Announcement date
19 April 2024
Link to announcement
Making some noise for safer vehicles | Ministers for the Department of Infrastructure
Problem being addressed
As Australia continues to decarbonise its road transport sector, there will be an increasing number of quiet road transport vehicles (QRTVs) on our roads, mainly comprised of electric and hybrid vehicles. These vehicles are typically very quiet at low speeds, when tyre and wind noise is negligible, which can make it difficult for pedestrians, particularly those with low vision to hear these vehicles, increasing the risk of a collision. This is a particular issue for the blind and low vision community, given their reliance on sound to negotiate the road network independently.
Proposal
To address the risk QRTVs pose for vulnerable road users safety, the United Nations (UN) World Forum for the Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations (known as WP.29) has established UN Regulation 138/01 in the RVSA to require Acoustic Vehicle Alerting Systems (AVAS) to be installed in new hybrid and electric vehicles. AVAS are sets of components installed in QRTVs for the purpose of emitting a sound external to the vehicle to improve its audibility to vulnerable road users.
The Impact Analysis (IA) considered the case for mandating UN Regulation 138/01 as a New Australian Design Rule under the Road Vehicle Standards Act 2018. The IA considered three options for the introduction of AVAS that would result in different adoption rates.
- Option 1 relies on the business as usual approach where the market determines the introduction of these systems.
- Option 2 mandates the fitment of AVAS to new light QRTVs (up to 3.5 tonnes gross vehicle mass) from January 2025.
- Option 3 is effectively the same as Option 2 but also mandates the fitment of AVAS to heavy QRTVs from November 2025. Two timeframes for Option 3 were evaluated:
- 3a - mandating AVAS for light vehicles from January 2025 and heavy vehicles from November 2025, and
- 3b - mandating AVAS for light vehicles and heavy vehicles from November 2025.
Assessed Impact Analysis outcome
The Office of Impact Analysis’ assessment is that the quality of the analysis in the IA is good practice.
Assessment comments
The IA addresses the seven IA questions and follows an appropriate policy development process commensurate with the significance of the problem and magnitude of the proposed intervention. In particular, response to Question 4 of the IA demonstrates high quality cost benefit analysis of the considered options and good analysis of the consequential impacts on the stakeholders.
Regulatory burden
The average annual regulatory costs are estimated to be $16.9 million for Option 2, $17.6 million for Option 3a and $19.3 million for Option 3b (as more vehicles are affected in the first 10 years). It is anticipated that regulatory savings from further alignment of the ADRs with international standards will offset the additional RBM costs of this measure.