bus industry compliance statistics and trends report · bus industry report– july 2020 4 1...

July 2020

Bus Industry Compliance Statistics and Trends Report

Bus Industry Report– July 2020 2

DISCLAIMER

Transport for NSW (TfNSW) Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) publishes statistical data to disseminate information and provide transparency for the benefit of the public.

Transport for NSW has taken care to ensure that data published is correct and accurate as possible. However, TfNSW do not warrant, represent or guarantee the accuracy or suitability for any purpose of the information published within this report.

Transport for NSW does not accept any legal liability for any loss or damage arising directly or indirectly from the use of data published within this report.

Transport NSW recommends that users exercise their own skill, care and judgment with respect to their use of data published including by evaluating the relevance of the material within the report for their purpose.

Date: July 2020

Branch: Insights and Engagement

Division: Safety, Environment and Regulation


Contents

1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 4

2 Key statistics and findings ...................................................................................... 5

3 Bus operator profile ................................................................................................ 7 3.1 Definitions .................................................................................................. 7

4 Bus operators and accreditations ........................................................................... 9 4.1 Operators and accreditations ..................................................................... 9 4.2 Accreditations by fleet size ...................................................................... 10 4.3 Operator accreditations ............................................................................ 11 4.4 Operator location by postcode ................................................................. 12

5 Registered buses .................................................................................................. 14 5.1 2014 – 2018 bus registrations .................................................................. 14

6 Bus driver authorities ............................................................................................ 16 6.1 Age and gender of bus drivers ................................................................. 17 6.2 Gender split .............................................................................................. 18 6.3 Bus driver location by postcode ............................................................... 19

7 Compliance ........................................................................................................... 21 7.1 Vehicle unit inspection notice compliance rate ........................................ 22 7.2 Major and major grounded defect notices ................................................ 22 7.3 Defect fault breakdown ............................................................................ 23 7.4 Mechanical issue breakdown ................................................................... 25

8 Independent audit results ..................................................................................... 27 8.1 BOAS rationale ........................................................................................ 27 8.2 Purpose of the audits ............................................................................... 27 8.3 Audit categories and process ................................................................... 27 8.4 Number of independent audits ................................................................. 28 8.5 Independent audit deficiency rates .......................................................... 28 8.6 Audit deficiencies ..................................................................................... 29

9 Annual Self-Assessment Reporting results .......................................................... 31 9.1 Drug and alcohol testing .......................................................................... 31 9.2 Bus safety employees tested with positive results ................................... 31

10 Bus incident reporting ........................................................................................... 33 10.1 Incidents categorised by incident type ..................................................... 33 10.2 Collision incident type by description ....................................................... 35 10.3 Collisions incident type by cause ............................................................. 36 10.4 Fire on bus incident type .......................................................................... 37 10.5 Assault and offensive behaviour incident type ......................................... 39 10.6 Threatening and intimidating behaviour incident type .............................. 41 10.7 Medical incident type not resulting in a collision ...................................... 42 10.8 Fatality ..................................................................................................... 42 10.9 Antisocial behaviour ................................................................................. 43

10.9.1 Top four antisocial behaviour by location ................................... 45

11 Glossary ............................................................................................................... 46


1 Introduction

Transport for NSW regulate bus operators and drivers under the Passenger Transport Act 1990 or 2014 and associated regulations. In addition, we regulate buses and coaches as heavy vehicles under the Road Transport legislation.

Our vision for the bus sector is to work with the bus industry, co-regulators and other agencies to improve bus safety in NSW with the aim of safe journeys by ensuring safe bus drivers, operators and buses.

Our purpose is to work together to protect everyone on our roads. Everything we do aims to reduce deaths and serious injuries on NSW roads. Our safety commitment means a safer NSW – for every individual and the community.

As a regulator, our role is to ensure and promote safe and efficient journeys through safer drivers, safer vehicles, and safer operators.

On 1 July 2005, as part of an accreditation reform the Bus Operator Accreditation Scheme (BOAS) was introduced to achieve a number of aims.

Visit the Buses Section of our website for more information www.rms.nsw.gov.au/business-industry/buses/index.html.

From 1 November 2017, a new regulatory framework for passenger services provided by any vehicle with 12 seats or less (including the driver) was introduced and is overseen by the Point to Point Transport Commissioner.

Visit their website for more information https://www.pointtopoint.nsw.gov.au/.

The purpose of this report is to identify how BOAS is performing and to highlight key statistics and trends about bus compliance in the five years to 2019.

On 1 December 2019 Transport for NSW and Roads and Maritime Services integrated into one organisation being Transport for NSW.

Safer vehicles

Safer operators

Safer drivers

http://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/business-industry/buses/index.html

https://www.pointtopoint.nsw.gov.au/


2 Key statistics and findings


Key findings between 2015 and 2019 are:

the number of bus operators has decreased by 13 per cent from 1,522 in 2015 to 1,369 in 2019

accreditations have decreased by 14 per cent from 2,078 in 2015 to 1,738 in 2019

the total number of buses as of 2019 is 11,593. This is a 16 per cent increase when compared to the 10,035 recorded in December 2015.

