OOOR77020
5689
                                             Toward
                                         a National
                                            Strategy
                                           for  Noise
                                             Control
                         ^s)
                U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                Office of Noise Abatement and Control
                    Washington, D.C. 20460

-------
    U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
TOWARD A NATIONAL STRATEGY FOR NOISE CONTROL
               April 1977

-------
                           TABLE OF CONTENTS
Preface 	     v
Summary	    vii

SECTION I - INTRODUCTION  	      1
     Background Data	      1
     Purpose of Publishing this Document  	      2
     Nature of This Document	      3

SECTION II - NATURE AND SCOPE OF THE NOISE PROBLEM	      5
     Effects of Noise   	      5
     The Pervasiveness of Noise Exposure  	      6

SECTION III - TOOLS AVAILABLE FOR THE CONTROL OF NOISE  	      9
     Regulatory Measures to Control Noise 	      9

SECTION IV - GOALS FOR THE NATIONAL EFFORT	     13
     General and Specific Goals 	     13

SECTION V - RELATIVE EMPHASIS AMONG ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES  ....     21
     Interrelationship of Specific Program Components 	     21
     National Source Regulations and State and Local Programs ...     22
     Labeling	     25

SECTION VI - NATIONAL PROGRAMS	     27
     Recommended National Programs  	     27
     The Role of Technology Research and Development	     29
     Development of Cost and Economic Impact Data	     33
     National Source Regulations  	     33
     State and Local Control Programs 	     38
     Labeling and Consumer Decision Making  	     41
     Community Awareness and Public Information 	     43
     Aircraft/Airport Noise 	     43
     Enforcement	     46
     Other Federal Programs 	     51
                                        111

-------
                                PREFACE









     This document is a revision of the October 1976 draft of Toward




a National Strategy for Noise Abatement and Control.  The draft was




made available to the public for comment through a notice published




in the Federal Register on November 10, 1976.  The comment period closed




on January 10, 1977.  The Agency found that there was substantial




agreement demonstrated by the comments with the general direction of




the draft.  For this reason fewer changes were necessary in this edition




than expected, based on the volume of responses.  Nevertheless, many




comments were detailed, extensive, and challenging.  EPA has endeavored




in this revision to review and give recognition to those comments which




could be answered or incorporated without considerable further study and




research.  There were, of course, complicated questions which were not




feasible to resolve in a short period time.  The more complex questions




are addressed in an Addendum to this document which is entitled, Policy




and Implementation Questions.   These issues will be dealt with more




substantively in the future.  It is the Agency's intention to use this




document as a stepping stone to the completion of a comprehensive noise




strategy.  The Agency will continue to seek public participation and




involvement as the strategy is shaped.

-------
                                SUMMARY









     This document has been developed to continue the dialogue on the




overall goals of the noise program, the role of government, the role of




consumers, and the role of industry in noise control, along with the




selection of specific abatement and enforcement activities for EPA.  It




establishes a general framework for making decisions on the best strategy




that EPA can employ to combat noise pollution.  The primary goal of the




Agency in the noise pollution area is to promote an environment for all




Americans, free from noise that jeopardizes their health or welfare.  In




order to reach this legislatively mandated objective five specific




operational goals have been formulated. These are:




     A.   To take all practical steps to eliminate hearing loss resulting




          from noise exposure;




     B.   To reduce environmental noise exposure to an Ldn value of no




          more than 75 dB immediately;




     C.   To reduce noise exposure levels to Ldn 65 dB by vigorous




          regulatory and planning actions;




     D.   To strive for an eventual reduction of noise levels to an




          Ldn of 55 dB; and




     E.   To encourage and assist other Federal, State and local agencies




          in the adoption and implementation of long range noise control




          policies.
                                  VII

-------
     The complexity of the noise problem, combined with the large array




of complementary control authorities, make possible a considerable number




of alternative approaches to a national program.  Numerous regulatory




measures are available to control noise, although many of them have




not yet been utilized to their full potential.  The ultimate shape of




the national noise control effort will be greatly influenced by the




programatic emphasis among three specific components of the program:




(A) Federal noise emission regulations for new products; (B) State and




local controls; and (C) Federal regulations requiring labeling of




products.  EPA's strategy for the implementation of the Noise Control




Act in the first few years after its passage was to attack the most




serious noise sources first and to meet the mandatory requirements for




which the Act established specific deadlines.  Specifically, top priority




for the short term was placed on developing source standards for major




sources of noise in the surface transportation and construction areas;




producing the other documents with mandatory deadlines, such as the




Airport/Aircraft Report, and the criteria and environmental noise level




documents; and publishing the two interstate carrier regulations.




Technical assistance, Federal program coordination, and labeling were




given lower priority.  EPA has now promulgated all standards and published




all reports for which there were specific deadlines.  Consequently, it




has been possible for EPA to become more flexible and to broaden its




approach to national noise control.




     On the basis of the directives of the Noise Control Act of 1972,




EPA's experience in the implementation of that Act, and the goals and




policy considerations discussed in this document, EPA has designed a
                                   Vlll

-------
program intended to maximize the effectiveness of the authority given




to the agency, as well as to encourage other parties to use their




authority effectively.




     This strategy recognizes the essentiality of State and local




programs, other Federal programs, and informed consumer choice through




labeling for the national noise control effort.  Increased efforts




in these areas are therefore planned for FY 1977 and 1978.  Starting




in FY 1977, EPA began to shift resources and attention to other areas




of the Noise Control Act which had not been emphasized previously.  One




major area of emphasis will be expanded assistance to State and local




agencies, which is essential to provide more immediate relief from




noise, to provide control of "nuisance" and other non-federally regulated




sources of noise, and to assist in the enforcement of EPA standards.




     Another area of increased activity is the coordination of Federal




noise control and research programs.  Emphasis will also be placed on




the implementation of a labeling program.  Labeling offers an alter-




native, or at least a desirable supplement, to Federal noise emission




limits. Product labeling will offer consumers an opportunity to deal




directly with noise pollution by enabling them to make informed choices.




     Development of noise emission limits for appropriate sources will




continue in the construction area and the surface transportation area.




Additionally, EPA is examining other categories including household




products and consumer products for possible emission regulations or




labeling requirements.
                                   IX

-------
                               SECTION I




                             INTRODUCTION




BACKGROUND DATA




     During the last several years, the abatement and control of noise




has become a major area of activity in many sectors of American society




as indicated by the following:




     A)   During the late 1960's several agencies of the Federal Government




          spearheaded an effort to increase the country's activities in




          the area of noise control;




     B)   In 1972, the Congress passed the Noise Control Act directing the




          U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to set national noise




          source standards and otherwise promote "an environment for all




          Americans, free from noise that jeopardizes their health or welfare;"




     C)   Loss of hearing caused by occupational exposure to noise has become




          a major ground for workmen's compensation claims today.  The




          prevalence of such noise-induced hearing loss has resulted in




          examination by the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration




          of more stringent noise standards for the workplace, and in




          additional pressures on American industry to protect workers




          from noise;




     D)   The number of State and local noise control programs have increased




          from 288 in 1973 to 665 in 1976;




     E)   Noise control has become an increasingly important component




          of other Federal agencies' programs (e.g., the building of noise




          barriers has become a significant element of the Department of




          Transportation's National Highway Program);.




     F)   In some cases, American industry is increasingly producing quieter




          products and is advertising "quiet" as a positive feature of its




          products;

-------
     G)   In October 1976,  President Ford approved a Federal Aviation




          Administration (FAA) proposal for retrofit or replacement of




          existing jet aircraft which do not meet the 1969 standards.




     All this activity stems from a growing awareness of the adverse




effects of noise on public health and welfare and from the realization




that no single organization or group can alone provide the necessary




relief. The abatement and control of noise is an extremely complex task




that will require the coordinated efforts of all segments of society,




and a national strategy must be designed and implemented to achieve this




goal.




PURPOSE OF PUBLISHING THIS DOCUMENT




     This document represents the continuation of the effort to define a




unified national noise abatement and control strategy.  It is hoped the




details of the strategy will be improved and that the activities of all




participating groups will begin to coalesce into a common effort.




     The Environmental Protection Agency has only a portion of the




authority necessary to carry out the national noise abatement effort.




The Noise Control Act of 1972, however, directs EPA to serve as the




coordinator of all the Federal Government's noise abatement activities




and to give technical assistance to State and local agencies and to the




general public.  Therefore, it seems appropriate for EPA to take the




lead in coordinating the preparation of a strategy and then to ask the




other organizations and individuals concerned with noise control to




assist in refining this strategy.  This procedure is designed to develop




a national dialogue, leading to an agreed-upon unified national strategy




that will serve as a general guide for the major noise control activities




in this country.




