New Utah Bill Defines Multiple-Mode and Out-of-Class Electric Bicycles. (May 2024)

[Papa]

New Utah Bill Defines Multiple-Mode and Out-of-Class Electric Bicycles
By: Rachel Fussell, eMTB policy

The bill is the first in the nation to define multiple-mode products and their labeling requirements while establishing truthful advertising requirements for OCEVs sold as “e-bikes.”
On May 1, 2024, Utah State Bill HB 85 went into effect after being signed into law on March 21, making Utah the first state to proactively address issues posed by certain electric vehicles. The bill includes a definition of multiple-mode electric bicycles and also more clearly defines out-of-class electric vehicles (OCEVs). Multiple-mode electric bicycles are bicycles capable of switching between the three class modes. During PeopleForBikes’ 2024 Bicycle Leadership Conference, Utah Representative Jeff Stenquist, one of the sponsors of the bill, discussed this landmark legislation with PeopleForBikes Policy Counsel Matt Moore.

“The recent proliferation of electric vehicles with multiple operational modes, or modes that exceed the power and speed limitations of a low-speed electric bicycle, has led to calls for a regulatory response from land managers and state legislators,” said Moore. “PeopleForBikes answered that call by working to pass House Bill 85.”

The impact of this bill is positive for both the bicycle industry and consumers. The bill is the first in the nation to define multiple-mode products and their labeling requirements while establishing truthful advertising requirements for OCEVs sold as “e-bikes.” This clarification will help legitimize actual electric bicycles that fit into the three-class system while clarifying gray areas around some switchable products. The bill breaks new ground by requiring sellers of vehicles that are not electric bicycles to inform consumers of that fact if they promote their products as “electric bikes” or “e-bikes.”
LABELING
Because labeling of electric bicycles is a matter of state law, multiple-mode, electric-assisted bicycles must be labeled accordingly. PeopleForBikes has worked to ensure that labeling is uniform across various states; however, the Utah bill (which refers to multiple-mode electric bicycles as “programmable electric-assisted bicycles”) advanced quickly to become law and states:

A Utah-based manufacturer or seller shall ensure that a programmable electric-assisted bicycle is equipped with a conspicuous label indicating the class or classes of electric-assisted bicycle of which the programmable electric-assisted bicycle is capable of operating.

Note that the Utah bill limits the application of the labeling requirement for multiple-mode electric bicycles to “Utah-based” manufacturers and sellers. Utah requires labeling as to “class or classes” and it’s not clear whether labeling as to highest class will satisfy this requirement or if all classes must be included on a label.
PeopleForBikes is currently advocating in two other states for labeling requirements for multiple-mode electric bicycles as the highest class they are capable of operating in, and we encourage manufacturers to do the same. Labeling multiple-mode e-bikes in this manner will send a clear message of support for land managers’ efforts to allow access for Class 1 electric bicycles on natural surface, non-motorized trails where traditional bicycles are already allowed.

OCEV DEFINITION AND TRUTHFUL ADVERTISING REQUIREMENTS
Additionally, Utah adopted additional language that defines OCEVs and what does not qualify as an electric bicycle. Within the bill, the definition of an “electric assisted bicycle” does not include:
(v) any other vehicle with less than four wheels that is designed, manufactured, intended, or advertised by the seller to have any of the following capabilities or features, or that is modifiable or is modified to have any of the following capabilities or features:
(A) has the ability to attain the speed of 20 miles per hour or greater on motor power alone;
(B) is equipped with a continuous rated motor power of 750 watts or greater;
(C) is equipped with foot pegs for the operator at the time of manufacture, or requires installation of a pedal kit to have operable pedals; or
(D) if equipped with multiple operating modes and a throttle, has one or more modes that exceed 20 miles per hour on motor power alone.
Beginning on May 1, when the law goes into effect, any seller of a new or used vehicle that is powered by an electric motor vehicle with less than four wheels (that is not an electric-assisted bicycle) will need to clearly and conspicuously provide the following disclosure to any prospective consumer at the time of sale and in any advertising materials, online website, or social media post promoting the vehicle:

"THIS VEHICLE IS NOT AN "ELECTRIC ASSISTED BICYCLE" AS DEFINED BY UTAH MOTOR VEHICLE CODE AND IS INSTEAD A TYPE OF MOTOR VEHICLE AND SUBJECT TO APPLICABLE MOTOR VEHICLE LAWS IF USED ON PUBLIC ROADS OR PUBLIC LANDS. YOUR INSURANCE POLICIES MAY NOT PROVIDE COVERAGE FOR ACCIDENTS INVOLVING THE USE OF THIS VEHICLE. TO DETERMINE IF COVERAGE IS PROVIDED YOU SHOULD CONTACT YOUR INSURANCE COMPANY OR AGENT."
Additionally, knowingly advertising or selling an out-of-class electric vehicle as an electric bicycle, electric bike, electric-assisted bicycle, or e-bike without including the disclosure notice constitutes a deceptive trade practice. These requirements apply to all sellers, not just those physically located in Utah, and include online advertising on websites and social media. If a seller falsely advertises a vehicle in violation of this provision, either the state or any person (a consumer, business, or organization) can file a lawsuit against the seller under Utah law. Failing to include the required disclosure allows a court to find that a deceptive trade practice has occurred, without the need for additional evidence. If the court finds the seller engaged in a deceptive trade practice, it can issue an injunction against the practice, award damages of $2,000 or actual damages (whichever is greater) and award attorney fees and costs.