driver authorities have increased 0.1 per cent in the five years with 28,571 driver authorities in 2019

between 2015 and 2019 on average 64 per cent of bus drivers were over the age of 50

the number of bus drivers over the age of 70 has increased 41 per cent between 2015 and 2019, however, as a proportion of total bus drivers those over 70 years have increased by 2 per cent

females consistently represent 9 per cent of total bus drivers

the number of buses inspected during 2019 was 22,846

registered long-distance, tourist and charter buses have shown a 6.7 per cent increase in compliance since 2015

registered regular passenger services have shown a 3.3 per cent increase in compliance since 2015

a total of 2,396 independent operator audits were reviewed with an average of 479 audits each year

the largest deficiency identified during bus operator independent audits relate to the reporting of incidents in the Bus Incident Management Database (BIMD)

the total number of ‘fire on bus’ incidents recorded were 175 with zero fatalities

physical assaults on bus drivers overall assault have increased by 11 per cent since 2015

bus incidents have increased by 63 per cent from 8,105 in 2015 to 13,221 in 2019

more bus safety employees (also known as transport safety employees who perform bus safety work) have returned positive results to drug testing (1.2%) than alcohol testing (0.2%)

one pedestrian on average per week is hit by a bus not resulting in a fatality

on average there have been eight fatalities per year


3 Bus operator profile1

The Bus Operator Accreditation Scheme (BOAS) was introduced on 1 July 2005 and comprises of the following key elements:

a requirement to apply for accreditation and renew accreditations every three years

a requirement that only licensed (MVRIA) repairers perform safety critical work on buses (brakes, suspension and steering)

Annual Self-Assessment Reports (ASAR)

independent audits

a comprehensive audit tool

a Safety Management System (SMS)

drug and alcohol programs.

Operators can apply for regular passenger services bus operator accreditation or long distance, tourist and charter bus operator accreditation or both.

3.1 Definitions

Regular Passenger Service (RPS)

A regular passenger service (RPS) is a public passenger service conducted according to regular routes and timetables but does not include a long distance, tourist or charter service.

An RPS operator must hold a service contract with Transport for NSW, or be the sub-contracted operator of a service contract holder.

Long Distance, Tourist and Charter Services (LDTC)

Long distance service A long distance service is a public passenger service conducted according to one or more regular routes where each passenger is carried for a distance of no less than 40 kilometres.

Tourist service A tourist service is a public passenger service, that is a:

a) pre-booked service designed for the carriage of tourists to destinations listed on a publicly available tour itinerary

b) service designed for the carriage of tourists where all passenger journeys have a common origin or a common destination, or both.

1 Data Source: Transport Information Management System (TIMS) as at 3 April 2020


Charter service Charter service is a public passenger service that is pre-booked for hire to take passengers for an agreed fee, but only if, according to the terms of the hire:

a) the hirer is entitled to determine the route for the journey and the time of travel

b) all passenger journeys have a common origin and/or common destination

c) individual fares are not payable by the passengers (either to the operator of the service or to the driver of the vehicle)

d) the service is not provided according to regular routes or timetables.


4 Bus operators and accreditations

4.1 Operators and accreditations

There are currently 1,369 bus operators, a decrease of 153 operators (10%) since 2015.

The number of accreditations has decreased by 340 (16%) since 2015.

The decrease may be attributed to the new regulatory framework for passenger services provided by any vehicle with 12 seats or less (including the driver) introduced in November 2017, which has transitioned to the Point to Point Transport Commissioner.

One operator can hold both a long distance,tourist and charter and a regular passenger service accreditation.

Of the total number of bus operators in 2019, 761 (56%) hold only one accreditation type with the remaining 608 (44%) holding both accreditation types.

31-Dec-15 31-Dec-16 31-Dec-17 31-Dec-18 31-Dec-19

Total Accreditations 2,078 1,997 1,908 1,825 1,738

Current operators 1,522 1,418 1,358 1,318 1,369

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,800

2,000

2,200

2015 - 2019 total operators and accreditations

Graph 1


4.2 Accreditations by fleet size

As of 2019, there were 1,738 accreditations compared to 2,078 in 2015. This represents a 16 per cent decrease in accreditations.

When reviewing accreditations by fleet size, we see that:

the majority of bus accreditations (72%) are approved to operate less than ten buses

about 9% can operate 10-19 vehicles

about 14% can operate 20 or more vehicles.

Graph 2

0-9 10-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80-89 90-99 >100

LDTC 851 121 46 25 16 16 7 2 2 3 25

RPS 465 46 26 24 12 9 7 4 2 3 26

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900Number of accreditations by fleet size


4.3 Operator accreditations

LDTC accreditations have decreased by 263 accreditations (19%) in the five years to 2019.

RPS has decreased by 77 accreditations (11%) in the same period.

LDTC accreditations make up 64 per cent of total accreditations, with RPS making up the remaining 36 per cent.

Graph 3

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

LDTC 1377 1325 1253 1180 1114

RPS 701 672 655 645 624

Total 2078 1997 1908 1825 1738

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

2015 - 2019 Operator accreditations


4.4 Operator location by postcode

The map below provides an indication of the number of accreditations by postcode.

Figure 1


The most accreditations for 2019 were located within the postcode 2340-Tamworth area followed by 2480-Lismore and 2400 - Moree.

A single postcode has been used as operators can have multiple addresses recorded in the database, e.g. a postal address and a number of depot addresses.

As mentioned earlier, one operator can hold more than one accreditation.

One postcode can cover multiple suburbs in the same area.

Table 1

Top 10 postcodes by number of accreditations

Rank Postcode Suburb(s) No. of bus

accreditations

1 2340 Tamworth, Nemingha, Nundle, Loomberah, Dungowan, Manilla

Hallsville 29

2 2480 Lismore, Modanville, Goolmangar, South Lismore, Tregeagle,

Goonellabah, Numulgi 23

3 2400 Moree 22

4 1805 Burwood 21

5 2594 Young, Bribbaree 18

6 2582 Yass, Bowning 16

7 2358 Uralla, Kingston 15

8 2795 Kelso, Bathurst, Laffing Waters, Meadow Flat 15

9 2666 Temora 15

10 2650 Kooringal, Wagga Wagga, Lake Albert 15


5 Registered buses2

There are currently 11,593 registered buses of which 92 per cent are classified as a heavy vehicle.

Registered buses are categorised by two usage codes: CBUS and RBUS/OMNI.