                                       2

-------
THE NATURE OF THIS DOCUMENT




     In order to stimulate a national dialogue, EPA believes it is




desirable that this general strategy be concise and non-technical.




This document sets out in summary form the general principles by which




the national effort should be guided, the division of responsibilities,




and the areas of emphasis.  It also identifies the major outstanding




policy and implementation questions.  The purpose of the document is to




provide an overview rather than to supply the details of how the effort




should be carried out.  As a follow-up, EPA is developing for publication,




 a surface transportation strategy and will develop specific program




strategies in several other areas (such as construction, household,




and consumer products) in which more detailed activities will be discussed.

-------
                              SECTION II




                 NATURE AND SCOPE OF THE NOISE PROBLEM









EFFECTS OF NOISE




     Noise, like other pollutants, is, to a very substantial degree a




waste product generated by the activities of a modern industrialized




society.  It is defined in the EPA Report to the President and Congress




on Noise (1972) as "any sound ... that may produce an undesired phy-




siological or psychological effect in an individual ... or group."




Noise is an extremely pervasive pollutant.  In one form or at one time,




noise adversely affects virtually the entire U.S. population.




     Certain noise effects are well documented as follows:




     A)   Noise can cause damage to the inner ear, resulting in




          permanent hearing loss that may range from mild to severe,




          depending upon the level and duration of exposure;




     B)   Noise can interfere with spoken communication and




          with the enjoyment of watching television, or listening to the




          radio or phonograph;




     C)   Noise can disturb and prevent sleep;




     D)   Noise can disrupt learning and teaching activities as well as




          other activities that require mental concentration or spoken




          communication;




     E)   Noise can be a source of annoyance;




     F)   Even the detectability of man-made noise in pristine environments,




          such as national forests, may be of significant annoyance to people.

-------
     Other effects of noise are less well documented but may become

increasingly important as more information is gathered.  They include

the non-auditory health effects (the "stress" diseases), the combined

effects of noise with other pollutants, and adverse social and economic
                                                   i-
effects.

     Annoyance caused by noise is a particularly complex phenomenon,

governed by a composite of factors that vary from individual to

individual, and from time to time.  Although hard to quantify or

predict, community annoyance caused by noise is very prevalent, and in

many instances, it has provided a powerful impetus to the noise abatement

movement.  The Bureau of the Census' 1974 Annual Housing Survey found

that although Americans in approximately four out of every five households

felt that they lived in good or excellent neighborhoods, almost half

(49 percent) considered their neighborhoods too noisy.  In this survey,

noise ranked first of all the undesirable conditions listed, surpassing

many other factors that are usually considered to be significant

in people's perception of the quality of their lives.

THE PERVASIVENESS OF NOISE EXPOSURE

     Noise-induced hearing loss is a recognized problem in the highly

mechanized industries, the military, and other high noise-exposure

occupations.  An estimated 14.7 million American workers are exposed

to an Leq(8)* of 75 decibels (dB) or greater, a level above which

there is a risk of hearing damage.  An additional 13.5 million Americans

are estimated to be exposed to an Leq  (8) of 75 (dB) or greater in

transportation or recreational vehicles.
* Leq, equivalent sound level, is the average energy  level  of  sound
  over a given period of  time.  The period of time is  shown in parenthesis,
  in  this case, 8 hours.
                                        6

-------
     Much less is known about the levels of noise associated with non-

auditory health problems, but it is generally assumed (although not

proven) that significant adverse effects do not occur below the noise

level considered safe the the purposes of hearing conservation.

     Noise levels above Ldn* 55 dB may interfere with normal activities

such as speech communication, sleep, relaxation, and privacy. An estimated

103 million Americans - virtually half the Nation's population - are

exposed to an Ldn of 55 dB or greater.

     Noise levels will increase significantly unless effective and

coordinated Federal, State and local noise control programs are implemented.

For example:

     A)    Urban noise intensities will increase roughly in proportion to

           growth in population density;

     B)    A three-to-four fold  increase is projected in the number of

           residents adjacent to freeways and major highways who will be

           exposed to noise levels of Ldn 65 dB or greater, by the year

           2000;

     C)    A 50 percent increase will occur in the number of person-hours

           of exposure to construction noise by the year 2000;

     D)    Occupational hearing loss and other adverse effects can be

           expected to increase as the number of exposed workers increases.
* Ldn, day-night sound level, is the energy-averaged equivalent level
  (Leq) for 20 hours adjusted to include a 10 dB penalty for noise exposures
  during night-time hours (10 p.m.  to 6 a.m.).

-------
                              SECTION III




               TOOLS AVAILABLE FOR THE CONTROL OF NOISE









REGULATORY MEASURES TO CONTROL NOISE




     Numerous regulatory measures are available to control noise, although




many of them have not yet been utilized to their full potential.  EPA




already has promulgated regulations for interstate motor and rail carriers




for new medium and heavy duty trucks, and portable air compressors.  Pro-




posed regulations will be issued in the spring of 1977 for motorcycles,




buses, truck-mounted refrigeration units and solid waste compactors, and




wheel and crawler tractors used as loaders and dozers.  Proposed regulations




for the labeling of hearing protectors will also be published in 1977.




     The following are examples of regulatory controls:




     A)   Federal Government




          1)   Environmental Protection Agency




               o    Regulations on the operation of interstate motor




                    and rail carriers;




               o    Regulations on new products that are major sources of




                    noise,  including such controls as anti-tampering,




                    warranty,  and useful life provisions;




               o    Labeling of products that produce noise capable of




                    adversely  affecting public health or welfare, or




                    products that are marketed for their noise attenuation




                    characteristics;

-------
     o    Providing technical assistance to State and Local




          units of government desiring to develop and enforce




          noise abatement and control programs;




     o    Public information dissemination to inform citizens




          of the hazards of noise to public health and welfare;




          and




     o    Certification of Low Noise Emission Products.




2)   Department of Transportation




     o    Enforcement of EPA's interstate motor carrier and




          rail carrier noise emission standards (FHWA/FRA);




     o    Procedures for abatement of highway noise and highway




          construction noise (FHWA);




     o    Standards limiting in-cab truck and locomotive noise




          levels (FHWA/FRA);




     o    Standards limiting shipboard crew noise levels (USCG);




     o    Policies for land retention around audible aids to




          navigation (fog signals) (USCG);




     o    Standards for railroad employee sleeping quarters (FRA);




     o    Noise abatement features in; airport development and




          improvement (FAA); regulations controlling aviation




          noise; and grants to airports for noise planning; and




     o    Noise specifications and design standards for bus and




          rail rapid transit systems  (UMTA).




3)   Department of Labor




     o    Standards for control of occupational noise  (OSHA).







                       10

-------
     4)   Department of Interior




          o    Enforcement of noise standards in mines (MESA);




          o    Research, development and demonstration programs




               in mining equipment noise control (Bureau of




               Mines).




     5)   Housing and Urban Development




          o    Limitation of mortgage guarantees and assistance




               to housing and other noise sensitive uses in areas




               with high noise levels, such as near airports and




               major highways;




          o    Noise requirements in comprehensive planning.




     6)   Other Federal Agencies




          o    Development of noise control methodologies and




               requirements by Department of Defense, Department




               of the Interior, Department of Health, Education and




               Welfare, and the Department of Agriculture.




          o    Implement the purchase of low-noise emission products




               up to 25% premium; and




          o    Develop methods for abatement of noise at Federal




               facilities and from Federal equipment.




B)   State and Local Agency Regulatory Measures




     1)   Permit programs (construction sites, manufacturing plants);




     2)   Controls on use and operation of noisy products;




     3)   Economic incentives (e.g., noise-related fees at  airports,




          for motor vehicles, etc.);







                              11

-------
          4)    Zoning;




          5)    Property line standards;




          6)    Curfews;




          7)    Labeling;




          8)    Enforcement of the above;  and




          9)    Regulation of large stationary sources such as




               power plants, cooling towers, etc.




     C)    Consumers




          1)    Purchase of low-noise products.




     D)    Industry




          1)    Reduction of occupational  noise exposure;




          2)    Production of quieter products;  and




          3)    Provision of noise information to purchasers of




               products.




     Each of  the above regulatory and program tools is exercised to




varying degrees and with little coordination.  If the tools were used




together in a unified program, their effectiveness would be greatly




enhanced.
                                   12

-------
                              SECTION IV




                     GOALS FOR THE NATIONAL EFFORT







GENERAL AND SPECIFIC GOALS




      The complexity of the noise problem combined with the vast




array of complementary control authorities listed in the previous




section, raises the prospect of a large number of alternative




approaches to a national program.  In order to give some structure




to the strategy planning process, some tentative goals have been




established for the program.  Our purpose is to design the program around




these goals and then to subject them to examination in this general




strategy and in the specific program strategies to  decide whether or




not they remain reasonable.  If further review and  evaluation indicates




they are reasonable, then timetables for their achievement can be




established and the program monitored for progress  toward achieving




them.