 

[Bengy22]

So while obviously written because of the surron emoto style bikes doesn't this make all ebikes illegal?

Additionally, Utah adopted additional language that defines OCEVs and what does not qualify as an electric bicycle. Within the bill, the definition of an “electric assisted bicycle” does not include:
(v) any other vehicle with less than four wheels that is designed, manufactured, intended, or advertised by the seller to have any of the following capabilities or features, or that is modifiable or is modified to have any of the following capabilities or features:
(A) has the ability to attain the speed of 20 miles per hour or greater on motor power alone;
(B) is equipped with a continuous rated motor power of 750 watts or greater;
(C) is equipped with foot pegs for the operator at the time of manufacture, or requires installation of a pedal kit to have operable pedals; or
(D) if equipped with multiple operating modes and a throttle, has one or more modes that exceed 20 miles per hour on motor power alone.

Because of the line:

or that is modifiable or is modified to have any of the following capabilities or features:

Could seemingly apply to any ebike, even the 250w EU emtb's can have a speed chip or new motor swapped in which would make them fall into this and thus not a "electric assist bicycle"

 

[wturber]

So while obviously written because of the surron emoto style bikes doesn't this make all ebikes illegal?


Because of the line:

Could seemingly apply to any ebike, even the 250w EU emtb's can have a speed chip or new motor swapped in which would make them fall into this and thus not a "electric assist bicycle"

Yes. That is ambiguous language given that anything is modifiable. But clearly the intent isn't to make all ebikes illegal. If so, then why have all of this complication? I'd assume that the interpretation in court would come down to some "reasonable person" interpretation. And I would think that would come down to how much trouble and cost the "modification" would entail. For instance, moving a jumper or changing a controller setting when these things are easily user accessible would probably be considered by most people to be easily "modifiable." But having to hack the controller physically or via software, or having to change out major hardware components should probably not be interpreted as violating the intent of the rule.

Link to the actual statute: Utah Code Section 41-6a-102

 

[neptronix]

The pattern for Utah lawmaking on ebikes has been to sloppily copy/paste from other states.
There's numerous holes and flaws in them for each round of laws they've passed, including this one.

Here's a local take:

Also, cops don't really know the ebike laws, except on certain popular trails in salt lake / utah county, where a small 'problem with ebikes' exists. Elsewhere, nobody cares, i see not so legal vehicles on 2,3, and 4 wheels out here in the suburbs of the SLC area quite often on the road, on trails etc.. but there aren't enough of them to create a 'problem'.

 

[wturber]

The pattern for Utah lawmaking on ebikes has been to sloppily copy/paste from other states.
There's numerous holes and flaws in them for each round of laws they've passed, including this one.

Here's a local take:

Also, cops don't really know the ebike laws, except on certain popular trails in salt lake / utah county, where a small 'problem with ebikes' exists. Elsewhere, nobody cares, i see not so legal vehicles on 2,3, and 4 wheels out here in the suburbs of the SLC area quite often on the road, on trails etc.. but there aren't enough of them to create a 'problem'.

I get tired of people discussing the three classes and confusing "assistance only while pedaling" with "no throttle". This guy even says, "no throttle at all". But that isn't what the law states. In fact, the word "throttle" is often never used. You can certainly have a throttle so long as it only operates if you are pedaling. I guess these people are trying to simplify concepts for the audience. But you shouldn't simplify to the degree that you are inaccurate.

This guy gets a number of things wrong in his reading and interpretation of the new law. If you are going to make a video of this type, you really should be more careful and precise - especially when one of your complaints is the lack of precision and clarity in the law. His misreading just cloud things up more.

 

[Papa]

The pattern for Utah lawmaking on ebikes has been to sloppily copy/paste from other states.

It's crystal clear what's happening in many states. An organization labeled People For Bikes (PFB) has been making the rounds during legislative powwows and actively lobbying for these changes. I know, because they landed in Boise in 2017, and nothing been the same since.

 

[wturber]

It's crystal clear what's happening in many states. An organization labeled People For Bikes (PFB) has been making the rounds during legislative powwows and actively lobbying for these changes. I know, because they landed in Boise in 2017, and nothing been the same since.

Correct. This is an industry promoting group and they are the reason we have the three class scheme that is a common standard in most states. They provided model legislation that was relatively easy to sell to state legislatures. The key point wasn't so much to provide good law, but was to allay fears of electric motorcycles gone wild and to clear the way for the marketing and sales of ebikes.

