Mass Limits for 2-Axle Buses - ntc.gov.au9440C869-E1AE-4415-B32D-B… · Mass Limits for 2-Axle...

Mass Limits for 2-Axle Buses

Discussion Paper

February 2014

National Transport Commission

Mass Limits for 2-Axle Buses

Report prepared by: NTC

Mass Limits for 2-Axle Buses February 2014 i

Report outline

Title: Mass Limits for 2-Axle Buses

Type of report: Discussion paper

Purpose: Identification and discussion of issues related to an increase in mass limits for buses fitted with two single axles

Abstract: The paper identifies and discusses options to facilitate an increase in mass limits for buses fitted with two single axles. The paper addresses project options, industry impact, risks, and benefits. The paper is based on stakeholder engagement with the jurisdictions and industry, and previous analytical work undertaken.

Submission details: Submissions will be accepted until 21 March 2014. They can be submitted online at www.ntc.gov.au or by mail to:

Att: Mass Limits for 2 Axle Buses National Transport Commission L15/628 Bourke Street MELBOURNE VIC 3000

Key words: Bus, Mass Increases, Single Axles, overloading

Contact: National Transport Commission

Level 15/628 Bourke Street

Melbourne VIC 3000

Telephone: (03) 9236 5000

Fax: (03) 9642 8922

E: [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Mass Limits for 2-Axle Buses February 2014 i

How to make a submission to the NTC

Who can make a submission?

Any individual or organisation can make a submission to the NTC.

How to submit

To make an online submission please visit the NTC homepage (www.ntc.gov.au) and select ‘Make a submission to the NTC’ from the News & Publication menu.

Alternatively, you can mail your comments to: Att: Mass Limits for 2-Axle Buses National Transport Commission, Level 15/628 Bourke Street, Melbourne VIC 3000.

Where possible, you should provide evidence, such as data and documentation, to support your views.

Publication of submissions

Unless submissions clearly request otherwise, all submissions will be published online. Submissions that contain defamatory or offensive content will not be published. The Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Cwlth) applies to the NTC.

Mass Limits for 2-Axle Buses February 2014 iii

Foreword

The National Transport Commission (NTC) is an independent body established under the National Transport Commission Act 2003 and Inter-governmental Agreement for Regulatory and Operational Reform in Road, Rail and Intermodal Transport. It has an on-going responsibility to develop, monitor and maintain uniform or nationally consistent regulatory and operational reforms relating to road, rail and intermodal transport.

The bus industry forms a large integral part of Australia’s public transport network. Any improvement to the bus industry will have significant flow on effects to the economy, and provide a greater service the public.

There are currently around 88,0001 registered buses operating in Australia, which service 1.5

billion urban public transport passenger movements annually. The bus industry is an important form of public transportation, and issues facing this industry affect both road users and the road network.

The bus industry is currently encountering an increasing demand for its services throughout Australia and bus operators on busy routes are facing a serious challenge of meeting this demand while operating within the prescribed mass limits set for buses with two single axles under existing Vehicle Regulations.

The NTC has undertaken extensive consultation with representatives of Commonwealth, state and territory transport agencies, industry, and other relevant stakeholders, in order to identify issues in relation to increasing limits for buses fitted with two single axles.

Buses fitted with two axles are operating above the regulated mass limits on an infrequent basis as a result of a number of factors including regulatory requirements and industry standards. During peak times on a busy route a bus may, for a short period, exceed the mass limit of 16 tonnes prescribed by individual jurisdictions and now also prescribed under the Mass, Dimension and Loading Regulations of the Heavy Vehicle National Law. The prescribed mass limit is exceeded due to a number of factors including progressive increases in the tare weight of the vehicle, the increased average weight of passengers and the greater patronage during peak times. Industry has expressed the need to change the regulated limits to ensure that bus drivers are not operating outside the law.

The purpose of this discussion paper is to seek feedback from stakeholders on potential options to address the issue, and to gather information on the impacts of proposed solutions and identify any stakeholder concerns.

Stakeholder feedback is invited to ensure that the most practical and effective actions are identified. I acknowledge the work of NTC staff in developing this report, in particular Jeff Potter, Vinh Trinh and Julian Del Beato for their contributions.

Paul Retter AM

Chief Executive Officer and Commissioner

1 Bus Industry Vital Statistics. 2013. Bus Industry Vital Statistics. [ONLINE] Available at:

http://bic.asn.au/information-for-moving-people/bus-industry-vital-statistics. [Accessed 24 September 2013].

Mass Limits for 2-Axle Buses February 2014 v

Executive summary

Buses fitted with two single axles are in common use around Australia to provide commuter route services. The mass limits for these buses are set by regulation at 16 tonnes. Increasing tare weight for these buses together with the increasing weight of the average Australian passenger, has led to situations where buses may exceed the currently permitted mass for short periods.

Bus industry representatives have indicated that a solution is required to address the issue of buses operating over their prescribed mass limits under the National Heavy Vehicle (Mass, Dimension and Loading) Regulation (MDL Regulation). It has become apparent that there is no accurate relationship between the number of passengers legally allowed on board a two axle bus and the mass limits set by the MDL Regulation.

The problem of buses operating above the prescribed mass limits is a result of a number of changes in policy and industry standards. Both of these have contributed to increases in the operational weight of buses.

The tare weight of buses (that is, the weight without any passengers on-board), has increased due to:

the introduction of standards established by the Australian Design Rules (ADRs) for the

inclusion of Euro 4 and 5 star rating engines;

requirements for improved access for disabled passengers such as wheel chair access

facilities; and

the fitting of more passenger amenity features such as air conditioning units.

The average mass of a passenger has been increasing, and now exceeds the 65 kg per passenger assumed when setting the number of passengers permitted to be carried. The current Australian Bureau of Statistics figures for the average male and female are 86 kg and 71 kg respectively

2. A

vehicle’s passenger rating, which is established by the manufacturer, continues to use the design rule 58.3/00

3 which sets out the average weight of passengers. As a consequence, a bus may be

operating within the licensed passenger limit, but the mass of the bus may exceed the total mass limit prescribed by the MDL Regulation. Changing the ADR to update the current average weight of a passenger does not address the specific issue of buses operating above the mass limit. A change to the ADR could result in buses’ passenger capacity being reduced based on the vehicles’ design. It should be noted that the ADR does not govern a bus’s operating mass limit; the MDL imposes the mass limit.

It should be noted that the occurrence of two axle buses exceeding their regulated mass limit of 16 tonnes appears to be limited. A recent survey commissioned by VicRoads and conducted by Advantia Transport Consulting (Advantia)

4, indicates that the buses would exceed the prescribed

mass limits for a short period of time between heavily utilised bus stops, and this situation would occur primarily in suburban route buses. The survey also revealed that the magnitude of the overloading was also limited, with the bus exceeding the mass limit by a margin of up to 2 tonnes.

The additional wear that overloaded buses might cause to pavements and road surfaces has been a key concern of road managers. When assessing the potential pavement wear, the Equivalent Standard Axle equation demonstrates a 4

th power relationship. For example, a load that is 2 per

2 Australian Health Survey: First Results, 2011-12. 2013. [ONLINE] Available at:

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/Lookup/4364.0.55.001Chapter1002011-12. [Accessed 23 September 2013]

3 Vehicle Standard (Australian Design Rule 58/00 - Requirements for Omnibuses Designed for Hire and

Reward) 2006 . 2013. Vehicle Standard (Australian Design Rule 58/00 - Requirements for Omnibuses Designed for Hire and Reward) 2006 . [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2012C00350. [Accessed 23 September 2013].

4 Rob Di Cristoforo, Survey of axle loads on two-axle buses, Advantia transport consulting, 22 February 2012

http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2012C00350

vi Mass Limits for 2-Axle Buses February 2014

cent higher than the normal running mass will result in a 16% greater impact on the pavement. Therefore a small increase in a vehicle’s mass has the potential to produce additional wear to pavements and road surfaces. However, it is noted that the Advantia survey concluded that the additional wear caused by those buses operating above their mass limits for short periods would cause close to negligible additional wear, and the additional cost of maintaining the roads would be limited

5.

The safety implications of any mass increase is important to the general public. Ensuring that any increase in mass is restricted to buses which are rated to operate at 18 tonnes is critical. The Advantia survey highlights that many of the buses which are operating in Victoria are imported from Europe and are designed to operate at 18 tonnes, the standard for European buses.

The objective of this discussion paper is to draw on the findings and recommendations of previous studies to develop possible options to resolve the issue of bus mass limits adequately. In doing so NTC has attempted to minimise changes to current practices, while maintaining appropriate safety and service provision requirements. This paper seeks to gain insight from stakeholders on identified issues, other relevant matters that may not have been included herein, and proposed options as a way forward.

This paper presents a number of options based on the following:

Changes to Regulations- potential amendments to the MDL Regulation in relation to

general mass limits for two axle buses.

Administrative Change- the provision of a solution by the National Heavy Vehicle

Regulator (NHVR) which may include the issue of a national notice.

Operational Change- no regulatory change required, with a solution to be found in

changes to industry’s operations.

The five options presented in this paper are listed below, and are further detailed in the Options section of the paper:

Option 1: Maintain the status quo.

Option 2: Increase the mass limits from 16 tonnes to 18 tonnes via an amendment to the MDL Regulation.