     Congress has stated a general goal in the Noise Control Act which




we suggest for the entire noise control effort.  Reference this general




goal in the Noise Control Act of 1972, Section 2, as follows:




          "To promote an environment for all Americans free from




          noise that jeopardizes their health or welfare."




     In order to achieve this general goal, specific goals based on




our knowledge of what levels of noise jeopardize health and welfare




are needed.  The following tentative specific goals are recommended:




     A)   Take all practical steps to eliminate hearing loss as a




          significant consequence of noise exposure both in the work-




          place and in the- general environment.
                                 13

-------
     B)    Reduce  environmental  noise  exposure of  the  population

          to an Ldn value of  no more  than 75  dB immediately,

          utilizing all  available  tools,  except in those isolated

          cases where  this would impose severe hardship.   This

          will essentially eliminate  risk of  hearing  loss due

          to environmental noise,  and reduce  the  extreme

          annoyance and  activity interference for the population

          most severely  affected.

     C)    Through vigorous regulatory and planning actions,

          reduce  environmental  noise  exposure levels  to Ldn

          65* dB  or lower, and  concurrently reduce noise

          annoyance and  related activity interference caused

          by intrusive noises.

     D)    In planning  future  programs concerned with  or affecting

          environmental  noise exposure, to the extent possible,

          aim for environmental noise levels  that do  not exceed

          an Ldn  of 55 dB. This will ensure protection of the

          public  health  and welfare from all adverse  effects  of

          noise based  on present knowledge.

     E)    Encourage and  assist  Federal, State and local agencies

          in the  adoption and implementation of a long-range  noise

          control policy designed  to prevent significant degradation

          of existing  noise levels or exposure in designated

          areas.   Such a "non-degradation" policy could be

          incorporated into land-use and development  planning
*  Technically, this should be expressed as Ldn=65, however, hereafter
   in this document it will be shown as Ldn 65 for purpose of simplification.

                                 14

-------
              processes in an effort to reduce potential increases




              of noise levels or exposure in areas where quiet is




              at a premium, e.g., hospital zones, quiet residential




              areas, and wilderness areas.




     The choice of these specific goals involves many value judgments,




which should receive critical review.  For instance, goal C specifically




focuses on Ldn 65 dB rather than 55 dB.  Although activity interference




may occur as low as Ldn 55, the Agency believes the greatest emphasis




of the noise control program should be on levels of noise of Ldn 65 and




above until the problems of the higher levels are solved.  Nevertheless,




regulatory action to reduce levels below Ldn 65 will be  necessary in




some cases, and Ldn 55 should be the goal of future planning,  especially




since noise control is often so much easier to achieve if it is  built




in from the beginning.




     EPA recognizes that it would take a long time to achieve a national




environmental noise level of Ldn 55.  In fact, it may be impossible and




undesirable from the point of view of all our national needs to do so in




all situations.




     It must be emphasized that these are goals and are not intended as




regulations, since EPA has no authority to regulate ambient noise levels.




In promulgating specific source regulations, EPA does a thorough study




of both the specific benefits to be achieved and the cost to society of




achieving these benefits.  These same costs and benefits will be examined




in the development of specific program strategies in such areas as surface




transportation and construction.
                                    15

-------
     All the details of exactly how these goals can and should be achieved

and the associated cost to society for the efforts as a whole remain to

be developed.  However, many of the details of the component programs

have been developed.  For some types of problems other than noise, the

development of such a total strategy is relatively simple and can be done

quickly.  However, in an area as complex as noise, where there are so

many unknowns and where very little in-depth planning has been done up

to now, strategy planning must be an evolving and flexible process.

     The strategy questions that should be answered in the noise area

(and the alternatives available) occur on many different levels.

Figure 1 illustrates one way in which these alternatives can be

categorized.  The more general choices are shown at the top of the

triangle; the more concrete and specific ones are shown at the bottom.

     This strategy document concentrates on the first four levels of

choices shown in Figure 1.  The specific program strategies to follow

will deal with  the choices shown on Levels V and VI.  While the formal

documentation  of these specific program strategies is only now beginning

to be developed within EPA, initial descriptions of three such program

strategiessurface transportation, construction, and aviation,can be

found in other documents  already published by the Agency.*
*Surface Transportation:  Identification of Major Sources, June 21, 197A,
 and May 28, 1975; Preamble and Background Document for New Heavy and
 Medium Truck Regulation, March 31, 1976.
 Construction:  Identification of Major Sources, June 21, 1974  ,
 May 28, 1975 and February 3, 1977; Preamble and Background Document for
 Portable Air Compressor Regulation.
 Aviation:  Report to Congress on Aircraft/Airport Noise, July  27, 1973;
 Preambles ?.nd Brckground Documents for proposed regulations sent to
 FAA under Section 7 of the Noise Control Act  (December 6, 1974 through
 October 1, 1976).  April 5, 1976 Speech of the Administrator to Inter-
 Noise '76.

                                    16

-------
                                  II.

                            SPECIFIC GOALS

                                Activity
                    Hearing   Interference   Other

                                 III.

                           GENERAL APPROACH

           ''Source     In-Use    Consumer     Other  including
          ^Standards   Control   Decisions  Public Information

                                  IV.
                        PRINCIPAL PARTICIPANTS

         Federal   State   Local     Consumer
          Govt.    Govt.   Govt.     & Local
                                  Organizations
Industry   Other
                                  V.

                             MAJOR  SOURCES

       Surface       Construction    Industrial   Aviation   Other
   Transportation      (Loaders,       Sites
 (Truck, Motorcycles  Compressors)
	etc.)	

                                  VI.

                          SPECIFIC  APPROACHES

  Inspection  EPA New  Product   Labeling   Permits   Property   Other
   Programs       Standards                             Line
	Standards

                               Figure 1.
                                      17

-------
     In formulating a strategy for its own activities since the passage




of the Noise Control Act of 1972, EPA has sought to use its finite




noise control resources to achieve the maximum initial progress toward




its goals.  Most of its activities resulted frojp program decisions that




flowed directly from the structure of the Noise Control Act and the




legislative discussions that preceded the passage of that Act.




     Specifically, EPA has:




     A)   Published regulations for in-use control of interstate motor




          carriers, to reduce further escalation of the noise from these




          sources (goals B and C);




     B)   Formally recommended to OSHA, under Section 4 of the Noise




          Control Act, that OSHA establish a stringent workplace




          standard to reduce substantially, noise exposure that is damaging




          workers' hearing (goal A);




               Note:  Although the new product regulatory provisions




               of the Noise Control Act could be used to some extent




               to eliminate hearing loss as a significant consequence




               of noise in the workplace, the authority under the




               Occupational Safety and Health Act seems the most




               effective means for this purpose.




     C)   Began a process of establishing new product standards for




          the most serious contributors of noise to the environment,




          concentrating initially on  those in surface transportation




          and construction (goals A,  B, and C).
                                   18

-------
     D)   Recommended eleven regulatory proposals to the Federal Aviation




          Administration (goals B, C, and D).




     To achieve its initial goals, EPA had to concentrate its finite




noise control resources on these basic activities.  As a consequence,




EPA gave less emphasis to other authorities in the Act, and to important




organizations in the Federal government and to State and local agencies




who can and should play an important role in the total national effort.




Now that these initial actions are completed or well under way, the




Agency has reviewed its program and is attempting, with the resources




available, to foster a more comprehensive and carefully integrated




national program.
                                     19

-------
                               SECTION V




            RELATIVE EMPHASIS AMONG ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES









INTERRELATIONSHIP OF SPECIFIC PROGRAM COMPONENTS




    The ultimate shape of the national noise control effort will be




greatly influenced by the programatic emphasis among three specific




components of the program:  (A) Federal noise emission regulations for




new products, (B) State and local controls, and (C) Federal regulations




requiring labeling  of products.  The relative emphasis given to each of




these  components of a national effort is an important issue because, to




some extent,  each component can substitute for the other two.  In other




words, a national  strategy could be fashioned that placed almost all




the emphasis on new product  regulations and gave very little attention




to State, local and consumer  actions.  Alternatively, Federal new




product regulations could be given  less emphasis, with State, local,




and consumer actions filling at least  part of the void.