I think we are now into phase 2 - backlash. The backlash is mostly coming from abuse of the laws and the abundance of higher powered "e-bikes" that are actually electric scooters or motorcycles and are more powerful and faster than any of the bikes in the three classes. The sad thing is that old laws are generally adequate. Imagine how quickly ebike stores would have to change their procedures if one of their customers got hit up with a major traffic citation and citations for no insurance etc. that came to the cost of the bike. That kind of unhappy customer isn't good for business. But my bet is that most people buying non-class high powered ebikes know that they don't meet the legal requirements. So this labeling stuff won't fix much other than provide some liability shield for the sellers.

 

[LewTwo]

It's crystal clear what's happening in many states. An organization labeled People For Bikes (PFB) has been making the rounds during legislative powwows and actively lobbying for these changes. I know, because they landed in Boise in 2017, and nothing been the same since.

Apparently they made a trip through Texas as well. The definitions of various vehicle types seem intentionally written to be vague and confuse the issue.

8) "Moped" means a motor vehicle that is equipped with a rider's saddle and designed to have when propelled not more than three wheels on the ground, that cannot attain a speed in one mile of more than 30 miles per hour, and the engine of which:
(A) cannot produce more than five-brake horsepower; and
(B) if an internal combustion engine, has a piston displacement of 50 cubic centimeters or less and connects to a power drive system that does not require the operator to shift gears.

As I am ancient fossil, when I think of a "Moped" then I think of the circa 1960 Allstate Moped. The term "moped" came from the fact it had both 'pedals' and a 'motor'. Best I remember one had to start off pedaling the bike to get the 2 cycle motor to turn over and start . Somewhere along the line they have dropped the pedals from the legal definition. It seems to me that they should have used a different term at that point.

(1) "Class 1 electric bicycle" means an electric bicycle:
(A) equipped with a motor that assists the rider only when the rider is pedaling; and
(B) with a top assisted speed of 20 miles per hour or less.
(2) "Class 2 electric bicycle" means an electric bicycle:
(A) equipped with a motor that may be used to propel the bicycle without the pedaling of the rider; and
(B) with a top assisted speed of 20 miles per hour or less.
(3) "Class 3 electric bicycle" means an electric bicycle:
(A) equipped with a motor that assists the rider only when the rider is pedaling; and
(B) with a top assisted speed of more than 20 but less than 28 miles per hour.
(4) "Electric bicycle" means a bicycle:
(A) equipped with:
(i) fully operable pedals; and
(ii) an electric motor of fewer than 750 watts; and
(B) with a top assisted speed of 28 miles per hour or less.
(5) "Top assisted speed" means the speed at which the bicycle's motor ceases propelling the bicycle or assisting the rider.

So if I remove the pedals from my Electric bike then it becomes a Moped and I can ride it up to 30 MPH (vs 28 MPH)?

Sec. 664.002. LABELING.
(a) A person who manufactures or sells an electric bicycle shall apply a permanent label to the electric bicycle in a prominent location that shows in Arial font in at least 9-point type:
(1) whether the electric bicycle is a Class 1, Class 2, or Class 3 electric bicycle;
(2) the top assisted speed of the electric bicycle; and
(3) the motor wattage of the electric bicycle.
(b) A person who changes the motor-powered speed capability or engagement of an electric bicycle shall replace the label required by Subsection (a) to show accurate information about the electric bicycle.

I submit that nothing in 9 point Arial Font could ever remotely be consider "prominent" regardless of the location. The quotes in this message are in a 9 point sans-serif font.

Now just illustrate how ridicules this gets ...

(11) "Motor vehicle" means a self-propelled vehicle or a vehicle that is propelled by electric power from overhead trolley wires. The term does not include an electric bicycle or an electric personal assistive mobility device, as defined by Section 551.201.

Sounds more like the definition of a San Francisco Trolley Car than a Motor Vehicle. I do not know of any of those in Texas but there may be somewhere I guess.

 

[Superb_Raccoon]

"Motor vehicle" means a self-propelled vehicle or a

Sounds more like the definition of a San Francisco Trolley Car than a Motor Vehicle. I do not know of any of those in Texas but there may be somewhere I guess.

SF Trolley cars are not self powered. They grab a cable that is under the roadway. The electric buses with overhead power lines might be what you are thinking of.

Trolley cars cars traditionally have the following two characteristics:

Rails
External power source. Horses, mules, cables, overhead electric.

It's as fun as defining e-bikes accurately!

(in jest, to demonstrate how silly laws are, not to say you are wrong)

 

[LewTwo]

SF Trolley cars are not self powered. They grab a cable that is under the roadway. The electric buses with overhead power lines might be what you are thinking of.

I totally missed that wee little 'or' and you are correct about the trolley cars vs. buses.
I sit corrected.

By the way there is another section of the Texas code that deals with golf carts, neighborhood vehicles and low speed vehicles that is just as convoluted and confusing.