Option 3: Issue of a mass limit exemption for route buses through the gazette of a national notice issued by the NHVR.

Option 4: The encouragement of innovation and industry best practice models to address mass overloading.

Option 5: Develop methods to allow bus operators to monitor and manage the bus mass.

5 Rob Di Cristoforo, op. cit.

Mass Limits for 2-Axle Buses February 2014 1

Table of contents Report outline i

Foreword iii

Executive summary v

1. Introduction 3

1.1 Purpose 3 1.2 Problem Statement 3

2. Background 4

2.1 Previous analysis 4 2.2 Advantia Transport Consulting survey 4 2.3 Brisbane City Council analysis 5 2.4 Bus design and tare weight 5 2.5 3-axle bus designs 9 2.6 Increasing passenger weight 9

3. Current status 10

4. Key issues 13

5. Options 14

5.1 Options requiring changes to Regulations 14 5.1.1 Option 1: Status Quo 14 5.1.2 Option 2: Increase the regulated mass limits from 16 tonnes to 18 tonnes 14 5.1.2.1 Option 2 (a): Increase the mass limits from 16 tonnes to 18 tonnes for

restricted routes 15

5.1.2.2 Option 2 (b): Increase the mass limits from 16 tonnes to 18 tonnes with a limitation that any new buses must be fitted with certain technologies 16

5.2 Option requiring Administrative Action only 17 5.2.1 Option 3: Exemption process for route buses through Commonwealth

gazette issued by the NHVR 17 5.3 Option requiring Operational Changes only 17

5.3.1 Option 4: Encouraging better innovation and industry best practice models to address mass overloading 17

5.3.2 Option 5: Develop methods to allow bus operators to monitor mass and manage the buses’ mass 18

6. Conclusion 20

7. Glossary 22

8. References 23

Appendix A 24

Appendix B 27

Appendix C 28

Appendix D 32

Appendix E 34

Appendix F 36

Appendix G 42

2 Mass Limits for 2-Axle Buses February 2014

List of tables Table 1. Results of pavement wear and pavement maintenance cost assessment 5

Table 2. Bus Registration for two axle chassis for NSW, Vic and Qld 2013 6

Table 3. Required Bus Components 7

Table 4. Weight Reducing Technologies 9

Table 5. State based and national bus mass limits 10

List of figures Figure 1. Bus Tare Weight 7

Figure 2. Bus Axle Mass 11


1. Introduction

1.1 Purpose

The purpose of this discussion paper is to seek feedback from stakeholders on potential options to address the issue of mass overloading for buses fitted with two single axles, and to gather information on potential impacts of proposed solutions for industry and capture stakeholder concerns.

1.2 Problem Statement

Buses fitted with two axles are infrequently operating above the regulated mass limits. During peak times on a busy route a bus may, for a short period, exceed the mass limit of 16 tonnes, currently prescribed by individual jurisdictions and since 10 February 2014 also prescribed under the Mass, Dimension and Loading (MDL) Regulation. The mass limit is exceeded due to progressive increases in the tare weight of the vehicle, the increased average weight of passengers and the greater patronage during peak times. The Advantia survey has identified this as currently occurring, although infrequently and for short periods of time. Industry has expressed the need for action to change the regulated limits to ensure that bus drivers are not operating outside the law.

The survey found that passengers waiting at heavily utilised stops would attempt to fill the bus, mostly on the suburban route buses

6. With city route buses having seated and standing room, it may be

difficult for bus drivers to limit the number of passengers boarding. Bus drivers are disinclined to leave behind passengers at a stop when there is still physical space on board, even though the vehicle may be overloaded from a mass perspective. Bus drivers may not know or have the means to identify when mass overloading is occurring.



2. Background

2.1 Previous analysis

In 2000, the National Road Transport Commission (NRTC) prepared a paper titled “Improved Bus Productivity through Increased Mass and Dimension Limits”, aimed at improving the regulation of limits for mass and dimensions of buses at a national level

7. The NRTC recommendation to increase

the mass limit for two axle buses from 16 tonnes to 18 tonnes was not approved by the then Australian Transport Council (ATC). The paper’s recommendations are attached in Appendix A.

2.2 Advantia Transport Consulting survey

In 2007, a submission by the Bus Industry Confederation to VicRoads recommended that the mass limits of two axle buses should be increased to adapt to changes in technology and increasing passenger weight. Advice from industry is that when a bus is carrying the maximum number of people it is licensed to carry, it is very likely be above its gross mass limit of 16 tonnes.

In order to verify and examine the extent of the issue, VicRoads commissioned Advantia in 2011 to undertake a survey of the incidence of mass limit overloading on two axle buses and to consider the potential road wear impacts

8. The survey indicated some infrequent overloading was occurring. The

survey also indicated that there were potential ramifications, under chain of responsibility legislation, if an incident should occur. The Advantia survey recommended that the regulated mass limit for two axle buses should increase from 16 tonnes to 18 tonnes

9.

The survey was completed in two stages, with an initial desktop analysis of the possible scenarios and estimation of front and rear axle loads. The input data used for the desktop analysis included tare weights, total passenger capacities, average passenger weights and carry-on baggage weights. Using the heaviest loading scenario of adult passengers with bags at full capacity, the analysis indicated that there was a total gross mass overloading of up to two tonnes.

Advantia then conducted field surveys where an on-board electronic weighing system was fitted to 13 sample buses to collect real world data of operations. The weighing device monitored air pressure in the bus suspension every half second and this data was translated into the equivalent weight of the vehicle at the recorded time. The data collected showed that there were instances when buses exceeded the 16 tonnes regulated mass limit. The process with which the data was collected has been thoroughly monitored and revised methods of calibration were undertaken to produce greater accuracy in the results. Transport Certification Australia also reviewed the data to ensure its accuracy.

Using the data collected from the field survey, ARRB Group Ltd (ARRB) undertook an independent analysis of the potential additional pavement wear and maintenance costs. The results of this analysis were included in the report of the Advantia survey. ARRB used the Equivalent Standard Axle (ESA) formula to provide a measurement of pavement wear. The ESA for buses was extrapolated from the data and multiplied by the distance travelled for that year. Two cost estimates were applied, 4 cents/ESA-km and 15 cents/ESA-km. The 4 cents/ESA-km index represented the cost impact on medium quality roads, while 15 cents/ESA-km represented the impact on routes where road quality is not known

10.

The table below from the Advantia survey (also attached in Appendix B) identified that the marginal costs of pavement wear and maintenance costs were, in most cases, negligible. However two exceptions were highlighted that warranted special attention, “… an airport shuttle that almost always travels at or near capacity for its entire journey” and “… a tour coach that operates on the Great Ocean Road, where tour operators would prefer to use three-axle coaches if they were permitted to

7 Roaduser International P/L & Saturn Corporate Resources P/L Improved Bus Productivity through Increased Mass and Dimensions Limits, NRTC, August 2000


9 Ibid.

10 Ibid.


be used on that road” 11

. ARRB noted that these costs would be shared amongst state and local government as the applicable road managers for various sections of road.

Table 1. Results of pavement wear and pavement maintenance cost assessment

Source: Advantia Transport Consulting

2.3 Brisbane City Council analysis

Brisbane City Council conducted an analysis of the operation of two axle buses and their passenger loadings by monitoring the use of the touch on, touch off smart cards. Based on the number of on and off touches there was an indication that at peak times buses would be carrying more than their licensed passenger numbers. As a result, Brisbane City Council conducted a review of bus networks, and increased the number of buses operating on busier routes to more appropriately distribute the passenger loadings. As a result Brisbane City Council anticipated that during peak times the number of passengers would be spread amongst the additional services and buses would not operate above their prescribed mass limits.

2.4 Bus design and tare weight

From a technical perspective the bus chassis, which houses the bus axles, are mostly imported while the bodies are made in Australia. From a review of bus chassis conducted by NRTC in 2000, some 75 per cent of chassis and axles operational in Australia were manufactured based on European standards, which operate with an 18 tonnes regulated limit

12. Table 2 below summarises data for

current bus fleets in NSW, Vic and Qld, the data was collated by Pekol Traffic and Transport as part


12 Roaduser International P/L & Saturn Corporate Resources P/L, op. cit.


of a NTC report on Bus and Coach average gross mass and Equivalent standard axle values13

, released in November 2013.

Table 2. Bus Registration for two axle chassis for NSW, Vic and Qld 2013

Bus Registration for two axle chassis for NSW, Vic and Qld 2013

Chassis Builder Source Number Registered

Mercedes Benz Europe 4384

Volvo Europe 4359

Hino Asia 1178

Scania Europe 2035

MAN Europe 1144

IVECO Europe 446

Volgren Australia 207

Denning Australia/Europe 161

MAN Europe 557

BCI Australia 421

ISUZU Asia 57

Leyland Europe 117

IRSBUS Europe 55

Bustech Australia 206

Austral – Denning Australia/Europe 191

White – Higer Asia 169

Daewoo Asia 73

MCA Australia 67

International 61

Other 1161

Total 17049

When the bus is constructed in Australia its tare weight (weight of the bus without any passengers on board) is designed so it can operate at the higher regulated mass limit of 18 tonnes. According to

13 Pekol Traffic and Transport, 2013, bus and coach average gross mass and equivalent standard axle values,

Pekol Traffic and Transport. Spring Hill, Qld


industry, much of the increase in bus tare weights over the last few years has been due to improvements to technologies in safety, higher standard engines and passenger amenity including disability access obligations.