    For instance, if one were concerned with urban traffic noise, one




could attempt to provide most of the needed control through new product




regulations limiting the noise produced by new vehicles (trucks, motor-




cycles, buses, etc.) coming off the assembly line.  Or, this approach




could be supplemented and to some -extent replaced by State and local




controls limiting the noise emitted by these vehicles when they were




being operated.   As another alternative, consumers could be given information




about the noise emitted by the specified model of vehicle which might result




in market-induced noise control, and would substitute to some degree for




the other two efforts.
                                     21

-------
    The effectiveness of each of these components varies according to




the product and the situation.  For instance, the effectiveness of labeling




would be much greater in cases where the buyer is also the person most




adversely affected by the noise.  In situations where the principal person




affected is a third party, there is less incentive for the purchase




of quieter products.




    In many cases, it would not be beneficial to develop State and local




programs to handle the problems caused by a single product.  Consequently,




general policy decisions should be made regarding the relative roles of




Federal new product regulations, State and local controls, and labeling,




in order to lay the groundwork for individual product-by-product decisions.




NATIONAL SOURCE REGULATIONS AND STATE AND LOCAL PROGRAMS




    Since the passage of the 1972 Noise Control Act, EPA has focused its




noise control resources on the development, promulgation, and enforcement




of national source regulations, and has not emphasized assistance to




State and local programs and labeling.




    This strategy was appropriate during the beginning years because national




source standards were (and still are) clearly needed, and because the Act




places primary emphasis on them.  Such standards are capable of producing




significant noise reductions that, to a large degree, are not obtainable




by other means, such as State and local controls and labeling.  It now




appears, however, to be time to initiate another phase in the national




effort.  National source regulations, specifically new product standards,




must continue to be the major component of the Federal effort, and EPA




has studies under way that will lead to such regulations for a number of




additional products.  (See Table I, Pages 36 and 37).






                                    22

-------
    However, it is clear that the abatement and control of noise is such




a complex process that new product regulations cannot provide for the




degree of abatement and control necessary to achieve the goals discussed




above.  The growth in the quantity of a particular product in use, and




degradation once it leaves the factory, combine to make the Federal new




product regulations a necessary, but not totally sufficient, portion of




a national noise control program.  The problem is compounded by the fact




that the EPA's new product standards will not actually produce a benefit




until a substantial number of the old noisy products are replaced by the




quieter new ones.  For many products, this replacement cycle will take




eight to ten years and in some cases much longer.




    Therefore, EPA has concluded that strong State and local noise




control programs are an essential element of the national noise control




effort, particularly in the following areas:




     A)   Enforcement of Federal new product regulations as an extension




          of the Federal enforcement program: The effectiveness of any




          new product standard after the product has left the factory is




          dependent on the enforcement of the provisions of the Federal




          regulations that cover the product - namely, the anti-tampering,




          warranty, and useful life provisions. For example, it is




          planned that the Federal standard for motorcycles will specify




          noise level requirements and labels for replacement exhaust




          systems.  Without effective enforcement of these provisions,
                                   23

-------
     the full effect of the rest of the regulation may be vitiated.




     EPA's enforcement of these provisions would be greatly assisted




     by an active field enforcement effort on the part of State and




     local governments.




B)   Implementation of additional controls on the use and operation




     of products for which EPA has promulgated new product regulations.




     Given our knowledge of technology today, it is impossible to




     set new standards for many products that would fully protect




     public health and welfare.  These standards must be complemented




     by additional use and operational controls administrated by




     State and local authorities.  A multitude of control alternatives




     is available to these authorities, many of them beyond the




     normal reach of Federal authority. For instance, the effective




     enforcement of local ordinances controlling the time and place




     of off-road motorcycle operation would greatly enhance the




     effectiveness of any Federal requirements for noise level




     reductions at the time of manufacturing.




C)   Achievement of immediate control of noise.  National new




     product regulations are designed to bring relief in the long




     term.  In-use and operational controls are essential to provide




     some immediate relief.  Except in the case of air, rail, and




     motor interstate carriers, State and local agencies are the




     only levels of government with the authority to enforce this




     type of immediate control.
                             24

-------
LABELING




     The use of labeling and associated consumer choice in the control of




noise are also critical components of the national control effort.  It




is impractical and undesirable to establish Federal new product regulations




for all products which are deemed to be "noisy."  When the principal




impact of a product is on the buyer or user rather than on third parties,




labeling may prove to be as effective a regulatory approach as the




promulgation of a new product standard.  The consuming public is beginning




to request quieter products as they sense noise intrusion.  If easily




understood noise comparison information could be provided to the consuming




public in the form of a simple label, consumers could choose quieter




products when quiet is important to them.  Labeling of certain products,




including those with third-party effects, may also enable State and




local agencies to implement simpler control programs  related to the




label.  For instance, a community could prohibit the use of a product




emitting more than X dB in certain sensitive areas, and this prohibition




could be enforced without the use of a sound level meter by simple




examination of the label.




    In the coming years, EPA plans to continue its emphasis on new




product regulations, and also to increase its work on assistance to




State and local noise control programs and, relying to a lesser extent,




on labeling.




    In determining the appropriate mix of Federal, State, local, and




consumer tools to use in specific cases, EPA will consider:




     A)   The relative effectiveness of the various tools in meeting the




          goals of the national program;







                                 25

-------
B)   The need for national uniformity where products cross




     State lines and where differing standards applicable to




     manufacturers would be unduly disruptive;




C)   The Agency's general preference for the control of problems




     at the State or local level rather than the Federal, where it




     is feasible;




D)   The Agency's general preference for the allocation of national




     resources by the marketplace rather than through Federal




     regulations, if the marketplace can be sufficiently effective;




     and




E)   The need to provide immediate relief from some of the more




     serious noise problems while working on long-range solutions




     to the rest of the problems.
                              26

-------
                              SECTION VI




                           NATIONAL PROGRAMS









RECOMMENDED NATIONAL PROGRAM




     On the basis of the directives of the Noise Control Act of 1972,




EPA's experience in the implementation of that Act, and the goals and




policy considerations discussed above, EPA has designed a program




intended to maximize the effectiveness of the authority given to the




agency, as well as to encourage other parties to use their authority




effectively.  This section of the document sets forth EPA's program in




summary fashion.  The program represents the present thinking of the




Agency, but is subject to modification as the national strategy evolves




or as additional Federal legislation is enacted.  This description of the




program is focused primarily on EPA activities.  However, on the basis




of comments and contributions submitted during the review period for




this document, EPA has expanded this section somewhat to include more




comprehensive description of noise control activities of other organizations.




It is clear that the roles and contributions of other Federal agencies,




State and local agencies, manufacturers and consumers still needs




considerable delineation.




     The national program is discussed below under the following categories:




     A)   Health and Welfare Investigations




     B)   The Role of Technology Research and Demonstration




     C)   Cost and Economic Impact Data




     D)   National Source Standards




     E)   State and Local Control Programs






                                  27

-------
     F)   Labeling and Consumer Decision Making

     G)   Community Awareness and Public Information

     H)   Aircraft/Airport Noise

     I)   Enforcement

     J)   Other Federal Programs

     A)   Health and Welfare Investigations

     The Noise Control Act places great emphasis on the protection of

public health and welfare as the primary purpose of Federal action to

control noise.  One of the first actions under the Noise Control Act,

was two documents EPA developed and published on this subject.  First,

the Criteria Document,* set forth a summary of all the information then

known about the effects of noise on public health and welfare. The other,

known as the "Levels Document,"** further refines noise effects criteria

and uses this information to derive levels  protective of public health

and welfare with an adequate margin of safety.  When combined with data

on technical feasibility and costs, this information forms the framework

for regulatory decision-making.  EPA plans to revise and update the

Criteria and Levels documents to reflect the most recent information

concerning the effects of noise.  Based on studies and investigations,

currently underway, it is expected that issuances on the following topics

will occur beginning in FY 1978: (A) The effects of noise on  the cardio-

vascular system, sleep disturbance, speech disruption, intrusiveness, and

wildlife,  (B) community annoyance related to levels of exposure; and  (C)

new information on noise induced hearing loss.
* Public Health and Welfare Criteria, July 1973  (#550/9-73-002).
**Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite  to Protect
  Public Health and Welfare With An Adequate Margin of Safety, March
  1974  (#550/0-74-004).


                                     28

-------
     EPA is now assessing the most pressing health and welfare information




needs in the context of its present and projected regulatory actions.  The




Agency has convened a Federal interagency research panel on health and




welfare effects to assess the research programs and priorities of other




Federal agencies and then to plan a coordinated research program to address




the most pressing needs.  When these studies are completed in the Spring of




1977, EPA, in coordination with other agencies, will re-evaluate its role




on health and welfare effects research.  In the past, EPA has depended on




other agencies and organizations to carry out the requisite research in




this area because of finite resources.   Discussions have also been




held with members of the scientific community on this same subject.




