-------
»-l
l"»
.5
5
**
tn
CO
V)
W
g
i3
0
2
&
2
R
Q
1
' c
o
<-N
•a
V
x
a>
•o
M
^^
GRANTS— KEYDEXEL^
3C
0
<
CO
M
-y*
P5
(O
Q
»-l
z
M
£
H
S
4)
«0 '
•r4
O
Z
C
o
0
w
r-f.
«•
o\
5
vO
co
z
•a
BJ
M
CO
r~
<*>
CO
z
1
••L
;
e
•>
'.it
S
•4 •
•*:"
M
M
»•
Vk
ae
NCIPAL INVESTIGATOR. I
AT ION, PROJECT TITLE
— o
ec O
a j
o
o
ee
IU
a.
t»
jf
• <
eC
O
VI
« vi
Ul <
O _l
x u
3
zx
<
»- ee
z o
•c o
e: or
oo.
IU
Ck
>•
»» •
«
•' ' \
' NtAOOO
«no
• r-wv
• • • . i
o«« .
IA*: ' •
' ; ' J1
ioettftfec
. irr*r
<3333
U. U It U,
a f eor
3 v> z CC 1-
O«4* *M
o
i
.:!.-'•--
4 O O O O
-*••-•
•'*'.• /'
aeeec«'ac
et >->>->
<
< 33 3 3
U. U. U. U.
aci-oa X
3 M Z si *-
o — Nr> *
o
f-.
I/I
X
u ..
r
VI •
IU
g
•3.
«
Z_l
«
"ee
VI O
— C.
. GONZALEZ, L CERARDO
TULANE UNIVERSITY
NEW ORLEANS LOU
HISTOPATHULOGY OF TEH
•. • . .
** , •- •_ •
*- • '. ...
•Of'-' '
n
J."
- o • ~
. o ' '
l^» • — ^^
1
•^
o
• 1
*4
O, _ ._..., -
t>
o
i
N
CO)
P»
•<>
0 0
V, A
z <
1
«4
0 <0
oe CM
' m
ooooe
• . •
o ee ec ae «
< • •
• '< 33 33
U. U. O.U.
DC
K i-o or
3 v> Z « »-
o -«N. u.
•I l- O
ee «4 .
IU M V
O OC O
Uf O
^ > VI -f
— z o
• z< z ••
isl 3 iu >>
Uf -f <
.J Uf eC CL
< r o o
IS! < »•
Z _f3t VI
a 3>u»
01-2 Z
^ :-...•
* »4 •
1- .
• r*
.0 . :
«4
O. '.
o ;'- r ^ i
-1---.
*4
o
1
•4
—0.. ..,
. . t '
•4
VI
e»
o
M
•»
»-
rt
0 U
S 5
1
«4
O 4fi
OC -
< 3 33 3
If. U.U. U.
OC
ce »-oo i
' 3vl Z ae i-
UXOKO *
•4
•k
» *^ •
a
ct
VI
Z v,
ee
• Ul
o
ee
o
• 2
: o
• v»
; t- '
* "".
* Uj *4 O*
t 3<
oo
ty% S
o — —
U. X »-
2 ^
t-s i
-It- X
. V* V* O
•< Z — 0 .
ee«3.
— o>-
-t_toc
•.< o
X CC1- V-
vi i- z —
et z — o
— Ul< 3
I O VI <_
*
; »4
• ^»
''o
1 f)
•
A
o
* O "
f-
1-
++
' 1
0
*<*
0k
o
i
tA
(0 -•
ft •
00
1
Vt f\
X U|
• .
ffi r+
a. M
.
V.
-/„.-. . •--• - --1 •
I « IAO OO
,Ni^
J *0 C4
1 » •
! C* 9
NN
/ •*?•''•.
Oer ee ee ec
9c *• M l— 1—
< 3 3 3 3
U. U.U. If,
ee
ee >- a o z
3 viz e:»-
uxnin >r
• •
••4 •
!•
. .
VI
M
0
mt
«"
Z
S 5
0 «
0
1-
fc
w«
^
fttf
CO
za
sy
UL Uf 3
O Z VI
WARD. M OIXON
MINNESOTA UNIVERSITY
MINNEAPOLIS MIN
THE DETERMINATION OF '
I
^4
f>
1
o
«
•*
•4
O
»•
»^
N
,•4
? «k*
S
(«
o
•r
Of ' 0
1
vl in
Z <
1
•4 V4
O 0
ee
1
1
•»r-ooo '
' •* •*
l*\ ^O
* "
MO* '
«* i
• • j
]
a ec ec ee ec '
•»
3E 1- >• H« 1-
< 333 3
U. U. If. It,
«
ee ^ oo X
3 vi z ee h-
v> -4 rf -n ^>
' #4)
• r-
> "
VI-
z
u
ec
<.
Ul
ec
IU •
z
z
5S
01-
u. z u.
o: ooo
T »-•
>• X VI
» *- Uf
Ul "4 ^i
VI O
X ee 3
a w i-
IU > V>
VI —
?§ ii
-ZOO
vi < e o
z ti «• v>
— — < o
* Z . tf
* 0 ZO
< — z —
z x «* x
t-
i
•^
•**
N '
-4»
^'t
' t~
•<' •
'«4
O '
i '-
o '
CQ>
0
1
in
o
o
IA
o o
i
VI IA
1 Z <
: I
: ^4
O -D
• a. N !
i j
I •
' «ft
• i
i
• '
' --oooo
2
N
««
One ee aCo.
1' 3C t- !->->-
< 3 3 3 3
. U, U. U. H.
; cc»-ooz
• 3 vi z ee H
UXMrt »•
•4)
^
-
3.5
Ul
>-
Z
»4
W
_l .
u
•«•!
O M
*4 Z
r««
O A.
"• X
ee_ix x
">•« f
• . i-
»•-> Ul
uo. z
VI 1-
_IO
51 ft
> o
oo
ee ec ui
0 0
-U. V- Z
Z ~ul
Ul V o 3
O oe ec J
> Z i- u.
>< tu ut z
IXO —
P4 '
t-
. |
«!•
m
i 1
N
»4 .
•4
f»
f
v4 •
O
i
o
a
o .
i
n
CO
o
IA
0 0
VI f\
z m
1 • 7
•4 »4
o a •
ec N •
' in
.<
i
1
t
^
,::
i
i
i
!
1
t
•t
'••
'
i
'«
1
i
•
i
*«
t
i
i .
• •>
i
!
',;
i
I
.
.i •
i
* '
,r
i
->
-------
. 1
•"* 1
r-*- I
v. \«
•* !§
w ;§
•*
I
i
j
w
w
1
g
2
^
J
^
fy
P
5
C
CO
C
6
ndexed)
ANTS--KEYDEXED (I
erf
u
D:
u
Oi
*rf*
(S
CO
(4
jv*
t^»
to
Q
2:
n
Z;
•w
£
o
<;
0
!2
i
£
• (9
• ef
>»
i
*-» : z'
0) ;t>
w !j:
•H ! 5
o ! »•
2 JP
C S
0 -
o !^S
W .01-
82 and NS 6459 al
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGAT
1 ^CATION, PROJECT TI
>*
..... ......,-
J •••»•
•* x*O OO' 1
I
1 CDO-^OO
1 •* »in
K« S«°00i °.^^
JT.T ' ' '*** ' «-<*
V* *^ I » * * &.I «k Mh
ss las
* * * c>i «™
; •>•>•>•. oorororor
»»-*->->-• 3*"*"*"*"
0333
U. U. U. U.
ee
ef »- o o x
3 v> z of *-
o •< «M«*I V
•4
t».
• . •
S V- H >- »-
<333 3
U. U. U. U.
of »- O Q X
3 v> .z ce h-
^^ r^ Csl rt ^
•4 •
•^
• 17*
1
i
'. •
a. '
0. - IB
vi y
z . ft
Z . C
i <.
a
o
i CC
: a
<
o
U. X
oo
LAWRENCE, MERLE
HJCHICAN UNIVERSITY
'ANN ARDOR • HI
CAUSES OF DEAFNESS
.
>-
f-
>«
tf\
a
o
l
ft
o
o-
o
41 •
o
l/>
CO
f-
m
O U
1
vt tn
- 1-
O CO
CX N
in :
o
2
w
vt
Ul
0 VI
*• UJ
or o
1«Tf «V W
-
Oaf ac ee tt
€£>•>>>•>'
3t 1- H *- >-
«r "^ •"» ™* "^
^ ^ «^ ••? — ^
u. a u, u.
or
ce >- oo X
3 VIZ E *-
Ox N l»» *
A
s
§
E
tu
o
5
« •
4^
5 5
UJ
Ul
Ck.
to
i
^•. '
13
• . 2P
• . +K
•t X
•"^1 •
z <
«f K
O 1
U 1
1- •• VI
tA J VI
y < tu
. MOOO
o>
l«»
• •
.p4
m
ootcete
*»•>•
* 333
«"•"•"•
a t- oo
3 viz ee
VI •^N It
**
S
'irt
tu
§
>.
VI U
5 3
»T
. V>
O
vt
Z
Ul
v>
•j
Of «
30
03
^ vi<
V v>
< oz »u z
o juj £
•- u.— X <
g S ai i
i g- °S o
g 2 ^2 Jg
1 ° ... rf < tf ^ ^
J Ul < ^ (£ Q
S^rJiJ o 2 01 u. o uj
• tfvis: »-ZJv>
^^zo >-« ,
1
**
»4 T
•r- A
1 «
s T
i S
0
o
_• ••
— 1
T S
o A
HATSCHINSKY, FRANZ H
WASHINGTON UNIVERSIT
SAINT LOUIS HI
ENERGY METABOLISM OF
<4 •
i
4
n
A
9
9
i
?
i S *
N
O
O
p-
lA
V
O
o u
VI *
* V
s «
6. »•
^<
l~- °
1
m ..
? 2
2 o
S °
^
f**
0 U
1
•A *4
« . £
•4 »4
0 XI
Of N
**
O'
O
O O
1
v> m
Z 0
r* M ,
O CO
tt H
m
~™» » —
-------
v>ooo o
•*
ft
10
o
o
a
«t 33 => =>
u. u. u. u.
tf »- O O X'
3irt z o: >-
o—< CM •»» +
O
>•
§»> v»
z 2 5
I "
o •
S §
Ul
*•> o:
x, te *j < tu
O »- XX
t> •-- >•
Z «I >- >- O
•- O X •" Z
tt »-K- >- 1« <
gi» o «- c
to ai X »j vt
101 V\ > O
u) > o — •-
> z cr *^z w
— •- a. . 3 ui >•
t- • O X
U -> » "» o o a.
< < Z 2 tt ~ O
o. o LU < nr x
vt — ~ > > o o
»• o^* w a: z >•
Z z < *- < < n
< •- o v> x o a
« tf o
u o. j
U N
a: »-•
2 o i
vi O rt
Ul M I
C£ OC -•
U O
I fib
O Z »•
z < I
•• o; «H
20 o
ISI
o
o
I* «4
tun |
uj«( v
a: ~J K
a: o cf
7> «M
z *• oo
t- tc M —•
Z U Z u.
< O I
er a: •-« 'M
oo- o e>
ec N
tu
-------
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
-------
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20410
OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY ,N REPLY REFER TO:
Dr. Albert F. Meyer, Jr.
Director
Office of Noise Abatement
and Control
Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D. C. 20460
Dear Dr. Meyer:
This is in reply to your request of July 30, 1971, for information on HUD's
Noise Control and Abatement activities.
The involvement of HUD in the noise control and abatement areas stems largely
from its support of the national goal of "a decent home in a suitable environ-
ment for every American family." This goal appeared first in the National
Housing Act of 1949. It has been reaffirmed in the interim years and rein-
forced by the Department of Housing and Urban Development Act of 1965 and the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.
Pursuant to this goal, HUD has been interested in noise policy and standards
regarding:
1. site selection for the housing HUD insures or subsidizes;
2. structural characteristics and components of housing HUD insures
or subsidizes;
3. land use planning; and
4. other forms of assistance that support the concept of a decent
home in a suitable environment.
Noise control and abatement is not a separate and distinct program within HUD
but rather, an ingredient in the environmental considerations of all HUD pro-
grams and activities.
-------
In this context, HUD has recently consolidated, simplified and extended vari-
ous noise control requirements relating to the several HUD programs into a
single Department-wide Circular 1390.CL, published August 4, 1971. We attach
a copy. Prior to publication, this circular was reviewed by the Environmental
Protection Agency, the Department of Health, Education and Welfare and numer-
ous other Federal, State, and local groups and private citizens. Although
HUD's interim standards have been found appropriate by reviewers, the Depart-
ment plans to consider revision after a reasonable period of experience.
The Department also has a continuing research activity in this area.
In order for the HUD Circular to be fully effective, it is necessary that
builders and the State and local comprehensive planning agencies have know-
ledge of the HUD noise control policies and standards -- we are providing a
direct mail out to planning agencies on this -- and also that they have a
convenient way of getting reliable, objective calculations of noise levels
around airports, major highways, and other sources of high noise.
