicitness tends to make them straightforward. That said, it seems some states have poorly written laws that are difficult to figure out. Often the on-line access methods seem themselves to make finding content daunting. Still, that does not mean that you can throw up your hands and proclaim that the Federal Law 'trumps" the state by default so your bike is legal.

Also - FWIW:

• Your best source of information is to go directly to your state motor vehicle department website, and get a copy of the your local state vehicle codes, with NO EDITING. Only a recently updated official state vehicle codes will contain all the latest changes to the laws. 1 For a link to your state MVA, look here:2
  http://eco-wheelz.com/electric-bike-laws.php

  As we saw above, it is the State traffic statutes that determine road use legality - not the DMV. This is just more confusion about the roles of the statutes and agencies. If you want to read the traffic statutes, go to your state government (legislature) and read the statutes. Done.
  
  In my experience, these predigested DMV summaries of the traffic statutes are very often out of date, imprecise, and often simply incorrect. By definition, Motor Vehicle Departments deal with motor vehicles not vehicles that are excepted - the kind in which ebikers have interest. And more to the point, they are not involved with any aspect of enforcement of traffic statutes - rather licensing, registration, safety, and taxes. Providing information regarding general traffic statutes is simply not a priority and has little if anything to do with their mandate.
  
  • As an example of this DMV shortfall, the OP's DMV link to Nebraska flatly states that a moped is a kind of bicycle. As the actual statute above states, it is not - it's an entirely different kind of vehicle altogether. The distinction is important because the very specific 'bicycle' terminology used in the DMV version gives the moped 'bicycle privileges' regarding other use - where it can be ridden, etc., where the actual statute says nothing of the kind and would preclude using it on sidewalks where a 'bicycle' might be allowed. Moreover, the DMV statute search yields no information on 'bicycles' at all - motorized or otherwise. So - in this one example, a glaring error and complete omission of a vehicle type of particular interest.
  Reading re-stated traffic use statutes by a department uninvolved with creating or enforcing those statutes is simply inadvisable and clearly not "the best source".

Anyhow - although consulting your own legal counsel is always good advice, I hope this example helps you get a handle on researching this yourself. One thing is for certain though, you need not look further than the statutes in your own state.