     B)  The Role of Technology Research and Demonstration




    It is generally accepted that the most cost-effective method of




reducing noise is to control it at the source.  In other words, noise




reduction should be an intrinsic design criterion in the pre-development




phase of any new product.  The apparent lack of technological means of




controlling noise from specific products is proving to be a constraint




in establishing national source standards that can provide the desired




level of protection of the public health and welfare.  The noise




reduction benefits to be derived from technological developments are




directly related to the state-of-the-art of the available technology and




the speed in which it can be incorporated into production hardware.




     The primary responsibility for developing this technology should




rest with the industry; however, investment by the Federal Government




in technology development, particularly in the demonstration stage, is
                                 29

-------
needed in some cases to help bring new technology into the marketplace,




or to stimulate industry development.  In the area of noise technology,




the Federal Government's efforts have been focused primarily on aviation




and secondarily on surface transportation.  EPA has recently  reconvened




three interagency noise technology research panels (surface  transportation,




aviation, and machinery) to review the status of Federal  research in




noise abatement and control, assess priorities, and develop  a cooperative




research plan for the future.  The Federal Agencies represented on these




panels include National Aeronautics and Space  Administration (NASA),




Department of Defense (DOD), Department of  Transportation  (DOT)  (including




the functional administrations within  DOT, i.e., Federal Aviation




Administration (FAA), Federal Highway  Administration (FHWA), and Urban




Mass Transit Authority  (UMTA)), Department of Interior (DOI) (Bureau of




Mines), Department of Commerce (DOC)  (National Bureau of Standards),




Department of Health, Education and Welfare (DHEW) (National Institute




of Occupational Safety  and Health  (NIOSH),  Department of Housing and




Urban Development (HUD), and the Energy Research  and Development




Administration (ERDA).




     Even if new technology is developed  there is no assurance that  it




will be incorporated into new products.   The most effective way to ensure




that it will be is through regulatory action.  One cannot expect  a




manufacturer, operating in a competitive  environment,  to do more than




that which is minimally required to maintain or increase  his market




position.  Only when all of the competitors are required to  meet comparable
                                   30

-------
standards, can significant environmental progress be  made in an equitable




fashion.  The guidance provided to the manufacturers in the form of




regulations reflecting the implementation of "enabling" technology will




provide the manufacturers with the necessary leadtime to adjust their




design and production process to meet market and environmental require-




ments.




     There are at least two approaches for regulating the noise of




new products:




     1)   Putting a lid on the allowable noise limits of all




          new products, based upon available, demonstrated




          technology as it is applied to some products in




          production and operational use, in some industries.




          The same technology may be equally applicable to other




          products in other industries.  This, in effect, prevents




          an escalation of single-event noise in the environment,




          as additional products enter the market place.




     2)   The establishment of noise targets for products




          or equipment to be produced in the future.  These




          targets would be based upon demonstrations of




          components or systems that are not yet in production.




          As the technology development programs proceed, the




          targets may be modified to be more, or less, strin-




          gent as indicated by the "enabling" technology.
                                  31

-------
EPA has adopted both of these approaches in its program.




     The objectives of the technology program are to:




     1)   Illuminate the state-of-the-art of available technology to




          provide the basis for Federal, State and local regulatory




          actions that limit the allowable noise of products identified




          as requiring noise control actions.




     2)   Ensure the availability of an advanced technology base to




          permit the gradual reduction of allowable source noise on




          a timely basis.




These short and long range objectives will be implemented by:




     1)   Establishing and implementing an effective Federal coordination




          program to identify on-going noise research, development and




          demonstration programs and to assess their contribution to




          meeting the National Noise Control Strategy objectives.  In




          addition to the Federally sponsored noise research activities,




          privately funded industry and university noise research will




          be included in a comprehensive assessment.




     2)   Identifying noise research needs that are currently under-




          funded or nonexistent in order to expand the required technology base




          for future regulatory action.  This will include participation




          in joint research component or system technology demonstration




          programs as required, both domestically and internationally.




          One joint project already underway is the EPA/DOT demonstration




          program concerned with noise  reduction of heavy duty trucks.




     3)   Encouraging the transfer and  use of technology developments




          across product and industry lines.
                                   32

-------
     C)  Development of Cost and Economic Impact Data




     The Noise Control Act requires the Administrator to take the cost




of compliance into account when promulgating standards.  Data are




collected for each new product regulation on the cost of meeting various




alternative noise control levels and on the impact of these costs on the




affected industry and in the marketplace.  The results of these studies




are published in the background document issued with each regulation.




In order to assist in the analysis of these impacts, EPA is developing




improved forecasting techniques, and accounting and finance models.




     Assigning dollar values to benefits achieved by noise reduction is




an extremely complex procedure, which EPA has not attempted in its




presentation of noise regulations.  Some economic measures which have




been suggested as proxies for noise benefits are land value changes,




settlement values of legal suits on noise, and workman's compensation




benefits.  However, each of these dollar figures has an extremely wide




range.  Rather than assigning dollar values, EPA has stated its noise




benefits in health and welfare terms.




     D)  National Source Regulations




     Except, in the area of aviation, the Noise Control Act of 1972




leaves to the judgment of the Administrator the identification of the




limits on product noise emissions that are necessary to protect the




public health and welfare, taking into account the extent and conditions




of use of the particular product (alone or in combination with other




noise sources), the degree of noise reduction achievable through the




application of the best available technology, and the cost of compliance.




Potentially, several thousand classes of products come within the




Administrator's authority to prescribe regulations for new products.
                                   33

-------
     The essential data required for setting national  source standards

for noise control are limited.  The setting of a national noise  source

standard requires the collection and analysis of data (most of it

never developed or accumulated before) on such factors as; the contri-

bution of the particular product to noise exposure resulting   in adverse

health and welfare effects; the technology available to  control that

product; the cost of applying that technology to control  the noise;

the impact of the regulation on the economy (including effects  on

employment and inflation); and the alternative ways of controlling the

noise from the product.

     By reviewing groups of products in terms of the health and welfare

goals of the national program, EPA selected nev medium and heavy trucks

(in the surface transportation category) and portable air compressors

(in the construction equipment category) as initial new products to be

regulated.  The intent of these regulatory actions was to set limits on

the noisiest items of transportation and construction equipment at the

earliest possible date.*

      In a multiple source noise environment, such as that associated

with  construction sites, it is necessary to quiet many major sources to

achieve  a significant reduction of site noise level.  To this end,

present regulation development activities are directed toward such

products as  wheel and crawler tractors, to supplement the regulations

already published  for portable air compressors and trucks (including

dump trucks, cement  mixers and other construction related trucks).
*  The specific basis for these and later choices of products to
   regulate under EPA's new product standards authority are given in
   Identification of Major Sources, June 21, 1974, May 28, 1975,
   January 12, 1977, and February 3, 1977.

                                    34

-------
      Similarly, in the surface transportation category, regulation




development activities are currently underway for buses, motorcycles,




truck mounted solid waste compactors, and truck mounted refrigeration




units.  Concurrent with the above regulation development actions, EPA is




conducting  in-depth studies of the contributions that automobiles, light




trucks, and  guided mass transit systems make to the total noise environment.




      Vehicular replacement components, which are critical for pre-




vention  of increased noise emissions, are also possible subjects of




regulation.  Two principal replacement components currently under study




are tires and muffler/exhaust systems.




     The United States is not, of course, alone in developing noise




abatement strategies involving noise standards.  Many other countries are




similarly pursuing the goal of providing a satisfactory noise environment




for their citizens.  To maintain uniformity in international commerce




the EPA believes that it is necessary to cooperate with other nations in




the harmonization of noise standards and measurement procedures for products




where it is considered desirable and possible.  EPA will maintain a




continuous technical liaison with these other nations.  Acknowledging the




necessity of these actions, however, does not imply that EPA will sacrifice




the stringency of its own noise standards, unless a case-by-case review




indicates that the benefits of such a sacrifice would outweigh the




disadvantages.




