rtment of Commerce, prolonged exposure to sounds above 85 decibels creates damage to the human hear (1985, p.2). Around airports, annoyance is the most prevalent effect of noise pollution. Some individuals are always more vocal than others, but generally people complain about interference with their conversations, sleep, concentration on work, and ultimately damage to hearing. Community response to airport noise pollution is a complex matter because people do not always agree on what is disturbing or too noisy. Some less frequently identified effects of noise on humans are physiological disturbances, such as cardiovascular and circulatory problems, psychological problems stemming from intense annoyance with the noise, and social behavioral problems associated with noise. Research is not absolutely conclusive in this area, and some of the results to studies are controversial (U.S. Department of Commerce, 1985, p.4). Real estate values may be affected if the airplane noise is disturbing to the residents. Also land use, wildlife and farm animals are likely to be disturbed by a high level of airport pollution.
Attempts have been made at the governmental level to control and limit airport noise pollution, but the laws are difficult to enforce. In 1972, Congress passed the Noise Control Act, and established an Office of Noise Abatement and Control at the Environmental Protection Agency, but after nine years then-President Reagan closed the office (Gordon, 2002, 14CN1) In 1976 the Federal Aviation Administration estimated that up to 7 million Americans living near airports are subjected to a level of 65 decibels or more of noise around the clock. When the national office closed, support to the states on the issue faded. Les Blomberg, director of the Noise Pollution Clearinghouse in Montpelier, Vermont, says that over the next twenty years from the national closure, the state offices closed (Gordon, 2002, p.14CN1). Maryland, howe...