CBUS Charter/airways vehicle used for hire

RBUS/OMNI Bus/tourist vehicle used for hire

Of those registered buses, there are currently:

8,899 buses with usage code RBUS/OMNI

2,694 buses with usage code CBUS.

CBUS 2,694

RBUS/OMNI 8,899

5.1 Table 2015 – 2019 bus registrations

In 2015 there were a total of 10,035 RBUS/OMNI and CBUS registrations compared to 11,593 in 2019. This is an increase of 1,558 registrations (16 per cent).

Table 3

2015 – 2019 bus registrations by type and year

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

CBUS 2,020 2,207 2,339 2,559 2,694

RBUS/OMNI 8,015 8,276 8,478 9,025 8,899

Total 10,035 10,483 10,817 11,584 11,593

The number of RBUS/OMNI registrations has increased by 11 per cent from 8,015 in 2015 to 8,899 in 2019.

2 Source DRIVES database


The number of CBUS registrations has increased 33 per cent from 2,020 in 2015 to 2,694 in 2019 however CBUS registrations continue to make up about 20 per cent of registrations.

Graph 4

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

RBUS/OMNI 8,015 8,276 8,478 9,025 8,899

CBUS 2,020 2,207 2,339 2,559 2,694

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

2015 - 2019 number of registered buses


6 Bus driver authorities3

All drivers of public passenger buses seating 13 or more (including the driver) must be authorised under the Passenger Transport Act 1990 or 2014.

In 2019 there were 28,511 driver authorities, which is consistent with the past five years, although there was a slight drop in numbers in 2017 from previous years.

From 2018 to 2019 there was a decrease of 83 drivers.

2018 recorded the highest ever number of bus driver authorities.

This may be attributed to the establishment of the Point to Point Transport Commissioner and Point to Point laws.

Graph 5

3 Data Source: Transport Information Management System (TIMS) as at 8 January 2019

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Current Drivers 28,534 28,184 27,553 28,594 28,511

20,000

21,000

22,000

23,000

24,000

25,000

26,000

27,000

28,000

29,000

Number of bus driver authorities


6.1 Age and gender of bus drivers

The industry’s workforce is aging with the majority of bus drivers over the age of 50 years. Between 2015 and 2019 the per cent of drivers over the age of 50 remained steady at 64 per cent. It is worth noting that the number of bus drivers over the age of 70 increased 41 per cent between 2015 and 2019, from 1,513 to 2,131 respectively, however, as a percentage of total bus drivers, the increase was more moderate at 2 per cent.

Drivers over the age of 60 are required to have annual medical assessments.

It is forecast that in the next five years, there will be additional 5,043 drivers who will be required to have yearly medical assessments.

Drivers under the age of 60 with no medical condition are required to complete a medical assessment every three years.

Those with a medical condition are required to have an annual medical assessment.

In November 2018, the medical assessment process was streamlined for bus drivers to avoid duplication and save customers time and money.

Drivers over the age of 60, or who have a medical condition, now require just one medical assessment that covers both their driver licence and driver authority.

Transport for NSW is working with the industry by allowing doctors to now complete the medical assessment form online.

Medical assessments for bus drivers are now aligned to driver’s birthdays.

Graph 6

20-24

25-29

30-34

35-39

40-44

45-49

50-54

55-59

60-64

65-69

70-74

75-79

80-84

85-89

90-94

F 13 47 112 183 270 374 474 539 375 174 76 31 3

M 91 419 1227 1906 2063 2864 3619 4504 4204 2922 1449 485 82 4 1

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

Bus driver authorities by age group and gender


Graph 7

6.2 Gender split

Females consistently represent nine per cent of total bus drivers in the past five years.

Graph 8

20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65-69 70-74 75-79 80-84 85-89 90-94

2015 128 730 1,461 1,918 2,730 3,519 4,573 4,971 4,253 2,737 1,154 317 40 2

2016 128 661 1,450 1,936 2,576 3,536 4,379 4,939 4,212 2,698 1,263 358 47 1

2017 105 527 1,413 1,918 2,352 3,394 4,051 4,954 4,227 2,805 1,359 406 38 4

2018 121 563 1,524 2,094 2,445 3,468 4,141 5,124 4,340 2,899 1,397 427 45 6

2019 104 466 1,339 2,089 2,333 3,238 4,093 5,043 4,579 3,096 1,525 516 85 4 1

-

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

Bus driver authorities by age group and gender

2,601

25,931

2,588

25,596

2,503

25,050

2,622

25,971

2671

25,840

-

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

F M F M F M F M F M

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Bus driver authorities by gender


6.3 Bus driver location by postcode

The highest number of bus driver authorities for 2019 was located within the 2170 postcode, followed by postcode 2148 and 2145.

Please note that one postcode may cover multiple suburbs in the same area.

Table 4

Top 10 postcodes with bus driver authorities

Rank Postcode Suburb(s) No. of bus driver authorities

1 2170 Casula, Chipping Norton, Hammondville, Liverpool, Lurnea, Moorebank, Mount Pritchard,

Prestons, Warwick Farm

453

2 2148 Blacktown, Kings Park, Maryong, Prospect 437

3 2145 Constitution Hill, Girraween, Greystanes, Mays Hill, Pemulwuy, Pendle Hill, Wentworthville,

Westmead

335

4 2560 Airds, Ambarvale, Appin, Blair Athol, Bradbury, Campbelltown, Englorie Park, Glen Alpine,

Leumeah, Rosemeadow, Ruse, St Helens Park, Woodbine

286

5 2155 Beaumonth Hills, Kellyville, Kellyville Ridge, North Kellyville, Rousehill, Rouse Hill Town Centre

262

6 2770 Bidwill, Blackett, Dharruk, Emerton, Hebersham, Lethbridge Park, Minchinbury, Mount Druitt,

