A Study of Riders' Noise Exposure on Bay Area Rapid Transit Trains
- 199 Downloads
Excessive noise exposure may present a hazard to hearing, cardiovascular, and psychosomatic health. Mass transit systems, such as the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) system, are potential sources of excessive noise. The purpose of this study was to characterize transit noise and riders’ exposure to noise on the BART system using three dosimetry metrics. We made 268 dosimetry measurements on a convenience sample of 51 line segments. Dosimetry measures were modeled using linear and nonlinear multiple regression as functions of average velocity, tunnel enclosure, flooring, and wet weather conditions and presented visually on a map of the BART system. This study provides evidence of levels of hazardous levels of noise exposure in all three dosimetry metrics. L eq and L max measures indicate exposures well above ranges associated with increased cardiovascular and psychosomatic health risks in the published literature. L peak indicate acute exposures hazardous to adult hearing on about 1% of line segment rides and acute exposures hazardous to child hearing on about 2% of such rides. The noise to which passengers are exposed may be due to train-specific conditions (velocity and flooring), but also to rail conditions (velocity and tunnels). These findings may point at possible remediation (revised speed limits on longer segments and those segments enclosed by tunnels). The findings also suggest that specific rail segments could be improved for noise.
KeywordsTrains Noise exposure Auditory health Cardiovascular health Hypertension Psychosomatic stress
We thank Craig Ishida and the Environmental Health & Safety Department of California State University East Bay for the loan of the dosimeters used in this study. We thank Professor Tom Dolan of Portland State University’s Department of Speech and Hearing Sciences manuscript feedback before submission. This study was unfunded.
- 1.Corey, Canapary & Galanis Research. 2008 BART customer satisfaction survey. Commissioned study report. San Francisco, CA: Corey, Canapary & Galanis Research; 2009.Google Scholar
- 2.Corey, Canapary & Galanis Research. 2008 BART station profile study. Commissioned study report. San Francisco, CA: Corey, Canapary & Galanis Research; 2009.Google Scholar
- 3.Curiel JSF. BART noise needs to be silenced. San Francisco Chronicle. December 11, 2008; B-2.Google Scholar
- 4.John from cyberspace noise in the tube, kids in the car and kudos for the queen. The Oakland Tribune. Available at: http://www.insidebayarea.com/oaklandtribune. April 25, 2007.
- 5.Rocha A. BART goal: stop SCREEECH! The Examiner. October 25, 2007.Google Scholar
- 23.Harris CM, Aitken BH. Noise in subway cars. Sound Vibration Mag. 1971; February, pp. 12–14.Google Scholar
- 24.World Health Organization (WHO). Guidelines for community noise. WHO expert task force report. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1999.Google Scholar
- 25.U.S. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). Criteria for a recommended standard: occupational noise exposure revised criteria 1998. DHHS (NIOSH) Publication. Cincinnati, OH: Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health; 1998.Google Scholar
- 26.U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Protective noise levels: condensed version of EPA levels document. EPA report. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; 1979.Google Scholar
- 28.Royston P, Cox NJ. A multivariate scatterplot smoother. Stata J. 2005; 5(3): 405–412.Google Scholar
- 29.StataCorp. Stata statistical software: release 11. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP; 2009.Google Scholar
- 31.Kelley K, Maxwell S. Sample size planning for multiple regression: power and accuracy for omnibus and targeted effects, chapter 11. In: Alasuutari P, Bickman L, Brannen J, eds. Sage Handbook of Social Research Methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2008: 166–192.Google Scholar
- 38.Gordis L. Epidemiology. 4th ed. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders; 2008.Google Scholar
- 41.Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y. Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J R Stat Soc B Methodol. 1995; 57(1): 289–300.Google Scholar