Mr. David Hirsch
International Ecological Systems, Inc.
24599 Pacific Coast Highway, Suite B201
Malibu, CA 90265

Dear Mr. Hirsch:

This responds to your letter in which you asked what impact a proposed amendment to the Federal definition of low speed vehicle (LSV) would have on a State definition if the Federal proposal were published as a final rule. Your question is addressed below.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration established Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 500, Low speed vehicles, to ensure LSVs are equipped with an appropriate level of motor vehicle equipment for the purposes of safety. The agency defines an LSV as a 4-wheeled motor vehicle, except a truck, whose attainable speed in one mile is more than 20 miles per hour (mph) but less than 25 mph (49 CFR § 571.3(b)). On December 8, 2003, the agency published a notice of proposed rulemaking to amend the definition of LSV, in part to limit the class to small vehicles (68 FR 68319). We proposed to limit the class of LSV to vehicles whose gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) is less than 1,134 kilograms (2,500 pounds). That proposal has not been published as a final rule.

In your letter you noted that California has a definition of LSV that limits the class to vehicles that have "an unladen weight of 1,800 pounds or less[. ]" CA Vehicle Code § 385.5. You also noted that under California State law, an LSV operated or parked on a public roadway must comply with FMVSS No. 500. See, CA Vehicle Code § 21253. You then asked what impact the proposed amendment to the Federal definition of LSV would have on the California law, if the proposed amendment were published as a final rule.

We note that if we issued our proposed amendment as a final rule, there would be an inconsistency in the definition of "low speed vehicle" between the California statute and the Federal motor vehicle safety standards. Under the California statute, the weight limitation aspect of the definition of LSV would be dependent on the unladen weight of the vehicle, while under Federal law it would be dependent on GVWR. This would create the possibility of vehicles being considered different types of vehicles under State and Federal law.

Under 49 U.S.C. § 30103(b), when a Federal motor vehicle safety standard is in effect, a State or a political subdivision of a State may prescribe or continue in effect a standard applicable to the same aspect of performance of a motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment only if the standard is identical to the standard prescribed under this chapter. Different motor vehicle safety standards apply depending on how a vehicle is classified, i.e. , its vehicle type. If a State law classifies a vehicle differently than Federal law, preemption is an issue under 49 U.S.C. § 30103(b) if: (1) the State classification results in the vehicle being subject to a State standard applicable to the same aspect of performance regulated by a FMVSS, and (2) the State standard is not identical to the FMVSS. In such an instance the State safety standard would be preempted.

If you have any further questions, please contact Mr. Calamita at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Jacqueline Glassman
Chief Counsel

ref:500
d.3/17/05