Restriction on the noise of the exhaust for the car dB. What is the penalty for the silencer- "forward flow"? How to measure the noise level of the muffler

Judge of the Central District Court of Tula Grishina L.Yu., examined the complaint of Kotova Nikolai Anatolyevich for the decision of the commander 1 on DPS of the traffic police of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia in the Tula region on bringing it to administrative responsibility under Art. Section II. Special part\u003e Chapter 8. Administrative offenses in the field of environmental protection and environmental management\u003e Article 8.23. Operation of mechanical vehicles with exceeding the standards for the content of pollutants in emissions or noise levels "target \u003d" _ blank "\u003e 8.23 \u200b\u200bof the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation dated April 30, 2014 and the decision of the VRIO. Head of the UGIBDD of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia in the Tula region dated 05/14/2014,

S T A N O V I L:

Decree of the commander 1 on DPS traffic police of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia in the Tula region from DD.MM.YYYY Kotov N.A. attracted to administrative responsibility under Art. Section II. Special part\u003e Chapter 8. Administrative offenses in the field of environmental protection and environmental management\u003e Article 8.23. Operation of mechanical vehicles with exceeding the standards of the content of pollutants in emissions or noise levels "target \u003d" _ blank "\u003e 8.23 \u200b\u200bof the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation.

Disagreeing with the above decree, cats N.A. He complained of the name of the head of the UGIBDD of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia in the Tula region.

Solving VRIO. The head of the UGIBDD of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia in the Tula region dated 14.05.2014, the above-mentioned ruling is left unchanged, Kotova N.A. without satisfaction.

05/26/2014 Kotov N.A. He came to court with a complaint about the decision of the commander 1 on the traffic police of the traffic police of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia in the Tula region dated April 30, 2014 and the decision of the VRIO. The head of the UGIBDD of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia in the Tula region dated 14.05.2014, to which he indicated disagreement with the decision to bring him to administrative responsibility for those grounds that the administrative offense protocol was indicated by violation of the requirements of GOST R 52231-2004.

According to Kotov N.A., specified GOST R 52231-2004 sets permissible levels and methods for measuring the external noise of vehicles of categories M1, M2, M3, N1, N2, N3 (section 1), and not motorcycles, i.e. The procedure for measuring the noise and the noise level of the exhaust system of motorcycles with this GOST is not defined, and, accordingly, the motorcycles are not applicable.

Employees of the DPS disrupted the procedure for measuring the noise level, namely: 5.2.4. The cost, since the requirements for the measurement conditions were not followed (the motorcycle was on the roadway at 50 cm. From the fence, for a motorcycle at a distance of 1.5- 2 meters was a motorcycle inspector DPS, which is a noise-reflecting surface); _ P.5.2.5, p.5.4.32 of the GOST, because the level of noise noise was measured. The noise interference should be not less than 10 dB and below the level of measured noise; violated P.5.4.1.2 and Appendix A (mandatory) to GOST, since the microphone of the measuring device was set at approximately 50 cm. Without the use of measuring instruments (roulettes); Disrupted clause 5.2.4. GOST, since on his motorcycle "Honda VTX1800C" of 2004, a tachometer is lacking constructively. Portable Tachometer DPS inspections were not used. Measurements were made approximately (on the eye). For these reasons, Kotov N.A. It believes that legal grounds for bringing it to administrative responsibility was not available.

Kotov N.A. I do not agree with the decision on the complaint dated 14.05.2014, since, in the decision there is a reference to GOST P41.41.-2001. "Uniform prescriptions relating to the approval of motorcycles in connection with the noise produced."

According to N.A. cats, this GOST was not specified in either the Protocol, nor in the decree on an administrative offense as a basis for bringing it to administrative responsibility. It believes that the substitution of the requirements of GOST P41.41-2001. The Gorthwards52231 is unlawful.

In addition, Kotov N.A. It is believed that GOST R 41.41.-2001 is a requirement for manufacturers of new motorcycles and their official approval and does not regulate the legal relations with the further operation of the vehicle.

The specified GOST does not contain any technical requirements for the operation of motorcycles, and, accordingly, violation of its requirements cannot be a legitimate basis for bringing it to administrative responsibility during the operation of the vehicle, since none of the following in the resolution and decision of regulatory acts (GOST R 52231-2004, GOST R41.41.-2001) did not violate.