Shalvey, Tregear, Whalan, Willmot

260

7 2761 Colebee, Dean Park, Glendenning, Hassall Grove, Oakhurst, Plumpton

258

8 2250 Gosford, Erina, Holgate, Kariong, Kulnura, Lisarow, Mangrove Mountain, Matcham, Narara,

Niagara Park, Peats Ridge, Point Clare, Point Frederick, Somersby, Springfield, Tascott,

Wyoming

251

9 2259 Chain Valley Bay, Gwandalan, Hamlyn Terrace, Jilliby, Kanwal, Lake Munmorah, Mannering Park,

Mardi, South Tacoma, Summerland Point, Tuggerah, Tuggerawong, Wadalba, Watanobbi,

Woongarrah, Wyee, Wyong, Wyongah, Yarramalong

219

9 2166 Cabramatta, Canley Heights, Canley Vale, Lansvale

219

10 2480 Booyong, Caniaba, Clunes, Dorroughby, Lismore, Federal, Goonellabah, Modanville, Nimbin,

Richmond Hill, Tregeagle, Tullera

214


Figure 2

The map below shows the location of bus driver authorities by postcode.


7 Compliance4

As part of the BOAS accreditation scheme, public passenger buses are required to be inspected twice a year by Transport for NSW Heavy Vehicle Inspectors.

In the past five years:

more than 16,000 notices were issued to RBUS/OMNI and CBUS, which is 3.5 per cent of all notices issued to heavy vehicles greater than 4.5 tonnes

notices issued to RBUS reduced by 14 per cent while CBUS remained consistent

RBUS/OMNI were more compliant than CBUS

RBUS/OMNI average compliance rate* of 88.9 per cent is considerably higher than the CBUS average compliance rate of 64.6% and the overall heavy vehicle (HV) industry of 80.9%

CBUS compliance rate has steadily increased from 60.4.1 per cent in 2015 to 67.1 per cent in 2019

RBUS/OMNI compliance rate has increased by 3.3 per cent from 2015 to 2019.

* Compliance rate includes Heavy Vehicle Inspection Scheme (HVIS), Heavy Vehicle Safety Station (HVSS), On Road Enforcement (ORE) and Special Operations.

Table 5

Compliance Statistics

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

CBUS

Units Inspected 3,661 4,162 4,336 4,703 5,000

Notices to Vehicle Units

1,450 1,556 1,483 1,554 1,646

Compliance Rate 60.40% 62.60% 65.80% 67.00% 67.10%

RBUS/OMNI

Units Inspected 15,488 15,839 16,521 17,363 17,846


2,047 1,884 1,645 1,782 1,765

Compliance Rate 86.80% 88.10% 90.00% 89.70% 90.10%

HV industry

Units Inspected 525,360 543,364 528,988 494,445 429,747


97,742 101,935 100,057 96,995 84,690

Compliance Rate 81.40% 81.20% 81.10% 80.40% 80.30%

4 Data Source: VROP (Vehicle Regulation Operations database)


7.1 Vehicle unit inspection notice compliance rate

Graph 9

The compliance rate is the per cent of vehicle units inspected that are compliant.

RBUS/OMNI has an average compliance rate of 88.9 per cent in the past five years, which is considerably higher than CBUS and the heavy vehicle industry.

The reason behind the compliance rating is that RBUS/OMNI holds a contract with Transport for NSW while CBUS is a long distance, tourist and charter service.

The difference in compliance rate may be attributed to RBUS/OMNI:

having a vehicle age limit requirement resulting in the operation of newer vehicles

KPI requirements that include service reliability, incomplete trips, contract bus maintenance major defects and contract bus maintenance minor defects as part of their contract.

However, CBUS continues to improve annually with 11 per cent increase in the past five years, while RBUS/OMNI has recorded a three per cent increase.

7.2 Major and major grounded defect notices

Operators are responsible to ensure vehicles meet the prescribed standards and mechanical conditions. If a bus is found to be non-compliant a defect notice is issued. Defects identified are recorded based on safety risk. The National Heavy Vehicle law identifies three main categories for defects, Formal Warning (Self Clearing), Minor and Major with a subcategory of Major Grounded.

Major and major grounded defects are most severe. These defects are likely to cause a serious crash or fatality.

The majority of buses do not receive major and/or major grounded defects.

During 2019:

22,846 buses were inspected

125 major and major grounded defect notices were issued

the most notices for major and major grounded defects related to brakes (25.6%) followed by ancillary equipment (20.5%).

67.1%

90.1%80.3%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Notice to inspection compliance rate

CBUS RBUS/OMNI HV Industry


The past five years’ trend saw:

an average compliance rate for RBUS/OMNI of 99.7 per cent

an average compliance rate for CBUS of 98.2 per cent

RBUS/OMNI and HV industry remain stable, while CBUS fluctuated slightly.

Graph 10

* Compliance rate includes Heavy Vehicle Inspection Scheme (HVIS), Heavy Vehicle Safety Station (HVSS), On Road Enforcement (ORE) and Special Operations.

7.3 Defect fault breakdown

In the past five years, ancillary equipment (e.g. light, mirror, marking, etc.) remains the most common defect fault for both RBUS/OMNI and CBUS at 27.8 per cent followed by brake related defect faults at 19.2 per cent.