The largest contributors to the increase in tare weight of buses are the requirements of the ADRs:

ADR 27 mandates the use of Euro 4 and 5 emission ratings, and;

The requirement (Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cwlth)) for a bus to have access to a

wheel chair lift.

These two requirements have added up to 300kg to the tare weight of complying buses14

. There has been no change in the regulated mass limits to reflect these inclusions.

Figure 1 takes the data collected by the NRTC in 2000 and the data collated by Advantia in 2012 and highlights the changes in tare weights for two axle buses that have occurred between 2000 and 2012.

Figure 1. Bus Tare Weight

Figure 1 indicates that there has been an increase in the tare weight of close to 1.5 tonnes between 2000 to 2012.

The 2000 NRTC paper provided estimates of the increases in weight associated with mandated bus components. These components affect the tare weight of buses

15.

Table 3. Required Bus Components

14 2013. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/roads/motor/design/pdf/17.pdf. [Accessed 20 July 2013].

15 Roaduser International P/L & Saturn Corporate Resources P/L. op. cit.


Component Weight increase of the component

Air Conditioning Unit 250kg

Disability Access 300kg

CNG Fuel Systems 1300 litre adds 1,000kg

Seat Belts 4kg per seating position

Rollover Protection 300kg


Table 4. Weight Reducing Technologies

Weight Reducing Technologies

Component Weight Reduction in tare weight

Reducing engine capacity: Turbocharged intercooled Computer controlled engines

250 kg

Utilising aluminium and fiberglass and replacing steel walls and roofs

300 kg+ or a 20% weight Reduction

A comparison of Tables 3 and 4 suggests there has been a significant weight increase in design requirements for buses and despite innovative technologies designed to reduce the tare weight of the buses.

2.5 3-axle bus designs

Currently there are route buses designed for city use which utilise a 3-axle configuration, consisting of a single steer axle and a tandem rear drive axle. The length of the bus can also affect how and where a bus can be employed. 3 axle buses are 14.5 m in length. Some jurisdictions have been concerned about the potential for the rear overhang of the bus to impede on-coming traffic when turning. The rear tandem axle has a prescribed mass limit of 14 tonnes. However, due to the controlled access for these 14.5 m route buses, the potential use of this fleet of buses is limited.

2.6 Increasing passenger weight

Current passenger capacity limits are based on the 1989 ADR. The ADR designates an average adult weight of 65 kg. The 2011-2012 Australian Health Survey (conducted by the Australian Bureau of Statistics) indicates that a more accurate average adult male weight would be 86 kg and 71 kgs for an average adult female

16. As a result, there is a mismatch between the average weight per passenger

on which licensed passenger numbers are calculated, and the real weight of passengers. This issue contributes to difficulties in complying with the upper limit regulated masses for these vehicles.

16 Australian Health Survey: 2011-2012, op. cit.


3. Current status

Prior to the development of the Heavy Vehicle National Law Act 2012 (HVNL) and the MDL Regulation, the states and territories had the following regulated mass limits for two axle buses.

Table 5. State based and national bus mass limits

State based and national bus mass limits

State/Territory Total allowed Bus mass limit (Tonnes)

Steer Axle (Tonnes) Single Drive Axle (Tonnes)

Victoria 16.0 (18.0)* 6.5 (7.0)* 10.0 (12.0)*

New South Wales 16.0 (18.0)* 6.5 (7.0)* 10.0 (12.0)*

Queensland 16.0 6.5 10.0

Northern Territory 16.0 6.0 (6.5)* 10.0 (11.0)**

Western Australia 16.0 (18.0)* 6.5 (7.0)* 10.0 (12.0)*

South Australia 16.0 6.5 10.0

Tasmania 16.0 6.5 10.0

ACT 16.0 6.5 10.0

MDL Regulation 16.0 6.5 10.0 (11.0)***

*Victoria, NSW and WA allowed increased mass limits through government gazette and ministerial orders (Attached in Appendix C, D and E) The NSW and Victorian provisions have been recognised under the HVNL by Notice in The Commonwealth Government Gazette (Appendix G)

**Northern Territory allows a mass increase if the bus is fitted with road friendly suspension

*** Buses classed as ultra-low floor 2-axle route buses are allowed an increase of drive axle mass; this increase is designed to act as a floating mass concession

NSW has developed a series of bus mass regulations based on the category of the bus:

Complying bus – 16.0 t total allowed mass = 6.5 maximum steer axle mass +10.0 maximum

single drive axle mass

Non-complying bus (All other vehicles of this configuration) - 15.0 t total allowed mass = 6.0

maximum steer axle mass +9.0 maximum single drive axle mass

Ultra-low floor bus – 16.0 t total allowed mass = 6.0 maximum steer axle mass +11.0

maximum single drive axle mass

Complying bus, ultra-low floor bus or controlled access bus operating under ministerial order

– 18.0 t total allowed mass = 7.0 maximum steer axle mass +12.0 maximum single drive axle

mass

A complying bus is defined under Statutory Rules 1996 No. 342, where a bus is fitted with an approved air suspension system and meets ADR 44, ADR 59 and ADR 68 (attached in Appendix F)


Figure 2. Bus Axle Mass

It should be noted that the sum of the mass of the steer and drive axles must not exceed the total allowed mass limit

NSW, Victoria and Western Australia have used ministerial orders and gazette notices17

, respectively (attached in Appendix C, D and E) to allow the increase of the buses’ mass limit. These regulatory instruments have been utilised under the exemption process of state based heavy vehicles laws. Under these arrangements, a vehicle can be classified as ‘class 3’ and has been allowed exemptions from some parts of the law.

NSW had imposed the condition that a bus operating at up to 18 tonnes under Ministerial order must have anti-lock braking systems (ABS) and Electronic Braking System (EBS) or Electronic Stability Control (ESC) to be eligible to operate at 18 tonnes

18. However these requirements were modified in

January 2014 to require a bus manufactured before the 1st January 2015 to have anti-lock braking

systems (ABS) and a bus manufactured after the 1st January 2015 to have ABS and EBS or ESC to

be eligible to operate at 18 tonnes19

. The data provided by Transport for NSW shows the NSW State Transit Authority (STA) bus fleet consists of 2161 buses, all of which are fitted with ABS. Since 2004 all buses purchased by STA have also been fitted with EBS as a standard feature. Over 1200 STA buses have EBS installed.

Victoria and Western Australia have placed no further design requirements or conditions as part of their gazette notice that allows complying buses to operate at 18 tonnes. Since 10 February 2014, the NSW and Victorian provisions have been maintained under a Local Productivity Initiative (LPI)

20.

LPIs provide for the interim maintenance of state-based concessions that have not been captured under the HVNL.

17 A gazette provides official notification of a decision or action taken by the government

18 Ministerial Declaration (Two Axle Bus Mass Exemption) Order, New South Wales Government Gazette No. 49

pp 990-991, 19 April 2013 19

Ministerial Declaration (Two Axle Bus Mass Exemption) Order, New South Wales Government Gazette No. 12 pp 211-212, 24 January 2014 20

The New South Wales and Victoria class 3 bus mass limit exemption (notice) 2014 (no. 1). Government Notices Gazette C2014G00166 30/01/2014


4. Key issues

Impact on pavement wear and costs of maintenance

Road managers have expressed concern that the potential change in the mass limits for two axle buses will lead to a rise in road wear, and that as a consequence the cost of maintaining the roads will increase. However, the additional pavement wear and potential costs associated with maintenance outlined in the Advantia survey (attached in Appendix B) indicated that any additional costs would be negligible

21. It further concluded that as these costs would be distributed across

numerous road managers, with the cost to any one road manager being very minor. In the worst case scenario at 15c per ESA-km eight of the 13 buses registered a marginal cost of less than $100 a year. Of the remaining five buses, two were under $150 a year, one under $500 and the two remaining were operating under unique circumstances and had costs of $2716.04 and $3130.19

13.

These findings reinforced the 2000 NRTC Improved Bus Productivity report which concluded that the impact on pavements would be negligible and potentially alleviated through future cost recovery mechanisms

22. It was noted that pavement wear impacts could be further alleviated through

reductions in emissions and congestions on roads.

Limits for other similar heavy vehicles

Allowing an increase to the regulated mass limits for two axle buses may cause other sections of the heavy vehicle industry to question why the same mass increase has not been allowed for vehicles of similar build. The unique circumstances under which a bus may travel above the regulated 16 tonnes mass limit, the nature of the task and load, and the ability of the driver to control the loading process suggest there is a need to consider this two axle buses as unique within the broader heavy vehicle fleet.


22 Roaduser International P/L & Saturn Corporate Resources P/L op. cit.

1. Question:

Can you provide information on how often buses exceed 16 tonnes and for what

proportion of their scheduled journey in your state or territory?

What is the primary issue of concern to bus operators with respect to overloading?

What mitigation measures do bus operators currently have in place to manage the

issues of mass overloading?

Is there evidence of buses being fined for mass overloading? If so, what is the

frequency and type of incidence?