In addition, it believes that when considering a complaint against a decree on an administrative offense, his rights were violated provided for by Part 2 of Art. The Russian Federation, since he was not notified about the time and place of consideration of the complaint, the consideration of the complaint was carried out in his absence.

Kotov N.A. asks the court, the decision of Virio. Head of the traffic police department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia in the Tula region from DD.MM.YYYY and the Decree on the case of an administrative offense number from DD.MM.YYYY Cancel, the production of an administrative case in relation to it to stop.

At the court session of Kotov N.A. The arguments of the complaint supported in full, asked the court to cancel the decision on the case of an administrative offense number from DD.MM.YYYY G., the decision of VRIO. Head of the traffic police department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia in the Tula region from DD.MM.YYYY G., proceedings on the case.

The court, hearing Kotova N.A., Inspector DPS FULL NAME3, examining the case file, comes to the following.

In accordance with clause 6.5. The list of faults and conditions in which the operation of vehicles is prohibited, which is an application to the main provisions for the access of vehicles for the operation and responsibilities of officials to ensure the safety of the road, approved by the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of October 23, 1993 No. 1090, (editors with subsequent changes and additions) the permissible level of external noise exceeds the values \u200b\u200bestablished by GOST R 52231-2004.

Technical regulations "On the safety of wheeled vehicles", approved by the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of September 10, 2009. No. 720, it is determined that the design of the vehicle should ensure minimization of external and internal noise.

From Appendix No. 2, it follows to the technical regulations that the external noise of vehicles of category L3 (two-wheeled motorcycles) must comply with the UNECE International Regulations No. 41. Based on these rules in the Russian Federation, GOST P41.41-2001 was developed, which establishes the requirements of the external noise of motorcycles.

The maximum limits of the noise level of new motorcycles are set by Appendix No. 6 to GOST P41.41-2001 and amount to 80 dBA for motorcycles with a working volume of over 175 cc.

In accordance with GOST R 52231-2004, the maximum value of the permissible level of noise of the exhaust system is 100 dBA. When checking the technical condition of the car, the permissible noise level should not exceed this value by more than 5 dBA.

At the same time, as follows from the protocol number from DD.MM.YYYY year, the noise indicators of the noise level of the exhaust system of the Honda VTX 1800 C Motorcycle, the State Registration Sign No. under the measurements carried out: 109.3, 115.2, 112.6. Analyzing the above rules in their The Court considers that when determining the level of external noise of motorcycles, it is possible to use both GOST R41.41-2001 and GOST R 52231-2004, since GOST R41.41-2001 establishes more stringent requirements for external motorcycle noise as new, For motorcycles in operation, we use a softest noise level indicator, defined by GOST R 52231-2000 for cars.

Thus, the argument of Kotova N.A. None of the guests referred to in the situation under consideration not applicable to the situation in question, the court finds not wealthy, since, defined in GOST P41.41-2001, the permissible level of external noise cannot exceed the established values, both in the manufacture of new motorcycles and their future operation.

In accordance with paragraph 82 of the administrative regulations, approved by the Order of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia No. 185-2009, the grounds for verifying the technical condition of the vehicle are established visually, signs of administrative offenses provided for by Articles section II. Special part\u003e Chapter 8. Administrative offenses in the field of environmental protection and environmental management\u003e Article 8.23. Operation of mechanical vehicles with exceeding the standards for the content of pollutants in emissions or noise levels "target \u003d" _ blank "\u003e 8.23, section II. Special part\u003e Chapter 12. Administrative offense in the field of road traffic\u003e Article 12.5. Managing the vehicle in the presence of faults or conditions under which the operation of vehicles is prohibited, or by the vehicle, which is illegally established by the identification mark "target \u003d" _ blank "\u003e 12.5 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation.

Thus, the actions of Kotova N.A. Properly qualified under Art. Section II. Special part\u003e Chapter 8. Administrative offenses in the field of environmental protection and environmental management\u003e Article 8.23. Operation of mechanical vehicles with exceeding the standards for the content of pollutants in emissions or noise levels "target \u003d" _ blank "\u003e 8.23 \u200b\u200bof the Administrative Code, the punishment is assigned within the sanction of this article, taking into account the nature and degree of public danger of a perfect offense.

DD.MM.YYYY Kotovov N.A. In the name of the head of the UGIBDD of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia in the Tula region, a complaint was filed, in which he requested to cancel the decision number from DD.MM.YYYY on bringing it to administrative responsibility.

