464 86th Meeting ß Acoustical Society of America

dentiM communities are in many cases quite intense, the noise exposure patterns are sufficiently different from commonly studied industrial noise environments to make the application of existing damage risk models for predicting hearing loss of the residents difficult or impossible. Nonetheless, noise exposures in certain areas appear great enough to preclude ruling out the possibility of hearing loss due to aircraft noise exposure. Audiograms and other data relative to ear condition and noise exposure were obtained from residents drawn from two neighborhoods in the greater Los Angeles area. The two communities were chosen to be similar in all respects other than aircraft noise exposure, one representing a severe aircraft noise impacted area and the other a more typical surburban resi- dential community. Results from these measurements are reported and suggestions made as to the proper interpretation of the data. [Research performed under contract to the U.S. Public Health Service, funded by a PHS-FAA interagency agreement.•

9:40

MM3. Aircraft Noise and the Community. MA}tJORIE W. EVANS, 2600 El Camino Real, Palo Alto, California 94306.--Noise levels declared to be acceptable and tolerable by local California noise ordinance and by several studies and hearing reports are compared to both (a) actual levels of air- craft/airport noise, and (b) levels stated to be acceptable and tolerable by acoustical firms employed to prepare environmental impact reports. The author will comment unfavorably on style, clarity, and quality of EIRs prepared by acoustical firms for local governing bodies such as city councils. Results of the Aircraft/Airport Noise Study by an Environmental Protection Agency Task Force in the Spring of 1973 to assist EPA in the preparation of its report to Congress on that subject are discussed. The author was a member of the Task Force Study Group.

Contributed Papers (12 minutes)

10:00

MM4. Some Techniques for Assessment of Community Noise Environments. Louis C. SUTHERLAND, MARCIA BRADEN, AND RICHARD COLMAN, Wyle Laboratories, 128 Maryland Street, El Segundo, California 90245.--Several measurement tech- niques were evaluated for assessment of community noise environments. These included some new social survey tech- niques and methods for assessing noise exposure of individuals. Both of these are covered in companion papers. This paper considers some of the techniques and models for assessment of outdoor noise environments. Particular emphasis is placed on evaluation of the variances in levels in time and space. [-The study was supported by the Department of Transportation and the Environmental Protection Agency.-]

10:12

MM5. Application of Some New Survey Techniques for As- sessing Exposure to Noise and Human Reaction. MARCIA BRADEN, RICHARD COLMAN, AND LOUIS C. SUTHERLAND, Wyle Laboratories, 128 Maryland Street, El Segundo, California 90245.--The components of human reaction to noise have been studied extensively in the laboratory, but have been less assessed in the real world. This paper describes a theoretical framework and practical application of some novel techniques for assessing human reaction under field conditions. Data collection techniques never before applied in this context included (1) 24-hour diary (recall), and (2)paired-comparison method to determine an individual's relative value of noise/ quiet. These techniques were utilized as part of a survey instrument, or questionnaire, which was administered to a small group of subjects in a preliminary test. The survey was tested in four different residential sites in conjunction with a pilot test of a system for assessing community noise and individual noise exposure and reaction to this exposure. •The study was supported jointly by the Department of Transpor- tation and the Environmental Protection Agency.]

10:24

MM6. A Technique for Individual Noise Exposure Assess- ment. RICHARD COLMAN, LOUIS C. SUTHERLAND, AND MARCIA BRADEN, Wyle Laboratories, 128 Maryland Street, El Segundo, California 90245.--Instrumentation and methodologies were developed in a feasibility study to measure noise exposure, at

the ear, of a person as he went about his usual daily activities. Two physiological parameters, heart rate, and peripheral vasoconstriction at the earlobe, were also monitored during the same measurement period. The instrumentation consisted of a small, portable package consisting of (1) a subminiature electret microphone worn on the ear, (2) standard EKG chest leads for measuring heart rate, (3) a photoplethysmo- graph sensor mounted on the earlobe for measuring peripheral vasoconstriction, (4) circuitry to convert the microphone signal into a dc voltage proportional to the A-weighted noise level, and (5) a subminiature four-channel cassette tape recorder. Each of the five persons who participated in the experiment were instrumented early in the morning, wore the device for the entire day, and removed it at night (leaving it in the bedroom until it was picked up the next morning). Each person also kept a log of location and activity during the day. Representative results of the pilot study are illus- trated by synchronized time history records of the noise levels and physiological responses. The technique could be adapted to allow the measurement of noise exposure and physiological response under a wide variety of circumstances in the field. [The study was supported by the Department of Transpor- tation and the Environmental Protection Agency.-[

10:36

MM7. A Consultant's View of the U.S. Department of Hous- ing and Urban Development's Noise Standards (HUD Cir- cular 1390.2). J. M. GARRELICK AND KLAUS KLEINSCHMIDT, Cambridge Acoustical Associates, Incorporated, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138.•A number of federal agencies in dealing with environmental noise specify criteria and by so doing imply a procedure by which one may assess the acceptability of a given noise environment. Based on consulting experience, a practical evaluation of the' U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's policy in this area (HUD Circular 1390.2) is presented. In particular, the desirability of speci- fying a 24-h sample time is discussed. Alternate schemes are suggested. Also, diurnal variations in noise data have been compiled and are used to compare HUD's criteria with the Federal Highway Administration's standard (PPM 90-2).

J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 55, No. 2, February 1974

Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://acousticalsociety.org/content/terms. Download to IP: 132.174.255.116 On: Thu, 27 Nov 2014 07:24:35