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

CBUS 97.7% 98.2% 98.0% 98.5% 98.6%

RBUS/OMNI 99.6% 99.6% 99.7% 99.7% 99.7%

HV Industry 98.2% 98.2% 98.2% 98.2% 98.2%

95%

96%

97%

98%

99%

100%

Compliance rate for major and major grounded defect notices


Table 6

Defect faults by registration

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

CBUS RBUS/ OMNI

CBUS RBUS/ OMNI

CBUS RBUS/ OMNI

CBUS RBUS/ OMNI

CBUS RBUS/ OMNI

Ancillary Equipment

864 904 921 774 927 775 856 814 944 823

Brakes 557 750 578 664 486 531 503 498 484 439

Oil & Fuel Leaks

293 376 335 378 331 289 323 312 355 288

Suspension 280 449 309 385 247 332 274 300 295 262

Body & Chassis 253 340 259 313 220 228 245 275 284 291

Other 243 201 235 180 191 165 211 164 220 147

Steering 162 241 166 240 143 197 144 181 143 188

Wheels & Tyres 170 151 194 129 190 143 184 144 181 116

Exhaust & Noise

124 130 107 95 100 91 93 97 103 91

Tow Couplings 58 16 52 12 57 9 43 7 34 12

In reviewing the five year trend, we can see that for:

RBUS/OMNI

the five year average for the number of ancillary equipment defect faults was 818

in 2019, 823 ancillary equipment defect faults were recorded, which is consistent with the five year average

the number of brakes defects faults for 2019 was 439, which is 137 lower than the five year average of 576.

CBUS

the five year average for the number of ancillary equipment defect faults was 902

in 2019, 944 ancillary equipment defect faults were recorded, which is 42 more than the five year average

the number of brake defect faults for 2019 was 484, which is 37 lower than the five year average of 521.


7.4 Mechanical issue breakdown

In the past five years, the top three mechanical maintenance issues identified for RBUS/OMNI, and CBUS were:

1. Engine oil leaks

five year average was 188 records

in 2019, 177 were recorded, which is 11 less than the five year average

2. On axle 2 - more than 30 per cent break imbalance between wheels


in 2019, 82 were recorded, which is 10 more than the five year average

3. Transmission oil leak


in 2019, 44 were recorded which is three less than the five year average.

More information is available in the table on the next page.


Table 7

Top mechanical issues

Fault description 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Grand Total

Engine oil leaks 184 213 189 177 177 940

On Axle 2 -- More than 30% brake imbalance between wheels

71 80 69 59 82 361

Transmission oil leak 54 55 49 34 44 236

Windscreen is damaged / cracked

41 38 50 48 54 231

ADR 35 system fault. With one tank drained and when service brake is applied, Maxi brake automatically applies.

43 36 27 29 34 169

Windscreen washers are inoperative / incorrectly aimed

21 28 32 33 43 157

ADR 35 System to operate correctly.

43 28 26 30 16 143

Windscreen washers are inoperative

19 32 16 27 22 116

Reverse light inoperative

22 24 27 20 21 114

Fire extinguisher insecure

24 22 26 23 14 109

Number plate light/s inoperative

37 21 18 20 17 113

ADR35 system fault when one air reservoir is drained, both circuits drain rendering service brakes inoperative

28 27 16 16 20 107

On Axle 2 -- service brake/s uneven efficiency (left side low)

24 23 19 22 17 105

Drag link end excessive play / movement (rear end)

32 13 20 23 16 104

Note: data has been extracted where the total count on the mechanical fault is more than 100


8 Independent audit results5

8.1 BOAS rationale

On 1 July 2005, as part of an accreditation reform the Bus Operator Accreditation Scheme (BOAS) was introduced to:

apply for reaccreditation and renew accreditations every three years

allow only licensed (MVRIA) repairers to perform safety critical work on buses (brakes, suspension and steering)

complete an Annual Self-Assessment Report

carry out an independent audit every three years

develop a comprehensive audit tool

develop a Safety Management System

develop a drug and alcohol program.

The major objectives of BOAS are to:

provide safe and reliable public passenger bus services

ensure bus operators comply with the requirements of the scheme

improve the effectiveness and efficiency of bus operations as a result of the accreditation process.

8.2 Purpose of the audits

The objective of the audits is to confirm:

compliance and regulation with BOAS pursuant to the Act

standards and conditions of accreditation are being met

systems are tested and checked

bus operators understand their obligations under BOAS.

8.3 Audit categories and process

Accredited bus operators are subject to an Annual Self-Assessment Report (ASAR) and an independent audit every third year:

An ASAR is conducted by an operator of their accreditation system using our form to determine compliance and must be conducted annually. Refer to Section 9 – Annual Self-Assessment Reporting results for more information.

An independent audit is a review of an accredited operator’s compliance with the legislative requirements of BOAS.

Transport for NSW require accredited bus operators to submit an independent audit of their BOAS at least once every three years during the period of accreditation.

5 Data source: Independent Audit Deficiency spreadsheet as at 21 January 2019


Transport for NSW will advise operators when their independent audit is due and provide them with a list of qualified independent BOAS auditors.

Operators can select the auditor of their choice from the approved list and engage them at their own expense to perform the audit.

All audits are returned to Transport for NSW for review and assessment.

Requests for further information or appropriate action may be taken based on audit results to ensure compliance.

An accredited operator may be audited at any time by a Transport for NSW program auditor.

This auditor will use the same audit tool as an independent auditor.

8.4 Number of independent audits

Table 8

Number of independent audits

Year RPS LDTC Operator

accreditation audits accreditation audits audits*

2015 230 455 565

2016 228 425 502

2017 202 362 426

2018 208 432 484

2019 222 360 419

Grand Total

1,090 2,034 2,396

* One operator can hold both an LDTC and an RPS accreditation.

A total of 2,396 independent operator audits were reviewed in the five year reporting period with an average of 479 audits each year.

The total figure includes a small number of audits performed by Roads and Maritime Services auditors.

8.5 Independent audit deficiency rates

The performance of several audit components remains steady; however, there are significant increases in deficiencies relating to Safety Management Systems (Section 10) and Management Information Systems (Section 7).

The significant rise in both section 10 and section 7 is a result of changes made to the way data was being recorded.

The top five audit component deficiencies observed in the past five years remains consistent and include:

1. management information system

2. vehicle maintenance and heavy vehicle inspection scheme

3. bus operator management and records

4. safety management system

5. buses.