After examining the materials of the case, interviewing the inspector 1 on DPS traffic police of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia in the Tula region FULL NAME3, DD.MM.YYYY VRIO. The head of the UGIBDD Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia in the Tula region decided to refuse to satisfy the complaint of Kotov N.A. and leaving the contested ruling without change.

In accordance with Art. The Russian Federation, a complaint against the decision in the case of an administrative offense is considered by an official sole. When considering the complaints are checked on the basis of the legality and substantiation of the rendered decision available in the case and additionally presented materials.

In accordance with Art. RF, according to the results of consideration of the complaint against the decision on an administrative offense case, a decision is made to leave the decision without a change, and complaints without satisfaction.

In accordance with Art. The Russian Federation, a complaint against the decision on the case of an administrative offense is subject to consideration within ten days from the date of its receipt with all the materials of the case into the body, the official, eligible to consider the complaint.

Kotova N.A. that he was not notified of the time and date of consideration of his complaint, the court finds not wealthy, since as follows from a copy of the accompanying letter, Kotov N.A. Directed a notice of time and the date of consideration of its complaint.

The above indicates that the decision of the VRIO. Head of the UGIBDD of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia in the Tula region on refusal to satisfy the complaint of Kotova N.A. 14.05.2014 was taken within the credentials provided, within the period established by applicable law.

Thus, the court believes that grounds for satisfying the complaint of Kotova N.A. there is none.

Other arguments set forth in the complaint Kotova N.A. The court finds not consistent and regards how an attempt to avoid the established law of responsibility.

Based on the above, and guided by 30.7 of the Administrative Code,

I decided:

Resolution of the inspector 1 on DPS UGIBDD of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia in the Tula region No. dated April 30, 2014 on the involvement of Kotova N.A. to administrative responsibility under Art. Section II. Special part\u003e Chapter 8. Administrative offenses in the field of environmental protection and environmental management\u003e Article 8.23. Operation of mechanical vehicles with exceeding the standards for the content of pollutants in emissions or noise levels "target \u003d" _ blank "\u003e 8.23 \u200b\u200bof the Code of Code of the Russian Federation and the decision of the VRIO. Head of the UGIBDD Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia in the Tula region on refusal to satisfy Kotov N.A. from 14.05. 2014 leave unchanged, Kotova N.A. complaint without satisfaction.

The decision may be appealed to the Tula Regional Court for 10 days from the date of its adoption.

Probably, nowhere in the world is not so acute about the tuning of the car. Our country is still famous for the people's tuning. We must admit, many creative car enthusiasts live in our country. Unfortunately, in recent years, ways to legitimize the forward flow, or a little wheel drives left a little. First, it is expensive and most often impossible.

As a result, many car owners improve their iron horses, forgetting that there is administrative responsibility. Including the exceeding the noise levels of vehicles according to the existing GOST. Portal website Reminds that the change in the exhaust system may be outlined.

Many tuning lovers love to modernize the exhaust system first. This is especially fascinated by young drivers who want to pay attention to them.

Naturally, the louder will noise the exhaust system, the better. 100 decibels? 150 decibels? Someone and this is not enough. After all, with such a loud sound of the engine / exhaust, even an ordinary car may seem like aggressive musculick. But most often, such folk tuning is outlined.

How loud can be a car, what tuning of the exhaust system is allowed?

The limiting level of noise of cars is regulated by the new Gosth 33997-2016, enacted by order of RF Rossostand of the Russian Federation of July 18, 2017 N 708-Art. We are talking about paragraph 4.12 of the GOST 33997-2016 "Interstate Standard. Wheel vehicles. Safety requirements in operation and test methods. " Also, this GOST refers to the technical regulation of the Customs Union, which regulates the safety of vehicles.

According to GOST 33997-2016, the limiting level of car noise of category M1, N1, L should not be above 96 dBA (decibels).

For vehicles category M2, N2, the maximum allowable noise level is 98 dBA. For automatic category M3, N3, the maximum noise level should not exceed 100 dBA.

According to clause 4.9.9 of GOST 33997-2016, the noise level of the exhaust vehicle gases is measured at a distance of 0.5 ± 0.05 m from the cutting tube slice at an angle of 45 ° ± 15 ° to the gas stream axis during the engine operation at idle.

