| By Nadia Papotto
The motor vehicle; personal or for business, is an integral part of today’s society and has contributed to the development and prosperity of Victoria, along with the whole of Australia. Unfortunately, motor vehicles are known to produce adverse environmental impacts, particularly in urban areas. One of these impacts is road traffic noise, and is a growing source of concern for the community.
In addressing the issue of traffic noise, EPA (Environmental Protection Authority) Victoria, developed the Road traffic noise strategy – Background Paper. Based on sufficient submissions, comments and feedback, it was decided that the original aims of a road traffic noise strategy could be met through the development of an SEPP (State Environmental Protection policy).
One major element of the policy (among many others) is the ‘motor vehicle’, and the strategy of reducing noise from individual vehicles.
Standards and test methods for motor vehicle air and noise emissions are specified in the Environmental Protection (Vehicle Emissions) Regulations 2003. Among other regulations, the Act prescribes measurement methods for noise and vehicle emission standards and establishes offences relating to modification and tampering with vehicle fuel, emission control and noise control systems. Under the regulations, offences for the use of a non-compliant vehicle and for unlawful modifications are created.
It is proven that motor vehicles have a major impact on air quality and noise, therefore, EPA Victoria’s objective is to work with all Victorians to enable the achievement of a clean, safe and sustainable environment.
Many owners customize their vehicles, and modifications can range from changing wheels, through to modifying engines and even building individual vehicles. In order to permit modifications be carried out legally whilst still ensuring that vehicle air and noise emission standards are not being eroded, modification guidelines have been developed. EPA affirm that ‘it is neither reasonable nor practical to prohibit vehicle modifications altogether’. It is the owner’s choice in the extent of the modification, as long as emissions are not increased and the vehicle remains compliant with the provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1970 and the Environmental Protection (Vehicle Emissions) Regulations 2003.
It is an offence to own or use a vehicle that exceeds noise limits in the vehicle emissions regulations. Whereby, EPA can require a vehicle to be presented at one of its approved motor vehicle testers to determine compliance with the limits. This is where police assistance is relevant; they have the power to inform EPA if they believe a vehicle is over the legal noise limit. So too, can a member of the public report a noisy vehicle to the Traffic Management Unit at their local police station. If a police officer then assesses the vehicle as being too noisy, the vehicle will be referred to EPA for noise testing. And this applies to all parties involved including, designers, manufacturers, sellers, owners and drivers.
A person, who installs, removes, replaces or repairs noise-reducing equipment on a motor vehicle must ensure that the vehicle meets the requirements once the job is complete. Both the Act and Regulations state that anyone who fails to comply with a requirement is guilty of an offence and liable to a penalty; the maximum penalty for the most serious offences being $240,000.
The modifications of exhaust manifolds and exhaust systems permitted have been assessed by EPA through tests, measurements or engineering reason, with basic consideration not to increase emissions beyond what could be expected of a normal unmodified vehicle of a similar age.
The basic rule is that the use of non-original equipment, aftermarket parts or systems as add-ons, auxiliary or secondary part of a system are permitted if their use does not adversely affect emissions performance. The fitter and owner are expected to ensure that they have evidence that supports this.
So how does it all work?
On vehicles fitted with one or more catalytic converters, all the exhaust gas must flow through the converters at all times when a vehicle is used on the road. In modifying or replacing an exhaust system, it is essential that the catalytic converter and any sensors are positioned in the same exhaust flow location as the original system. For instance, some manufacturers will put the catalytic converter close to the exhaust manifold so that it heats up very quickly and will allow uncontrolled exhaust emissions to be emitted, including louder noise levels.
APA was keen to find out what affects these environmental regulations and the enforcement of EPA pollution abatement notices had on all parties involved in the modifying of a motor vehicle exhaust system. In effect, we interviewed Nicky Webster from EPA, Wayne Elston; Traffic Management Unit Officer, Brad Mayer; exhaust retailer of Autobarn, Andrew Coleman; owner, and Glenn Liu; EPA abatement notice recipient.
What are the reasons for establishing the Environmental Protection Act 1970 and the Environmental Protection (Vehicle Emissions) Regulations 2003?
Wayne: “The reason the Act was introduced was to provide a legal framework for the protection of the environment in Victoria. The Regulations were introduced to minimize the impact of motor vehicles by setting a standard for air and noise emissions and also fuel quality.”
Nicky: “There are historical reasons for the establishment of the Act and Regulations. These cannot be summarized.”
The Environmental Protection Act 1970 requires all parties including manufacturer, seller, fitter and owner to apply any modifications with respect to air and noise emissions from motor vehicles and must ensure the vehicle meets the requirement of regulation 10. Are you aware of this requirement in it’s entirety?