Although we had earlier hoped that the Department of Transportation would pro-
vide Noise Exposure Forecasts to HUD as well as to the comprehensive planning
agencies across the Nation free of charge, it now appears to DOT that the
calculations can be provided to planning agencies only on a "cost reimburse-
ment basis." Although we understand DOT's views, the result is to limit
severely the role and initiatives of the local planning agencies in assessing
and controlling noise and in improved land use planning as regards noise.
Accordingly, we believe it highly desirable for EPA to consider providing Noise
Exposure Forecasts and other noise control data as part of its coordi native
role in protecting the noise environment.
Sincerely yours,
fal
Charles 0. Orlebeke
Deputy Under Secretary
Enclosures
-------
SEP 2 ? tar*
FEDERAL NOISE PROGRAM INFORMATION
I. Organizational
Department of Housing and Urban Development (see cover letter)
II. Functional
A. Objectives (see cover letter)
B. Specific Research
1. On-Going Projects
a. Technical Background for Noise Abatement in HUD Operating
Programs
(l) Description and Objectives;
This project provides the technical support to assist in
implementation of the Departmental Circular 1390.2.
(2) Producte Include;
(a) Site assessment techniques that do not require the use
of acoustical measurement instrumentation for preliminary
screening of applications to determine suitfMli-f-.v of the
site with regard to noise exposure.
(b) Interim procedures for the measurement of noise exposure
at proposed housing sites.
(c) A technical support document for use as a reference by
field personnel.
(d) Training materials, including a demonstration tape
recording.
b. Development of Comprehensive Urban Noise Survey Methodology
(l) Description
This is the initial phase of a cost-shared research project
with the City of New York which is designed to assist the
-------
Department with obtaining factual information that may be
used in the conduct of its programs in a large city as
well as to provide New York City with tools whereby it can
deal with its urban problems,
(2) Objectives
The objective of this first phase is to develop a statis-
tically valid methodology for objectively obtaining
information by which to characterize the baseline noise
climate of the City of New York.
c. Metropolitan Aircraft Noise Abatement Policy Studies
J.F. Kennedy International Airport, New York, N,Y.
Tri-State Transportation Commission;
O'Hare International Airport, Chicago, Illinois,
Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission;
Bradley International Airport, Windsor Locks, Connecticut,
Capitol Region Planning Agency;
Cape Kennedy Regional Airport, Melbourne, Florida,
East Central Florida Regional Planning Commission
(l) Description
These four studies, funded jointly by HUD and the Department
of Transportation, are currently in their final stages of
completion. Each of'the four planning agencies examined
the problem of aircraft noise in the communities located
near its airport. Various land-use-related measures were
evaluated for their potential for alleviating existing
-------
problems and preventing future problems from arising in
the environs of the study airports.
(2) Objectives
The objectives are to provide in-depth case studies of the
airport noise/community conflicts in specific airport areas
to represent a range of potential noise alleviation strategies.
d. Summary of MANAPS and Development of a Planning Guidelines Manual
(l) Description
This is presently being negotiated as a follow-up study to the
four original MANAPS. It will summarize the findings of the
MANAPS and other similar studies, and evaluate each of the
remedial and preventive measures for broader application over
the nation. This, along with a discussion of the compatibility
of different land uses to various levels of noise exposure,
will be included in a planning guidelines manual to be used by
planning officials.
(2) Objectives
The follow-up study is intended to make the information
gathered by the MANAPS more useful to local officials con-
cerned with airport noise. It is also intended to incorporate
the knowledge gained in other studies into the MANAPS.
2. Projects About to be Contracted for or Under Active Consideration
for F.Y. 1972
-------
a, HUD Community Noise Handbook
(l) Description
A practical reference handbook for use by HUD personnel,
planners, civic officials, developers and builders.
(2) Objectives
The objective is to provide a practical handbook that will be
useful to the non-specialist. It will deal with feasibility
of alleviating existing problems and guide planning to avoid
creation of future noise problems.
b. Comprehensive Urban Noise Survey
(l) Description and Objectives
Upon satisfactory completion of Phase I development of the
methodology, Phase II will assist New York City in conducting
the comprehensive survey to document the baseline noise
climate as well as to provide the HUD Regional Office with
detailed objectives information of the City of New York.
c. Urban Noise Survey Methodology for Intermediate-Size City
(l) Description and Objectives
The purpose of this study is to review and evaluate the
methodology developed for use in New York City to determine
its applicability to much smaller cities. Necessary revisions
will be made and tested in an actual noise survey.
-------
d. Development of Noise Exposure Measurement_Instrumo;itation
(l) Description and Objectives
The purpose of this project is to modify existing or
develop new instruments suitable for easy use in determining
site noise exposure pursuant to the interim standards of
HUD Policy Circular 1390.2.
e. Engineering Guidelines for "Suitable Noise Control Feasures"
(l) Description
In some instances, mitigating circumstances may cause the
Regional Administrator to make exceptions for sites that
would be found "normally unacceptable." In those cases,
noise control features must be included in the site design
arid building construction.
(2) Objectives
The objective is to provide HUD field personnel with technical
guidelines for techniques of minimizing adverse impact of
environmental noise on sites proposed for participation in
HUD programs.
f. Evaluation of Site Noise Exposure Assessment Techniques
(l) Description and Objectives
The objectives are to evaluate, improve and augment the non-
instrumental techniques for screening proposed housing sites
with respect to their noise exposure.
g. Development of Model Ordinances and Building Code Sections,
(l) Description and Objectives
-------
(a) One purpose is to develop model ordinances, zoning and
others for noise abatement and control that would avoid
incompatible land use with respect to noise.
(b) Another purpose is to develop building code sections
that would be used as models for specifying the performance
of buildings in providing acoustical privacy.
h. Noise Emission Ratings for Appliances and Equipment
(l) Description and Objectives
The purposes of this study are (a) to foster the creation of
a national mechanism to provide noise emission ratings for
kitchen appliances and other equipment for single- and
multi'family structures, and (b) to develop HUD noise emission
standards for approving the use of such appliances and equip-
ment in HUD-insured and HUD-assisted housing.
C. Procedures (refer to HUD Circular 1390.2)
1. Problem areas and research needs are identified by field personnel
who implement the Departmental programs and HUD Circular 1390.2.
Research priorities are assigned fundamentally on the basis of
incidence of problem, need and overall benefit to the
community.
2. Specific actions to abate and control noise mainly deal with efforts
to avoid exposure of new residential areas and to provide a suitable
auditory environment both outside and within residential buildings.
3. Procedures for coordination with other Federal agencies include
participation in the Interagency Aircraft Noise Abatement Program,
where KUD chairs the Land Use/Airports Panel and the Structures Pane1.,
-------
7
Coordination and cooperation with other agencies on research efforts
is accomplished through direct communication between principals
responsible for research in the respective agencies. Furlher
coordination is provided through development and review of environ-
mental impact pursuant to Section 102(2)(c) of P.L. 91-190, National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969.
4. In-house technical capability consists of several professionals in
acoustics in HUD's research office and planning in HUD's Office of
Community Planning and Management. Consultants are used by Central
and field offices as required.
5. Proposed new efforts to upgrade noise abatement and control includes
a training session for all HUD personnel responsible for environmental
matters. The training program will assist in the implementation of
the Departmental policy 1390.2 by including instruction in the use of
site assessment procedures as well as in fundamental noise measurement
instruments and procedures.
D. Future Program Proposals and Objectives
Future program proposals include development of better methodologies and
techniques for determining community response to noise; improved
performance of structures; significant investigations of air rights
structures; economic and social aspects of noise abatement and control
related to HUD operating programs.
-------
-------
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
TRANSMITTAL
NOTICE
1390.2
1. This Notice transmits the following;
Departmental Circular 1390.2, Noise Abatement and Control: Depart-
mental Policy, Implementation Responsibilities, and Standards.
2. Explanation of Material Transmitted;
This Circular establishes noise exposure policies and standards to
be observed in the approval or disapproval of all HUD projects.
This Circular supersedes those portions of existing program regulations
and guidance documents which have less demanding noise exposure
requirements. The Circular (see paragraph 3) calls for prompt
administrative actions both by Assistant Secretaries to incorporate
new noise policies and standards in their program regulations and
other central office instructions, and by Regional Administrators
to identify existing problem cases.
3. Filing Instructions;
Insert:
1390.2
UDE:DISTRIBUTION: W-l, W-2, W-3, W-4
R-l, R-2, R-3, R-4, R-5
-------
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
CIRCULAR
1390.2
8/4/71
SUBJECT"
Noise Abatement and Control: Departmental Policy,
Implementation Responsibilities, and Standards
1. PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY. It is the finding of the Department of Housing
and Urban Development (HUD) that noise is a major source of environ-
mental pollution which represents a threat to the serenity and quality
of life in population centers. Noise exposure may be a cause of adverse
physiological or psychological effects as well as economic losses.
Accordingly, it is the purpose of Departmental policy to call attention
to this threat, to encourage the control of noise at its source in
cooperation with other Federal departments and agencies, to encourage
land utilization patterns for housing and other municipal needs that
will separate uncontrollable noise sources from residential and other
noise-sensitive areas, and to prohibit HUD support to new construction
on sites having unacceptable noise exposures.
This circular thus provides policy to guide the exercise of discretion
afforded in legislation on the various HUD programs. The circular is
based on authority provided in:
a. The Department of Housing and Urban Development Act of 1965
(PL 89-174) which provides that the Secretary may make such rules
and regulations as may be necessary to carry out his functions,
powers, and duties, and sets forth, as a matter of national
purpose, the sound development of the Nation's communities and
metropolitan areas; and
b. The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (PL 9.1-190) which
directs Federal Agencies to develop procedures to carry out the
purposes of this Act.
2. POLICY
a. Foster Standards and Consumer Protection. It is HUD's general
policy to foster the creation of controls and standards for
'community noise abatement and control by general purpose agencies
of State and local governments, and to support these activities
by minimum national standards by which to protect citizens against
the encroachment of noise into their communities and places of
residence.
-------
1390.2
(1) Planning assistance. HUD requires that noise exposures
and sources of noise be given adequate consideration as
an integral part of urban environments in connection
with all HUD programs which provide financial support to
planning. This consideration shall be of a form that
provides assurance that new housing and other noise
sensitive accommodations will not be planned for areas
whose current or projected noise exposures exceed the
standards cited herein. In this regard, HUD places
particular emphasis on the importance of compatible land
use planning in relation to airports, other general modes
of transportation, and other sources of high noise, and
supports the use of planning funds to explore ways of
reducing environmental noise to acceptable exposures by
use of appropriate methods. Reconnaissance studies,
and, where justifiable, studies in depth for noise
control and abatement will be considered allowable costs.
(2) New construction. HUD discourages the construction of
new dwell ing units on sites which have, or are projected
to have, unacceptable noise exposures*, by withholding
all forms of HUD's assistance for such dwelling units.
This policy applies also to college housing, group prac-
tice facilities, non-profit hospitals and nursing homes.
(*See paragraph 4, Standards).
(3) Existing construction (including Rehabilitation). HUD
considers environmental noise exposure an important fac-
tor in determining the amounts of insurance and other
assistance. Within cost restrictions, including those
set by market forces, HUD encourages modernization
efforts for buildings in noisy environments when such
efforts improve the noise exposure environments without
substantially increasing the life of the structure.
When modernization or rehabilitation would substantially
increase the life expectancy of the structures, it is
HUD's policy to apply noise exposure standards closer to
those applicable to new construction.
(4) Grants and allowances. HUD extends such assistance to
State and local governments for the alleviation of
community noise as may be provided for by the Congress
and as appropriate.
Page 2
8/71
HUD-Wash., D. C.
-------
1390.2
(5) Information and guidance (Research and publication).
HUD maintains a continuing program designed to provide
new knowledge of noise abatement and control to public
and private bodies, to develop improved methods for
anticipating the encroachment of higher noise exposures
and to deal with this encroachment and to foster better
understanding of the consequences of noise. Dissemi-
nation will be made through appropriate channels.
(6) Construction equipment, building equipment and appliances.
HUD encourages the use of quieter construction equipment
and methods in population centers, the use of quieter
equipment and appliances in buildings and the use of
appropriate noise abatement techniques in the design of
residential structures and other structures with poten-
tial noise problems. In appropriate circumstances, HUD
will allow certain additional costs for quieter construc-
tion equipment.
(7) Acoustical privacy in multifamily.dwell ings. . HUD encour-
ages the use of buildina design and acoustical treatment
to afford acoustical privacy in multifamily dwellings.
(8) Advice and cooperation. HUD welcomes advice and counsel
on improved methods for dealing with the noise problem,
and encourages cooperation with other units of government
as well as with appropriate private and voluntary organi-
zations.
b. Promulgate Minimum Standards. It is HUD's further general
policy to promulgate minimum standards and guidelines with
respect to noise abatement and control, to utilize such stan-
dards and guidelines as a uniform national policy to guide HUD
program decisions, and to support appropriate existing policies
and standards of State and local governments designed for noise
control and abatement. In this regard, noise exposures will
be divided into three groupings (to be defined in "Standards"):
(1) acceptable
(2) discretionary
—normally acceptable
--normally unacceptable
(3) unacceptable
Page 3 8/71
HUD-Wash., D. C.