What do the noise level of exhaust in cars check?

But this is not all the troubles that are waiting for lovers tuning and loud exhaust. According to the current legislation, making changes to the construction of cars must be discreted properly. To do this, it is necessary to get permission to the traffic police, then contact the testing laboratory, in order to get good to install additional designs for vehicle or tuning items, then visit a specialized organization for the modernization of the car.

Next, it is necessary to come to the laboratory again to obtain a certificate of security of changes made to the car's design. After that, it is necessary to undergo inspection and contact the traffic police.

Naturally, such complexity scares drivers from the legalization of tuning cars. Plus, not all changes in the design of cars can be decorated. For example, if changes in the design of the car worsen its safety, the testing laboratory will not give permission to tuning the work.

As a result, thousands of cars with unformed tuning ride on the roads of the country, whose owners risk to be brought to administrative responsibility under part 1 of Article 12.5 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation (vehicle management in the presence of malfunctions or conditions under which the operation of vehicles is prohibited, or a vehicle on which illegally set identified sign "Disabled").

Recall that part 1 of article 12.5 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation refers to Appendix 1 of PDD "List of faults and conditions under which the operation of vehicles is prohibited."

For example, lover of a noisy exhaust should be remembered that the traffic police inspector is entitled to limit the operation of the vehicle, the exhaust system of which exceeds the norm established by law (paragraph 6.5). Thus, the movement of the car can be prohibited before eliminating a malfunction, which is an obstacle to use on common roads. Also, the car can be evacuated to the stradition, if the traffic police station will interfere with the security of other road users.

Including the driver who controls the car, in whom the noise of exhaust exceeds the limit norm according to GOST, the traffic police inspector may issue a prescription requirement to eliminate the improper work of the exhaust system, the noise level of which exceeds the norms established by GOST.

If the driver is re-falling to exceed the noise standards of the exhaust system, then it can be already attracted to administrative responsibility under part 1 of Article 19.3 of the Codecha of the Russian Federation (disadvantage of the legal order or the requirement of the police officer, a military personnel or an employee of the authority or institution of a criminal executive system in connection with The fulfillment of their responsibilities for the protection of public order and ensuring public security, as well as the obstruction of their duties), which threatens with a fine of 1000 rubles or administrative arrest for up to 15 days.

Here is an example of a court case, where the driver was attracted for a loud exhaust of the car to administrative responsibility not only under Article 8.23 \u200b\u200bof the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation, but also later attracted responsibility for failure to fulfill the legal requirement of the traffic police inspector.

Finally, we recall that, according to the regulation of the Ministry of Internal Affairs on the state registration of vehicles, for illegal change in the design of the car (neo-formated tuning, wheels with removal, hitch, non-zero headlights, etc.) Car registration may be terminated. In this case, to restore the registration of the vehicle, the car owner will have to eliminate the reasons for the cessation of registration, that is, return the construction of the car to the factory form (dismantle the illegal tuning).

Is the penalty for the excess of noise in case of dismantling the catalyst?

In recent years, many motorists began to remove the catalyst (in diesel vehicles, the particulate filter) from the car exhaust system. Someone does it when the diesel filter or catalyst came into disrepair, as these new details are very expensive. Someone believes that these autocomponents strongly stroke a modern car. As a result, quite a few drivers turn into specialized technical centers, where they are removed from the exhaust system a catalyst or a sump filter.

Unfortunately, it often leads not only to exceeding the permissible level of harmful substances in the exhaust, but also to an increase in the noise of the exhaust system. Often this noise exceeds the permissible GOST standard. Naturally, the driver may threaten administrative responsibility under Article 8.23 \u200b\u200bof the Code of Administrative Code of the Russian Federation. Also, such interference in the exhaust system can be recognized as illegal amendments to the design of the car with all from here by the resulting.

Noise in numbers

Volume in decibelch

120 dB:this is a threshold of pain. At the same time, noise man can start feeling pain in the ears
● 100-110 dB: Concert, jackhammer
● 90 dB: Truck, motorcycle movement
● 80-85 dB: motorway
● 20 dB: The noise of leaves in the wind
● 10 dB: breath

We all want to stand out in all the increasing rapid rates of cars and motorists - someone buys an expensive and beautiful car for this (and, maybe not expensive), and someone stands out for the means. Unfortunately, such "Ponte" are not always legitimate :, tinting, understatement of the car - all this is not always done in (legal) measure and remains even safe for such an initially dangerous process as road traffic.

