A "Defective Vehicle" Notice is issued by the EPA for a motorcycle which fails to meet their Regulations, in addition to the $200 fine. A bike that has such a notice issued against it can't be ridden except to a repair station, or to the EPA testing station.There are many eyes on the inspection process.
Photo: Courtesy of Performance Streetbike
Example of Defective Vehicle Notice
The Defective Vehicle Notice can only be cleared by appearing at the EPA testing station at Lidcombe, by appointment, only on Wednesdays, between limited hours.
This may mean a rider has to travel for some time to get there on a working day. A "normal" defect notice issued under the Road Transport (Vehicle Registration) Regulations can be cleared at any local RTA authorised Safety Check garage.
If the Notice isn't cleared within 30 days, the registration will be cancelled, and the bike can't be re-registered until it is cleared.
If the bike is ridden to the station and the defect isn't cleared, the registration will be cancelled, so the bike can't be ridden home.
Example of Registration Cancellation Notice (2 pages wide)
The Defective Vehicle Notices issued to riders are causing immense inconvenience, massive costs, and head-spinning confusion. The effect is to make the owner spend considerable sums to ensure compliance by buying an original exhaust, or to encourage cheating by riders swapping exhaust systems.
The average cost of a factory original motorcycle exhaust system is from $800 to $2,500 for a larger capacity motorcycle. This manner of enforcement virtually demands that riders obtain factory original equipment, as no reliable information exists that will allow a rider to determine the correct process for compliance of an aftermarket exhaust system.
Clause 36 of the Regulations from the Protection of the Environment Act stipulates that the exhaust label is to be in a format approved by the EPA, despite the content of the label being specified under Clause 19. ADR 39/00 speifies a format for labels to be fitted to the frame of a motorcycle. The EPA offers no assistance in compliance and have not told anyone what the approved format is.
There appears to be confusion at the EPA as to exactly what notices they should be issuing, and as to what stickers the bike must have.
In the example above, the rider was issued with a fine of $200 for "causing a vehicle to be operated without labelled noise control equipment" under Clause 19 of the Protection of the Environment Act
The Suzuki Bandit 1200 motorcycle in question had, two weeks prior, been fitted with a new aftermarket muffler fitted at a cost of approximately $600. The muffler was not supplied with any label, nor had the rider any way to know that he would need one. The aftermarket suppliers are equally unaware of this new law.
A new stock muffler for this model from Suzuki costs just under $1400 and the locally made muffler is of good quality and reputation. The aftermarket muffler was tested by the EPA at the same time the defect notice for lack of label was issued and found to be below the legal noise limit. This is not a loud bike.
This particular Suzuki motorcycle no longer has, for some reason lost in history, the original ADR 39/00 label. The stickers are not indestructible, they age and break or fall off, or become illegible with time and wear.
The EPA Inspector could have issued a Defective Vehicle Notice for "No label on aftermarket exhaust", an appropriate Notice, as by fitting an appropriate label to the aftermarket exhaust, the motorcycle would become compliant with Clause 19(1)(b).
The EPA Inspector chose instead to issue a Defective Vehicle Notice demanding that the owner "Refit ADR 39 Label", in accordance with Clause 19(1)(a).
However, the original label is irrelevant, it has nothing to do with the bike as it now is, the information on it is for an exhaust that isn't on the bike, it tells no one anything about the bike's noise level or the exhaust manufacturer. For that, the bike needs a label for the aftermarket pipe. But the bike was defected for not having the original label.
The EPA has no jurisdiction over ADR labels, only over labels on aftermarket exhausts as per Clause 19.
This indicates that the EPA Inspector either
(1) Could not tell that the aftermarket muffler fitted to this Suzuki motorcycle was not an original Suzuki part, despite the appearance of an Australian brand name (in large, proud lettering) or,
(2) The EPA Inspector makes no distinction between an ADR label and an aftermarket exhaust label.
There are quite clear and distinct differences between these labels. The ADR 39 label is fitted on the frame and can ONLY be issued by the original motorcycle manufacturer where they are under control of all equipment on the motorcycle. A motorcycle manufacturer cannot issue a label as a spare part unless they have fully inspected the motorcycle to ensure it still meets the "Type Approval" for the machine as specified for import and initial sale. Just refitting an original system if you have it doesn't mean they can give you the label, it has to be tested and inspected.
The "aftermarket exhaust label" is defined by a combination of Clause 19 and Clause 36 and is to be fitted on the muffler. The EPA has not issued any details on the "approved" format of this label. It might be that the format in one section of ADR 39/00 may be appropriate, but the section referred to Clause 19 is for content, but EPA have not confirmed this.
By choosing to issue the Defective Vehicle Notice for "Refit ADR 39 Label", the EPA Inspector has indicated a manner of enforcement designed to force the motorcycle owner to purchase an original muffler from Suzuki and also to force the owner to illegally "obtain" an ADR 39 label from a wrecked motorcycle of the same model. Suzuki cannot legally sell him one.
This is the only manner in which this particular Defective Vehicle Notice may be cleared.
This course of action is clearly expensive and unreliable at law, as the sticker has to be obtained illegally, and isn't strictly legal even when re-fitted, unless the manufacturer tests the bike.
When the owner rang the telephone number on the Notice to inquire as to just exactly how they would need to proceed to clear the Defect Notice, they were told the only way was "Like it says, refit the ADR 39 label".
To date, the owner has failed to find a way to clear the defect without doing so dishonestly. The consequence of which is that his motorcycle has now had its Registration cancelled.
No, he is not happy, he is also bewildered by this experience and angry. He is not the only one.
We assert that EPA Enforcement has failed the community. It is clear they do not understand their own Regulations or the reason for them. Ticketing quiet bikes for stickers is not going to get noisy bikes off the road.
Riders certainly cannot understand the requirements or powers of the EPA, or their apparent ability to command the Police in such operations through the conferring of special powers to the Police via the Protection of the Environment Act.