-------
1390.2
3. IMPLEMENTATION RESPONSIBILITIES
a. Assistant Secretaries. Each Assistant Secretary shall promptly
incorporate by reference the Departmental noise abatement and
control policy, standards and guidelines into appropriate regu-
lations, guidance documents, and administrative forms and pro-
cedures for programs under his jurisdiction, including guidance
for A-95 notification and review. Further, each Assistant
Secretary shall evaluate the effects of, and compliance with,
Departmental policy, and identify program areas under his
jurisdiction in which additional noise control and abatement
standards or guidelines are needed.
b. Regional Administrators and Area and Insuring Office Directors
(1) One-time Report of Existing Problem Cases. Using this
policy statement as a common interpretation of existing
HUD program policies, each Regional Administrator based
on surveys by Area and Insuring Office Directors, shall
identify active and pending applications in his region
which are problem cases. Any cases for which the Regional
Administrator intends to seek an exception action by the
Secretary should be forwarded to the Deputy Under Secre-
tary,-along with a draft Environmental Statement. This
should be accomplished within 90 days of the effective
date of this policy.
(2) General Policy Implementation. Regional Administrators
and Area and Insuring Office Directors shall assure that
this policy and the prevailing standards and guidelines
are implemented in relation to all decisions and recom-
mendations taken in their jurisdiction, effective from
the date of this policy, and that specialized noise
abatement and control policies now associated with indi-
vidual HUD programs are conscientiously enforced.
Page 4
8/71
HUD-Wash.. D. C.
-------
1390.2
(a) Exceptions to this policy, e.g., the approval of
actions in the range of unacceptable noise exposures ,
are strongly discouraged. Any exception to approve
sites with unacceptable noise exposures must be
accompanied by a Section 102(2)C Environmental State-
ment (see para 3c below), and must be concurred in
by the Secretary with the advice of the appropriate
Assistant Secretary. Such matters should be re-
ferred £o HUD Headquarters in the earliest possible
stage in the decision process. After common inter-
pretation has been established, the possibility of
further delegation will be reviewed.
(b) Authority to Approve New Sites. Administratively,
decisions with respect to proposed housing sites
with clearly acceptable noise exposures should be
delegated to the lowest possible levels within
field offices. Certain positive decisions to go
ahead with sites with intermediate noise exposures
are to be concurred in by the Regional Administrator
(see para. 4b(l). The Regional Administrator
shall use his discretion, and if he is of the opinion
that an important precedent or issue of national
significance is involved, he shall refer the case,
with recommendations, to the Secretary prior to
decision. (See also paras. 3c and 4c).
(c) Surveillance of Noise Problem Areas. Regional
Administrators, Area and Insuring Office Directors
and all field personnel, as appropriate, shall
maintain surveillance on possible noise problem
areas and advise local officials and planning groups
of the unacceptability of sites for noise reasons
at the earliest possible time in the decision pro-
cess. Subsequent to the cleanup of backlog pursuant
to paragraph 3b(l) above, it is not anticipated
that there will be a need to make exceptions to
this policy on the basis that the unacceptable
sites have been "in planning" for numerous years.
Page 5
8/71
-------
1390.2
(d) Assessments and Projections of Sound Exposures. In
order to assure adherence to the guidelines and
standards, it is the further responsibility of each
Regional Administrator to require by appropriate
means assessment or authoritative measurement and
projections of sound exposures for at least five
years (and longer if, there is a factual basis),
with respect to applications and projects under
review. Recommended measurement and procedures
will be provided in the issuance of each new stan-
dard or guideline.
(e) Notice to applicants. At the earliest possible
stage, HUD program administrators shall determine
the suitability of the acoustic environment of
proposed projects, and shall notify the applicant,
existing or prospective, of any adverse or question-
able situations.
(f) Interdepartmental Coordination. Regional Adminis-
trators shall foster appropriate coordination with
other departments and agencies in the field, parti-
cularly the Environmental Protection Administration,
the Department of Transportation, military base
commanders and the Veterans Administration. The
field offices of the Department of Transportation
should be consulted for data on existing and projected
noise in the vicinity of transportation media, includ-
ing airports.
c. Environmental Statements. Detailed Environmental Statements,
as defined by Section 102(2)C of PL 91-190 and implementing
guidelines of the Council on Environmental Quality and this
Department, shall be prepared to accompany any request for an
exception to this policy circular and its standards and to
accompany requests to approve those cases which fall into
discretionary noise exposures which are "normally unacceptable."
Final Environmental Statements shall be filed with the Council
on Environmental Quality 30 days prior to making decisions on
the exceptional cases.
d. Office of the Secretary. The Deputy Under Secretary in the
Office of the Secretary shall review and coordinate the
efforts under Assistant Secretaries, and provide Departmental
Evaluation of compliance with this policy.
8/71
Page 6
HUD-Wash., D. C.
-------
1390.2 CHG 1
4. STANDARDS.
a. Standards, incorporating both technical and policy considera-
tions, will be promulgated on the basis of review of the
nature of problem cases identified in the regions pursuant to
paragraph 3b(l) above, and advice from consultants, R&D
contracts as appropriate and further study by the Departmental
Working Group on Noise. Technical noise assessment manuals
may be issued by HUD to provide further guidance on noise
assessment and measurement to facilitate implementation of
this circular.
b. Interim Standards. The following interim standards are
established. In applying these interim standards, projected
noise exposures shall form the basis for decision. (See
Appendix 1 for explanations of terms, definitions, and for
background discussion.)
(1) External Noise Exposures: Sites for New Residential Con-
struction (single or multifamily)
(See Chart, External Noise Exposure Standards for New
Construction Sites, on following page)
Page 7
8/71
HUD-Wash., D. C.
-------
1390.2 CHG 1
CHART: EXTERNAL NOISE EXPOSURE STANDARDS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION
SITES (Measurements and projections of noise exposures are to be
made at appropriate heights above site boundaries)
GENERAL EXTERNAL EXPOSURES
dB(A)
AIRPORT ENVIRONS
CNR ZONE */
UNACCEPTABLE
Exceeds 80 dB(A) 60 minutes
per 24 hours
Exceeds 75 dB(A) 8 hours
per 24 hours
(Exceptions are strongly discouraged
environmental statement and the Sea
3
and require a 1
"etary's approva
NEF ZONE */
C
02(2)C
1)
DISCRETIONARY — NORMALLY UNACCEPTABLE
Exceeds 65 dB(A) 8 hours per
24 hours
Loud repetitive sounds on site
(Approvals require noise attenuation
Administrator's concurrence and a 1C
2
measures, the R
)2(2)C environme
B
egional
ntal statement)
JISCRETIONARY -- NORMALLY ACCEPTABLE
Does not exceed 65 dB(A) more than
8 hours per 24 hours
ACCEPTABLE
Does not exceed 45 dB(A) more than
30 minutes per 24 hours
1
A
See Appendix 1 for explanations of Composite Noise Rating (CNR) and
Noise Exposure Forecast ^NEF).
8/71
Page 8
HUD-Wash., D. C.
-------
1390.2
(2) Interior Noise Exposures (for new and rehabilitated
residential construction^
(Note: the standards listed below are performance
standards. The means required for achieving them will
depend on, among other things, the external' noise levels,
the equipment and layout used in the building, and the
noise attentuation characteristics of the building's
floors and walls. These standards assume open windows
unless other provision is made for adequate ventilation.)
(a) "Acceptable":
Sleeping Quarters. For the present time, HUD field
personnel should consider existing and projected
noise exposure for sleeping quarters "acceptable"
if interior noise levels resulting from exterior
noise sources and interior building sources such
as heating, plumbing, and air conditioning
—do not exceed 55dB(A) for more than an accumulation
of 60 minutes in any 24-hour period, and
--do not exceed 45dB(A) for more than 30 minutes
during night time sleeping hours from 11 p.m. to
7 a.m., and
--do not exceed 45dB(A) for more than an accumulation
of eight hours in any 24-hour day.
Other Interior Areas. HUD personnel should exercise
discretion and judgement as to interior areas other
than those used for sleeping. Consideration should
be given to the characteristics of the noise, the
duration, time of day, and planned use of the area.
(3) Insulation Between Dwelling Units
(a) "Unacceptable"
For multifamily structures, including attached
single family units, floors and dividing walls
between dwelling units having Sound Transmission
Class (STC) of less than 45 are always unacceptable.
Page 9
8/71
HUD-Wash., D. C.
-------
1390.2
(4) Other land uses and existing housing. Until HUD estab-
lishes a broader range of noise exposure standards, HUD
administration at all levels shall take noise into
consideration in the development of policies and guide-
lines and in the review and decisions on specific projects.
Wherever feasible, standards along the lines of the above
shall be employed in a manner consistent with proposed
uses, densities and construction types.
c. Philosophy in Application of Standards. HUD personnel in the
exercise of discretion should be guided by a desire to prevent
noise problems from coming into being and by an overall philos-
ophy of encouraging the control of noise at its source. Parti-
cular attention should be paid to fostering land utilization
patterns for housing and other municipal needs that will
separate uncontrollable noise sources from residential and
other noise-sensitive areas. HUD personnel should encourage
use of the A-95 notification and review processes to detect
potential noise problems as early as possible.
Richard C. Van Dusen
Acting Secretary
Page 10
8/71
HUD-Wash., D. C.
-------
1390.2
Appendix 1
APPENDIX I, EXPLANATION OF TERMS, DEFINITIONS AND ADDITIONAL BACK-
GROUND
1. Measurement and Noise Assessment Procedures. Technical definitions
of acoustical terminology shall be those contained in the related
current documents of the American National Standards Institute
(ANSI) and the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM).
There has been a proliferation of concepts and mathematical tech-
niques relating to sound and human response to sound. Fundamental
to most all noise assessment procedures are the physical measure-
ment of sound pressure and the concept of a level expressed in
decibels. (See Appendix 2.)
a. Sound Pressure Level Expressed in Decibels. Noise ("unwanted
sound") affects the human ear through physical changes in
sound pressure superimposed on the static atmospheric pressure
in the presence of sound. Sound pressure has units of force
per unit area.
When a sound level meter is used, Sound Pressure Level can be
determined and expressed in decibels, dB. In this case, the
decibel is a logarithmic value which is referenced to the
faintest sound pressure detectable by the human ear. Those
requiring a more precise definition or understanding of these
terms are referred to the forthcoming HUD noise assessment
manuals for further discussion.
In this circular, the decibel values, dB(A), are for those
sound levels measured using the A-weighting network of a
standardized sound level meter. The A-weighting network most
closely approximates the response of the human ear to noise.
Relatively inexpensive and portable metering equipment is
available for purchase or, in some cases, rental. Some of
the portable metering equipment also permits the accumulation
of time for which the noise level at the site exceeds a given
decibel setting. Sound level meters shall conform to the
specifications set forth in the appropriate documents of the
American National Standards Institute.
The sound level meter is useful for measuring steady state or
persistent noise and for identifying maximum sounds of inter-
mittent noise. The A-weighted sound level, dB(A), has also
been used as a first approximation in characterizing transpor-
tion noise. More sophisticated evaluations of aircraft
noise include some modifications which consider additional factors
and are expressed as perceived noise in decibels such as PNdB
or EPNdB. These refinements are discussed at greater length
in the HUD noise assessment manuals.
Page 1 3/71
HUD-Wash., D. C.
-------
1390.2
Appendix 1
Noise Exposure. "Noise exposure" as used in this circular is
generally a combination of a noise level in decibels and a
time duration for that noise level. For example, sites where
existing and prolonged noise exposures do not exceed 45 dB(A)
for more than 30 minutes in any 24-hour period are acceptable.
Composite Noise Rating (CNR). The CNR is a calculated rating
for aircraft noise based on maximum sound pressure levels
during a flyover, frequency of occurrence, time of day and
other variables. It has been adopted by the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) to describe the noise produced by aircraft
operations in the vicinity of airports. In FAA usage, the
CNR takes into account the magnitude of the sounds of individ-
ual aircraft types, the number of operations of each type on
each runway, and the time of day. The numerical value of CNR
is related to an expected range of community response.
The FAA has calculated CNR's for a number of domestic airports,
and has divided CNR's into three zones -- corresponding to
our acceptable discretionary, and unacceptable, respectively —
according to the expected community response, as shown in the
following chart:
Chert for Estimating Response of Residential Communities from Compozilo f'olsc Rating.
Composite Noise Rating
TitkfoJJs and
Landings
Less than
100
100 to 115
Greater than
115
Runups
Less than
80
80 to 95
Greater than
95
Zone
1
2
3.
Description of Ezpeclef Response
Essentially no complaints would be expected. The
noise may, however, interfere occasionally with certain
activities of the residents.
Individuals may complain, perhaps vigorously. Con-
certed group action is possible.
Individual reactions would lii.tly include repeated, vigor-
ous complaints. Concerted croup action might be ex-
pected.
When advice and guidance are required in the analysis of
property sites in the vicinity of military airports, the
request for existing data and projections should be made
initially to the Commander of the military base and subse-
quently to his designee.