5. Options

A range of options have been developed based on the preliminary analysis of the key issues, consultation with stakeholders and recommendations from previous research. Each option explores potential mechanisms to address circumstances where two axle buses may exceed their regulated mass limits and to address the key issues outlined in this report.

The options are based on the following groupings:

Changes to Regulations – potential amendments to the MDL Regulation in relation to

general mass limits for two axle buses.

Administrative Change – the provision of a solution by the NHVR which may include the

issue of national notices.

Operational Change – no regulatory change required, with a solution to be found in

changes to industry’s operations.

5.1 Options requiring changes to Regulations

5.1.1 Option 1: Status Quo

The regulated mass limits remain the same and buses continue to risk operating outside of prescribed limits.

Benefit

- No regulatory or administrative changes.

Risk

- Does not provide any solution to the current concerns put forward by the bus industry. - Buses will continue to risk operating in conditions that breach the regulations. This may

lead to further issues relating to chain of responsibility legislation for bus operators and companies.

Impact

There will be limited impact on current operations if status quo is maintained. With no change, route buses can be expected to continue to operate above the prescribed limits on limited occasions and for short periods.

5.1.2 Option 2: Increase the regulated mass limits from 16 tonnes to 18 tonnes

Amend regulated total vehicle mass limit for a two axle bus from 16 tonnes to 18 tonnes in the MDL Regulation. Specifically, amend the current steer axle mass limit to 7 tonnes and the mass limit for the rear ‘drive’ axle to 12 tonnes. This mass limit increase will not be restricted to any specific routes and would be general access for two axle buses. As with any heavy vehicle, a bus that is not rated to accommodate the new vehicle mass limit of 18 tonnes may not legally access the new limit.

Benefit

- Better reflects current two axle bus operations. - Provides an opportunity to attain better regulatory compliance within the industry. - Ensures that unintended transient mass overloading is legally accommodated. - Addresses both actual passenger mass and additional tare weight due to industry

improvements and regulatory burden.

- Will not compromise the current service provision during peak periods.


- Will partially address the increase in demand for additional bus services during peak periods without breaching regulated mass limits.

Risk

- Provides no incentives for industry to adjust its practices to accommodate greater weights, pursue innovation, or transfer to larger capacity buses where this is feasible.

- Potential increase in pavement wear if the proposal allows bus operators to increase loads to match the higher mass limit more frequently than currently occurs.

- Two axles buses operate across the road networks, the quality of the pavement and road surface varies considerably. Some rural areas may not have roads capable of accommodating additional wear therefore potential increased pavement wear may be greater on lower quality roads.

Impact

This option acknowledges the current operational trend of two axle buses to occasionally travel at masses above the regulated mass. It also addresses the issues around the increasing tare weight as a result of implementing bus components designed to achieve higher safety standards, more efficient emission control technologies and passenger amenities standards, some of which are required by law. The increase in regulated mass would also take into account a more realistic average passenger weight.

A key concern related to increasing mass limits continues to be the increased road wear that may result from the change. This option is, however, merely permitting a current practice to continue within the rules. This option would have limited impact on bus operators or passengers. It is noted that a change to the regulated mass limit is not, and is not intended to be, a mechanism to increase the number of passengers that a bus is licensed to carry. It is designed solely to accommodate the number of passengers that a bus can legally carry.

5.1.2.1 Option 2 (a): Increase the mass limits from 16 tonnes to 18 tonnes for restricted routes

Option 2 (a) would entail changing the current mass limits set by the MDL Regulation, however access to the higher mass would be limited to restricted routes assessed by the NHVR and road managers and on consent from road managers (e.g. city bus routes).

Benefit

- Aims to specifically identify areas where overloading is occurring and provide a solution which will not interrupt operations.

- Potential pavement wear will not be as extensive as the mass increase will not be applied to all two axle buses.

- If restricted to city route buses travel at the higher mass will occur on roads that can better accommodate the increased load.

Risk

- Potential for increased pavement wear from increased mass limits. - Limited incentive for operators to pursue innovation or vehicles that may better

accommodate the increased passenger loading requirements.

- Some operators that only occasionally operate at higher masses, for example regional charter services, may not be able to access the increased mass limit.

- The conditions which a road manager might place on buses seeking to operate at an increased operating mass could potentially be extensive.

2. Question:

Are there any implementation issues that a change to the regulated mass limits might

bring?


Impact

By specifically targeting routes that experience weights in excess of the regulated mass limit this approach would address overloading in a limited way. This option will require an effective means to identify all of the routes where regular mass limits are exceeded.

5.1.2.2 Option 2 (b): Increase the mass limits from 16 tonnes to 18 tonnes with a limitation that any new buses must be fitted with certain technologies

Option 2 (b) is similar to Option 2, however, it stipulates that new buses registered after a nominated date must be fitted with certain safety and pavement wear reducing features and technologies to gain access to the 18 tonnes mass limit. This reflects the approach taken in NSW.

Benefit

- Similar to options 2 and 2(a). - Requires the incorporation of safety and pavement wear technologies into the next

generation fleet of two axle buses ensuring continuing innovation and safety within the industry.

- By setting a nominated date from which these features are to be incorporated into new buses, this option allows older buses to continue operating in the interim period.

- Establishing a cut-off date also provides operators with the opportunity to plan their fleet upgrades noting planned regulatory changes.

Risk

- The addition of the new technologies may lead to further increases in the tare weight of the buses, and the effectiveness of the increased mass limit will be reduced.

- The capacity of bus manufacturers to produce or implement the new technologies for buses may not be available due to production line constraints.

- The speed with which bus fleets are replaced will limit how quickly new technologies are introduced.

- Finding the balance between older buses accessing concessions versus improved and safer buses is problematic.

Impact

Bus operators will be able to continue operating using their current two axle bus fleet. The requirement for new safety technology to be integrated into the next generation of buses is intended to ensure that bus industry is motivated to continue operating safe buses for their drivers, passengers and other road users. The increase in the operating mass may have an effect on the buses brake load and additional safety technologies may mitigate any issues which arise.

Noting that the increase of the bus mass may result in additional pavement wear, road managers may be willing to accept the additional pavement wear if the additional safety benefit which these technologies can provide to public transportation can be demonstrated.

The requirement to include improved technologies is likely to increase the cost and possibly the tare weight of the buses, potentially negating any gains from the increased regulated mass limit.

3. Question:

Would the provision of higher mass limits for key bus routes/service locations address

this issue effectively?

How would an increase in the regulatory mass limit for two axle buses affect the use

and procurement of three axle buses as a higher capacity alternative?


5.2 Option requiring Administrative Action only

5.2.1 Option 3: Exemption process for route buses through Commonwealth gazette issued by the NHVR

Currently under the HVNL, a mass or dimension exemption may be granted by notice or permit. The NHVR can use this mechanism provide an exemption to allow specific buses or types of buses, access to increased mass allowances subject to conditions including, if appropriate, route restrictions. Under section 117 of the HVNL, the NHVR may provide an exemption to a class 3 heavy vehicle with a mass exemption. A class 3 heavy vehicle is one that together with its load does not meet the mass requirements applicable to it. A two axle bus operating at 18 tonnes and with steer and drive axle masses of up to 7 tonnes and 12 tonnes respectively, would meet this definition.

Benefit

- Provision of exemptions for select route bus types and will provide a more accurate reflection of current bus operations.

- Provides an opportunity to attain virtual full compliance within the industry. - Ensures that unintended mass overloading is legally accommodated. - Limited to specific buses and routes determined by the NHVR with road agencies.

Risk

- Pavement wear will still occur. - Allowing an increase in the prescribed mass limits may potentially reduce industry’s

interest in innovations to design lighter and more efficient buses.

- Routes will still need approval from local road managers to allow the mass increase. - Road managers may place additional requirements on allowing buses to operate at the

higher mass, potentially similar to requirements under option 2b.

- The process for the NHVR to gain consent from all road mangers state and local may be an arduous task and national harmonisation may not be achieved.

Impact

This option can address the issue of route buses mass overloading by providing those specific buses with an exemption through a Commonwealth gazette. However an exemption process has a similar impact as the increase to the prescribed mass limits, on a smaller scale. Pavement wear continues to pose an issue to the states and territories and the industry’s interest to develop, innovative designs and use of lighter materials to meet lower tare weights may be impacted.

5.3 Option requiring Operational Changes only

5.3.1 Option 4: Encouraging better innovation and industry best practice models to address mass overloading

There may be operational procedures and coordination plans which can be implemented to avoid the problem of buses operating above the prescribed limit of 16 tonnes. The redesign of routes, or

4. Question:

What percentage of the current operational two axle bus fleet includes ABS, EBS, or

ESC?

What is the average age of the two axle bus fleet?

What is the average service life of 2-axle buses?

What technologies could be included in the next generation fleet of buses to

accommodate a potential increase in the regulated mass limit?


allocation of a greater numbers of buses to identified busy routes can limit the likelihood of mass overloading.

Benefit

- This approach does not require any regulatory change. - This requires bus operators and governments or other parties contracting for bus services

to modify operational procedures to limit the number of passengers on each bus.

Risk

- Does not provide bus operators any legal security if the bus exceeds existing mass limits. - Bus service providers may not have the required resources to provide more services to

specific routes.

