HB 87-ELECTRIC-ASSISTED BICYCLES  2:46:42 PM CHAIR CLAMAN announced that the final order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 87, "An Act relating to electric-assisted bicycles." 2:47:16 PM ASHLEY CARRICK, Staff, Representative Adam Wool, Alaska State Legislature, on behalf of prime sponsor, answered questions during the hearing on HB 87. She referred to questions that the committee had requested follow up on pertaining to HB 87 and recommended that Legislative Legal and Research Services provide answers to those. She referred first to questions that were posed on Section 2 of the bill which pertained to municipality regulations for e-bikes used on sidewalks. CHAIR CLAMAN stated that the question pertaining to Section 2 of the bill was whether municipalities would be prohibited from regulating the use of e-bikes on sidewalks, should HB 87 pass. 2:48:43 PM ANDREW DUNMIRE, Attorney, Legislative Legal and Research Services, Alaska State Legislature, answered questions during the hearing on HB 87. He opined that, should HB 87 pass, municipalities would not be restricted in regulating the use of e-bikes on their own pathways. He referenced Section 3 of the bill that specifies that municipalities may enact regulations for e-bikes for their locality. 2:49:35 PM CHAIR CLAMAN recalled an earlier question posed by Representative Vance whether it would be beneficial to include the three-tiered classification such as exists in the State of California. 2:50:13 PM MR. DUNMIRE stated his understanding of the question to be whether an amendment classifying e-bikes in a three-tiered structure would be beneficial, and he suggested that such an amendment would be a policy decision to be determined by the legislature. He suggested that, should the legislature deem such a classification system to be unnecessary, his recommendation would be not to include a definition since it would limit how e-bikes are defined. 2:51:14 PM REPRESENTATIVE VANCE added that her constituents had endorsed including the three-tiered definition of e-bikes as proposed by the People for Bikes to achieve uniformity among different states' regulations. She suggested that the question of whether to amend the bill to include the three-tiered classification should be at the discretion of the bill sponsor, and she offered her understanding that including a three-tiered definition may not provide any legal benefit. 2:51:48 PM REPRESENTATIVE ADAM WOOL, Alaska State Legislature, as prime sponsor, answered questions during the hearing on HB 87. He offered additional information to describe the various types of vehicles and assisted bicycles. He stated that there exist bikes which can be operated by a throttle without pedaling and that those are not considered in the proposed bill. He added that it remained a policy decision for the legislature to determine whether to include the three-tiered classification system or to combine class 1 and class 3 e-bikes. He added that it would be difficult to ascertain motor size and whether a pedal assist to engage a motor by simply looking at an e-bike. He added that motor size would be capped at [a maximum] of 750 watts and the speed capped at 20 miles per hour. 2:53:56 PM CHAIR CLAMAN recalled an earlier question posed by Representative Eastman pertaining to vehicles that have two, non-tandem wheels and how they relate to the proposed bill. MR. DUNMIRE explained that a Segway, which consists of two tandem wheels on which a rider balances, would be included in the definition, and that a three-wheeled mobility cart, such as one might see at a grocery store, would not. REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN stated his understanding of the intent of the bill would be to allow devices such as a Segway be allowed to operate on a sidewalk and asked why [a three-wheeled mobility cart, such as one might see at a grocery store] would not. During the discussion, he asked whether HB 87 would forbid grocery store scooters from being operated on a sidewalk. REPRESENTATIVE WOOL answered that HB 87 permits only those devices which have operable pedals to be classified as e-bikes, and that neither a Segway nor an assistive cart would be classified as an e-bike [should HB 87 pass]. He added that a tricycle with an electric assist might be included in the definition should it have operable pedals. 2:56:49 PM CHAIR CLAMAN recalled an earlier question posed by Representative Snyder in which she referenced assistive technology as defined in AS 45.45.600 and whether HB 87 pertained to any of those devices, which she had suggested that it would not. MR. DUNMIRE stated his belief that Representative Snyder's assertion that HB 87 would not pertain to assistive technologies described in the statute was correct. 2:57:32 PM REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN suggested that replacing the word "bicycle" with "cycle" would allow for devices with one to three wheels to be categorized as e-bikes under the proposed bill and would include tricycles and unicycles. REPRESENTATIVE WOOL asked whether Representative Eastman had suggested that e-cycle be the referenced terminology instead of e-bikes for devices with one to three, but not four, wheels as currently written in the proposed bill. He offered to consider the change to the language if there existed sufficient public interest on the matter, and if there existed many individuals operating electric assisted three-wheeled bikes. He stated his preference to maintain the word "bicycles" in the proposed bill. 2:59:10 PM CHAIR CLAMAN asked Ms. Carrick whether the committee and invited testimony had answered all the questions previously posed by the committee. MS. CARRICK stated her belief that, for the most part, it had, and she invited additional questions should they arise. She added that Representative Kurka had asked whether gas- or fuel- operated motors would be included in the definition of e-bikes. REPRESENTATIVE WOOL explained that fuel-driven assisted bicycles with an engine size of 50 cubic centimeters (cc) or less are classified as a motor-driven cycle. 3:00:19 PM MS. CARRICK explained that terms are defined in the bill. In Section 5, on page 3, line 22 is the definition of an electric personal motor vehicle that differentiates between a Segway and a motorized grocery cart. She added that in Section 6, on page 3, line 28 motor vehicle is defined, and on page 4, line 2, motor-driven cycle is referenced. She explained that an engine which is 50 cubic centimeters (cc) or less would be covered and those greater than 50 cc would be classified as a motorcycle. She pointed out that there exists a difference between a "motorcycle" and a "motor-driven cycle" and suggested that there exists some confusion between the two. [HB 87 was held over.]