8/71
Page 2
HUD-Wcwh., D. C.
-------
1390.2
Appendix 1
Definition and Calculation of Noise Exposure Forecasts (NEF)
or Composite Noise Ratings (CNR) shall be in accordance with
the current DOT-FAA practices.
Noise Exposure Forecasts (NEF). The NEF is a calculated
environmental rating which refines and replaces the CNR
calculations for aircraft by including corrections for the
presence of pure tone and duration of peak levels within
the composite of intermittent noise. As currently used, it
has validity only for airports.
The Department of Transportation (DOT) is converting from CNR
to Noise Exposure Forecasts (NEF's). DOT has a contract for
the calculation of NEF's at some 29 commercial and general
aviation airports, and will soon have an intramural capability
for producing NEF's for any civil aviation airport. The new
NEF ratings for areas around commercial airports should be
sought through FAA Airport Regional Offices.jY
The following categories correspond roughly to the categories
of community response calculated originally for CNR's (see
above).
Noise Exposure Forecasts
Category Rating Disposition in HUD
A less than 30 Acceptable
B 30 to 40 Discretionary
C more than 40 'Unacceptable
For data on anticipated noise levels in the vicinity of mili-
tary airports, the request should be made initially to the
Commander of the base and subsequently with his designee.
Until December 31, 1971, interim requests for NEF's should be made
directly to FAA's Office of Environmental Quality (Attention EQ-1,
Washington, D. C. 20590. Requests should be limited to applicants'
sites within about three miles of a runway during this period.
Page 3
HUD-Wash., D. C".
8/71
-------
1390.2
Appendix 1
e. Sound Transmission Class (STC) is a single-number rating which
provides an estimate of sound transmission loss performance
of a wall or floor as related to airborne sound generated by
a limited class of household sound sources. The higher the
number the better the performance.
2. Concepts Relating to Adverse Consequences of Noise. Noise is
objectionable for commonsense reasons because it destroys the
serenity of one's environment. Beyond that there are a number of
specific concepts or ideas relating to noise. Current research
efforts are directed toward establishing firm findings about
certain noise phenomena and their consequences.
a. General Hearing Loss or Damage. High intensity noises even
of relatively short duration such as blasts or explosions
are known to have destroyed or severely limited the hearing
sense. Moreover, highly amplified rock-and-roll music, sports
shooting, and other recreational uses might produce sound levels
capable of producing hearing loss especially if exposures are
prolonged or recurrent. Continuing exposures to levels exceed-
ing 100dB(A) lead to temporary and, eventually, to permanent
hearing loss.
b. Impaired Hearing for Speech Communication. Prolonged exposure
to less intensive noise is known to impair hearing of speech
communications. The following table shows the hearing impair-
ment resulting from 8-hour exposures to industrial noise over
a long period.
FIG. 1. Prevalence
of impaired hearing
in various popula-
tion?. . .Each point
indicates on the ver-
tical scale the per-
centage of indivi-
Juals having im-
;>aired hearing in a
I'TOUJ) C\p
tinuously
to Ihc A
sound le\'e
on the
scale.
used con- a: 20
at work £
-v.-ciyhtrd
indicated 'c
hoiizont-il
0
H 1>-
*
^
It*
I
6
7.
— r
1
I
— o-
A
~/N
It
p
i
z
i j "" '* '' /'\tL ''' «<"
_. ]_ -,i-.-X/i J.-y^ I
* i ^/ ' ^ ' Lx
— ; T-^"~X;'4~" *'*
1 _Lr2-^^ _J-*^' " :
; _^~ — ^ (» ! T
" | SOUWD LfVCL
<5 AT WOPK.DflA
si
o'£
8/71
Page
HUD-Wash., D. C.
-------
1390.2 CHG 1 |
Appendix 1
c. Speech Interference Levels. Background noise above certain
1
c
k
/•s
4J
1 ?.o ^
~ u
S 10
w
S 8
o 6'
ii .
O , \.,
t^* \-' ' ''
'V f<< v
terferes with .one's ability to understand oral
tion. The following figure illustrates some current
of this phenomenon.
' , _.. . . , . _ . .
\
"4
% ^
~\VV"N
j
\ - \ -
\ w^: ~
\ c^ •• >\v^
,....\ (-:. J.jx%..-.
\!/o-i'c^, ">i i \ ^
\\H \* \f\>
_> «x— — X V
N ,-J \ \ "- 1 •
'°*: \ /« \'A ^ \ i %
vv.<, \ ^ \'V V; ty~
" V , '••$>• \ ^ \ to. <;•>
\ /. ••^X>,K\ *
' ^- ,\Wc.\^
\xn .. ..\ \ V - v
"v* r\\^v-
h, v-^ \
_ .1 V. ._. \ . \v! \, \
r<> yj
v v, " "
^ N£
^, v> . ..
p . 1 V
— V"^:1 ~
V ~ "SV:
•• \> v
^.... V> ..>
v
vS . \
\ ".. - x • •-
•\ \
-v -'<
'* \
^r, K
V» ! \
•o \
^. \
G i \
^>_ \
T»
>*
°J-, - -
•Sf" •' "
V; .
\
&\
^ )
— ,-, —
«r>
\
) 60 70 °" 80 90 100 )^fi 1?0 " 1
%
Mo5.sc- Level dB(A) ^
^
\
\
Figure 2 - Voice level and distance between talker and
listener for satisfactory face-to-face speech
communications as limited by ambient noise. Along
the abscissa is the A-weighted sound level meter
reading (dB(A)).
(SIL-Past, Present, and Future, J. C. Webster,
Sound and Vibration, August, 1969)
Sleep Interference. Knowledge is less firm in this area and
a series of qualifications is associated with many of the
findings, including significant individual difference and
becoming inured to certain noise levels (perhaps by hearing
loss). Nevertheless, "sleep interference" would seem to
Page 5
HUD-Wash., D. C.
8/71
-------
1390.2 CHG 1
Appendix 1
have an important impact on the ability of the resident to
achieve rest and enjoy his leisure, and hence must be
considered.
e. Nervousness and Tension. There is a growing concern that
exposure to the higher noise levels of the city might
contribute to nervous disorders and tensions, but the
findings are still inconclusive.
8/71 Page 6
HUD-Wash., D. C.
-------
1390.2
Appendix 2
APPENDIX 2. SOUND LEVELS FOR COMMON NOISES
(Non-technical table for general perspective and background)
JET PLANE, 100 FT. AWAY 130
PNEUMATIC RIVERTER
ROCK MUSIC WITH AMPLIFIER 120
THRESHOLD OF FEELING PAIN
THUNDER; DANGER OF PERMANENT HEARING LOSS 110
INTERNAL COMBUSTION AIRCRAFT ENGINE, 15 FT. AWAY
BOILER SHOP; POWER MOWER 100
SUBWAY TRAIN PASSING STATION
ORCHESTRAL CRESCENDO, 25 FT. AWAY; NOISY KITCHEN 90
CITY TRAFFIC (inside car); PNEUMATIC DRILL, 20 FT. AWAY
PERSISTENT NOISE IMPAIRS HEARING FOR SPEECH COMMUNICATION 80
(85 DECIBELS)
BUSY STREET
INTERIOR OF DEPARTMENT STORE 70
AUTOMOBILE (AVERAGE) AT 35 to 40 M.P.H.
ORDINARY CONVERSATION, 3 FT. AWAY 60
VACUUM CLEANER, 3 FT. AWAY
QUIET AUTOMOBILE AT LOW SPEED 50
AVERAGE OFFICE 40
QUIET OFFICE
CITY RESIDENCE 30
QUIET COUNTRY RESIDENCE 20
WHISPER, 5 FT. AWAY
RUSTLE OF LEAVES 10
THRESHOLD OF HEARING 0
Sound levels can be measured with a mater and expressed in decibels.
When used this way, the decibel is based on a comparison with the
faintest sound that can be heard. The decibel scale is logarithmic;
decibel levels cannot be added arithmetically. (See Appendix 1 and
HUD noise assessment manuals for further discussion.)
Page 1 8/71
HUD-Wash., D. C.
-------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
-------
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR ADMINISTRATION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20210
SEP 3 1971
Dr. Alvin F. Meyer, Jr.
Director
Office of Noise Abatement and Control
Environmental Portection Agency
1835 K Street, N. W.
Washington, D. C. 20006
Dear Dr. Meyer:
Your letter of July 30, 1971 to Mr. W. Scott Railton, requesting
information regarding Department of Labor noise programs has been
referred to me for reply.
The nature of the work performed by the Department does not, for the
most part, result in objectionable noise, therefore, it has never
had a noise control program. Noise control surveys have been
conducted as part of regular safety inspections upon request of the
Department safety officer. Rare noise complaints have been responded
to with surveys, recommendations, and corrective action.
You have advised that we will be requested to conduct a survey to
determine whether any of our activities are producing objectionable
noise. Such a survey will be conducted upon receipt of the formal
request and the survey guidelines.
Sincerely,
cretary
stration
-------
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20210
October 22, 1971
Mr. L. Justice
Office of Noise Abatement and Control
Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D. C. 20460
Dear Mr. Justice:
In reply to your recent inquiries on noise control activities, we offer
the following information about our compliance activities.
1. Our first noise Standard was published May 20, 1969 in the Federal
Register. These were the Walsh-Healey Standards for Federal Supply
Contracts over $10,000. Our standards covered many items of safety
and health in addition to noise exposure.
2. On May 29, 1971, the U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety
and Health Administration published the Safety and Health Standards
under the Williams-Steiger Occupational Safety and Health Act of
1970 (copy enclosed). These standards for noise are essentially
the same as under the Walsh-Healey Standards of May 20, 1969.
3. I am enclosing a copy of our Bulletin 334 on "Guidelines to the
Department of Labor's Occupational Noise Standards." It explains
what we mean by "a continuing effective hearing conservation
program."
4. We are working to get our field staff of compliance officers
equipped to measure noise in workplaces. It is anticipated that
we will have about 450 sound level meters in use early in 1972.
5. Our efforts on noise measurement and correction have been extensive
since May 29, 1969. We have trained 70 of our key safety engineers
and supervisors with the help of the Public Health Service and we
plan to train others as time and facilities permit.
-------
A number of firms have already been cited for violating our noise
requirements. Much progress has been made in noisey plants
throughout the country. The impact of our regulations has been
felt far and wide as evidenced by the demand for speakers and by
the fact that noise control and evaluation has been a favorite
subject of many meetings and seminars.
Sincerely,
Charles R. McClure
Supervisory Industrial Hygienist
Office of Compliance Evaluation
Enclosures
-------
Bulletin 334
(Revised 1971)
Guidelines To
The Department of Labor's
Occupational Noise Standards
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY
AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20210
-------
GUIDELINES TO
THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR'S
OCCUPATIONAL NOISE STANDARDS
Introduction
Noise has long been recognized as a cause of occupational loss of hearing.
Some companies have for many years taken steps to reduce noise levels and
the exposure of their employees to them. In promulgating noise standards
under the Walsh-Healey Public Contracts Act, the Department of Labor
merely made mandatory minimum standards which have proved both practical
and effective in preventing hearing loss in many plants.
Measurement, control, and protection against noise is a somewhat technical
subject and one with which plant management, which is responsible for the
enforcement of safety regulations, may not be familiar. Therefore, this
paper:
First, explains the terms used in section 50-204.10 and later
in section 1910.95 of the Occupational Safety and Health Standards,
as amended and first published in the Federal Register on May 20, 1969.
Second, explains just what is expected of the employer in order
to be in compliance with the requirements.
Third, specifies certain instruments, equipment, and procedures
which will be acceptable as a basis for judging compliance.
These latter points are of particular interest to technical
personnel, either at the plant or engaged on a consultative
basis, to assist them in developing and carrying out the
required controls and procedures.
This paper is equally applicable to employers currently covered by the
McNamara-O'Hara Service Contract Act and by the Williams-Steiger
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970.
Determining Sound Level Exposures, and Permissible Limits
Basically, section 50-204.10 and section 1910.95 set maximum permissible
noise levels and exposures, and explain the types of corrective action
which must be taken if these noise levels are exceeded.
Paragraph (a) of this section states:
"(a) Protection against the effects of noise exposure shall
be provided when the sound levels exceed those shown in Table I
of this section when measured on the A scale of a standard
sound level meter at slow response . . . ."
-------
-2-
Loss of hearing occurs as a result of the cumulative effect of exposure to
sound above a maximum intensity and over a maximum duration in a given period
of time. For the purpose of this standard, the basic permissible intensity
is 90 dBA for a duration of 8 hours out of a day. The amount of sound energy
absorbed during such an exposure is considered to be the upper limit of a
daily dose which will not produce disabling loss of hearing in more than
20 percent of the exposed population.
Table I indicates the duration of exposure to higher sound intensities which
will result in no more damage to hearing than produced by 8 hours at 90 dBA.
Employees must not be exposed to steady sound levels above 115 dBA, regardless
of the duration.