- If the efforts are directed towards reducing the tare weight of the bus, there are limits to the extent that light weight construction can be applied without beginning to impact on structural integrity and hence the safety of the vehicle.

- Any reduction in the number of passengers carried by a bus will have implications on the cost of provision of public transport services due to the need for more vehicles and drivers, and associated increased fuel consumption, emissions and congestion for the transport of the same number of passengers.

- Using more buses does not ensure that the number of passengers will be evenly spread throughout the extra services being provided.

Impact

Increasing the number of buses available on busy routes may not mean that passengers will be spread evenly across the buses. The potential for passengers to seek to board the first available bus, rather than remain at the stop awaiting the next bus during peak periods is high. The road wear from one single overloaded bus needs to be compared to the road wear, additional emissions and congestion caused by an increased number of buses operating below the prescribed mass limit to properly assess the impact of this option.

The effectiveness of this option may be linked to option 5 and developing methods for bus operators to better control the number of passengers they allow to board. Consideration must be given to the increase in pavement wear, congestion and environmental impact on having an increased number of buses on the roads.

5.3.2 Option 5: Develop methods to allow bus operators to monitor mass and manage the buses’ mass

This option is to identify equipment and methods to allow the bus driver to monitor the operating mass of a bus, and so avoid mass overloading. This would involve assessing the feasibility of applying weigh-in-motion technology to buses, as well as determining acceptable policy guidelines to support denying access to passengers when the bus approaches its permissible mass limit.

Benefit

- Bus operators will have real time access to data on their vehicles’ mass and be able to respond accordingly.

Risk

- This option may require further analysis of available technology and the fitting of mass monitoring equipment. It is likely such technology would result in additional costs, and potentially additional mass.

- This option would lead to the need for bus operators to refuse to allow passengers to board the bus when there is clearly space (but not mass allowance) to accommodate them. This


is unlikely to be acceptable to passengers or to drivers and may conflict with other public transport policy imperatives and regulations.

Impact

This option involves providing the necessary equipment for bus operators to avoid mass overloading. This option is unlikely to address the issue of bus mass overloading and, similar to option 2, there is the potential for bus drivers to be required to deny entry to passengers.

5. Question:

Is it feasible for bus drivers to deny passengers from boarding if there is space to

accommodate them?

6. Question

Which option do you believe best addresses the problem of bus mass overloading?

Is there another option to address this issue that should be considered?


6. Conclusion

Based on the information which has been gathered from past research and consultation with transport departments and the bus industry, it is clear that some bus services are operating above the current mass limits, albeit generally infrequently. From the options provided in this discussion paper, it appears there are a number of possible solutions to address this problem.

The options discussed in this paper may assist with the development of a framework to assess potential policy proposals that address the overloading concerns. Input and feedback from stakeholders will help further refine ways in which a safe, fair and cost-effective solution can be implemented.

The NTC believes that there is a need for action to address the loading issues faced by operators of buses with two single axles. When the issue was last considered in 2000, NRTC recommended that mass limits for these buses should be increased from 16 tonnes to 18 tonnes.

Below is a consolidated list of questions which have been posed throughout the discussion paper. Answers to these question will assist in the development of appropriate policy settings to address this issue.


1. Question:

Can you provide information on how often buses exceed 16 tonnes and for what

proportion of their scheduled journey in your state or territory?

What is the primary issue of concern to bus operators with respect to overloading?

What mitigation measures do bus operators currently have in place to manage the

issues of mass overloading?

Is there evidence of buses being fined for mass overloading? If so, what is the

frequency and type of incidence?

2. Question:

Are there any implementation issues that a change to the regulated mass limits might

bring?

3. Question:

Would the provision of higher mass limits for key bus routes/service locations address

this issue effectively?

How would an increase in the regulatory mass limit for two axle buses affect the use

and procurement of three axle buses as a higher capacity alternative?

4. Question:

What percentage of the current operational two axle bus fleet includes ABS, EBS, or

ESC?

What is the average age of the two axle bus fleet?

What is the average service life of 2-axle buses?

What technologies should be included in the next generation fleet of buses to

accommodate a potential increase in the regulated mass limit?

5. Question:

Is it feasible for bus drivers to deny passengers from boarding if there is space to

accommodate them?

6. Question

Which option do you believe best addresses the problem of bus mass overloading?

Is there another option to address this issue that should be considered?


7. Glossary

ADR Australian Design Rules

ATC Australian Transport Council

COAG Council Of Australian Governments

HVNL Heavy Vehicle National Law

NHVR Heavy Vehicle National Regulator

NTC National Transport Commission

NRTC National Road Transport Commission

PBS Performance Based Standards

RMS Road and Maritime Service

RTA Road Transport Authority

TISOC Transport and Infrastructure Senior Officials' Committee


8. References

Australian Health Survey: First Results, 2011-12, 2013, Australian Health Survey: First Results, 2011-12, [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/Lookup/4364.0.55.001Chapter1002011-12. [Accessed 23 September 2013]

Bus Industry Vital Statistics, 2013, Bus Industry Vital Statistics. [ONLINE] Available at: http://bic.asn.au/information-for-moving-people/bus-industry-vital-statistics. [Accessed 24 September 2013]

Di Cristoforo, R, Survey of axle loads on two-axle buses, Advantia transport consulting, 22 February 2012

Roaduser International P/L & Saturn Corporate Resources P/L Improved Bus Productivity through Increased Mass and Dimensions Limits, NRTC, August 2000

Youldale, G & Donald, G, 2002, Report on the Impact on Infrastructure from Increased Axle Mass on Buses, National Road Transport Commission, February 2002


Appendix A

Improved Bus Productivity through Increased Mass and Dimensions Limits

NRTC 21 August 2000

“7.3.1 Regulation of maximum bus mass and dimensions

It is recommended that:

Bus mass and dimension limits be controlled via a new set of general 2-axle bus limits of M18L12.5W2.5, which involves increasing the mass limit from 16t to 18t and retaining the current national length and width limits;

Both axles of the vehicle be fitted with road-friendly suspension in compliance with VSB 11, to be eligible for the increased 18t mass limit;

Buses with manufacturers' ratings less than 18t should not be eligible for the increased 18t mass limit;

Consideration is given to appropriate cost recovery in relation to the pavement effects of the increased mass limit.

An ADR standard be introduced for new coaches and high-floor buses to ensure that a safe level of vehicle stability performance is achieved in association with the increased mass limit of 18t GVM; it is proposed that a minimum static roll stability of 0.45g is required when fully laden;

The GVM of buses be enforced at the time of registration via calculation of the fully laden GVM using the tare weight, seating and luggage capacity and unit passenger and luggage weights;

The maximum individual axle loads be set at 7t for the steer axle and 12t for the dual-tyred driven axle, permitting an appropriate degree of flexibility in load distribution between the axles, while the gross mass of 18t is not exceeded;

Bus designs with mass and dimensions in excess of the new general bus limit of M18L12.5W2.5 be considered for operation under permit, subject to their PBS certification for operation on suitable specified routes or in defined areas;

Applications to register and operate buses with dimensions exceeding 12.5m length and 2.5m width should be considered under a PBS certification regime; specific proposals (comprising vehicle, passengers and operating environment) should be assessed and the permitted maximum gross mass for 2-axle buses should in no case exceed 18t;

To enable PBS assessment of specific proposals, guidelines be developed encompassing vehicle performance, occupant safety and the operating environment; and

A rigorous route evaluation is completed prior to the use of buses and coaches exceeding the general dimension limits stated above, with the Austroads Swept Path Specifications for Local Roads and general arterial Roads, as appropriate, being utilised for this purpose.

7.3.2 Recommended bus mass regulation approach

The study examined methods of regulating bus mass using means that do not involve weighing buses in transit, as required by the Brief. Calculations of maximum laden GVM and axle load distributions should be carried out at registration using the passenger and luggage unit weights nominated below. This is intended to mitigate the need for active enforcement weighing as the limits and nominal unit weights will achieve virtually full compliance. This would not preclude active enforcement of bus mass.


The method outlined should be used to calculate the GVM which should not exceed 18t, nor:

Any axle capacity as rated by the manufacturers;

Any GVM capacity as rated by the manufacturers;

Any tyre load limit at a maximum pressure of 825 kPa.

The following passenger and luggage unit weight should be used:

70 kg per seat position for dedicated school buses with seat cushion widths based on 400 mm per secondary school student and seat row pitches of around 700 mm;

80 kg per seat position for all other buses without under-floor luggage compartments; and

97 kg per passenger (including luggage) plus an additional luggage allowance where total on-board luggage capacity exceeds 17 kg per passenger.

Coaches and buses which are manufactured with significant luggage compartment volume require an additional calculation based on the volume of the luggage space provided and a standard luggage density value. This standard luggage density value should be determined and agreed on a national basis. Such vehicles with significant luggage or freight capacity should be fitted with appropriate devices to allow the driver to monitor the axle loads as a means of ensuring that compliance with mass limits is maintained.

7.3.3 Recommended PBS approach

The use of PBS assessment needs to take into account the bus design features (and therefore the prescriptive limits which are being augmented or replaced), as well as implications for other prescriptive limits or regulations, the operational environment and proposed means of compliance and enforcement. The performance measures for buses and coaches are listed in Table 4.1 and suggested reference values for the key measures are given in Table 4.5. Table 7.2 illustrates a recommended prototype framework for the further development of PBS assessment for bigger buses.

