National Academy of Sciences | 150 Year Anniversary

Questions? Call 800-624-6242

| Items in cart [0]

The National Academies Press

Rights & Permissions

topleft topright

ACRP Report 15: Aircraft Noise: A Toolkit for Managing Community Expectations (2010)
Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP)

Citation Manager

Woodward, Jon M, Briscoe, Lisa Lassman, Dunholter, Paul, Transportation Research Board. "Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL)." ACRP Report 15: Aircraft Noise: A Toolkit for Managing Community Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2010.

Please select a format:

BibTeX EndNote RefMan


Page
113
bottomleft bottomright
Page
113
Front Matter (R1-R12)
Chapter 1 - Introduction and Guidebook Summary (1-1)
How to Use the Guidebook (2-2)
The Relationship Between Environmental Planning for Airports and General Community Response Factors (3-3)
Culture Shift Required (4-5)
Select Staff for Service-Oriented Attitude (People-Skills) (6-6)
Cumulative versus Single Event Noise (7-7)
Best Practices for Managing Noise Compatibility Issues (8-9)
Legal/Administrative Requirements for Public Contact (10-10)
Shifting to a Public Service-Oriented Approach (11-11)
Potential Communication Objectives (12-12)
Example Evaluation Questions (13-13)
What Does the Public Really Want? (14-14)
Introduction (15-15)
Strategies for Successful Community Engagement (16-16)
Strategies for Successful Community Engagement (17-26)
Self-Assessment Tool (27-27)
How to Use the Self-Assessment Tool (28-31)
Implementation Steps Matrix (32-32)
How to Use the Implementation Steps Matrix (33-35)
Community Engagement Techniques and Tools (36-36)
Community Involvement Manuals (37-37)
Communications Checklists (38-39)
Checklists For Meeting Preparation and Meeting Announcements (40-40)
Brochures (41-42)
Fact Sheets (43-43)
Flyers or Posters (44-44)
Newsletters (45-45)
Frequently Asked Questions (46-46)
Annual Reports and Noise Program Overviews (47-48)
Multimedia Presentations (49-50)
Websites (51-51)
Interactive Learning Tool (52-53)
Advanced Technology Demonstrations (54-54)
Outreach Vehicle Tools (55-55)
Airport and Peer Industry Literature Review (56-56)
Airport Case Studies (57-57)
University Case Study (58-58)
Best Practices in the Airport Industry: An Assessment of Airport Community Involvement Efforts (59-60)
Best Practices in the Transportation Industry: Transportation Research Board White Paper (61-61)
What is Good Practice? (62-62)
Challenges to Practitioners: Areas for Development (63-63)
Conclusions (64-64)
Study Findings (65-66)
Large/Medium-Hub Airport with Passenger Service - San Francisco International Airport (SFO) (67-69)
Small/Non-Hub Airport with Passenger Service - Long Beach Airport (LGB) (70-72)
Cargo Hub Airport - Louisville International Airport/Standiford Field (SDF) (73-75)
Large General Aviation/Reliever Airport - Van Nuys Airport (VNY) (76-79)
Smaller General Aviation Airport - Ohio State University Airport (OSU) (80-81)
Education Industry - Crisis in the College/University Relationship with the Community: A Case Study (14) (82-84)
Conclusions (85-86)
Chapter 6 - Noise Management and Public Response (87-87)
Congressional and Federal Regulatory Actions (88-89)
FAA Orders and Guidance on Environmental Planning (90-90)
State and Local Action (91-91)
Airport Role in Comprehensive Planning (92-92)
Stakeholder Involvement and Jurisdictional Coordination (93-93)
Cumulative versus Single Event Noise Levels (94-94)
Thresholds of Significant Noise (95-99)
Difference Between Compatible and Incompatible (Noise-Sensitive) Land Uses (100-100)
Differences within the FAA Divisions Regarding Thresholds of Noise Level Evaluation (60/65 DNL in Airports vs. 45/60/65 DNL in Air Traffic) (101-101)
Precedence of Federal and State/Local Standards and When Applicable (102-103)
Measured versus Computer-Modeled Noise Levels (104-104)
Sound Insulation Programs for Noise Abatement (105-106)
Difference between Interior and Exterior Sound Levels and Methods to Abate Each (107-107)
Contour and Impact Area Change Over Time and the Differences Between Federal and Local Response to Change (108-108)
Self Assessment Tools for Noise Management Programs (109-109)
Evaluation Checklist for Airports with Established Noise Programs (110-110)
Chapter 7 - Noise Metrics and Community Response (111-111)
Cumulative Noise Metrics (112-112)
Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) (113-113)
Sound Exposure Level (SEL) (114-114)
Maximum A-Weighted Sound Level (Lmax) (115-115)
Number of Events Above (NA) (116-116)
Time Above (117-117)
Best Applications (118-118)
Noise Complaint Characteristics (119-121)
Preferential Runway Use Program (122-122)
Flight Track Modifications to Fly Over Compatible Uses (123-123)
Approach Thrust and Flap Management Procedures (124-124)
Restrict Ground Run-up Activity (125-125)
Displaced Threshold - Landings (126-126)
High Speed Exit Taxiways (127-127)
Enhanced Navigational Aids (128-128)
Airport Access Restrictions (129-130)
Best Practices (131-132)
Chapter 9 - Land Use Management Techniques for Noise Abatement (133-133)
Purchase of Non-Compatible Land (134-134)
Waiver of Claim (135-135)
Purchase Assurance/Sales Assistance (136-136)
Comprehensive Community Planning (137-137)
Noise Impact Overlay Zoning (138-138)
Dedication of Noise and Overflight Easements (139-139)
Development Density Restrictions in High Noise Areas (140-140)
Building Code Modifications (141-141)
Best Practices in Land Use Management for Noise Compatibility (142-143)
References (144-151)
Abbreviations used without definitions in TRB publications (152-152)

Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 113
Noise Metrics and Community Response 113 or CNEL in California and Leq, as described in the following sections. Other cumulative metrics such as the Day-Evening-Night Level (Lden) used in Europe, the Australian Noise Exposure Fore- cast (ANEF), the Weighted Equivalent Continuous Perceived Noise Level (WECPNL) used pre- dominantly in Asia, and the Noise Exposure Forecast (NEF) used in Canada, will occasionally be raised by the public in discussions of noise issues, but are not accepted as primary metrics in the United States. Occasionally these metrics may be used in complex studies for supplemental analyses. They are described in the toolkit. 7-1 FAA evaluations of the environmental effect of airport development or air traffic modifica- tions require an assessment of the change of noise level that will occur. Consequently, the best examples of metric usage often are maps displaying areas of expected change. Throughout this chapter, examples of the key metrics and ways that change may be graphically illustrated for pub- lic consumption will be provided. Day-Night Average Sound Level (DNL or Ldn) DNL considers all the noise energy that occurs during an average day of operation. The sum of the noise energy present between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. is multiplied by 10 then added to the sum of the noise energy present between 7 a.m. and 10 p.m. (this equates logarith- mically to multiplying each nighttime operation by 10 before the energy of each noise event is summed). This penalty is applied in recognition of the increased sensitivity of people to opera- tions during the nighttime hours. The total is divided by the number of seconds in a 24-hour day (86,400) to obtain a 1-second average energy level. The logarithm of the average is multiplied by 10 to obtain the DNL level (see the glossary for formulae) 7-2 . The metric is complex, the mathematics are obscure to the general public, and the measure cannot be directly heard by neighbors. Many members of the public complain because the DNL averages energy across every second of the day, rather than only those seconds when aircraft noise occurs. The FAA has adopted the DNL as the only noise metric required for consideration in airport projects, although it may be supplemented by other metrics to better explain characteristics of the noise exposure pattern. As the metric of choice, the 14 CFR Part 150 land use compatibility guidelines are based on thresholds of DNL. A DNL of 65 dBA has been identified as the thresh- old of significant noise impact above which efforts should be taken to mitigate noise levels. Computer-generated contours connecting locations of equal noise exposure are typically used in the selection of land use development criteria and plans in airport environs. Example of Metric Display for Public Information: · Change in Day-Night Average Sound Level (DNL) Combined Alternatives (Boston Overflight Noise Study, Phase 1) (155) 7-3 · Comparative DNL Contours for Baseline and Alternative Conditions at Boston Logan Inter- national Airport (Boston Overflight Noise Study, Phase 1) (156) 7-4 · Example of DNL computation Video: (prepared for ACRP 02-05 project) 7-5 Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) CNEL is similar to DNL and used for essentially the same purposes. Required by state law in California, the FAA has approved CNEL as an acceptable substitute for DNL in federally funded airport noise analyses there. In addition to the penalty applied to nighttime operations by DNL, CNEL also applies a penalty to operations that occur during the evening hours between 7 p.m.