TABLE I
PERMISSIBLE NOISE EXPOSURES I/
Sound
Duration per level
day, hours dBA slow
8 -- 90
6 -- 92
/, QC
*T ----- — — — — — — — -_———-. — --.. .__.._-._._,_... y -j
3 --- - -- 97
9 -------.- — --------. — -- — -,.-_-_.-_-.«-,_---_._,., TOO
1% 102
1 - 105
% - 110
% or less 115
_!/ When the daily noise exposure is
composed of two or more periods of noise
exposure at different levels, their combined
effect should be considered, rather than the
individual effect of each. If the sum of
the following fractions: C1/T1 + C2/T2.
. .Cn/Tn exceeds unity, then, the mixed
exposure should be considered to exceed the
limit value. Cn indicates the total time
of exposure at a specified noise level, and
Tn indicates the total time of exposure
permitted at that level.
-------
-3-
~"he abbreviation dB in the right-hand column of the table stands for
decibels, the unit of measurement of sound levels. The A scale is one of
several on the sound level meter, a measuring instrument used to determine
sound intensity„ On this scale, the instrument reacts in much the same
way as does the human ear in that it is much less responsive to low pitched
tones than to those of higher pitch. The "slow" response is another set-
ting of the instrument which causes it to average out high level noises of
brief duration (such as hammering), rather than responding to the individual
impact noiseSo
It is important to note that decibels are measured on a logarithmic rather
than a linear scale. Every increase of 10 dB represents an increase of
approximately 300 percent in sound pressure, A 100 dB noise is, therefore,
3 times as intense as a 90 dB noise, rather than about 10 percent more
intense, as might be expected. Illustrated another way, if one machine
produces a sound level of 90 dB, a second machine of the same kind placed
next to it will result in a combined noise level of 93 dB, rather than
180 dB, which might be expected.
Exposures at Different Sound Levels
The footnote to Table I describes the method by which several separate
exposures to different sound levels during a day are to be treated in
determining whether or not the combined exposure is within permissible
limits.
" ;s an illustration, assume that an employee works most of the day in an
area in which the sound level is 90 dBA, but for 15 minutes out of each of
7 hours, he is in an area of 100 dBA, and for one 15-minute period each
day, he is in an area of 105 dBA.
This adds up to 6 hours at 90 dBA: permissible duration of exposure,
8 hours; 1-3/4 hours at 100 dBA: permissible exposure, 2 hours; and 1/4
hour at 105 dBA: permissible exposure, 1 hour. Tabulating it, we have:
Actual Time Permissible Time
dBA .C T
(hours) (hours)
90 6^ 8
100 1 3/4 2
105 1/4 1
-------
-4-
Putting these values into an equation, we get:
6 . 1.75 . 0.25 _6+l+2_15_ -, 8?
8 2 18888
Since this total exceeds unity, the daily exposure is above the permissible
limit, even though the total exposure at each sound level is below the
permissible duration for that level.
No matter how briefly a person is exposed to higher sound pressure levels,
if he spends the remainder of the day at a level of 90 dBA, his exposure
will exceed the permissible limit. Only by being in an area having a sound
level well below 90 dBA can his exposure to higher levels be compensated.
Assuming that the 6 hours are spent in areas of relatively low sound pressure
levels, are the two exposures to higher levels permissible?
The equation becomes:
U25 + 0,_25 „ 1.75 + 0.50 = 2_.|5 or 1,125, This is still greater than
unity and, therefore, not permissible. Either the exposure to the 100 dBA
level would have to be reduced to 1.5 hours or the exposure to the 105 dBA
level to 0.125 hours or 7 1/2 minutes in order not to exceed the permissible
total exposure.
Impulse or Impact Noise
The last sentence of sections 50-204.10 and 1910.95 states:
"Exposure to impulsive or impact noise should not exceed
140 dB peak sound pressure level."
This sets the upper limit of sound level to which a person should be
exposed, regardless of the brevity of the exposure.
In contrast with the 115 dBA upper limit for steady noise, the higher
intensity for impact noise is permissible because the noise impulse
resulting from impacts, like hammer blows or explosive processes, is
past before the ear has time to react fully. Impact noise levels are
to be measured only with an impact meter or an oscilloscope.
-------
-5-
Converting Octave Band Analyzer Readings
Many plants have done a great deal of noise control work based on
measurements taken with the type of instrument that measures the sound
level at each of a number of frequencies, or pitches, of the sounds
produced rather than the overall total noise, as measured by the sound
level meter. A chart is provided in the regulations to permit readings
obtained from an octave band analyzer to be converted to corresponding
values as indicated in Table I.
Sections 50-204.10 and 1910.95, paragraph (a), second sentence, state:
When noise levels are determined by octave band analysis, the
equivalent A-weighted sound level may be determined as follows:
140
100 200 500 1000 2000 4000 8000
BAND CENTER FREQUENCY IN CYCLES PER SECOND
Equivalent sound level contours. Octave band sound pressure
levels may be converted to the equivalent A-weighted sound
level by plotting them on this graph and noting the A-
weighted sound level corresponding to the point of highest
-------
-6-
penetration into the sound level contours. This equivalent
A-weighted sound level, which may differ from the actual
A-weighted sound level of the noise, is used to determine
exposure limits from Table I.
The above graph illustrates in a general way what was said previously about
the response of a sound level meter working on the A scale. It minimizes,
as does the ear, the low frequency sounds and emphasizes, as does the ear,
the high frequency sound. Thus, a 90 dB reading on the A scale may include
as high as 105 dB at 125 cycles per second, but would accept no more than
89 dB at 2,000 and 4,000 cycles per second.
To illustrate use of the graph in converting octave band readings into A-scale
sound level meter readings, two sets of values of octave band readings have
been plotted. The series numbered 1 shows readings at or below the 90 dBA
curve, except at 2,000 cycles per second, where the reading falls on the
95 dBA curve. In this case, the sound level for use of Table I should be
taken as 95 dBA. In the series marked 2, all the readings are below the
100 dBA curve, except at 1,000 cycles, where the reading is just on the
curve. One hundred dBA would therefore be the value to be used in Table I.
As noted in the explanation of the graph, the actual sound levels measured
with a sound level meter on the A scale may differ somewhat from the values
determined by plotting the readings from an octave band analyzer on the
graph. These differences, for most sounds, are of the same order of magni-
tude as the errors to be expected in the measurement and are not important.
The intention was to provide a simple and relatively accurate means of
conversion from one system of measurement to another to accommodate existing,
effective plantwide programs.
Variable Noises
Sections 50-204.10 and 1910.95 state the final consideration in
determining whether or not a permissible sound level is being exceeded:
"If the variations, in noise level involve maxima at intervals
of 1 second or less, it is to be considered continuous."
This means that where the sound level meter on the A scale at slow response
moves up from a generally steady reading, say from 88 to 92 dB, at intervals
of one second or less, the high reading shall be taken as that to be used in
Table I.
As a corollary to this, intermittent sounds of brief duration at intervals
greater than one second should, as far as practical, be measured as to
intensity and duration and the total duration over a day be ascertained.
This total should be entered in the equation given in footnote _!/» Table I,
-------
-7-
to determine the permissible limit. These intermittent sounds, which can
be measured with a sound level meter, should not be confused with impulse
sounds of very short duration resulting from impacts or explosions.
Control Measures
Paragraph (b) of sections 50-204.10 and 1910.95 refer to control measures
to be taken:
"(b) When employees are subjected to sound exceeding those
listed in the Table of Permissible Noise Exposures, feasible
administrative or engineering controls shall be utilized . .
The Department of Labor considers "feasible" to mean the following, as
stated in the Oxford English and Merriam-Webster Dictionaries: "Capable
of being done, accomplished or carried out; capable of being dealt with
successfully."
Engineering Noise Control Measures
Engineering controls are those which reduce the sound intensity either at
the source of the noise or in the hearing zone of the workers.
The following are examples:
A. Maintenance
1. Replacement or adjustment of worn and loose or unbalanced
parts of machines.
2. Lubrication of machine parts and use of cutting oils.
3. Properly shaped and sharpened cutting tools.
B. Substitution of Machines
f
1. Larger, slower machines for smaller, faster ones.
2. Step dies for single operation dies.
3. Presses for hammers.
4. Rotating shears for square shears.
5. Hydraulic for mechanical presses.
6. Belt drives for gears.
C. Substitution of Processes
1. Compression for impact riveting.
2, Welding for riveting.
3. Hot for cold working.
4. Pressing for rolling or forging.
-------
-8-
D. Vibration Dampening
1. Increase mass.
2. Increase stiffness.
3. Use rubber or plastic bumpers or cushions.
4o Change size to change resonance frequency.
E. Reducing Sound Transmission Through Solids
1. Flexible mountings.
2. Flexible sections in pipe runs.
3. Flexible shaft couplings.
40 Fabric sections in ducts.
5. Resilient flooring.
F. Reducing Sound Produced by Fluid Flow
1. Intake and exhaust mufflers.
2. Fan blades designed to reduce turbulence.
3. Large, low speed fans for smaller, high speed fans.
G. Include Noise Level Specifications When Ordering New
Equipment
H. Isolating Noise Sources
1. Completely enclose individual machines.
2. Use baffles.
3. Confine high noise machines to insulated room.
I. Isolating Operator
Provide a relatively sound-proof booth for the operator
or attendant of one or more machines.
Controlling noise at the source, as illustrated by A through Hi, is the
ideal means of preventing noise induced hearing loss. The results are
relatively long lasting; the operator of the individual machine is protected,
as well as those employees at a distance from it, and there is no need for
wearing protective equipment or following prescribed schedules of exposure.
The measures listed under H2, H3, and I will, if effective, limit the number
of persons exposed to high noise levels, but are unlikely to protect operators
and those close to the noise sources.
A number of the listed controls can be accomplished quite inexpensively by
plant personnel. Others require considerable expense and highly specialized
technical knowledge to ensure the expected results. It is therefore strongly
recommended that plants avail themselves of the services of competent
acoustical engineers in planning and carrying out their noise control programs.
-------
-9-
"'he Department of Labor expects employers to explore the possibility and
practicability of controlling noise by engineering and to take all feasible
measures before resorting to use of administrative controls or of personal
protective equipment.
Administrative Controls
If noise cannot be reduced to permissible intensities through engineering
controls, administrative controls should be developed in order to limit
duration of workers' exposure to noise levels above 90 dBA to the times
shown in the Table of Permissible Noise Exposures.
The following are examples:
1. Arrange work schedules so that employees working the
major portion of a day at or very close to the 90 dBA
limit are not exposed to higher noise levels.
2. Ensure that employees who have reached the upper limit
of duration for a high noise level, in accordance with
Table I, work the remainder of the day in an environment
with a noise level well below 90 dBA.
3. Where the man-hours required for a job exceed the permissible
time for one man in one day for the existing sound level,
divide the work among two, three, or as many men as are needed,
either successively or together, to keep individual noise
exposure within permissible time limits.
4. If less than full-time production of a noisy machine is
needed, arrange to run it a portion of each day, rather
than all day for part of the week.
5. Perform occasional high level noise producing operations
at night or at other times when a minimum number of
employees will be exposed.
Measures such as these can often be instituted at little cost or effort,
simply by introducing noise exposure as a factor in production planning.
While not as satisfactory as controlling noise at its sources, administra-
tive control measures are more easily enforced, than is the requirement to
wear personal protective equipment. For this reason it is preferred.
-------
-10-
Personal Protective Equipment
When engineering and administrative controls fail to bring noise levels or
duration of exposure to them below permissible levels, the use of personal
protective equipment is required, as stated in the second sentence of
paragraph (b), sections 50-204.10 and 1910.95:
"If such controls fail to reduce sound levels within the
levels of the table, personal protective equipment shall
be provided and used to reduce sound levels within the
levels of the table."
The use of personal protective equipment is considered by the Department
to be an interim measure while engineering and administrative controls are
being perfected. There will be very few cases in which the use of this
equipment will be acceptable as a permanent solution to noise problems.
Some methods of control, such as providing an isolation booth for operators,
or conducting noisy operations when few employees are in the plant, may
require use of personal protective equipment by the operator when he must
emerge from his booth to make adjustments, or by those few employees who
carry on the noisy operation.
In addition, the regulations require both provision and use of personal
protective equipment. How the latter is accomplished is up to the employer.
The Department recommends, however, that an educational and promotional
program precede initiation of required use of such equipment, and continue
as long as necessary to achieve 100-percent acceptance by employees. In
the absence of an observable high proportion of use, the Department would
consider the lack of a training and promotional program as constituting a
violation of the regulation.
Selection of Personal Protective Equipment
Cotton stuffed in the ears has little value and will not be accepted by the
Department, because of the relatively small attenuation (reduction of noise
level) and the care which must be taken in using it.
Fine glass wool can be used instead of cotton, because the attenuation which
can be achieved is very good. It is an acceptable protective device.
Wax impregnated cotton, when properly inserted in the ear, provides
protection equivalent to that provided by plugs or muffs. If supervisors
can assure that this material is properly used and fresh material is
provided daily, then this type of ear protection would be acceptable.
-------
-11-
Properly fitted earplugs are essentially equal in attenuating ability to
ear muffs; either is acceptable to the Department. Plugs are inexpensive
but must be fitted to the individual. In addition, plugs, and any other
type of protector inserted into the ear, must be issued by a trained person
under the direction of a physician or by the physician himself. Frequent
checks must be made to see that the plugs are being properly inserted.
