National Heavy Vehicle Regulator

2014 Review of the Motor Vehicle Standards Act 1989

1Direct response to the options discussion paper

The efficiency and effectiveness of the Motor Vehicle Standards Act (MVSA) can be improved in a number of areas. The NHVR’s responses to the questions posed in the Options Discussion Paper are provided in section two of this submission. There are four key areas that the NHVR are keen to have further dialogue with Commonwealth on to explore options for improvement. Specifically they include:

1.1Supply to market

Many heavy vehicles in Australia only receive their final body fitment, or other customisation, at the time that they are sold by a dealer to a transport operator. Previous State-based regulators have adopted different policies as to when they considered a heavy vehicle to be completely manufactured and the Commonwealth’s regulatory agenda has not always been consistent in this regard

The NHVR is supportive of Commonwealth developing a nationally consistent position on when a vehicle is considered supplied to market. This is of significance to the NHVR as it dictates when the Regulator’spowers commence in relation to reviewing anymodification of a heavy vehicle and when the in-service vehicle standards are applicable.

The NHVR encounters recurrent definitional difficultiessurrounding the boundary between when a vehicle has ceased being ‘manufactured’ and when it has entered into an ‘in-service’ status.

1.2Importation of special purpose vehicles

The NHVR supports improvements in relation to the importation of special purpose vehicles. The requirement for In-principle Support Applications to be processed by the NHVR in consultation with the Commonwealth and individual registration authorities creates a level of administrative burden that can be made more efficient.

The NHVR hasviews on options to improve this aspect of the Regulator’s business processes and how it interacts with the Commonwealth. The NHVR would welcome further discussion with the Commonwealth in this area.

1.3Decision making

With the commencement of the NHVR there is an opportunity to further review the decision making frameworks associated with many of the Commonwealths committees and sub-committees, in particular where such decisions relate solely to management of heavy vehicles.

The NHVR would welcome the opportunity to enter into further dialogue with the Commonwealth about the development of alternative decision making processes to facilitate red tape reduction and efficiencies in implementation of significant vehicle standards reforms.

1.4Ongoing Commonwealth role

ADR’s must be capable of meeting industry needs. It is necessary in some circumstances that Australia modify and adopt international standards for our operational environment. In all other respects we should align to UN Regulation. In some instances Australian standards are higher than the UN standards. It is important that Australia continue to maintain the ADR’sensuring our ability to adapt and create a more productive environment for the management of the heavy vehicle fleet.

The NHVR creates an opportunity, through the Heavy Vehicle National Law (HVNL) and Heavy Vehicle (Vehicle Standards) National Regulation (HV(VS)NR), for the Commonwealth to create further efficiencies. The NHVR would welcome theopportunity to work constructively with the Commonwealth in addressing some of the themes and directions proposed in the paper to reduce regulatory burdens on consumers and industry.

2Responses to options discussion paper questions

Further to the above direct response to your call for submissions, please accept additional answers to questions posed in the Options Discussion Paper in the below table.

Question No. / Question / Comments
5. Is there a problem?
5.1 / Have the problems with the current situation been reflected accurately and are there other problems that should be addressed? / The review paper raises many questions that are appropriate highlighting a number of gaps, including those outlinedabove in regards to supply to market, special purpose vehicles, decision making and the ongoing role of the Commonwealth, in particular with regard to the commencement of the NHVR.
7. What policy options could be considered?
7-1 / What are the benefits or costs of refining the risk based approach to the regulation of vehicles entering the Australia market? / This approach works well for main stream major manufacturers but smaller volume manufacturers may consume a disproportionate number of the department’s resources.
Requires a stronger regulatory framework with readily imposed sanctions.
7-3 / Does a case still exist for Australian Government intervention in vehicle standards? / The NHVR is of the view that regulatory intervention is still required in the interest of safety, environmental and consumer protection, particularly given that no manufacturing of light vehicles will occur in Australia post 2017.
The regulatory intervention of the Commonwealth has been a very significant intervention that should therefore continue.
Setting and ensuring safety standards are applied for Australia is an important outcome that the Commonwealth should continue and strengthen its current role given the benefits to the Australian vehicle market, industry and consumers.
7-4 / Could the Australian Vehicle Standards Rules be used as an alternative to the national standards? If so, what would be the necessary approach to minimise the regulatory burden, industry compliance costs and inconsistent application across states and territories? / With the introduction of the NHVR theoretically this is now a feasible option for heavy vehicles as ‘in-service’ vehicle standards can be managed through the Heavy Vehicle (Vehicle Standards) National Regulation (HV(VS)NR).
The NHVR would welcome the opportunity to explore and work cooperatively with the Commonwealth on how best to incorporate design and vehicle standards requirements in the ADR’s into the HVNL and the HV(VS)NR.
7-5 / Are there non-regulatory ways of achieving the same policy objectives of road safety, environment, security, and adequate consumer choice? / Regulated minimum standards are required to ensure vehicle theft prevention and environmental protection and that vehicles are safe.
Manufacturers are then better placed to make decisions about higher standards to meet consumer demand for safer and more environmentally friendly vehicles. Competition then drives consumer choice based on features that exceed the minimum standards. ANCAP – is a good example, however without the base safety requirements to leverage from, the results may well be negated.
7-6 / What other legislative ‘fixes’ to the Act do you consider necessary? /
  • Policy matters that impinge on in-service vehicles. For example:
  • clarification of when a vehicle is supplied to market - at which point do Commonwealth powers cease and NHVR powers commence in relation to in-service heavy vehicles;
  • clarification of when NHVR modification laws apply;
  • clarification of when; a vehicle is complete, when its identification plate has been fitted to signify that the vehicle meets the Identification Plate Approval (IPA) for that vehicle; and that any changes subsequent to the manufacturer certifying that the vehicle is complete (fitting of an Identification Plate) requires its own separate approval/certification. Note: Appropriate schemes exist for this function (SSM/ VSB6).
  • Further strengthening of the Act to ensure that the Australian legislation reduces capacity for legislative overlapsuch asjurisdictions introducing requirements for vehicle standards outside the Commonwealth certification system. (Application should be considered for all heavy vehicles and especially for all rigid special purpose vehicles such as mobile cranes, drilling rigs and concrete pumps).
  • Further strengthening of the Act is required in regards to the definition of special purpose vehicles such as mobile cranes, drilling rigs and concrete pumps, particularly where they are mounted to a truck based chassis. Clear and strong definition of ‘truck based’ and what it includes and excludes (built on an existing truck base versus specific platform type vehicles).