Table 7.2 Illustration of potential format for PBS assessment of bus limit

flexibility Assessment

Process

Example 1

Increased Length

Example 2

Increased Width

Bus Type Coaches at 14.5m overall length

School buses

Operating Zones Interstate with city access Country school runs

Implications for Other Limits or Regulations

Effects on gross mass, mass distribution, tyre ratings, chassis ratings

Mass increase to be checked

Assessment Criteria

– Stability and control

– Geometric performance

– Infrastructure impacts

Mass effects to be taken into account

Swept path and tail swing will be critical for inner urban access - routes to be assessed.

Fully-laden mass will increase with length – pavement effects

Stability will improve

Dynamic width will be critical in relation to lane widths - routes to be assessed.

Pavement effects to be checked.


will need to be evaluated.

Compliance and Enforcement Laden mass and mass distribution to be checked at approval stage.

Records of operational routes to be retained for audit purposes.

Records of operational routes to be retained for audit purposes.

Additional Considerations Increased passenger conveniences and comfort.

Occupant safety enhancement through increased ratio of seated to standing passengers.

Exit arrangements relating to bus disposal – acceptability in other jurisdictions.

To assist with the implementation of a PBS regime for longer (and perhaps wider) buses, and to minimise the administration of permits, consideration should be given to designating routes for buses exceeding the general dimension limits. This process could commence with the assessment of advantageous sections of the major roads system, and could be extended to consideration of local access off this major roads system.

7.3.4 Research and development needs

A list of the supplementary future work is suggested below to assist with policy development.

Further consultation in the bus industry should be undertaken particularly to address the effects that were not measurable such as passenger comfort/ convenience and the practicality issues such as operators’ and agencies’ responses to the recommended new general bus limit and the PBS certification regime.

Further data collection is recommended on fleet operations, vehicle overloading, bus capacities, passenger unit weights and bus weights (laden and unladen), in the event that further detail for evaluation, justification or regulatory impact assessment is needed.

A review of pavement costs and road user charges for 2-axle buses and coaches appears desirable, especially with consideration of the geographic distributional issues e.g. pavement adequacy of local roads on which peak period loads are high.

Identification of a nationwide networks for the operation of bigger buses operated under permits (with a view to defining (and gazetting) these) would assist the standardisation of conditions of permits throughout all jurisdictions.

Guidelines for the PBS assessment of buses should be developed, utilising the principles and directions outlined in Sections 4 and 7, then monitored and updated as necessary.

A study of the mass and dimension reform options for 3-axle buses and coaches should be conducted to complement the investigations of this study of 2-axle vehicles.”


Appendix B

Survey of axle loads on two-axle buses

Advantia 22 February 2012


Appendix C

NSW Bus Ministerial Order

ROAD TRANSPORT ACT 2013

Ministerial Declaration (Two Axle Bus Mass Exemption) Order 2013

I, Duncan Gay, Minister for Roads and Ports, pursuant to section 19 of the Road Transport Act

2013 make the following Order.

Dated this 18th day of December 2013.

DUNCAN GAY MLC

Minister for Roads and Ports

PART 1 – PRELIMINARY

1. Citation

This Order may be cited as the Ministerial Declaration (Two Axle Bus Mass Exemption)

Order 2013.

2. Commencement

This Order takes effect on and from the date it is published in the NSW Government

Gazette.

3. Effect

(a) This Order remains in effect until it is revoked.

(b) This Order revokes and replaces the Ministerial Declaration (Two Axle Bus Mass

Exemption) Order 2013 that was approved pursuant to section 16 of the Road

Transport (General) Act 2005 and published on 19 April 2013 in the New South Wales

Government Gazette No. 49 at pages 990-991.

4. Interpretation

Unless stated otherwise, words and expressions used in this Order have the same meaning

as those defined in the Road Transport Act 2013.

5. Definitions

In this Order:

anti-lock braking system means a service brake system that automatically controls the

degree of rotation wheel slip relative to the road at one or more road wheels of the

vehicle during braking.

complying bus has the same meaning as in the Road Transport (Mass, Loading and

Access) Regulation 2005.

electronic braking system means a braking system which is primarily controlled

electronically.


electronic stability control means an automated electronic control function for a

vehicle which improves the dynamic stability of the vehicle by utilising vehicle

systems such as the brakes or engine.

ultra-low floor bus has the same meaning as in the Road Transport (Mass, Loading

and Access) Regulation 2005.

controlled access bus has the same meaning as in the Road Transport (Vehicle

Registration) Regulation 2007.

6. Declaration

The axle mass limits in Table 1 and the total vehicle mass limits in clause 6 of Schedule 1

to the Road Transport (Mass, Loading and Access) Regulation 2005 are declared not to

apply to a vehicle described in Part 2 of this Order, provided the vehicle complies with the

mass limits set out in Part 3 of this Order and the operating and travel requirements set out

in Part 4 of this Order.

PART 2 – APPLICATION

7. Eligible vehicles

The following types of vehicles may operate in accordance with this Order:

(a) Two axle complying buses with single tyres on the single steer axle and dual tyres on

the single rear (drive) axle;

(b) Two axle ultra-low floor buses with single tyres on the single steer axle and dual tyres

on the single rear (drive) axle;

(c) Two axle controlled access buses with single tyres on the single steer axle and dual

tyres on the single rear (drive) axle;

(d) Two-axle buses with single tyres on the single steer axle and dual tyres on the single

rear (drive) axle that are licensed to carry standing passengers, other than ultra low

floor buses.

PART 3 – MASS LIMITS

8. Vehicle mass limit

The laden mass of a vehicle operating in accordance with this Order must not exceed the

lowest of the following:

(a) The vehicle’s Gross Vehicle Mass (GVM) limit specified by the manufacturer, or

(b) 18.0 tonnes.

9. Axle mass limits

The laden mass of an axle on a vehicle operating in accordance with this Order must not

exceed the limits set out in Table A of this Order.

Table A – Axle mass limits

Description of Single Axle Mass Limit Single steer axle with 2 tyres 7.0 tonnes Single rear (drive) axle with 4 tyres 12.0 tonnes


PART 4 – OPERATING AND TRAVEL REQUIREMENTS

10. Braking and Stability Control Requirements

10.1 Vehicles operating in accordance with this Order that are fitted with an Identification Plate,

indicating that the vehicle was manufactured before 1 January 2015, must be fitted with a

properly functioning:

(a) Anti-lock braking system; or

(b) Electronic stability control.

10.2 Vehicles operating in accordance with this Order that are fitted with an identification plate,

indicating that the vehicle was manufactured on or after 1 January 2015 must be fitted with

properly functioning:

(a) Anti-lock braking system and electronic braking system; or

(b) Electronic stability control.

10.3 Compliance with the requirements for an anti-lock braking system and electronic braking

system or electronic stability control must be verified by either:

(a) An identification plate issued by a person authorised by an Australian Authority to

affix an Identification Plate; or

(b) A certificate verifying modifications issued by a person authorised by an Australian

Authority to certify heavy vehicle modifications; or

(c) An original letter from the manufacturer of the vehicle stating the vehicle complies

with paragraph 10.1 or 10.2; which system is installed; the model and Vehicle

Identification Number (VIN) of the vehicle chassis.

11. Operating conditions

11.1 When operating under this Order, a copy of this Order must be carried in the driving

compartment of the vehicle and the driver must produce it if requested to do so by a Police

Officer or an Authorised Officer.

11.2 If issued, the certificate or letter referred to in paragraph 10.3 must be carried in the driving

compartment of the vehicle.

12. No increase to authorised passenger numbers

A vehicle operating under this Order may not carry more seated and standing passengers

than the number determined by the manufacturer in accordance with third edition ADR

58 on the basis that the mass limits in Road Transport (Mass, Loading and Access)

Regulation 2005 apply to the vehicle, rather than the mass limits in this Order.

-------------------------


Appendix D

Victorian Bus Exemption Gazette

Victoria Government Gazette SPECIAL

No. S 129 Thursday 19 April 2012

By Authority of Victorian Government Printer

Road Safety Act 1986

ROAD SAFETY (VEHICLES) REGULATIONS 2009

Declaration of certain 2-axle buses as class 3 vehicles and mass limit exemptions for such vehicles.

1. Purpose

The purpose of this notice is to declare certain 2-axle buses to be class 3 vehicles and to exempt them

from mass limits.

2. Authorising provision

This notice is made under regulations 193(2) and 194 of the Road Safety (Vehicles) Regulations 2009

(in this notice referred to as the ‘Vehicles Regulations’).

Regulation 193(2) provides that the Roads Corporation, by notice published in the Government

Gazette, may declare a category of vehicles to be class 3 vehicles.

Regulation 194 provides that the Roads Corporation may exempt, on conditions, a category of class 3

vehicles from mass or dimension limits set out in Schedule 9.

3. Commencement

This notice comes into operation on the date it is published in the Government Gazette.

4. Expiry

This notice expires on 18 April 2017.

5. Declaration and exemption

(1) For the purpose of regulation 193(2) of the Vehicles Regulations, I David Shelton, delegate of the

Roads Corporation, declare the following 2-axle buses to be class 3 vehicles –

(a) a complying bus;

(b) a low floor bus;

(c) a controlled access bus; and

(d) a bus licensed to carry standing passengers.