Ear muffs, though relatively expensive, may be issued by any designated
person in the plant, as the only fitting required is adjustment of the head
band. This makes it very easy for the supervisor to check on proper use of
the muffs. Long hair and spectacle or goggle temples will interfere with
the seal made by the cushioned edges of the muffs and will correspondingly
reduce the actual attenuation, as stated by the manufacturer.
Regardless of the type of ear protector decided upon, its attenuation, as
stated by the manufacturer, must be sufficient to reduce the noise level
in the worker's ear to the level and for the duration prescribed in Table I.
The manufacturer's stated values are determined under ideal conditions, and,
therefore, as a precaution, it is wise to assume that the attenuation actually
attained in use in the shop will be at least 5 dB less than the stated value.
Only those ear protectors which have been tested in accordance with ANSI
standard Z24.22-1957, "Method for Measurement of the Real-Ear Attenuation
of Ear Protectors at Threshold," are acceptable to the Department.
The Department strongly recommends that any employee who is exposed tc high
sound levels and requests ear protection be provided with it, even if the
duration of exposure is within the limits prescribed by Table !„
Hearing Conservation Program
Sections 50-204.10 and 1910.95 conclude:
"In all cases where the sound levels exceed the values
shown herein, a continuing, effective hearing conservation
program shall be administere'd."
Therefore, where the sound level in a working area has not been reduced
to 90 dBA or below by engineering means, and reliance must be placed on
administrative controls to'limit duration of exposure, or on ear protection
to reduce the sound level actually reaching the ear, a hearing conservation
program is required. The program will be applied to all those employees
whose work brings them either steadily or infrequently into areas in which
sound levels exceed 90 dBA.
-------
-12-
Definitions
"Continuing" means that the program will be in effect and in use as long
as noise levels above 90 dBA occur in the plant.
"Effective" means that exposed employees will not suffer continuing
deterioration of hearing acuity because of their exposure, but that incipi-
ent loss of hearing will be detected and necessary steps taken to prevent
further deterioration before serious hearing loss has occurred.
In a broad sense, "hearing conservation" covers the entire range of actions
required by sections 50-204.10 and 1910.95. As used here, however, it refers
to audiometry--periodic checks on the hearing ability of individual employ-
ees; and noise surveys—periodic checks of the noise level in the areas in
which employees are working.
Audiometry
Audiometric tests will be made of all individuals working regularly or
^frequently in areas in which the noise level is above 90 dBA. The purpose
of these tests is to assure that administrative controls in use or ear
protection devices provided are being adhered to or properly used and are
effective in preventing loss of hearing from the noise levels encountered.
Audiometric tests may be made as frequently as specified by the plant's
regular or consulting physician, but only under very special conditions
shall they be made less than once a year.
The tests may be made in a doctor's office or elsewhere outside the plant,
providing the test facilities, techniques, and records are equal to or
exceed the minimum requirements described below.
1. Test Facilities and Procedures
The test booth or room shall meet criteria of ANSI standard S3.1-1960
(or latest), "Standard for Background Noise in Audiometric Rooms" for
testing to a minimum level of 10 dB on the ISO 1964 audiometric
scale.
The booth or room may be either prefabricated or locally built.
Doors, gaskets, and other parts of the room or booth which may
deteriorate, warp, or crack shall be carefully inspected periodi-
cally and necessary repairs or replacements made at once to ensure
that successive audiometric tests of each individual are directly
comparable and will give a true evaluation of the individual's
hearing ability.
-------
-13-
The operator of the audiometer should be positioned outside the room
or booth but able to see the interior through a window. The person
being tested must face away from the operator and the audiometer to
ensure that all his responses are based on sound signals alone.
The test shall consist of an air conduction octave band analysis,
as described in ANSI standard S3.1, and shall include, at least,
500, 1,000, 2,000, and 4,000 Hz.
The audiometric tests shall be made by a person trained and skilled
in audiometric testing.
2. Audiometers
The audiometer used to make these tests shall meet the specifications
for limited range, pure tone audiometers in ANSI standard S3.6-1969,
"Specifications for Audiometers."
The audiometer shall have a certificate of calibration before it
is placed in use, and shall be recalibrated each year thereafter.
This calibration shall check both frequency and intensity at each
setting, rise time and overshoot, and electrical and mechanical
integrity. A current certificate attesting to such calibration
shall be readily available for inspection by the Department of
Labor.
On the audiometer shall be a statement indicating whether it is
calibrated to ASA 1951 values or to the current American National
Standard, which is identical to the ISO 1964 standard.
The audiometer shall be subjected to a biological check, preferably
once a week but at least once a month, or before each use of the
instrument if it is used less than once a month. The check shall
be made by testing a person with a known and stable audiometric
curve. The monthly check should include movement and bending of
cord, wire, and lead, knob turning, switch actuating, and button
pushing to ensure that there are no sounds other than the test
tones. A log of these checks shall be maintained and be available
for inspection.
3. Records
In addition to the certificates and logs referred to in 2 above, a
record of each audiogram made on each individual tested shall be
available for inspection. Records of audiometric tests shall indicate
whether readings are based on ASA 1951 or on American National Stand-
ard (ISO 1964). The complete records on each employee required to be
tested shall be retained for 1 year following termination of employment
or transfer to an area in which noise levels above 90 dBA do not exist.
-------
-14-
The records will be examined for evidence of any deterioration of
hearing acuity and of action taken to prevent further deterioration
in those employees found to suffer some loss of acuity. Conclusions
as to effectiveness of control measures taken will be based on
examination of a significant number of audiograms and not upon the
basis of one or two cases.
4. Audiometric Tests Outside of Plant
If audiometric tests are done outside the plant, the Department of
Labor representative will also inspect the facilities and test
records, as noted above, and the same standards will apply.
Plant management will make arrangements for such inspection with
the person conducting the audiometric tests and may accompany the
representative in his inspection and review of records.
Noise Surveys
A noise survey of each area in the plant in which sound levels exceed 90 dBA
shall be made at least once each year to ensure that sound levels have not
increased above those originally existing. The survey may also establish
that noise levels in some areas have been reduced to levels below 90 dBA and
thereby justify discontinuing application of requirements for administrative
controls, ear protection, and audiometric tests of individuals in such areas.
A noise survey of an area is recommended whenever a change is made in either
equipment or type of operations so that significant changes in noise level
will be acted upon immediately.
Tests of noise levels will be made with a sound level meter on the A-scale,
slow response. The use of octave band analyzers or impact meters for
control or other purposes shall be in addition to, not in place of, tests
made with the sound level meter.
The sound level meter used will be one meeting specifications in ANSI
standard SI.4-1961, "General Purpose Sound Level Meters."
Records will be made of such surveys showing: the instrument used; date,
time, and location of such tests; machinery or equipment generating the
noise; and name of person making the test.
Test records shall be kept readily available for inspection for 1 year or
until a subsequent survey is made, if done more frequently.
The noise survey will be made by an insurance carrier, a consultant, a
representative of a State health or labor department, or by a qualified
individual designated by the company.
-------
-15-
Compliance Plan
Whenever a noise survey shows noise levels in excess of those listed in
Table I, necessary steps to reduce the noise exposure to or below those
levels shall be ascertained and a detailed plan, with completion dates
for individual steps, shall be prepared.
Following the original survey which shows existence of overexposures, the
steps in a typical compliance plan might include the following, not
necessarily in this order and some usually going on simultaneously:
1. A detailed survey of sound levels and sound spectra to determine
the sources of excessive sound levels„
2. Initiation of engineering studies to determine methods for reducing
sound levels at their sources.
3. Planning and initiation of feasible administrative controls, such
as modifying production schedules to divide noisy jobs among enough
people to bring each below the permissible limit or spreading
part-time noisy operations.
4. Initial audiograms for personnel excessively exposed.
5. Installation of a personal protective equipment program.
j, Followup audiograms at appropriate intervals to assess effectiveness
of the personal protective equipment program and administrative
controls.
7. Installation of engineering controls, or process changes to reduce
noises at their source.
8. Repeated noise surveys to measure effectiveness of the engineering
change s.
When the compliance plan involves long term engineering projects (for
example, 1 or 2 years) it may be revised from time to .time as conditions
change. The orderly completion, on schedule, of the various phases of
the compliance plan, together with other components of the hearing
conservation program, will be considered compliance with the regulation.
-------
-16-
Applicable ANSI standards are available from the American National Standards
Institute, 1430 Broadway, New York, N.Y. 10018
SI.4-1961 -- Specification for General Purpose Sound Level Meters--$2.75
SI.6-1967 -- Preferred Frequencies and Band Numbers for Acoustical
Measurements--$2.75
S3.1-1960 -- Criteria for Background Noise in Audiometer Rooms--$2.75
S3.6-1969 -- Specification for Audiometers--$4.50
June 8, 1971
* U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1971 O - 484-783 (3)
-------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
-------
r;•!.*:«:•• tor , :"CVice of Koiso *-\-.t:-' ••:•'•!: .
;*:•--"!. ).'.:• :••••':• •-.;/;} Prot-^c; f-.:? on .^;"c:>f-;
r.':'.-?i'i~ Dr. •;.:•• var?
''Ms ir-: I". r;>^?orrra to ^."our i','t.:::x oi Ji::l:.-
In y.r.u.r 'vvi-lj.^^ of Axiaust 6 a;.-^:t.Tor;3 •-•.:or.>
•:oi':'iit of -l.',L;>rv^.?..io.i requirOvl f:-r th«i r.ir-::;
to 7iMo 17 :•:' th's Clv^rl Air "or of 197C,
v.xi.r off^c1.- •.-o'.t.lC f.or.nnt: ijrr;jt"'/vl,' on oj-x:vi<:'
i-Ar:::it: M't •;..i":iJ,Vkation thvtt you r-.,-;id.
Thvt I) •-' ' -~.Tt. ..':.'' :;ifc or 1?jr^""'-1''C'3rUoi)1iJ.O!ii * >•* 'fu^C'frlo;)
r, j'Th ;;.rr..-:r ".":.u st^'-i f'-;^:'; tho 1';'^ --.:•:•;:; -;o.»iv. of T
t.'i..T.:: "••" alrcr'. I'U uolae
if : •,••:!.: .'.o:s of ?ilrr;,:?.ic,
oi:
;O''.-!v vyutr? ov^l-ina oxir
^b^cMvc". , ths •)c:.-:»rli,;1.onl: e^^j.oys th& in-ho-i"& tecrinical oavahl3.it I?- 3
of tha *;,";: ;;^s-port.£ti;>ii Svrite::;-! Certor (Trrc) at Carhrl'%'? ? ''ab/iac^ue-tta,
••IK 'v:-«ll ,?.;•; th«- a«rvi.ea3 o^ oji-Bl oi'fice, vifch cto^.l.i;s of vrrit^-npt; for
o.-vch. (;;cs ;\ttael-:;-»nft !'.!} /.Isc jvi-.i-fic' '-.•:>-* r.r>^ ccoios cf our i^-lv'?! a:>fl
F!s*-X:>72 Trrtisportatioa K^i.^R r\J>at-e:^ut Pvrojocl: Plan Arsrciiwont wlt'i hho
Tranr>pox"t«»,Slon Systec-y Cor*. tor. togot-ivr wit->. a copy of l:.hsir Jane I'i71
iir,lc^3, oro^r^.^s report. ("s«s Afc':acrjuwA
-------
With rr'so&c' proctKlvros; vssid for coordination, w*j us« tha Intor-
agency .nirc'^ ' vx Abat'^^nt Program (IANAP) ;;tr^cture vlth which vou
are £'iw..ilisv. • T:Iuii:ion, the Dap^r t^'?rtt and riA;"A h-we an figrss'ir.^tvt
wherein all i ..... -../d r--.';v>az.'(:!n<5nt' to dinchat'qe trans-
portation noise ftb-aUeroo
Regulation jaKl c-^rcif I cation authority is reposacl v/itltin fete Deoartiri-ant.
uttd-rs.c t:h^ auov>5ca;i of tlio TAA pursuant to Public Lav 90*411. This oro-
'/ics;; ::or noise certification of aircraft pursuant to Federal Air Rsgu-
lation ?a-rt 30.
We 'r.-'ina this in for -ink Ion \d.ll px-ovs us«ful to you in preparing vour
report. If you r.ood further acsistanco, please RcTvi ?;« .