Wayne: “The requirement is on the manufacturer, supplier and owner to ensure that the vehicle complies with regulation 10; being the decibel level applicable to various types of vehicles as outlined. Failure to comply is an offence.”
Nicky: “Yes, we are aware of this requirement.”
Andrew: “Yes, I am and was aware of this requirement.”
Glenn: “Yes, I am aware of the regulation because I have had friends that have owned cars and have been [caught out] driving around. My ex-boss had a race modified WRX that he would race once a month. He told me that even though he held a road registration for it, he was always worried about being defected by Police. His main concern being the exhaust.”
Brad: “Yes, I am aware.”
Did the mechanic who fit your exhaust, mention these requirements to you prior to fitting the modification?
Andrew: “No.”
Glenn: “When I had the exhaust fitted, the owner of the company informed me that it was under the noise restriction which is 90Dbs. I believed him because I didn’t think he would do something illegal. However, when I got it tested a year down the track, it was over. That is why I had it changed so that it was legal.”
At Autobarn, do you make the customer aware that the modification they are buying from you could be illegal if driven on the road?
Brad: “I actually make people aware that it would be for a racing sort of system, and let them know that it could be an obstruction to EPA regulations. However, it doesn’t stop us from selling them. What they do after they leave here is up to them.”
Do you find that this regulation is breached by any of the aforementioned parties often?
Wayne: “Persistently, there are a number of products on sale and fitted to vehicles that do not comply with the Act/Regulations.”
Nicky: “Yes, we are aware of breaches.”
I have heard it said a few times that the mechanic “did not mention these requirements” to a client before fitting the modification. How do you feel about this? Do police have the authority to inform EPA of a mechanic breaching the Act?
Wayne: “No authority is required to inform the EPA that a person has breached the Act. It however, is another thing to prove beyond reasonable doubt as to who is at fault and whether the owner was made fully aware of the fact the article fitted, failed to comply with the Act. Most drivers who tamper with their exhaust systems along with fuels etc. that have an affect on the environment are fully aware that they are doing the wrong thing.”
Are you aware of which modifications are permitted under the Act, and which are not?
Wayne: “The only modifications that are permitted are those that still allow the vehicle to comply with the Act and Regulations. Vicroads have lists of standard modifications permitted without authority, any other modification would require a written certification from an authority depending which Act/Regulation it was in conflict with. All vehicles must comply with the Australian standards.”
Nicky: “The Act specifies limits in terms of noise and emissions controls but does not specify equipment etc.”
Andrew: “Not [aware] in detail, but yes.”
Glenn: “To what I know, you have to have one or more Cat backs, one or more Hot Dogs, and a Muffler. With all these, the noise pollution should be legal. You cannot have a straight through exhaust. I didn’t read the Act, just spoke to professionals in the industry.”
Brad: “Yes, I am fully aware of which modifications are permitted and which are not.”
|
It is an offence to use, own or modify a vehicle so that it exceeds the maximum permitted noise level when the vehicle is driven on the road. What is your personal opinion of this regulation?
Wayne: “I think that it is necessary to protect the general public from selfish drivers who have no respect for other people’s rights to enjoy some peace and quiet in their own home or park etc.”
Nicky: “[no comment]”
Andrew: “The rule is bias towards old vehicles; the regulation does not apply to vehicles produced before a certain year. Harley’s [motorbikes] are about double the legal regulation of cars. Ridiculous!”
Glenn: “I agree that if there are vehicles driving around with very loud exhaust systems on them, that some people could find it a bother. But if the exhaust is a little louder than stock, let it go! The law is that you have to be under 90 Dbs, and I think that it should be around 96 Dbs; that isn’t too loud when you are driving down a street. By the way, motorbikes are allowed to have a louder exhaust than a car, isn’t noise all the same?”
Brad: “The regulation sucks, I’ve actually been caught god knows how many times. It’s over-policed and sometimes unreasonable, bearing in mind that noise and things like that is basically up to the officer’s discretion not on their actual knowledge. [It is] just based on a suspicion.”
At Autobarn, have you experienced a decrease in sales of exhaust modifications due to tighter regulations?
Brad: “I don’t know statistics, but I don’t think so.”
Do you feel that in today’s society, with the production of more powerful vehicles, that the policing of this particular issue has become tighter and more regularly enforced than before?
Wayne: “Enforcement of EPA legislation has not changed. It is one of those things that when you come across a breach, enforcement is required. Most of the newer vehicles are not tampered with; as to achieve the best out of a vehicle, it should be left standard.”
Nicky: “[No comment]”
Andrew: “Yes, there are more police assigned to govern this regulation.”
Glenn: “I believe that yes, they have become tighter and more enforced to stop fatalities, but exhausts won’t do anything to prevent fatalities. They have brought in the ‘Anti-hoon law’ a year or so ago, where they can tow away someone’s vehicle for speeding or doing something stupid, which I believe will work in prevention of fatalities. But not exhaust systems.”