(2) For the purpose of regulation 194 of the Vehicles Regulations, I, David Shelton, delegate of the

Roads Corporation, exempt the vehicles specified in subclause (1) from the mass limits in the

Vehicles Regulations (as prescribed under clause 38 of Schedule 9 to those Regulations)

subject to the conditions set out in clause 6 of this notice.

6. Conditions of exemption

(1) For a bus travelling under this notice, the mass limit for a single axle described in column 1 of the

table below is the corresponding limit in column 2.


2 S 129 19 April 2012 Victoria Government Gazette

Table – Mass limit for buses travelling under this notice

Column 1

DESCRIPTION OF SINGLE AXLE

Column 2

MASS LIMIT (tonnes)

Single steer axle with 2 tyres 7.0

Single drive axle with 4 tyres 12.0


Appendix E

20 August 2013 GOVERNMENT GAZETTE, WA 3875

TN 401* ROAD TRAFFIC ACT 1974 ROAD TRAFFIC (VEHICLE STANDARDS) REGULATIONS 2002

EXEMPTION NOTICE

To allow higher axle and axle group loading limits for certain complying buses (RTVSR-2013-00886) 1. Exemption

I, Reece Waldock, Director General of the Department of Transport, acting pursuant to regulation 41 of the Road Traffic (Vehicle Standards) Regulations 2002 (“the Regulations”) hereby exempt the vehicles to which

this Notice applies from the following provisions of the Regulations, subject to compliance with the conditions set out in clause 4 of this Notice—

(a) Schedule 1, Division 1, Clause 2(3)—as to the mass limits on a single axle only; (b) Schedule 1, Division 1, Clause 2(6)(a)(i)—as to the sum of the mass on two single axles only;

and (c) Schedule 2, Division 1, Clause 2—as to mass limits relating to tyre width only. 2. Interpretation

In this notice—“complying bus” has the meaning provided by regulation 3(2) of the Regulations. “heavy motor vehicle” means a motor vehicle with a Gross Vehicle Mass (GVM) greater than 4500kg. “single drive axle” means a single axle other than a single steer axle through which the wheels of the vehicle are powered.

3. Vehicles to which this Notice applies

This Notice applies only to a heavy motor vehicle that—

(a) is a complying bus; (b) has a front axle consisting of a single steer axle; (c) has a rear axle consisting of a single, dual tyred drive axle; and (d) is operating within Western Australia. 4. Conditions

A vehicle to which this Notice applies is exempt from the provisions set out in clause 1 of this Notice subject to the following conditions—

(a) the drive axle mass shall not exceed 12.0 tonnes; (b) the sum of the mass on all axles shall not exceed 18.0 tonnes (c) the vehicle, when loaded to the axle mass limits in sub-clauses 4(a) and 4(b), shall otherwise comply with all applicable requirements of the Regulations; (d) except as provided in sub-clause 4(e), the vehicle and its components shall have the capacity to carry any increased loads under the increased axle mass limits provided in this Notice without modification; (e) any modifications made to the vehicle and its components to allow it to carry the increased loads provided in this notice must be approved by the Director General in accordance with regulation 69 of the Regulations; and (f) the vehicle shall not be operated on any bridge designated as “Restricted” by the Main Roads Structure Engineering Branch.

Note:

(a) A list of restricted bridges is available at— Main Roads Western Australia website under the Heavy Vehicles section— www.mainroads.wa.gov.au; or from Heavy Vehicle Operations, 525 Great Eastern Highway, Redcliffe, WA 6104. (b) Except as provided in this Notice a vehicle to which this Notice applies must otherwise comply with all applicable requirements of the Regulations. 5. Commencement

This Notice has effect on the day after the day of publication of this Notice in the Government Gazette. This instrument is to be known as RTVSR-2013-00NNN. Dated the 5th day of August 2013.

REECE WALDOCK, Director General.


Appendix F

Definition of Complying Bus

Statutory Rules 1996 No. 342

__________________

Road Transport Reform (Mass and Loading) Regulations (Amendment)

NOTE

These Regulations amend the mass limits in the Road Transport Reform

(Mass and Loading) Regulations to allow “complying buses” an increase of

up to 0.5 tonnes on the front axle and, except for 8-tyred tandem drive

buses, up to 1 tonne on the rear axle or axle group.

These increases are subject to an overall requirement that the total mass of

the bus must not exceed a limit that is 0.5 tonnes less than the sum of the

axle mass limits.

A “complying bus” for this purpose is a bus that meets certain

specifications in the Australian Design Rules concerning emergency exits,

rollover strength and occupant protection and has an approved air

suspension system.

The bus must either have a compliance plate indicating that it was

manufactured on or after 1 July 1994 or be declared by an Authority to

comply with the relevant specifications.

These Regulations also insert a new provision to ensure that if a person is prosecuted for a breach of the mass or dimension requirements of the Principal Regulations, an exemption from those requirements given under other Regulations must be disregarded if the conditions of the exemption have been breached in certain ways.


TABLE OF PROVISIONS

1. Commencement

2. Amendment

3. New regulations 12 and 13

4. Schedule (Mass and Loading Requirements)


Statutory Rules 1996 No. 3421

__________________

Road Transport Reform (Mass and Loading) Regulations2 (Amendment)

I, THE GOVERNOR-GENERAL of the Commonwealth of Australia, acting with the advice of the

Federal Executive Council, make the following Regulations under the Road Transport Reform

(Vehicles and Traffic) Act 1993.

Dated 20 December 1996.

WILLIAM DEANE

Governor-General

By His Excellency’s Command,

JOHN SHARP

Minister for Transport and Regional Development

____________

1. Commencement

1.1 These Regulations commence on a day or days specified by the Commonwealth

Minister for the time being administering the Road Transport Reform (Vehicles and

Traffic) Act 1993, by notice in the Gazette.

2. Amendment

2.1 The Road Transport Reform (Mass and Loading) Regulations are amended as

set out in these Regulations.


3. New regulations 12 and 13

3.1 After regulation 11, insert:

Failure to comply with certain exemption conditions

“12 (1) If:

(a) a person is prosecuted for an offence under these Regulations; and

(b) the offence relates to the failure of a vehicle or combination to

comply with a mass or dimension limit specified in these

Regulations; and

(c) an exemption has been given under any Regulations made under

the Act that is subject to the condition that the vehicle or

combination complies with a greater mass or dimension limit than

the mass or dimension limit referred to in paragraph (b); and

(d) at the time of the alleged offence, the vehicle or combination was

travelling:

(i) on a route other than a route on which the vehicle or

combination was permitted to travel under a condition of the

exemption; or

(ii) at a time other than a time at which the vehicle or

combination was permitted to travel under a condition of the

exemption; or

(iii) accompanied by fewer than the number of pilot or escort

vehicles required under a condition of the exemption; or

(iv) with an aggregate mass that is more than 10% in excess of

the limit allowed under a condition of the exemption;

the exemption must be disregarded for the purposes of the prosecution.

Declaring buses to be complying buses

“13 (1) This regulation applies to a bus with 2 or 3 axles and a single steer axle

that:

(a) is not fitted with a compliance plate in accordance with the Motor

Vehicle Standards Act 1989; or

(b) is fitted with a compliance plate in accordance with that Act but the

compliance plate indicates that the bus was manufactured before 1

July 1994.

“13 (2) The vehicle registration authority may declare that a bus equipped with

an approved air suspension system is a complying bus for the purposes of

these Regulations if the vehicle registration authority is satisfied that the

bus meets:

(a) the emergency exit specifications in ADR 44; and

(b) the rollover strength specifications in ADR 59; and

(c) the occupant protection specifications in ADR 68.”.


4. Schedule (Mass and Loading Requirements)

4.1 Subclause 1.2(6):

Omit the subclause, substitute:

“1.2 (6) The sum of the mass on the axle groups and single axles on a vehicle or

combination must not exceed:

(a) in the case of a complying bus without a trailer:

(i) if the complying bus has 2 axles—16.0 tonnes; and

(ii) if the complying bus has a rear tandem axle group fitted with

single tyres on one axle and dual tyres on the other axle—

20.0 tonnes; and

(iii) if the complying bus has a rear tandem axle group fitted with

dual tyres on both axles—22.5 tonnes; and

(b) in the case of a combination consisting of a complying bus and a

trailer—the sum of the mass limit specified for the bus in paragraph

1.2(6)(a) and the mass limits of the axle groups and single axles of

the trailer as provided in Table 1; and

(c) in any other case—the sum of the mass limits of the axle groups

and single axles as provided in Table 1.”.

4.2 Table 1 (Mass Limits for Single Axles and Axle Groups): Omit “Single steer axle on a motor vehicle 6.0”,

substitute:

“Single steer axle on:

(a) a complying bus 6.5

(b) any other motor vehicle 6.0”.

4.3 Table 1 (Mass Limits for Single Axles and Axle Groups): Omit “(b) a bus licensed to carry standing passengers 10.0”,

substitute:

“(b) a complying bus or a bus licensed to

carry standing passengers 10.0”.

