Lawmakers hear bill to define and create safety training for personal electric vehicles

Lede: The House Transportation Committee took testimony on HB 715 on Feb. 17, a bill intended to classify newer personal electric vehicles (PEVs) — including high‑speed electric bicycles, scooters and single‑wheel devices — and to create a safety‑certificate program modeled on existing snowmobile and OHRV safety instruction.

Nut graf: Witnesses said technology has outpaced law, leaving police, trail managers and drivers unsure how to treat powerful e‑powered devices. Supporters urged a measured approach that defines vehicle classes, preserves ADA‑related mobility needs, and creates safety education for operators; DMV and DOT staff said a stakeholder‑driven study would be the appropriate next step.

Representative Linda Gold, sponsor, said riders are using a widening array of PEVs and that dealers sometimes sell high‑powered electric motorcycles or other devices as if they were bicycles. She proposed a safety‑certificate program, a study council to develop definitions and training, and statutory language to help classify devices for roads, trails and multi‑use paths.

Dave Topham, representing the New Hampshire Rail Trails Coalition, testified in support and recommended that the committee create a stakeholder group to define the vehicles, how they operate and where they should be allowed. Topham stressed that speed alone is not the only factor; how a device is used and where are central concerns. He suggested an online safety certificate modeled after existing safety programs for off‑highway recreational vehicles (OHRVs) and snowmobiles. Topham said such a course could be developed with national partners at relatively low cost.

Department testimony: Jerry Bedard for the New Hampshire Department of Transportation said DOT has no formal position on the bill but reminded the committee that current law already defines electric bicycle classes (class 1, 2 and 3) and that class‑3 e‑bikes are limited to 20 mph for pedal‑assist operations. DMV Director Marc Roscoe said DMV and other states are studying similar issues and that DMV is willing to work with a stakeholder group to develop training and registration approaches.

Committee members queried whether ADA‑eligible mobility devices are covered; sponsor and witnesses said ADA‑related assistive devices would be treated separately and that the bill is focused on transportation‑style PEVs rather than children’s recreational toys. Members also asked about age restrictions; the sponsor said safety‑certificate thresholds (for example, age 12 and older for online courses) mirror other vehicle training programs but that details should be set by a working council.

Ending: The committee closed the hearing and signaled interest in a study approach with subject‑matter experts to craft definitions, enforcement priorities and a cost‑neutral safety‑certificate program before considering statutory changes.