     Table I shows EPA's present plans in the new product standards area.
                                      35

-------













































cn
C
o
H
4-1
cd
rH
3
M 00
01
cu pi
i i
43 4-1
cd o
H 3
a
o
S-i
PH

3
0)














































a) 4-1 -K
cn o cn
o 2 r-~
(3. cn
O 13 rH
>H CU
PH 43 >,
CO rH
- -H S-l
13 rH Cd
01 43 W
4-1 3
Cd PH C
H Cd
4-1 CU 43
H 43 EH
C
M 13 (-1
rH CU
" 3 4-J
M-I O Cd





cu
43 C
H 00
O r^
4-J 13 cn
0) rH
rH 43
cd cn oo
cn -H c
O tH -H
O, 43 S-i
o 3 a
S-l PH C/J
PH






0)
43 C *
H r
O r~-
4-1 -a cn
0) rH
rH 43
cd cn oo
cn -H c
O rH -H
CX 43 S-l
O 3 P.
P PH C/J
PH





13
Ol
4-1
0)
tH
a
B
0
C_)








































































































X >H 13 O 13
Pi S-i M S-4
O o eg tH cd
EH 4-1 13 -H T3
< O C cd G
i-J S cd pi 03
tD 4-1 4J
O 01 cn cu cn
W 4-1 4-1
pi cd cu m 01
4-1 cn jj cn
J CD 3 cn 3

cd
0)
53

13
G
cd

e
3
rl
13
0)
2




















































K

X



























^^
PH
W
2

^*

cn

o
3
M
H

*%
[>
cd
cu
M

13
G


6
p
H
rrj
a)
2






















































X X






















~*^
4-J
G
0)
B
a)
CJ

rH
a.
CU s~^
S-l 00
C
00 -H
C rH
H CU
13 43
3 cd
tH tH
CJ
C B
rl CU
^-* 4-1
CD
CO >:
oi cn
rH
CJ 4-1
>, cn
cj 3
s-i cd cn
0 43 0)
4-1 x cn
0 D 3
2 M






















































X





















cn
SH
O
4-J
CJ
cd
a
B
o
o

(U
4-1
cn
cd
3

13
rH
rH
0


13
CU
4J
C
3
0
2
1

CJ
3
S-i
H






















































X
























cn
4-1
H
C


G
O
H
4J
cd

CU
00
H
S_i
l[ [
cu
Pi

13
OJ
4J
G
3
O
S
1
AS
U
3
S_i
H
0)
43
































X X



















X XX
























cn
13 rH
C rH
cd -H
SH
cn o
cn SH
SH o cn A!
0) 4-1 SJ CJ
13 CJ Ol O
cd 0) N pi
0 4J 0
,-J 0 Q 13
SH C
S-i PH cn S-4 cd
cu c OJ cn
rH OO O rH cn S-l
3 C -H 3 SH CU
cd -H cn cd 0) 3
S-i SJ -H SH A! O
o a) > u cd B
01 O 0) G
13 P3 SH 13 SH 3
G | PL, C PQ cd
cd i cd j
00 rH 4-1
13 C cd 13 C 13
 3
43 cd O 43 cfl O
g J 3 PH PH
4-J Ol
MH O
o B

C SH
O O
H
4-1 S-4
cd cd
cj 01
H >,
tH
43 cd
3
ft cn

01 3
43 CJ
4-1 U
o
01 >,
4-1 tH
MH rH
cd cd
3
13 cn
Ol 3
4-J
cd 01
00 O
rH G
3 cd
B -H
O t-H
SH a
D- B
0
cu o
43

0 SH
4-1 4J
cn
C 3
O 13
H G
4-1 -H
cd
rH SH
3 0
00 MH
CU
SH 01
4-1
rH Cd
cd 13
C
H CU
MH >
H
0) 4-1
43 CJ
4-1 CU
MH
SH MH
O CU
MH
i  1
cn cd
43 3
4-1 4-1
G O
o cd
6
cu
CU 43
> H
rH
OJ
3 

01
p>^ 4-1
rH cn
OJ *H
4-1 00
cd 01
B Pi
H
X i  i
O cd
SH SH
O, cu
0. 13
cd cu
FH
cn
CU 0)
4*i 43
Cd 4-1
4-1
C
^ *H
rH
tH tH
cd cd
3 cn
cn o
3 a
0
4-1 SH
(H CX
X

































































r~^
r^
13 rH
SH
cd -
13 r^

cd
4-1 >,
cn cd
S
rH
Cd SH
C Q)
H 4-1
MH cn
H
01 00
43 0)
4J pi

MH rH
O cd
(H
G (U
0 13
H 01
4-1 fr (
cd
00 CU
rH 43
3 4-1
B
0 C
S-l -H
a
13
0) OJ
43 43
4-1 cn
H
SH tH
CU 43
4-1 3
MH P-,
cd -K
K
36

-------















































,  s
*
T3

4-1
C
0
O


(H

0)
rH
43
cd
H












































rH
CO 4-1 *
en O o\
0 S3 r^

O T3 rH
SH 01
PH 42 >,
en rH
- -H VJ
-d rH CO
CU 43 W
4-1 3
cfl P-i C
H CO
4-1 
PH






cu
43 C *
*H p-*"
O ("**
4-1 T3 ON
0) rH
rH -C
CO CO 00
Cfl -H C
O rH -H
CX 43 S-i
O 3 G
M P-4 C/2
p t




13
cu
4J
01
tH
ex
E
o
CJ

































f 4-1 CU












XXXXXXX X
































































o

OH en C
fa H ^ 01
H CJ E
P W 3 a
W en Vj -H Oi
Pi 1 H 3 W
W p W a- H

H j S3 42 C 2 Z
cn p H oo 4-1 cu<|O
SS Z S3 -H -H E O H
O <1 Pn (-J co cx e/>
OH 00 Ccfl-HPiH
cnpi CH"O COM3 OS-*
O -i>j HO
Pi P*i f*^ 3 3 rH n 3 r-| CO S^H PT1
PnHpL, g,
rH
43 CO
3
CX CO
CU 3
42 CJ
4-1 CJ
o
}-l
cu >-,
4-1 rH
CO cfl
3
T3 CO
CU 3
cfl 0)
OO CJ
H C
3 CO
E -H
O rH
s-i a
ex E
o
cu a
Xf
p>-^
O >J
4-1 4J
CD
C 3
o -a
H C
4-1 -H
CO
t  I S-i
3 0
00 UH
CU
S-i CU
4-1
rH CO
CO T3
C
H CU
"4-4 >
H
Q) 4-1
42 0
4-1 Q)
M-H
1-4 M-t
O 0)
M-H
rH
03 CO T3
42 3 S-i
4-1 4-1 Cfl
C 0 T3
0 cfl C
E cd
0) 4-1
a) 42 en
> H
r I i
CU cfl
S  !2
4-1 )-l T-l
CU U-l
rH Cfl CU
a) -H 42
4-1 OC 4-J
Cfl QJ
E Pi 14-1
H 0
r^ rH
O Cfl CH
t-l S-I O
CX CU -H
CXT3 4J
cfl CU cfl
fa 00
CO tH
01 CU 3
^ 42 E
Cfl 4-1 0
4-1 SH
c cx
r^ "H
rH CU
rH H 42"
ft) Cfl 4J
3 CO
TO O S-i
3 CL 0)
0 4-1

H a, ca
K
37

-------
     E)  State and Local Control Programs




     There has been an increase in State and local programs for noise




control over the past several years, although in many communities recent




budget crises have restricted the growth of programs and in some cases




have led to their termination.




     These State and local programs are highly varied in their scope




and level of activity, but a large number are focused on the abatement




of noise from surface transportation, the enforcement of laws prohibiting




the intrusion of noise above certain levels across property lines, and




the resolution of general nuisance problems.




     Unlike similar Federal environmental legislation, the Noise Control




Act places no specific requirements upon State and local governments.




Except as limited by certain Federal preemption provisions of the Act,




full discretion is left to these governments as to whether to become




involved in noise control, and as to what degree.  Moreover, assistance




from the Federal Government is limited to technical assistance; there are




no grants to help fund local programs.




     The actual delivery of person-to-person technical assistance by




the Federal Government is a manpower-intensive activity.  Because of




limited personnel resources in the noise program, EPA has concentrated its




efforts on producing general guidance documents such as model laws




and ordinances, and on conducting technical workshops for State and




local  officials.  These approaches have been reasonably effective in




documenting and communicating the combined knowledge of the relatively




few individuals and groups around the country who deal with
                                    38

-------
the noise problem on the local level.  However, with the increase in the




number of communities initiating noise programs, and with the need to




solve problems of actual implementation and enforcement, it is necessary




to find new ways to assist communities.




      Consequently, EPA has designed a new approach to the delivery of




noise control technical assistance to State and local communities.  This




approach will be implemented in a phased manner over the next several years




as resources allow.  The new effort is composed of two related programs:




the Quiet Communities Program (QCP) and the ECHO (Each Community Helps




Others) Program.  The Quiet Communities Program plans to select a limited




number of test communities around the country and establish an intensive




and close working relationship between EPA's Regional Offices and those




communities in the development of either a comprehensive noise control




program or a program in one of several different alternative functional




areas, such as construction site noise, motor vehicle noise, boundary




line standards, or railroad noise.  These test projects would be carefully




evaluated and documented with regard to both success and failure in order




to serve as guides for the future efforts of other communities.