Sincerely,
Oi-'ir/inal Signed by
ghfs.v4.ca R. Fostor
Charles R. Pouter
Director
Offica of Moise Abatement
Enclonuren - 4
TST-5 2 MRankin:ekk
TST-50 reading
TST-50 su3j>ject
TST-1
M.Rankin
8--27-71 x. 64558
-------
Updated 11/3/70
DOT-OS-00002
Start Date:
19 12 69
Estimated Completion Date: 12 72 (3-yr. effort)
Kind of Report:
New
Performing Organization, Name: Department of Aerospace Engineering
University of Southern California
University Park
Los Angeles,California 90007
Principal Investigator, Name: John Laufer, Professor and Chairman
Department of Aerospace Engineering
Responsible Government Organization, Name: Department of Transportation
Assistant Secretary
for Systems Development and Technology
Office of Noise Abatement
800 Independence Avenue, SW
Responsible. Government Individual, Name:
Washington, D.C. 20590
W. Harry Close
Research Division
Office of Noise Abatement
Key Words; Basic research on jet engine noise and its ab'atement
Title: Modeling for Jet Noise
Summary: Develop engineering guidelines for the noise abatement of subsonic
and supersonic jets. The program of basic research will be conducted
over a period of three years. The first year's activity will include:
a) the overall design and construction of the research facility: the
anechoic chamber, the air supply system for the jet, the jet nozzle,
the traversing mechanisms used for detailed measurements; b) develop-
ment of special narrow angle microphones of electronic system for
data processing; and c) preliminary measurements in a high subsonic
"clean jet". In the second year plans are laid out to conclude the
"clean jet" experiments to initiate the theoretical study on a source
model, as well as to start an experimental and analytical work on
the effects of initial conditions. Depending on the progress of
this^program, it is hoped that in the third year research on the
supersonic jet noise problem could be initiated.
ttes ou r ces Es t Ima c g , Fund s: $529,000 for 3-yf. effort. First year - $23.5,165.
: Second year -. $126,883
Security of Report: Unclassified
Procurement Method: Grant Agreement.
-------
DOT-OS-00035, Task Order #3
-H-ti<
ipdated May 15, 1971
Start Date:
28 01 70
Estimated Completion Date: 01 71
Kind of Report: New
Performing Organization, Name: National Academy of Sciences
National Research Council
Division of Engineering
Highway Research Board
Principal Investigator, Name: W. N. Carey, Jr.
Executive Director, Highway Research Board
Responsible Government Organization, Name: Department of Transportation
Assistant Secretary
for Systems Development & Technology
Office of Noise Abatement
800 Independence Avenue SW
Responsible Government Individual, Name:
Washington, D.C. 20590
Jot»t--G-«--Ge«-F]ras- W. Harry Close
Research Division
Office of Noise Abatement
Key Words: Advisory and information services for transportation noise
Title: NAS Services Trans Noise Abate
Summary: Provide four interrelated information services: 1) Advisory
Services — Information Storage, Retrieval and Synthesis: an
Advisory Committee within the Highway Research Board of the National
Research Council, National Academy of Sciences of approximately 8
experts in the various aspects of transportation noise will be
appointed to advise on the scope, sources and input/output require-
ments of a storage and retrieval system for noise information and
to advise on topics and procedures to be used in the synthesis of.
stored information and that which is available from other resources.
Initial priority for committee'concerns is in the area of surface
transportation noise; 2) Storage and Retrieval System for Trans-
portation Noise Research Information: develop a specialized file
for transportation noise research information service (TNRIS).
The service will provide for up to 2500 references in the first
year operation to cover ongoing research activities, reports on.
completed research and publications or other documents within the
scope of the service. Output from the system will include response
to direct queries, monthly lists and indexes of stored mat&rial and,
at the end of the contract year, an experimental publication to
represent the year's accomplishments; 3) Synthesis of Information
-------
DOT-OS-00035, Task Order #3
Page 2
for Selected Topics on Transportation Noise Abatement: after an
adequate information base has been acquired, a small number of
relatively narrow topics within the field of transportation noise
abatement will be selected as high-priority topics for information
synthesis. One topic will then be selected for producing a
corresponding information synthesis document; 4) Advisory Services -
Research Programs: examine and make recommendations for research
and development activities that may lead to the implanentation,
within the transportation community, of policies, standards and
procedures for alleviating transportation noise.
Resources Estimate, Funds: $116,000
Security of Report: Unclassified
Procurement Method: Contract - Task Order
Amendment #2 to above provided $50,000 to continue the advisory
and information services.for transportation noise abatement
through August 21, 1971.
-------
8 October 19/0
fc_,rt Date: 27 08 70
)•;s 1. i.'L;,-i 1:ecl Curr.p 1 e t i o n
Kind of Report: Nev^
31 12 71
Performing Organization, Name: U.S. Department of: Commerce
National Bureau of Standards
Office of Vehicle Systems Research
Washington, B.C. 20234
Pr incipal Invos t: i_ga tor, Namej
Responsible Government Organisation, Name: Department of Transportation
Asst. Secretary for Systems Development &
Technology
Office of Noise Abatement, TST-50
Rm. 10409, 400 - 7th St., S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20r.91
Responsible Government Vndividual, Name:
Close, W. Harry
Chief, Research Division
e nf Noise Abatement
Title:
Words: Identify and quantify the physical parameters which affect the noise.
generation characteristics of truck tires; develop an information bast
that may lead to standardized tire-noise testing, procedures and to
highway noise reduction criteria, standards, and regulations.
Truck Tire Noise Investigation
Summary;
This study wi'
Hopefully the
and tire manu:
agencies to ae
A literature :;
ongoing relate
problem;.visit
vehicle raanufa
practices of '
that exist amc
parameters th,-;
laboratory and
As a result of
on the road an
collection anc
significant f:
1 provide a scientific basis for designing quieter tires.
information produced will prompt additional action by vehicle
acturers, truckers, highway designers and local law enforcemen
hieve a full measure of environmental quality improvement.
carch will be performed for existing information as well as
d work to determine the scope of the overall truck tire noise
s and contacts will be made to trucking industry and tire and
cturers to identify and define the truck tire population,
he fleet and individual users of trucks, and the basic differe
ng different users. An at tea pi will be made to identify th;;
t affect noise generation. Reassessment of the status of
roadside noise measurement development will be conducted.
these efforts, certain tire types will be selected and tested
d in the laboratory. Upon completion of testing and the
reduction of cata, an analysis will be conducted to deter nine
ndi:igs of the truck Lire noise investigation.
.{ .:--!£"f' l-'-^i^f^. v'un.'j ; To\ ,.I "fysidi: r; estimate. .- <327,00i
tor FY-70 was 'provided by F11WA in April "'1970. Intcragency Agi cement DOT-AS-1C"
/it' r1r(*~ r, r fl f-hf» fi rpi- i r..^'i-/jmnr> ^ /^f Ti'V._71 i-r^.-m i rn.1 1 r, fnni-imir» ^-..-.7;]; without
000.
addresses the first increment of
innerrvipv.ion. Tota'j i-T-71 r<><
FY-71. required t
.-
-------
5' !L)-_SlLJ*RP°r1' •' Un c 1 a ss i. f i ed
-——-- MJ^il!0^ : * "^era6en cy Agreemen t
/Other Funding Agencies: FHWA-
-------
19 February 1971
DOT-OS-10025
Start Date: 17 02 71
Es t ima ted Completion _Dat_&: 01 06 71
Kind of Report: New
Performing Organization Name Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc.
Two Pennsylvania Plaza
New York, N.Y. 10001
Principal Investigator, Name: Favata, Fred
Responsible Government Organization, Name: >Department of Transportation
Asst. Secretary for Systems Development
and Technology
Office of Noise Abatement
400 Seventh Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20590
Responsible Government Individual. Name: Paullin. Robert L.
Chief, Regulatory Policy & Standards Div.
Office of Noise Abatement
Key Words: Analysis and report of the Plenary Session of the SAE Conference on
Aircraft and the Environment
Title: Aircraft and the Environment
Summary: Analyze and report on the results of the Plenary Session of the SAE
Conference on Aircraft and the Environment. The review and evaluation
shall cover the following:
1) A delineation of the conclusions and recommendations of the nine
workshop sessions, as modified (if any) by the Plenary Session.
2) A delineation of the pertinent discussions at the Plenary Session,
with identification of appropriate groaps or representatives of those
groups.
3) A technical/engineering review of the conclusions and recommendations
arising from the Plenary Session, with a ranking of such results as
to viability, reasonableness and scheduling.
U) An evaluation of the feasibility of implementing the results of the
Plenary Session, with particular emphasis on the following:
a.- The technical interation of air, noise, solid waste and fluid
pollutants-.
b. The economic implications of the results.
c. Suggested priorities from a materials aid manpower standpoint.
d. The effect on the avr transportation system.
Resources Estimate, Funds: $8,855 (fixed price)
-------
,t)OT-OS-10025, page 2
Security of report: Unclassified
Procurement method: Contract - fixed price.
-------
28 May .1971
DOT-OS-10183
Start Date: 14 5 71
Estimated Corslet ion. JDat_c: 14 7 71
Pe r £ ci rm ing 0 r g an i 2 a IjLon_>_ __N ar;ie_: B&K Instruments, Inc.
. - - ^_^ ^^ 164th Street
Cleveland, Ohio 44142
Principal Investigator, Name: E. John Wootten, Vice President
Systems and Engineering
Responsible Government Organization, Name; Dept. of Transportation
Asst. Secretary for Systems
Development and Technology
400 7th Street, S. W.
Washington, D.C. 20590
'Responsible Government Individual, Name: .Close, W. H.
Chief, Research Division
Office of Noise Abatement
Key Words: Sound level detection system; noise monitoring system.
Title; Field Noise Monitor System
Summary; Obtain sound level detection system for unattended monitoring
of aircraft and ambient noise levels in airport environs.
Resources Estimate, Funds; $18,000. ($17,099 Actual)
Security of Report: Unclassified.
Procurement Method: Contract - fixed price
Other Funding Agencies; N/A
Final Product Due: July 14, 1971
-------
14 May 1969
POTTOS -A9 -026
Date: 18 10 68
Estimated Completion Date: 07 69
Kind of Report: New
Performing Organization, Name: Southwest Research Institute (under contract
to Society of Automotive Engineers, ; Inc. )
Principal Investigator; Name: Walters, F. C.s Chairman
SAE Research Project Committee
t
Responsible Government Organization, Name: Department of Transportation
Asst. Secretary for Research & Technolog
Office of Noise Abatement;;
800 Independence Avenue, £.W.
.Washington, D.C. 2.0590
Responsible Government Individual , Name; Foster, Charle s R.
Director, Office of Noise Abatement
Key Words ; Urban noise levels; noise generating machines; operator tolerance.
Title; Support of Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc. Noise Research Study.
Summary : Obtain data which is correlatable to urban noise levels for use in
transportation noise abatement research.
This program is to gather, catalog, analyze and summarize available
noise data in .3 areas relative to noise associated with the operation
of tractors and related equipment. Specifically, the 3 areas—are^-
(1) Definition of the physical characteristics of typical noises to
which operators of such equipment might be exposed.
(2) The tolerance levels of such opefators, both with and without
protection.
(3) Degree of possible hearing damage and operator disorientation
from exposure to variable noise.
Resources Estimate. Funds: $5,000. (.$U,290 Actual)
Security of Report ; Unclassified.
Procurement Method; ___ Contract^- fixed price. ___ _____ „ __ _ ... __ — __
Other Funding Agencies; Industry - Farm & Industrial Equipment Institute;
Construction Industry Manufacturers Assn.;
Power Saw Manufacturers Association.
Final Report received December 1969.
-------
Updated 17 A
DOT-OS ~A<;-009
Sl/llt.JM.te_L 23 08 68
rsi-.ir.ia tec). CompI&t-Ion^Date ; 06 69
Kind of Repp rt : K e, Massachusetts 02138
I^E-'iP^ifiSl IlLYJjSti^iPtqr . Marae: Frankeu, Peter A., Vice President
Physical Sciences Division
Responsible Government 0 roaiiization , Hame : Department of Transportation
Assistant Secretary for Research £,
Technology
Office of Noise Abatement
800 Independence Ave. , S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20590
IRss j:ons ib IP. Gpvernf:-,e;i t T t;C' ividuajl , Ncurie : Paullin, Robert L.
Chief, Racyl&tory Policy & SU-.;K'ar>.is Div
Office of Noise Abatement
Key V'ords ; Hetropolitftn airports near-term noise abatement alternatives; opera' io:;
and non-operational procedures; composite noise rating; nircraff roic'C
exposure forecasts .
Tjjj-e: Metropolitan Aircraft Noise Abatement Study (Logan International Airport)
Summary: Develop useful alternatives for achieving both preventive and remedial
relief from aircraft 'noise' exposure in the vicinity of a lar»:-e metro-
politan airoort - Logan International Airport, Boston, Massachusetts.
Included ar-j considerations of: basic causes, growth trends, and social-'
economic im'.?f:ct of aircraft noise exposure on individuals and coifanunities
near airports. The project will include preparation of alternative
approaches for use by local, state, and Federal governments to guide tVet
in land use development, airport developiraut and related aircraft
operational procedures.
t
•Develop s methodology for use by other airport and metropolitan planning
officials.
Progress ; Ro-^iaotli-tijr.Lf Ui-i;c.Boti'tii-iLaLirjCn«liii-iiiili»»Cawiaiin »ianti . Final repor1: rec'cl 3/-C.
Resources Estimate, J'imds; $31,027 (Jointly funded: Department of Transportation/
Department of Ucusin^ and I'rben Devn.\cpn:?nt )
Se.eu_rity. of Report;; 'Unclasrif ied.