Graph 11

8.6 Audit deficiencies

The top three audited deficiencies with the highest increase in the past five years were:

1. bus incident reporting (Have notifiable crashes or incidents been reported via the bus incident management database as required?)

2. registration usage (Are the vehicles registered according to Transport for NSW requirements by usage code?)

3. vehicle maintenance (Is the maintenance carried out by the operator’s maintenance schedule? The independent auditor will select a sample of vehicles to make sure the maintenance is carried out as required by the manufacturer standards.)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Independent audit deficiencies by audit component

Management Information System

Vehicle maintenance and Heavy Vehicle Inspection Scheme

Bus operator management and records

Safety Management System

Buses

Records management

Drug and Alcohol


Table 9

Top 10 independent audit deficiencies in 2019

Rank Audit

Section Audit Question 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

1 10.7.3

Have notifiable accidents or incidents been reported via the Bus Incident Management Database as required?

2 2 97 210 102

2 7.5 Are the vehicles registered according to Roads and Maritime requirements ie CBUS or RBUS?

0 80 136 86

4 8.7

From a sample of maintenance records, is the maintenance carried out in accordance with the operator’s maintenance schedule?

64 71 121 147 80

3 12.1 Have records been maintained in English and held for at least five years?

26 49 59 89 55

9 8.6

Does the operator have a maintenance schedule for the sampled vehicles that is consistent with, or better than, the manufacturer’s recommended maintenance standards?

20 21 32 23 25

5 10.5.8 Are the records stored in continuous date order for the last three years?

8 11 14 17 22

7 DA2 Does the operator have a drug and alcohol program and policy in place?

6 6 11 15 15

6 DA1 Has the operator conducted a risk assessment?

0 11 18 9

8 10.3.3

Have risk controls identified in the risk register been implemented? (Auditor to review the controls of the two highest rated risks).

0 14 12 7

10 10.4.1

Has the operator developed SMS related procedures and made these procedures available to all staff?

2 2 9 10 7


9 Annual Self-Assessment Reporting results6

ASAR is one component of the three part audit approach in use to monitor the bus industry.

It is intended that the ASAR independent audits and Transport for NSW conducted audits are used together to monitor emerging issues within the industry and ensure third party providers are compliant under their respective schemes.

An ASAR is conducted by an operator of their accreditation system using our form to determine compliance and must be conducted annually, under section 9 of the Bus Operator Accreditation Package.

It requires providers to assure they are meeting their obligations through a series of questions.

In addition, ASAR can be used by bus operators as a self-checking system to assess various aspects of their operation, identify where weaknesses and deficiencies may exist and work towards eliminating these before they become issues.

9.1 Drug and alcohol testing

Operators must ensure their transport safety employees are no under the influence of drugs and alchohol while on duty for transport safety work.

Operators are required to prepare and implement a drug and alchohol program for their transport safety.

Drug and alcohol testing is not a compulsory operating requirement for bus operators.

Bus operators are required to carry out a risk assessment of their business to determine whether drug and alcohol testing is a necessary part of their compulsory drug and alcohol program.

Self-assessment results are captured from 14 September 2015 onwards.

Although 2015 results are included in the analysis below, it is not for a full calendar year.

Before this, only positive results were being recorded.

Table 10

Annual self-assessment audit (ASAR) drug and alcohol results

Year

Drug Alcohol

Total Audits Tests

Conducted Confirmed

Positive Drivers Tested

Tests Conducted

Confirmed Positive

Drivers Tested

2015* 232 4 238 3,332 15 1,292 238

2016 5,989 35 3,015 33,750 10 10,950 1,432

6 Data source: ASAR deficiency spreadsheet as at 30 March 2020


2017 3,934 36 3,309 21,896 12 6,640 1,301

2018 3,643 38 2,587 47,115 33 7,024 1,232

2019 8,328 50 4,758 160,840 9 18,236 1,238

* From 14 September 2015

9.2 Bus safety employees tested with positive results

A bus safety employee* includes anyone who is a paid employee, contractor, or volunteer of the accredited operator when involved in:

driving or operating buses, loading/disembarking passengers, or the movement of buses

repairing, maintaining or upgrading buses, bus terminals or bus maintenance facilities

developing, managing or monitoring safe working systems for bus services.

The number of bus safety employees tested for alcohol in the past five years is 44,142.

The number of bus safety employees tested for drug use is much lower at 13,907.

Many more bus safety employees are tested for alcohol use rather than drug use however, there are still more positive results found in drug testing.

The number of positive alcohol tests returned for the five years is 79.

The number of confirmed positive drug results for the same period is 163.

*Bus safety employee also known as transport safety employee who performs bus safety work

Note: one test can have more than one bus driver and one driver can be tested more than once.

Graph 12

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

18,000

20,000

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

No

. o

f P

osit

ive R

esu

lts

No

. o

f D

rivers

Teste

d

Annual self assessment audit results: drivers tested v positive results

Drivers Tested: Drug Drivers Tested: Alcohol

Confirmed Positive: Drug Confirmed Positive: Alcohol


10 Bus incident reporting7

Bus Operators are required under Clause 88 of the Passenger Transport (General) Regulation 2017 to notify us when they become aware that a bus being used to provide the service has been involved in a crash or incident that resulted:

in a person being injured

in preventing the bus from continuing its journey

in the reasonable opinion that the operator of the service, otherwise likely to arouse serious public concern.

In 2009, to streamline reporting requirements, we developed an online bus incident reporting facility, the Bus Incident Management Database (BIMD).

The database allows operators to electronically report a bus incident directly to us, Office of Transport Safety Investigations and Police Assistance Line, replacing the existing manual reporting.

The benefit for everyone is that there will be a centralised database of information that can be used to target resources, establish trends and validate response actions for the bus industry.

NSW Police receives daily reports from the database, which enables the development of intelligence and allocation of appropriate resources to prioritise tasks.

