You are right that it has to be a state (Federal) standard otherwise interconnected trails have an issue. Can you imaging the chaos driving a car would be if each community had their separate rules? Also, onerous or confusing rules will prohibit tourism. For example, NJ's new rules would make me never visit NJ to ride their trails. I am VERY happy you will share the raw data. This I think is exceedingly important for the trail authorities to help determine the right policy. This is a great series!!!
The issue is that the federal government views e-bikes as consumer products rather than motor vehicles. They defer to the states' departments of transportation, defining them as motor vehicles. States further define their usage on trails beyond roads. The 3-class system that People for Bikes has championed and most states have adopted falls short on what is really needed. Plus, states vary in how they interpret the classes.
You are right that it has to be a state (Federal) standard otherwise interconnected trails have an issue. Can you imaging the chaos driving a car would be if each community had their separate rules? Also, onerous or confusing rules will prohibit tourism. For example, NJ's new rules would make me never visit NJ to ride their trails. I am VERY happy you will share the raw data. This I think is exceedingly important for the trail authorities to help determine the right policy. This is a great series!!!
The issue is that the federal government views e-bikes as consumer products rather than motor vehicles. They defer to the states' departments of transportation, defining them as motor vehicles. States further define their usage on trails beyond roads. The 3-class system that People for Bikes has championed and most states have adopted falls short on what is really needed. Plus, states vary in how they interpret the classes.