And what about the punishment for the directing silencer, installed on the car, on which the quiet factory silencer was originally stood - what a fine is imposed for the so-called "forward flow"?

What is the penalty for the silencer- "forward flow"?

Many of you know that one of the most common articles of the CACAP, according to which disorders are punished in a spirit similar to the installation of the silencer- "forward-point" - this is 12.5.1, which provides for a warning or a fine of 500 rubles for making changes to the machine design, not stipulated by the manufacturer. This article is suitable here, and it is imputed for violation of paragraph 7.18 of the List of Malfunctions from the traffic rules:

7.18. The design of the vehicle made changes without the permission of the State Safety Inspectorate of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation or other bodies determined by the Government of the Russian Federation.

However, in this case, there is more private punishment not quite for the installation of the silencer- "forward-time", but for the exception of the noise established norms, namely, article 8.23, which provides for the same punishment, but for another act. Let's get acquainted with it:

Article 8.23. Operation of mechanical vehicles with exceeding standards for the content of pollutants in emissions or noise level standards.

Operation by citizens of air or sea ships, inland water sailing vessels or small vessels or cars, motorcycles or other mechanical vehicleswho have the content of pollutants in emissions either noise levelThey produce with them when working exceeds the standards established by state standards of the Russian Federation, the warning or imposition of an administrative fine in the amount of five hundred rubles.

What noise norms should be a "forward-point" and how to determine them?

The question is quite logical: who establishes and how that the noise level from our "forward-flow" is exceeded, and what is the norm of noise. The answer to this question gives us the technical regulations of the Customs Union 018/2011 "On the safety of wheel vehicles" (in February 2015, we replaced simply "Technical Regulations on the Safety of Wheel TC") in paragraph 9.9:

It remains only to clarify that:

• category M1, N1 and L are passenger cars that have no more than 8 seats for the seat, trucks with a permitted maximum mass of not more than 3.5 tons, motorcycles / mopeds / quad bikes, etc. respectively;
• category M2 and N2 are cars with more than 8 seats (except for the driver), but the maximum mass of which does not exceed 5 tons, and trucks with a permitted maximum mass of 3.5 to 12 tons, respectively;
• category M3 and N3 are full buses and trucks with a permitted maximum mass of more than 12 tons (wagons, most dump trucks, etc.).

And determines this level of noise and imposes a penalty for the silencer- "forward flow" DPS inspector with a special device - a sound meter, which establishes the excess of these noise norms. At the same time, the inspector is in principle without a difference, you have a straight-flow silencer or factory.

DPS inspector soundmark with a fixed increased noise level of the muffler

Can they punish for "forward flow" in two articles right away?

Oh yes, there is another interesting article in the Administrative Code - 4.4, paragraph 2 of which tells us the following:

When performing the person of one action (inaction) containing the composition of administrative offenses, the responsibility for which is provided for by two or more articles (parts of articles) of this Code and the consideration of cases of which is subordinate to the same judge, the authority, an official, administrative punishment is assigned within Sanctions involving the appointment of the person who has committed the specified action (inaction), more strict administrative punishment.

However, this article in this case is not applicable, since both of the above disorders (traffic rules and tr ts) flow from different actions:

1. At 8.23, the COAP motorist is attracted specifically for the operation of the car with an excess of noise levels (i.e. for control and the like).
2. 12.5.1 Administrative Code The driver (or the owner) is attracted precisely for making changes to the design of the car without permission of the supervisory authority - the traffic police.

Thus, we see that the penalty for the silencer- "forward flow" can be from a warning plus a fine in the amount of 500 rubles, or two fines of 500 rubles (two warnings in practice cannot be carried out). And do not forget that recently in some regions of our country, the traffic police are issued among the traffic police or prescriptions for the elimination (termination) of violations.

The noise in the car negatively reflects on the well-being of passengers and driver behavior - irritability and fast fatigue appear. The permissible level of noise in the car is regulated by Gosstandar (SanPine).

The noise in the car consists of such factors:

• street sounds;
• vibration;
• friction mechanisms;
• circulation supports (thermal, air), etc.

To understand for how many units in the car exceeds noise, it is necessary to measure it. In addition, it is necessary, including to determine and calculate the amount of insulating material that will stop the sound.