Brad: “Yes.”
The Act establishes the powers, duties and functions of EPA, including the ability to administer pollution abatement notices and penalties. Do you feel this is a suitable delegation?
Wayne: “The EPA are the regulatory authority, they have to be able to act on breaches of the Act. They are also the only ones with the specialized equipment to check noise levels. They also have a greater knowledge of the Act than most Police members. It is their field of expertise.”
Nicky: “[No Comment]”
Andrew: “Yes, but they should be selective with whom they use their enforcement upon.”
Glenn: “Yes, I do think EPA should have this power, but only for serious acts of pollution, like smoke coming out of an exhaust, extremely loud exhaust systems, and other situations not related to vehicles.”
Brad: “Obviously, there’s got to be some sort of governing body, but the way it’s policed at the moment is unreasonable.”
What is the role of the Victoria police in regards to noise pollution from a modified exhaust?
Wayne: “Identify the offending vehicle, members can then either issue a defect notice or forward notification to the EPA requesting the vehicle be tested by them. Or both.
Nicky: “A member of the public can report a noisy vehicle to the Traffic Management Unit at their local police station. If a police officer assesses the vehicle as being too noisy, the vehicle will be referred to EPA for noise testing.”
Are you aware that the police have no official power to penalize an obstructer of this regulation; that they are merely informants to the EPA?
Andrew: “No.”
Glenn: “No, I didn’t know that. Now I know why they sent me letters on both occasions instead of giving it to me on the spot.”
Brad: “I am well aware of that.”
What is your opinion on the level of assistance by the community? Is it a high or low level?
Wayne: “I have no knowledge of what assistance the community provides to the EPA. However, we do not receive a large amount of noise complaints at the Traffic Unit, usually only when a particular vehicle frequents the same area constantly.”
Do you believe that exhaust modifications that exceed the legal noise limit are vital enough to be classified as “noise pollution”?
Wayne: “Yes, what difference does it make whether it is music, machinery or a noisy car, once above the legal limit for that device/situation, then it’s noise pollution.”
Nicky: “Yes, this would be noise pollution.”
Andrew: “Some, yes - dependant on the level above legal.”
Glenn: “Like I said, it all depends on how loud the exhaust system is, something under 96 Dbs, no. But over, then yes.”
Brad: “Depending on the application. When there’s people out there blatantly to have a loud noisy car for no reason, that’s one thing. I believe the classification is correct, but I believe the current limits are a little bit low. The legal decibel limit should be a bit higher, as some cars are harder to quiet down than others.”
In your opinion, what effects do these regulations have on the youth society, where a personal motor vehicle can be used as an avenue for personal identity?
Wayne: “A motor vehicle is a form of transport foremost. Nothing stops a youth from personalizing his motor vehicle as long as it remains safe and complies with the various Acts and Regulations, that not only protect his life, but other peoples. I have not seen any ill effects from a person not being allowed an excessively loud exhaust.”
Andrew: “Not a great deal, but evident among the demographic.”
Glenn: “Since I have been accused of noise pollution twice, I have seriously been thinking of changing my vehicle, because of the frustration of having to get the test done and spending money that does not help me in any way. Family and friends know that I love my car, and that I drive the Blue Subaru. If I change my vehicle, I will be changing my personal identity. I have owned my car for six years now, and the only reason I would change would be because of EPA!”
Brad: “Again, it comes back to the owner. Most people have got a vague understanding of what’s legal and what’s not, so it comes back to the owner and how they want to express themselves. I guess it does have an adverse affect on modifying, and effectively can reduce sales of other modification products in the store due to the fear of being defected.”
Do you feel these regulations effectively prevent the use of exhaust modifications by vehicle owners?
Wayne: “The regulations most likely prevent the majority of motorists from modifying their exhaust illegally; however, there will always be the ones that change their exhaust to pass the EPA/Roadworthy test and as soon as they have passed, modify it again.”
Nicky: “There is continual review of policy and procedures. There are also amendments to legislation. Legislation is always changing and evolving.”
Andrew: “No real effect, apart from a revenue generating exercise.”
Glenn: “I do feel that having regulations like this prevents people buying exhaust modifications for their cars because everyone that likes cars, talks about cars. When people say that they have been in trouble with EPA for no reason, it makes other people think that they do not want to be in the same boat, and effectively, won’t get an exhaust modification fitted.
Brad: “Personally, it would stop me doing some things, but wouldn’t stop me doing others. At the moment I’ve got a car with a big exhaust and an EPA notice on it and it’s had its registration cancelled a week ago. I’ve been doing this since I was 18, so there is no doubt I will just do it again. Every time it happens, I re-shell the car, and put all the gear into another car and start all over again.”
|
|