4.4 Table 1 (Mass Limits for Single Axles and Axle Groups): Omit “Tandem axle group fitted with single tyres

on one axle and dual tyres on the other axle 13.0”, substitute:

“Tandem axle group fitted with single tyres

on one axle and dual tyres on the other axle on:

(a) a complying bus 14.0

(b) any other vehicle 13.0”.


4.5 Subclause 4.1 (1): Insert the following definitions:

“‘ADR’ (Australian Design Rule) means a national standard under the Motor

Vehicle Standards Act 1989, as amended and in force from time to time;

‘approved air suspension system’, in relation to a vehicle, means a

suspension system in which:

(a) vertical movement between each axle and the body of the vehicle is

controlled by variations in the pressure of air in an air spring; and

(b) the proportion of the vehicle’s mass that is borne by the air spring

remains substantially constant despite variations in the pressure of

air in the air spring;

‘complying bus’ means:

(a) a bus with 2 or 3 axles and a single steer axle that:

(i) is fitted with a compliance plate in accordance with the

Motor Vehicle Standards Act 1989 indicating that the bus

was manufactured during or after July 1994; and

(ii) meets the emergency exit specifications in ADR 44; and

(iii) meets the rollover strength specifications in ADR 59; and

(iv) meets the occupant protection specifications in ADR 68; and

(v) is equipped with an approved air suspension system; or

(b) a bus that is the subject of a declaration under regulation 13 or

under a corresponding law of another State or Territory;”. _____________________________________________________

NOTES

1. Notified in the Commonwealth of Australia Gazette on 24 December 1996.

2. Statutory Rules 1995 No. 56.


Appendix G

Commonwealth of Australia Gazette

HEAVY VEHICLE NATIONAL LAW NEW SOUTH WALES AND VICTORIA CLASS 3 BUS MASS LIMIT EXEMPTION (NOTICE) 2014 (No. 1) PART 1 – PRELIMINARY 1. Purpose The purpose of this Notice is to exempt specified types of buses from the total mass limits and axle mass limits of the Heavy Vehicle (Mass, Dimension and Loading) National Regulation

(the Regulation). 2. Authorising provision This Notice is made under section 117 of the Heavy Vehicle National Law as in force in each participating jurisdiction (HVNL) and section 69(1)(a) of the Heavy Vehicle (General) National

Regulation. 3. Title This Notice may be cited as the New South Wales and Victoria Class 3 Bus Mass Limit

Exemption (Notice) 2014 (No. 1). 4. Commencement This Notice commences on 10 February 2014. 5. Expiry

This Notice expires on 9 February 2019. 6. Definitions

Unless otherwise stated, words and expressions used in this Notice have the same meanings as those defined in the HVNL. In this Notice – ‘Australian Road Authority’ includes the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator

PART 2 – TWO-AXLE BUSES 7. Application of this Part This Part applies to a two-axle bus that has a steer axle with single tyres, and a single rear (drive) axle with dual tyres and is—

(a) a complying bus; (b) an ultra-low floor bus; (c) a bus that is longer than 12.5m but not longer than 14.5m (a controlled access bus); or (d) a bus that is licensed to carry standing passengers, other than an ultra-low floor bus.

Note: This Part replaces—

In Victoria, Declaration Of Certain 2-Axle Buses As Class 3 Vehicles And Mass Limit Exemptions

For Such Vehicles (S129 2012); and

In New South Wales, Ministerial Declaration (Two Axle Bus Mass Exemption) Order 2013.


8. Exemption from prescribed mass requirement This Part exempts a bus to which it applies from the mass limits stated in section 2(1)(a)(iv) and section 4 of the Regulation. 9. Total mass limit

The mass of a bus must not be more than 18t. 10. Axle mass limits

The mass on an axle of a bus must not be more than- (a) for a steer axle with single tyres – 7t. (b) for a rear drive axle with dual tyres – 12t.

11. Vehicle safety conditions A bus operating in NSW must comply with the following braking and stability control requirements:

(a) If a bus is fitted with an Identification Plate which indicates that the vehicle was manufactured before 1 January 2015, it must be fitted with a properly functioning:

i. Anti-lock braking system; or ii. Electronic stability control.

(b) If a bus is fitted with an Identification Plate which indicates that the vehicle was manufactured on or after 1 January 2015, it must be fitted with properly functioning:

i. Anti-lock braking system and electronic braking system; or ii. Electronic stability control.

(c) Compliance with the requirements of subclauses (a) and (b) must be verified by either- (i) an Identification Plate issued by a person authorised by an Australian Road Authority to affix an Identification Plate; or (ii) a certificate verifying modifications issued by a person authorised by an Australian Road Authority to certify heavy vehicle modifications; or (iii) an original letter from the manufacturer of the vehicle stating the vehicle complies with the requirements of subclause (a), which system is installed; the model and Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) of the vehicle chassis.

(d) A certificate or letter referred to in subclauses (c)(ii) or (c)(iii) must be carried in the driving compartment of the vehicle.

12. Approved routes

A bus operating under this Part may use any road in New South Wales or Victoria.

PART 3 - THREE-AXLE COMPLYING BUSES 13. Application of this Part

This Part applies to a complying bus with a single steer axle and a rear tandem drive axle in New South Wales.

14. Exemption from prescribed mass requirement This Part exempts a bus to which it applies from the mass limits stated in section 2(1)(a)(iv) of the Regulation. 15. Total mass limit The mass of a bus must not be more than-

(a) For a bus with a rear tandem axle group with single tyres on one axle and dual tyres on the other axle - 20.5t. (b) For a bus with a rear tandem axle group fitted with dual tyres upon both axles - 23t.


16. Axle and axle group mass limits The mass on an axle or axle group of a bus must not exceed the limits that apply to single axles and axle groups as set out in Table 1 of Schedule 1 to the Regulation. 17. Vehicle safety conditions

(a) A bus must be fitted with a properly functioning: (i) anti-lock braking system and electronic braking system; or (ii) electronic stability control.

(b) Compliance with the requirements subclause (a) must be verified by either: (i) an Identification Plate issued by a person authorised by an Australian Road Authority to affix an Identification Plate; or (ii) a certificate verifying modifications issued by a person authorised by an Australian Road Authority to certify heavy vehicle modifications; or (iii) an original letter from the manufacturer of the vehicle stating the vehicle complies with the requirements of subclause (a), which system is installed; the model and Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) of the vehicle chassis.

(c) A certificate or letter referred to in subclauses (b)(ii) or (b)(iii) must be carried in the driving compartment of the vehicle.

18. Approved routes A bus operating under this Part may use any road in New South Wales. PART 4 - THREE AXLE ULTRA-LOW FLOOR BUSES 19. Interpretation

In this Part— ‘disrupted railway passenger services’ means the unplanned disruption of railway passenger services operated by a NSW entity that are sufficiently serious to require the provision of rail replacement bus services. ‘rail replacement bus service’ means a bus operated by an accredited service operator within the meaning of the Passenger Transport Act 1990 (NSW) for the purpose of carrying passengers, and persons who were proposing to be passengers, of disrupted railway passenger services. ‘regular bus service’ means a bus service provided in accordance with a service contract entered into under Part 3 of the Passenger Transport Act 1990 (NSW). 20. Application of this Part

This Part applies to a bus providing a regular bus service or a rail replacement bus service in NSW that is either-

(a) A rigid ultra-low floor bus that is longer than 12.5m but not longer than 14.5m that has a rear tandem axle group fitted with single tyres on one axle and dual tyres on the other axle; or

(b) An articulated ultra-low floor bus that has no tandem axle groups and only three single axles, with dual tyres fitted on the centre and rear axles.

Note—This Part replaces the NSW Class 3 Metropolitan High Capacity Bus Mass Limit Exemption

Notice 2012 (as amended)

21. Exemption from prescribed mass requirement This Part exempts a bus to which it applies from the mass limits stated in section 2(1)(a)(iv) and section 4 of the Regulation. 22. Total mass limits

(a) The mass on a bus that complies with subclause 20(a) must not exceed 20.8t.


(b) The mass on a bus that complies with subclause 20(b) must not exceed 26.8t. 23. Axle and axle group mass limits

(a) A bus that complies with subclause 20(a) must not exceed the following mass limits- (i) for a single steer axle - 6.5t. (ii) for a tandem axle group - 14.5t.

(b) A bus that complies with subclause 20(b) of this Notice must not exceed the following mass limits-

(i) for a single steer axle - 6t. (ii) for a central axle - 9t. (iii) for a rear axle – 11.8t.

24. Approved routes

A bus operating under this Part may use any road in New South Wales. DECLARATION I, Richard Hancock, delegate of the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator, hereby exempt a bus to which this Notice applies from the vehicle mass limits in section 2 and the axle and axle group mass limits in section 4 of Schedule 1 of the Heavy Vehicle (Mass, Dimension and Loading)

National Regulation, subject to compliance with the requirements and conditions set out in this Notice. 29th January 2014 Dated Richard Hancock Chief Executive Officer

National Heavy Vehicle Regulator Government Notices Gazette C2014G00166 30/01/2014

Mass Limits for 2-Axle Buses - ntc.gov.au9440C869-E1AE-4415-B32D-B… · Mass Limits for 2-Axle...

Documents

Transcript of Mass Limits for 2-Axle Buses - ntc.gov.au9440C869-E1AE-4415-B32D-B… · Mass Limits for 2-Axle...