We carry out regular quality assurance data checks.

10.1 Incidents categorised by incident type

Incidents are collected within BIMD and categorised by 15 incident types.

Collisions make nearly up to 50 per cent of the incidents types and continue to be the most common incident type as they include minor incidents such as a broken mirror due to a collision with a pole, vehicle, tree or bus stop.

The second most common incident type is ‘vehicle breakdown’. Vehicle breakdowns have increased significantly (487%) from 2018 to 2019.

The third most common incident type is ‘slips, trips and falls’. These are common due to bus drivers braking suddenly to avoid a collision on the road, or if a passenger is not fully prepared once a bus is approaching or leaving a bus stop.

Threatening/intimidating behaviour continues to steadily increase each year.

We are working with NSW Police to reduce the number of these incidents across all transport modes and to assist Police resource allocation.

Projectiles have increased by 28 incidents between 2018 and 2019.

The following table highlights the bus incident data captured during the five years.

7 Data source: BIMD (Bus Incident Management Database) as at 3 April 2020


Table 11

Count of incident type by year

Incident Type 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Grand Total

Grand Total %

Collision 4,630 4,442 4,493 4,880 4,394 22,839 49.9%

Vehicle breakdown 117 102 469 911 5354 6,953 15.2%

Slips, trips and falls 882 909 771 665 916 4,143 9.1%

Threatening/intimidating behaviour

523 560 611 654 812 3,160 6.9%

Projectiles 597 654 530 372 400 2,553 5.6%

Medical incident(no collision)

415 451 474 387 457 2,184 4.8%

Assault and offensive behaviour

590 390 284 301 383 1,948 4.3%

Vandalism 115 93 89 94 192 583 1.3%

Bus doors(no collision) 76 86 71 76 55 364 0.8%

Refusal to pay 44 20 43 65 152 324 0.7%

Dangerous Behaviour (Driver)

29 40 66 42 18 195 0.4%

Fire on bus(no collision) 30 45 35 33 32 175 0.4%

Security threat 37 40 19 10 20 126 0.3%

Dangerous Behaviour (Public)

14 13 16 21 25 89 0.2%

Runaway bus 5 13 6 14 11 49 0.1%

(blank) 1 25 20 1 1 48 0.1%

Grand Total 8,105 7,883 7,997 8,526 13,222 45,733 100.0%

Graph 13

0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000

Collision

Vehicle breakdown

Slips, trips and falls

Threatening/intimidating behaviour

Projectiles

Medical incident(no collision)

Assault and offensive behaviour

Top 7 reported incident types

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019


10.2 Collision incident type by description

The most common incident description for vehicles involved in a collision is with another vehicle and makes up more than 49 per cent of all incidents.

The incident description of hitting tree/ branch was created in 2017 as a result of feedback received from the industry and makes up 9 per cent of collisions in 2019.

The collision description of hitting an animal was added in 2018 due to industry feedback.

This option is more common among rural and regional operators.

In the past five years, on average more than one pedestrian is hit by a bus per week.

Table 12

Incident type collision by incident description

INCIDENT DESCRIPTION 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Grand Total

Another vehicle 3,311 3,180 3,093 3,298 2,932 15,814

Building/structure 773 819 942 965 921 4,420

other 453 358 246 93 66 1,216

Hitting Tree / Branch 122 443 380 945

Pedestrian - adult 64 67 58 43 47 279

Cyclist 20 8 21 21 18 88

Pedestrian - child 9 10 11 10 8 48

Hitting an Animal 7 22 29

Total 4,630 4,442 4,493 4,880 4,394 22,839


10.3 Collisions incident type by cause

Driver behaviour for both buses and road users remains the most common collision incident cause.

The incident cause ‘other’ appears to be entered in place of more appropriate options such as driver behaviour, another driver at fault, or road condition.

We are working with industry to improve our incident cause capturing.

Table 13

Incident type collision by incident cause

INCIDENT CAUSE 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Grand Total

Driver behaviour 2,836 2,608 2,242 2,414 2,074 12,174

Other driver at fault 780 859 1722 2,236 2,088 7,685

Other 901 895 432 108 58 2,394

Pedestrian behaviour 52 51 56 46 54 259

Road condition 22 15 26 58 93 214

Weather condition 25 8 7 13 18 71

Driver health 8 2 4 4 5 23

Driver drug or alcohol related 3 1 1 5

Vehicle brake failure 1 1 2 1 5

Vehicle suspension/tyre or wheel failure

1 1 1 3

Vehicle steering failure 1 1 1 1 2 6

Grand Total 4,630 4,442 4,493 4,880 4,394 22,839


10.4 Fire on bus incident type

In the five years, 175 ‘fire on bus’ incidents were recorded specifically:

120 mechanical issues

53 electrical

two incidents resulting from passenger behaviour.

Zero fatalities have occurred from incidents recorded as ‘fire on the bus’.

All incidents recorded indicate that passengers were safely evacuated and transferred when a fire on the bus occurred.

A number of incidents reported under this type include thermal incidents with smoke.

Fires are decreasing with 45 incidents recorded in 2016 compared to 2019, where 32 incidents were recorded, a 29 per cent decrease.

Graph 14

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Passenger behaviour 1 1

Electrical 6 14 9 11 13

Mechanical 23 31 26 22 18

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Incident type fire on bus by incident cause


Graph 15

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

4

5

4

2

6

2

1

1

4

1

3

2

4

1

1

1

1

3

4

9

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

3

1

1

1

2

2

9

4

6

1

2

1

1

1

3

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

3

3

7

3

2

2

8

2

2

1

2

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

1987

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

Incident type fire on bus by vehicle model and year of manufacture

Austral

BCI

Bustech

Hino

Irisbus

Iveco

MAN

Mercedes

Metrotec

Other

Renault

Scania

UD

Volvo


10.5 Assault and offensive behaviour incident type

The number of assault and offensive behaviour incidents between 2015 and 2017 fell.

