Modified cars - emissions testing
2156. Hon Alison Xamon to the Minister for Transport
I refer to the decision to impose a moratorium on IM 240 emissions testing for modified cars on 11 September 2009, and ask —
(1) Why was the IM 240 emissions testing originally implemented?
(2) What were the anticipated effects of introducing IM 240 emissions testing on —
(a) owners of modified cars;
(b) sellers of aftermarket vehicle parts;
(c) vehicle workshops modifying cars; and
(d) private businesses undertaking IM 240 emissions testing?
(3) On what basis was the moratorium imposed?
(4) How many centres were qualified to perform the IM 240 testing at the time the moratorium was imposed?
(5) What was the basis of qualification to perform the testing?
(6) Which, if any, of the centres were owned and/or operated by the Department of Transport?
(7) Which, if any, of the centres were financially supported by the Department of Transport?
(8) What was the average cost to a vehicle owner to undertake an IM 240 emissions test?
(9) How many vehicles presented a valid IM 240 test result at a vehicle examination centre between the start of the testing regime in April 2009 and the start of the moratorium?
(10) How many vehicles have passed examination at a vehicle examination centre during the moratorium period that would have required an IM 240 test under the original implementation?
(a) how many of these vehicles presented a valid IM 240 test?
(11) What is the Government intending to achieve during the moratorium period?
(12) What were the anticipated effects of imposing a moratorium on IM 240 emissions testing on —
(a) owners of modified cars;
(b) sellers of aftermarket vehicle parts;
(c) vehicle workshops modifying cars; and
(d) private businesses undertaking IM 240 emissions testing?
(13) What, if any, steps have been undertaken to minimise the financial damage of the moratorium on the private businesses that were performing IM 240 emissions testing?
(14) When will the Minister lift the moratorium on IM 240 emissions testing?
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied:
(1) IM240 vehicle emission testing was implemented to increase the range of approved testing options available for owners of modified vehicles to ensure compliance with regulations.
(2)
(a) The provision of an additional vehicle emissions testing mechanism that was cost effective, being cheaper than a full Australian Design Rules test.
(b) Strong inducement that parts being sold result in compliance with emission standards and regulations.
(c) Increase the range of approved vehicle emission testing options that could be accessed and utilised.
(d) The opportunity for businesses to consider increasing their range of services to include vehicle emission testing, either in-house or as a separate endeavour.
(3) The moratorium on IM240 modified vehicle emission testing was imposed in response to industry concerns about the scope, cost and availability of the IM240 test for modified vehicles.
(4) Two.
(5)
• An approved test facility.
• Adequately trained personnel to perform tests and maintain the facility.
• Evidence of management risk systems in place that gave some guarantee of traceability and risk management. National Association of Testing Authorities (NATA) accreditation has been identified as one way to satisfy this criterion, although evidence of substantial progress towards achieving NATA accreditation may be deemed by the Department of Transport as able to produce acceptable test results.
(6)-(7) None.
(8) Approximately $900.
(9) Fifteen.
(10) Seventy five vehicles have been given a temporary modification permit during the moratorium. Depending on the outcome of the review, most may still need an IM240 test.
(a) Six.
(11) The purpose of the moratorium is to provide time to consult with industry stakeholders and to develop a testing regime that addresses their concerns and ensures that vehicles which have undergone significant modification meet the emission standards specified in the Australian Design Rules (ADR) for such vehicles as required by the Regulations.
(12) (a) The moratorium allows vehicle owners to operate their vehicles whilst the revised test requirements are developed. They may be required to undergo another emission testing regime at the conclusion of the moratorium depending upon the outcome of the review.
(b) It would provide more certainty as to what parts would give rise to an emissions test in the longer term and during the moratorium modifications could be carried out with a reduced testing regime pending the determination of the review.
(c) Given this time, these businesses may be able to improve their work practices to help ensure that they are providing a 'fit for purpose' modified product that meets the vehicle standards.
(d) The IM240 is a cheaper alternative to the full ADR test for emissions and the moratorium would be expected to result in a temporary reduction in the volume of testing during the moratorium.
(13) None, although IM240 test reports always have been and are still accepted as evidence of compliance. The moratorium may have reduced the demand for services.
(14) This will be lifted when a clear policy is devised and implemented.