      Under the ECHO program, EPA will assist these communities, as




well as other communities,  with well-developed and successful noise




control programs, to provide  direct, person-to-person technical assistance




to other communities with  similar problems.  ECHO utilizes the willingness




of some communities to proceed with the establishment of strong noise




control programs without Federal grant assistance and capitalizes on




the strong affinity that exists among local levels of government.
                                  39

-------
      The two programs recognize the need to make the maximum use of




personnel experienced in noise control, no matter where they are located,




in order to improve the magnitude and quality of the noise control effort




at the State and local level.  They also recognize that the Federal




Government does not have, and may never have, enough personnel resources




to provide extensive person-to-person technical assistance in the noise




control area.




      In preparation for this new approach, EPA will produce during FY 1977




a series of technical assistance and public education materials to serve as




the basis for the Quiet Communities  and ECHO Programs.




      To complement this effort, EPA is also developing methodologies and




guides that will assess environmental noise levels and trends more accurately,




State and local governments will then be in a better position to evaluate




their noise problems and determine the effectiveness of programs designed




to solve these problems.  A limited Federal effort to collect assessment




data on a national basis will also be carried out.
                                   40

-------
     F)  Labeling and Consumer Decision Making




     The Noise Control Act directs EPA to label products falling into




two categories:




          1)   Products that are capable of adversely affecting public




               and welfare; and




          2)   Products sold wholly or in part on the basis of their




               effectiveness in reducing noise.




     The intent of the Agency's product noise labeling program under




Section 8 of the Noise Control Act, is to provide accurate, uniform, and




readily understandable information concerning the noise generating




and noise reducing qualities of specific products to potential purchasers




and end users in a manner minimizing Federal involvement.  The program




will be initiated in as simplified a form as possible and, along with




its effects, be continually evaluated as to the need for revisions to




the various elements of the regulatory approach being taken.




     The program will utilize a regulatory structure consisting of both




general and product specific provisions.  The Agency has recently completed




the development of the general provisions, which contain basic labeling




requirements, such as minimum label information content, format, graphical




design, and guidelines concerning the acoustic descriptors and rating




schemes to be utilized.  These proposed provisions will be made available




to the public for their comment in the Spring of 1977.




     Product specific labeling provisions will be promulgated as additional




subparts of the general labeling regulation, and will contain requirements




concerning label size and location, rating scheme specifications, test




methodologies and enforcement procedures.
                                  41

-------
     The first product specific regulation will be for hearing




protective devices and will be proposed concurrently with the general




provisions in the spring of 1977.   The selection and prioritization




of products for future labeling action is dependent upon the results




of studies currently underway.  EPA has recently awarded contracts




for technical support for the assessment of various products and classes




of products to identify principal candidates on the basis of their




acoustical properties, typical use environments, usage cycles, health or




welfare impacts, and their eligibility for regulatory action under




Section 6 of the Act.  Also included in these studies are (A) audience




analysis, through surveys of public preference for and the effectiveness




of various approaches to labeling format, content, and graphical design,




(B) analysis of the potential economic impact of proposed labeling




requirements for a representative range of products and industries




likely to be regulated under Section 8, and (C) the analysis of the




appropriateness of various acoustic descriptors and rating schemes for




the same representative range of product and industries.




     The products being considered for noise labeling action are:




household appliances (of particular interest are blenders, vacuum




cleaners, air conditioners, and dishwashers), home shop tools, powered




lawn care equipment, and acoustical tiles and building materials.




Studies are also being initiated for tires and mufflers, and it is




planned that the Federal standard for motorcycles will include a re-




quirement for muffler/exhaust system labeling.  In addition, studies are




completed and a decision will be made shortly as to the possible




labeling of snowmobiles.

-------
     G)   Community Awareness and Public Information




     Clearly, labels on products will only be as effective as the public's




understanding of the information communicated.  It is therefore essential




to a successful labeling program that the public be made aware of the




inherent detrimental effects of noise on their health and welfare.




For this reason product labeling should be preceeded by an effective




educational effort to inform the public of the intent and meaning of




"noise labels."




      The Agency is now in the process of planning such a program.




     H)   Aircraft/Airport Noise




      The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has the authority and




responsibility to control aircraft noise by the regulation of source




emissions, by flight operational procedures, and by management of the




air traffic control system and navigable airspace in ways that minimize




noise impact on residential areas, consistent with the highest standards




of safety.  The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) also provides




financial and technical assistance to airport proprietors for noise




reduction planning and abatement activities, and, working with the




private sector, conducts continuing research into noise abatement




technology.




     Under the Noise Control Act, EPA has a special role in the area of




aircraft/airport noise.  EPA is required to propose to the FAA these




regulations which EPA believes to be requisite to protect the public
                                   43

-------
health and welfare from aviation noise.  The FAA must then respond




either by concurring or by explaining its disagreement with the proposal.




EPA has sent eleven such proposals to the FAA.




     FAA has prescribed EPA proposals on:




          1)   Reduced flap setting noise abatement approach for




               turbojets;




          2)   Civil subsonic turbojet engine-powered airplanes noise




               retrofit requirements (except for business jets).




     FAA has chosen not to promulgate the following EPA proposals:




          1)   Propeller driven small airplanes (except for several




               minor provisions);




          2)   Minimum altitudes for turbojets;




          3)   Fleet noise levels requirements;




          4)   Visual two-segment approach; and




          5)   Two segment 1LS approach.




     FAA has not responded (beyond holding public hearings) to  the EPA




proposed regulations on supersonic transports, modifications to FAR Part 36,




and airport planning.




     The FAA's retrofit-replacement proposal  accepted by President Ford




in November was issued by the Federal Aviation Administration December 23




(41 FR 56046).  This rule applies to about 1,600 noisy subsonic aircraft




that do not now meet 1969 FAR Part 36 noise standards.




      Under the timetable contained in  the rule, airplanes must comply




with FAR Part 36 according to the following schedule:
                                   44

-------
          1)  By January 1, 1981:  At least one quarter of an air carrier's

              707's and DC-8's and at least one half of a carrier's 727's,

              737's, DC-9's, and early 747's;

          2)  By January 1, 1983:  At least one half of the carrier's 707's 

              and DC-8's and all other airplanes; and

          3)  By January 1, 1985:  All airplanes.

      Under the new authority granted in the 1976 Amendments to the Airport

and Airway Development Act, the FAA plans to establish a high priority for

the allocation of discretionary Airport and Airway Trust Funds for airport

land acquisition to ensure compatible use of land near airports, the purchase

of noise suppressant equipment, the construction of physical barriers and

other noise reduction activities.

      Much of the solution to the problem of aircraft/airport noise is

institutional rather than technological.  A substantial portion of the

problem can be solved if the parties involvedaircraft manufacturers,

air carriers, pilots, airports, local communities and various agencies

of the Federal Government would work cooperatively.*

      The proposals which EPA has submitted to the FAA are designed to

abate aviation noise on a nationwide basis.  However, many of the abate-

ment solutions are to be applied on an airport-by-airport basis because

site-specific solutions are necessary once the Federal Government has

acted on a national basis.
*  EPA's assessment of the nature, causes, and remedies of the aviation
   noise problem was summarized in an April 5, 1976, speech by Administrator
   Russell Train on Aviation Noise which is available upon request.
                                  45

-------
       EPA has developed a systematic noise abatement planning process




  that can be applied at individual airports.  The process reduces complex




  technical data into a format that is understandable and usable in its




*  end form by persons in the community who are not technically trained in




  aviation noise abatement.  The process therefore makes possible the much




  needed dialogue between the airport operator, the citizens living




  immediately around the airport, those who use the airport  (both airlines




  and local industries), local governments, and land use planners.  EPA




  is now working with airport proprietors at a number of airports to




  demonstrate the  implementation of this planning methodology.  This




  effort should result  in several airport noise abatement plans which




  will demonstrate significant  relief from local aviation noise problems




  and the utility of the planning  process for airport noise problems.




       I)   Enforcement




       Enforcement is a necessary part of any national program to abate




  and control noise.  Because noise control may increase the cost of




  regulated products, though often by only a small amount, those who




  choose not to comply with the standard may gain a competitive economic




  advantage over those who comply in good faith.  In addition, even a  few




  noisy  non-complying products can undermine the control effort in a




  local  community, since individual intrusive noise events,  even if small




  in number, can be  a significant source of community annoyance.