7-10 / What regulatory services under the Act could be delivered through private sector or other organisations? / The NHVR is of the view that the Commonwealth could create type approvals for certain categories of special purpose vehicles (Model and Type), such as cranes, to reduce the administrative burden when manufacturing or importing.
For example, where a crane (or other SPV) has been imported it couldbe added to an approval list whereby a fee couldbe paid and the approval thenissued subject to the vehicle meeting the type approval.
This would be a self-declaration by the applicant and be subject to verification by a weigh and measure or registration inspection.
7-11 / What regulatory mechanisms should be in place to ensure that motor vehicles are effectively recalled when safety concerns arise? / Ensure linkages to consumer protection legislation are strong and viable – penalties for not taking appropriate action should be strong. These penalties tend to be more effective under Consumer Protection Law than vehicle standards law.
Recalls should be clearly stated as part of any IPA to ensure design and quality of the components, especially safety components, meeting the relevant design standard throughout the vehicle’s life cycle.
7-12 / What costs and benefits do you see from providing a legislated role for the vehicle safety standards regulator in vehicle safety recalls?
7-16 / Is there benefit in providing for the approval of modules of design/ assembly of a vehicle? How could this be done to ensure the certification is valid for a range of later added componentry and bodies? / The NHVR recommendsthat type approvals be permitted for special purpose vehicles which would significantly reduce the regulatory burden whereby applicants would not be required to apply for an In-principle Support Application from the NHVR for each individual vehicle seeking to be imported.
Modules of design assembly would need to specify final options and standards(size, mass power etc.) as well as integration of components.
Key components (e.g. couplings) should have the final product specified with each component identified.
7-24 / Do you agree that the concessional options could be grouped into risk categories to allow the possible consolidation of the scheme? If so, do you agree with the model proposed in this review? / The NHVR supports the concept of grouping types of imports based on risk as proposed in the paper. For special purpose vehicles included in scheme 3, vehicle standards will require development and management by a Commonwealth certification system that identifies what standards vehicles must meet for road use in Australia. It should also clarify the vehicles that can be imported, related to; their special purpose, availability in Australia and type of vehicle.
Any scheme must consider the efficiencies of the industry that uses the vehicle, e.g. construction and mining etc.
7-27 / Could the regulation of the Registered Automotive Workshops and the New Low Volume Manufacturers be combined under a new legislative framework (as illustrated in Figure 3)? / Refer 7.24. - Vehicle types and eligibility needs to be closely managed.The scheme must address the category of vehicle as it will end up on the Australian market.
Must specify the final vehicle category so that the imported vehicle enters the market in the category approved.

Response to Proposed Options

Option / Description / Comments
1 / Do nothing / The NHVR believes the current review of the Act is an opportunity to improve the regulatory environment, particularly given significantchanges to the automotive industry to occur inAustralia by 2017.
The benefits of an Australian standard (ADRs) for all vehicles across Australia could considerable and should be maintained. How this is achieved presents an opportunity to create a more efficient regulatory environment.
2 / Repeal the legislation / The appropriate regulation of vehicle standards is an ongoing requirement to cater for safety, environmental and the consumer protection objectives of the Act. The NHVR does not support the repealing of the Act, however supports opportunities to investigate improvements to the Act.
3/ 4 / Modernise the legislation/ Strengthen the legislation / The NHVR strongly supports these options the need to improve the clarification of a number of areas and to strengthen the operation of a number of schemes under the Act. The NHVR is open to exploring the benefits that can be achieved through transfer of responsibilities from the Act to the HVNL.
5 / Harmonisation of Australian vehicle standards with international standards / The preferred approach by the NHVR is adopting the UN Regulations as the standard, maintaining the capacity to allow for variations for unique and specific Australian operating conditions, either through continued use of ADR’s or by increasing the powers within the HVNL.
Demonstrated braking compatibility across all braking methods must be a requirement, in particular between prime movers and trailers.
6 / Streamline new vehicle certification processes
7 / Reduce the barriers to the importation of second-hand quality vehicles and personally imported new vehicles / Heavy vehicle differences between US, Japan and the EU (e.g. width) make this difficultwithout wider change to standards (ADRs and infrastructure limits).
It also raises issues about industry’s capability to manage the in-service support of many of these vehicles as they are constructed to different standards and increased consumer protection would be a must.
8 / Reduce/ consolidate concessional arrangements / There is an opportunity to create further value in this area in both administrative efficiency and reducing consumer cost, however further detail is required.

Page 1 of 82014 Review Motor Vehicle Standards Act 1989 – NHVR Submission

Page 1 of 82014 Review Motor Vehicle Standards Act 1989 – NHVR Submission