View the feedback we have received on the Heavy Vehicle National Law statutory instruments consultation paper.

• Do you have any feedback specific to the draft Safety Management System (SMS) Standard or the accompanying Schedule 1 – SMS Evidence Requirements?

  The implementation as laid out in the draft Safety Management System, specific to requirements, burdens and obligations as required, affect or require greater resolution for owner/operators and small businesses disproportionally. The proposed Standards, as laid out in Section 1.1 Leadership and Commitment, 1.4 Safety Culture, 4.1 Performance Targets and Indicators, 4.2 Monitor and Review, Standard 5: Safety Systems are systems which required significant proof and engagement with systems outside of a single operator's direct control. This will unfairly burden small operators trying to do the 'right thing'. Systems are currently written for a hierarchy of responsibility for which small business and operators are unlikely to have the ability to structure in a satisfactory manner without further considerations.

• Consultation question – General

  No

• Consultation question – Section 4

  If implemented, split rest break should be at least 8 hours and include time entering rest & sleep periods, which differ between individuals. Noting a recommended 20-minute wakeful period prior to commencing driving tasks needed for full alertness. Additionally minimum rest breaks must be between 2-3 hours, such as 5/3 or 6/2

• Consultation question – Section 4(b)

  Concern regarding safety use case of split rest breaks, concerned driver will ‘unofficially’ schedule system in place for scheduling, particularly for small scale operations or when driver is time constrained rather than only as needed. Prefer transparent system of reasonable rest breaks, with schedule and systems in place for drivers to take rests as dictated by fatigue & working conditions.

• Do you have any feedback specific to the draft Ministerial Guidelines for Heavy Vehicle Accreditation?

  Risk Classifications Systems Matrix systems may be burdensome and difficult to maintain for an individual operator. Safe Driving Plans system may be better equipped for small operators to undertake pre-trip for fatigue management and risk assessment.

• Do you have any feedback specific to the draft National Audit Standard (NAS)?

  The one period audit rule change is likely to negatively affect the audit quality and not reflect the best interests of customer or regulation. The two-audit rule currently has benefits including that; a first audit establishes relationship and provides operators with clear expectations for current and following audit. The proceeding audit encourages investment in following up and ensuring closure and action of issues, leading to better outcomes. Without two audit rule, Operator and auditor contact stretches to 4 years minimum, divesting both parties from beneficial outreach, although this should not mean it will be significantly harder for an operator to find an auditor it will expose smaller and more remote businesses to increased costs through having to move from local auditor/s, which remote auditors who may have greater travel costs.

• Do you have any feedback specific to the draft Ministerial Standard for Alternative Compliance Hours?

  No