       As with  the other components of the national noise control program,




  an effective  enforcement effort requires the integration of Federal,




  State, and local activities.  The success of the noise control program

-------
requires in the first instance some level of visible and effective




Federal enforcement at the new product stage.  With an established




level of enforcement at the Federal level directed at the manufacturers




as a starting point, the States will be encouraged to establish their




own enforcement programs to assure that owners of the regulated products




operate and maintain them so as to preserve the noise control




characteristics of the products. State and local agencies may assist EPA in




enforcing the Federal requirements for warranty, maintenance instructions,




labeling and anti-tampering.  Without an effective Federal program directed




at the product manufacturers, the likelihood and potential effectiveness of




substantial State participation in enforcement of the in-use program would




be diminished.




     EPA has developed an enforcement plan for the first two national




source standards:  medium and heavy duty trucks and portable air compressors.




The enforcement plan for future products must be individually tailored




to the special circumstances of the particular industry; nevertheless, the




truck and portable air compressor enforcement plan will serve as a




prototype for future new product enforcement activities.  The plan consists




of the following three primary elements:  product verification, selective




enforcement auditing, and in-use controls.  Product verification (PV) is




the testing by a manufacturer (or by EPA at the option of EPA) of early




production models to verify the manufacturer's ability to comply with




the regulation prior to substantial distribution of the products into




commerce.  Manufacturers are required to submit the PV test results to




EPA prior to distribution of the products in commerce.






                                  47

-------
     Selective enforcement auditing (SEA) is the testing by a manu-




facturer or by EPA, pursuant to an administrative request, of a statistical




sample of products from a particular category or configuration to determine




whether those products conform to the noise standards, and to provide




the basis for further enforcement actions, such as recall and cease-to-




distribute orders, in the case of nonconformity.




     The essential feature of this enforcement strategy is that it




requires no action by EPA (e.g., no issuance of a certificate or permit)




before a manufacturer may proceed to market his product,s if his products




conform to the noise emission standards.  The plan requires a manufacturer




to do a minimal amount of testing and provides mechanisms by which EPA




can monitor or remedy non-compliance with standards.  The strategy




seeks to maximize deterrence to the production of non-complying




products while minimizing Federal involvement.  Moreover, the level




of EPA enforcement resource commitment can change in response to




perceived levels of compliance/non-compliance without restructuring




or reissuing regulations.




     A very important feature of the Federal enforcement program is the




EPA Noise Enforcement Facility  (which is located outside of Sandusky, Ohio).




The ability of EPA to perform tests using the regulatory measurement




methodology is an indispensable part of  the enforcement strategy.  Without




that ability, the Agency is left in the  position of depending on the efforts




of others to interpret the performance standard.  It is not essential for




the Agency to conduct all emission testing.  However, some Federal testing by




the Noise Enforcement Facility will permit EPA to monitor and reassess
                                  48

-------
baseline technology and enforcement measurement methodology.  The product




manufacturer should be required to perform the bulk of the compliance testing.




However, testing upon which the ultimate determination of compliance will be




based must be conducted by the Agency.




     EPA's authority to control products in use includes the respon-




sibility to promulgate regulations regarding manufacturers' warranties,




anti-tampering provisions, maintenance instructions, and labeling




requirements.  The Act requires that the manufacturer of each new




product regulated by EPA shall warrant to the consumer that, at the time




of sale, the product conforms to the noise regulations.  The Act also




prohibits the removal of any noise-attenuating device from a new




product and the use of a new product after such removal or tampering.




The EPA truck and portable air compressor regulations require that




the manufacturer affix a label to each product, indicating, among




other things, that the product conforms to the EPA noise emission




regulations.  These regulations also require that the manufacturer




provide with each new product a set of instructions for proper main-




tenance, use, and repair in order to minimize the degradation of the




noise emission reduction features of the product.   In addition, EPA




plans to promulgate and enforce regulations, which will require labels




for some products.  Moreover, EPA will  encourage States and localities




to assist the field enforcement of these in-use regulations.




      Under the Noise Control Act, States and localities may promulgate




source regulations for any product not regulated by EPA.  This will be




unnecessary in most cases since the State and local governments will have




authority to deal effectively with localized problems through use controls.




For new products that EPA has regulated the State and local governments may




                                    49

-------
adopt and enforce regulations identical to EPA's regulations.   Existing




State and local new product regulations that are different from the




Federal standards are automatically preempted on the effective date of




the Federal regulations.




    In addition, EPA has  promulgated noise emission standards  for inter-




state motor carriers and  railroads.  The U.S. Department of Transportation




has the primary responsibility to enforce these two sets of standards.




The Bureau of Motor Carrier Safety is currently enforcing the  motor carrier




compliance regulations, which became effective on October 15,  1975.  The




Federal Railroad Administration will promulgate compliance regulations to




enforce EPA's railroad noise regulations, which became effective




December 31, 1976.  EPA and DOT will continue to cooperate in  monitoring




the level of compliance and the effectiveness of the total program.




    Moreover, State and local governments may adopt and enforce inter-




state railroad and motor  carrier noise emission standards if they are




identical to the Federal  standards.  In addition, upon application by




a State or local jurisdiction, the Administrator of EPA may grant a




waiver of this Federal preemption and permit additional State  and




local controls on noise from these two sources if the Administrator




determines that such controls are necessitated by special local conditions




and are judged to be not  in conflict with applicable Federal regulations.




    In addition, as discussed above, State and local jurisdictions have




extensive authority to establish and enforce controls on environmental




noise through the licensing, regulation, or restriction of the use,




operation or movement of  noise sources.






                                 50

-------
      J)  Other Federal Programs




      The noise-related roles and activities of agencies within the




Federal Government are varied and complex.  For example, regulatory




and grant authorities include those that have specific mandates




to control noise, as well as those whose mandates fall under more




general environmental quality control legislation.  In both cases,




programs administered under such authorities should, to the extent




feasible, protect the public from noise levels that affect their




health and welfare.  In addition, these programs should be mutually




supportive and consistent with the national goals for the abatement




and control of noise.




      The Federal Government owns and operates a significant number




of mobile and stationary noise sources that impact communities.




Each agency, therefore, has the authority and responsibility to control




noise emissions of the sources it owns, both through product noise




procurement specifications and in the use restrictions it imposes




on mode or period of operation.  In addition, as an employer of a




large segment of the American work force, the Federal Government is




directly responsible for protecting its workers from hazardous




occupational noise environments.
                                51

-------
     During the next year, EPA hopes to increase the dialogue among




Federal agency officials concerning the relationship of their programs




to national noise abatement goals and to discuss ways in which their




programs and those of EPA can be integrated into a more effective and




comprehensive national effort.  The following issues are among those




that need to be addressed:




     A)   Air and Surface Transportation Noise.  What might be done to




          noise control policies used in the administration of Federally




          funded programs and those established for regulating individual




          vehicular sources to insure that they are consistent and mutually




          reinforcing?




     B)   Land Use Control.  Are all Federal activities influencing land




          use appropriately designed to discourage noise sensitive development




          in noise-impacted areas around airports and other major noise




          generators and are local governments provided with sufficient




          incentives and guidance to ensure land use compatibly with noise?




     C)   Construction Noise.  Can the agencies conducting or supporting




          construction activities incorporate noise control techniques as




          a complement to the regulations established on specific items of




          equipment?




     D)   Occupational Noise.  Are all appropriate Federal authorities




          administered in a way that adequately protects the Federal and




          non-Federal workers from hazardous occupational noise levels?
                                 52

-------
     E)   Household Noise.  Are Federal activities directed  at

          influencing building construction and operations for

          the purpose of energy conservation also providing  for

          maximum noise abatement as well?

      EPA is required under the Noise Control Act to coordinate  the

activities of the Federal Government so that a consistent and effective

noise control effort is mounted by the Federal establishment.  EPA plans

to increase its efforts in this regard in the coming year and to seek a

common effort on a cooperative basis.

      Emphasis will be placed on:

      A)  Coordination of Federal research, as previously discussed.

      B)  Obtaining consistency in the noise assessment methodologies

          employed by various Federal agencies.

      C)  The use of joint Federal agency special studies and

          demonstration noise control programs that exemplify how

          various Federal authorities can be effectively combined

          to bring about reductions in specific noise environments.

      D)  Discussions with individual Federal agencies to seek

          improvements in their policies and programs.

      E)  Workshops and the publication of manuals that will help

          guide the noise abatement activities of the Federal Government.
       -.US GOVMNMEN1 PRINTING OFFICE lS77-?20-117/l'-)y9
                                 53

-------

-------