However, from 2017 to 2019 the number of incident types increased by 35 per cent from 284 to 383.

The five year average is 389 incidents per year.

The two most common assault and offensive behaviour incident description are:

physical assault on the driver

physical assault between passengers.

In 2019 these two descriptions made up 84 per cent of all assault and offensive behaviour incidents.

Data quality has improved since 2015 due to increased industry engagement and education by us.

Graph 16

*Other: Includes driver health, graffiti, passenger health, rocks/bricks/bottles etc and unknown incident description.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Incident type assault and offensive behaviour by incident description

Indecent exposure by a passenger Indecent exposure by the driver

Physical assault between passengers Physical assault by the driver

Physical assault on the driver Robbery

Sexual assault between passengers Sexual assault by the driver

Sexual assault on the driver Other*


Table 14

Incident type assault and offensive behaviour by incident description

Incident Description 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Grand Total

Physical assault on the driver

183 147 111 124 162 727

Physical assault between passengers

192 130 80 117 159 678

Robbery 73 43 52 30 31 229

Indecent exposure by a passenger

29 19 18 12 14 92

Sexual assault between passengers

19 13 12 10 13 67

Physical assault by the driver

9 3 4 7 3 26

Indecent exposure by the driver

9 9 1 19

Sexual assault by the driver

2 1 1 4

Sexual assault on the driver

71 26 5 102

Other 3 0 1 0 4

Grand Total 590 390 284 301 383 1948


10.6 Threatening and intimidating behaviour incident type

Threatening and intimidating behaviour as an incident type has increased each year with 523 incidents in 2015 and 812 incidents in 2019.

The most significant change in behaviour is physical threat or intimidation between passengers, which has increased from 35 to 148 in the past five years and is the most recorded incident description in 2018, making up 48 per cent of all incident types recorded in 2018. However, it has decreased in 2019 by 53 per cent compared to 2018.

Incident descriptions involving physical threats or intimidation and verbal assaults against the bus driver make up a further 58 per cent of the incident type recorded in 2019.

In 2019, zero incident descriptions were recorded as ‘other’.

This shows operators are making a discerned effort to record threatening and intimidating behaviour incident type by description accurately and that our industry engagement and education has been effective.

Graph 17

*Other: Includes physical assault between passengers, refusal to pay and unknown incident description.

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Other* 42 22 7 0 0

Verbal assault by the driver 5 7 4 3 7

Verbal assault betweenpassengers

37 56 43 26 186

Verbal assault against thedriver

218 185 138 146 300

Physical threat orintimidation by the driver

10 14 6 2 2

Physical threat orintimidation between

passengers35 65 261 312 148

Physical threat orintimidation against the

driver176 211 152 165 169

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

Incident type threatening and intimidating behaviour by incident description


10.7 Medical incident type not resulting in a collision

Medical incident type (not resulting in a collision) decreased from 2015 to 2018 but increased in 2019.

Medical incident type is separated into two incident descriptions:

passenger health

driver health.

Driver health incident description increased significantly between 2015 and 2017.

The increase may be attributed to the renewal cycle of bus driver authorities, which are every three years and that drivers under the age of 60 require a medical assessment on renewal.

Graph 18

10.8 Fatality

In the five years, there has been an average of eight fatalities per year.

In 2016, 10 fatalities were recorded, which is the highest recorded in the five years.

In 2019, nine fatalities were recorded.

In the five years, pedestrians remain the most common fatality type.

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Passenger health 350 351 347 294 381

Driver health 64 98 126 93 76

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

Incident type medical incident by incident description


Graph 19

10.9 Antisocial behaviour

We are working with NSW Police by providing details of incident types containing incident descriptions relating to antisocial behaviour each month to assist with resource allocation.

The following seven bus incident types are categorised as antisocial behaviour:

assault and offensive behaviour

dangerous behaviour (public)

projectiles

refusal to pay

security threat

threatening/intimidating behaviour

vandalism.

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Public fatality 2 2 3 3 4

Pedestrian School Childrenfatality

0 1 1 0 1

Pedestrian fatality 0 4 2 4 4

Driver/ Employee fatality 1 1 0 1 0

Passenger fatality 2 2 1 1 0

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Bus incident management database fatalities


Graph 20

25 24 22 24

4632 30

4735 31 32 35

27 27 3621

33

3732

32

3952

3331

7863 54

64

74

64 71

7066

60 8266

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

2019 antisocial bus incidents

Assault and offensive behaviour Dangerous Behaviour (Public)

Projectiles Refusal to pay

Security threat Threatening/intimidating behaviour

Vandalism


10.9.1 Top four antisocial behaviour by location

Graph 21

2 2 2 2 2 2

2

2

1

2

1

2

1

7

3

2

1

3

1 1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Bus incident management database December 2019 - Top 10 incident locations

Assault and offensive behaviour Projectiles

Refusal to pay Threatening/intimidating behaviour


11 Glossary

BOAS = Bus Operator Accreditation Scheme

CBUS = Charter/ Airways bus usage – let for hire registration

RBUS/OMNI = Bus/ tourist vehicle used for hire registration and any bus operated by State Transit Authority

RPS = Regular Passenger Service

LDTC = Long Distance and Tourist Charter

ASAR = Annual Self-Assessment Audit Report

SMS = Safety Management System

BIMD = Bus Incident Management Database

TIMS = Transport Information Management System

VROP = Vehicle Regulation Operations database

ORE = On Road Enforcement

HVSS = Heavy Vehicle Safety Station

HVIS = Heavy Vehicle Inspection Station

MVRIA= Motor Vehicle Repair Industry Association

bus industry compliance statistics and trends report · bus industry report– july 2020 4 1...

Documents