Procurement. Method; Contract - fixed price1
Other Funding Agenci c s ; Depax'trr.cnt of Uou~inf, and J'vl;?.n Devcio'rri-.v.ut ,
-------
- -J-l-
Kew
PC r form 1 nj^ 0 r <. • a n ^za t- \on__Fi_ftri 2 : So3, rend 1 pi '<. y , Inc ,
Special Studies Division
2001 Joffe-rson-PaviF Highw
Arlington s, Virginia 22202
Pr i n c i pajt _ In ye g t 1 (t.- a t^ojr^Natne : Sa f e e r » Ha r vey
Prograni Manager, S,neciaJ. Studies Division
I'lesponsible __Gpvernmont Organization , Name : Department of Transportation
As at. Secretary for Research & Technology
Office of Noise Abatement
COO Independence Ave. , S,W.
Uashingfcon, D.C. 20590
Ras ports ibleGoverr.rnant Individual , Nac:e : Paul 1 in r Robert L.
Chief j Regulatory Policy it Standards Div.
Office oi: Noise Ab&'ceoaent
vords ; Assessment of transportation noise abatement problems; potential solutions;
all modes of transportation - airplanes, buses, trucks, autoss trains, and
boats.
Title; A Study of the Magnitude of Transportation Noise Generation- end Potential
Abatement.
Summary: Determine the magnitude of the transportation noise abatement problem in
the U.S. and develop a set of analytical tools which can be used to determine
the extent of the problem in the future end to evaluate alternative proposals
for noise abatement; provide a comprehensive analysis of the current technical
economic and legal limits of noise reduction, and estimates of what they may
be in the future; determine the level of ref.ponsibi.lity (public and private)
for noise abatement, and the ability at each level to provide the necessary
resources to inplemsnt noise abatement programs; determine the need for
government standards and regulations for transportation noise abatement, to
establish specific recommendations for standards and regulations and the-ir
means of enforcement; determine the scientific research needed to understand
noise abatement and develop a research program which will isaxirnize the
expected return froa all related resource allocations; determine how to
provide transporto tien son/ices that pwducc acceptable noisr- exposure ir
populated actras, £,'.ven the cpc:rat.'cn> ecc.ionic.. social, and political
constraints .
Resources Estinvate, Funds: $492,683
-------
*-' ' i ^
) Ci^l 3
I ,-1 t - f
o
fcU
X
f'1
£•!«
;-.--, (
j ^,
iQ
01
T3
r4 ^L
ov
vO
X
r^.
ON
ON
ON
10
X
vO
ON
C>
I-H r-H ON CN O*
r-. 1-. VD vo vo
X \ X X
,-lOO <-*'. ON CN
r-i
O> t— < r~4 ON ON ON
vo r-v. r^ vo vc 'O
ON ON O"' OA ON ON
O
r^-
X
vO
ON
vo
0.
o
•O
ON
<-'
r'
;j
C
"••^
O
01
-t
'j*:
O
vO
O-l
CM
•a
o
r~ '
k--.
•-
oo
£• M
'.-^ CO
O '-O
— ' CN
n o
-d-
•O
q
o
r~^
CN
vo
,-4
'O
o
s:
o
o
c::
o
co
OT CM
in O
jj -"t
r.O CM
in
CO
i\
r^.
10
r—t
O
o
o
0
o
o
0
o
o
f-J
o
o
o
r>
o
U1
X^
t
o
J-l
M
O' '*"
Q
&
• -i
1>(3
c:
•11
v(
'•-1
cy 6 .»
•-' C
J 1 '- • ;
.-'• -^
o 07
\ d!
iJ 4--'
rj ^;;
-: J
,-
o
CJ
-*)
t:
C
;j
<•
Cj
C
^
iJ
•rH
c>
O
CO
•~. (
'o
'J'
CJ
CO
'«— * , — i
JJ \
CO 0
r? »-i
'r-<
nr3
& -y
o c
t-7 Zf)
0" •»• 1
c; 10
•'0
c) vo
o
J_J J.
OJ tr
3 i"
,^- o>
IcJ'
J^J
o
11
a
o.
o
X
a
• r
- ' •• •
(^
r1 (:j
., ! '-j
j., G
CJ - t
-! O
-"-x
1
c/;
O
i
O
G
C
^:
;? oo
- C) *^J
'**' *\
t'o
5-< C^
.'U 'c:0
f)
4J
"o o
fLl 0
y^s.
O -C
01 CJ
•^ VO
c o
x^ -X
O s~,
~.'i ''.:',
('. j->
-jj j '
••-H i-J •,-'.
O c.
a. *: 4-j
O :'• ::'
!-' o! '"I
i' '' '•)
',. •:: •--'
«
y
M
,.;
.u
•r^
O-,
• r-4
rc
S
"•)
C'
l^
r..»
O^
"«1>
\
r-<
<"-«4
\
in
r^l
6
rr
'cO
•ri
en
03
,— i
O
1
ON
T
CO
o
H
C
Q
C?
o
J.)
oi'
• r-l
.d
f'l
i;,J
^
(^-1
0
^»,
-!^i
r/]
•^
•y
>
P
ri
O
•M
4-J
nj
^
>
W
n)
•M
V.
o
JJ
., 1
14
O
!5!
10
•-4
O
'•^
CO
VO
N^
IN
X^
O«l
r-4
rc
O
C'
v^ri
•.H
05
>O
01
O
1
ON
('
CO
O
1
O
ON
vO
X
^v
3
C
C'5 'O
M rj
^ C-
1) 'i*-0
t?j ''*^
m
c^jj
0
"o o
C i
rj O^
>j <
IS) 1
p". I/)
O
-•-' I
"~0 0
M O
CO
4-J
C
O
M
«
^
^?*
.— t
iV
C '*"•
*.- ! •>,
^> rj
i'l »S
:> ,o
o ;j
f.! CO
••y! *»^
CTV
'0
\,
c^.
f-H
\
r-4
*o
o
c;
to
•r-H
co
ON
in
o
1
ON
r
CO
O
1
"H
O
O
1
^. 0
« fi
f^V Vi
- CJ
O .ri
r-< O
:s o
v-' •/)
< 'o
< X
frj
t-3
O O
4-> i'-'
'J\ M
i< x o
"<
' !. J 4--*
in '—> '.i
c: • •'••
iu -i-* • -«
;.. i; «
{.-. (.. .1!
ON
1O
X
in
Of
v.
O)
•o
ft)
G
bO
>»'
to
c--)
r-.
O
1
ON
f
CO
O
1
H
O
C
/-N
CO
p4
<1
1
v^
Q
g
O
J.)
(-1
fj
IV--4
i)
l"!
*~x VJ
P «
*v^ ^
P<
£; o
O V
Ji O«
o
L, ,- I
CJ 05
tl 4
r/i :.!
" 'vi
rj •-(
ij r-*
1 ' O
-------
TJ
CO ' 'O
Q
O
Q
O
in
to
w
+J
o
c*
(-,
C
O
0
4>
r:
,^
C
•J
>
CJ
a
F
s
^
Cj
O
O
A!
|
i
1
!
ij
lj
fi
c_>
r.<
{
t
Jx t
G :
[i
4-
C
<
1
O
5?.
•M
" V
C -r-
u tr
Ci -H
pC CO
Con trace/,'
Date
l1.)
,~~f
/-)
•r I
F-
._, --, V
•> r-i ° •'"•
* 0 r-, ^ ^
CJ I"-, (J f-> •*
s ^ s -
" ^
l-i >-< O o J?
o n r-- Jr <-<
y ' it N. r- «-> i^
J to o v> x £ X
«fn " - i
CO — '
x: cj O
ft, J3
ft.
n
: S S ° ° - o
2 2 2 § £ £ £ s
"^ rH - •-• r-< ._,
VO
? § § ^coooc^
f. _* ^' ^J- c-w -j- o r^
•r, "^ « ^ co 6 § §
™ CN S ^0 vo co vo" c
V> ^ CO (X| ^, ._ -
CN ri co ^
. — 1
"-1 co r-,
C^ t x
S c- c^ M S ^ « » -« K'
0 S d \ ^ C c; w 0 3
o .^ x ^ ,;> ,, > x cj c f^ •„
co .u co ^ L^ ji c~ --1 <••: r- ^, s.:
X cj \ T^ v '?, r1 ^ n . s.>
•§2 «2 g^l «•«""«
«•§' §„ -; •,-.&§
-Sco g" « « g « « a^sS
r-i ,-( .^ ,0 11. l< 'a c
« -' 00 .!, ^ J. ^ « C!) 0 in CN
°d W8 « o -o. 3 S S *
i y
ii ig i "ii mi
^n •<* Sh ;;g£ ^v;'g^i
X-N
. CO ^
• O CV C)
u C •- •"
•y ro co 4J
0 4J .,, CO
c 0) •;;:?; ^i » S .u
•2S g«'tJ ?0 -s >S
4-> •-< .,.• jj i> Sj° 5 ^ z
CO 0 CO ' i. ^ 0 Ci
'> ^ "' F1 .^ n' JJ W T-:
CJ r; itj S !H o, ^ 0 .0
•-* o o < co cj :;-j -"•:
"". ••* fj • .
*• 4J r; -^ --J 4.J o '•- -;
^4^ .S ° « ^ "' -« ,.-••
^ J -' J. : ! • -S > - r-'-
w o -* i. J-, ;- Vi' • - ^-
^ 2. ;•; c ^ " .s
o t-j - • p ^ • • cv
^ '-; i: ^. ' ci 7j " ^
•i. cj i. :! ,,., ,( _•> •.-. r:
•: >< f! (/j 0 .,.. .-. .' ;.;
i- '-' :-, -..^ r'-i •:-; '« .''
r-- r-- r^
0% cr- o>
•-< --' ^-.
S 0 otO o
-^ s ° ° °
° O CJ o u-l
o o o' !o" ^N"
vo 0 OJO M
.— ' '—' ,-.^:
1
-
CU
to
w ''^ p>
", ^ I- c-i
'rj ° .0 ,-,
.1 1'^. r.' f^
l^ ^ ' ^ '••••j r-4
0 f- .-< '.; |
t: ci ,--. ,..,
;- V 1 . f,
-'•' '-'•'> > 1- :"'
W T-J c.j (j
•0 c: /y
•i-l L '-11 "> ^J
0 ^ r' ';, tj
y ..^ 5 'X 0
^ "> =:: J)
J C ,,T
i -t- r-' ,, 11 ..
';:£•- ..< ?} <^j
7- O cs' CD - ,--^
f.:. CJ -^ r: "u x'
° c s< -t
'"' 7 !;;- v r' 03
r- f) W
C < 4-- , .y
•r -' .r 4i w ^
j; ;^ T ^ w 41
R ••-' ' •-: n cj
^' C-4 •" f:.l V r-^
o
• 1 )
aj
CJ
v-.o
.u
C)
a)
^>
>-t n"
' * Cy
o
<"> n
(/) fy
T'i
O (.,
•>' rj
C.)
,"'
*"• > .
r-i <
vj /—
t • x;
"^ t--'
-------
O
n,
o
D
Q
O
•H
j:;
O
traccs
in
in
00
O
z
4>
u w
r. "i
,9 OT
x «
4J JJ
o «;
«! R
CJ
O
O
0 X.
C r-.
' C-J
ra
li 'O
o> a
•y 4J
r.i oj
in
CN
o
O
>
•H
I
O O
S I
O H
4J O
2 P
>.
4J
0 >-!
O •
00 E2
4->
f.
S
r:
o
u
r
w
t j
CJ
(I
y
O
• H
.d
O
•a
c
cu
0
o in
C
l-( 13
a)
- 4-1
Ul 01
4J 13
d
-------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS CENTER
CAMBRIDGE. MASS.
PROJECT PLAN AGREEMENT
GWA NO
72-OS
2. PPANO.
OS207
REV. NO.
0
AFFECTS PAGES
1-9
3. DATE:
August 23,
1971
4. TITLE:
Transportation Noise Abatement
Mr! Charles R. Foster, TST-50
Office of Noise Abatement
DOT/400 Seventh Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20591
(202) 426-4553
7. TASK MANAGER:
John E. Wesler, TME
DOT/Transportation Systems Center
55 Broadway
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142
(617) 494-2258
.6. SPONSOR NO.:
8. RELATED PPAS:
9. BRIEF TECHNICAL suMMARY:In continued cooperation with the OST Office
of Noise Abatement, TSC.,will work in two broad ^reas of transpor-
tation noise abatement: (1)continue measurement and simulation mod
eling of community noise levels created by transportation-related
sources; and (2)conduct research into the mechanisms of noise gen-
eration by jet engine exhausts, V/STOL aircraft, and internal com-
bustion engines. In addition, TSC will provide technical support
in all aspects of transportation noise abatement, providing suit-
able expertise on call, monitoring research contracts negotiated
y the Office of Noise Abatement, and directing demonstration pro-
jects as appropriate. Further, the TSC Task Manager will serve as
the focal point for all noise abatement activities involved in
other programs underway at TSC for coordination purposes.
'•0. RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS:
DIRECT MANYEARS
SALARIES & BENEFITS $K
MAJOR EQUIPMENT
RESEARCH CONTRACTS
IN-HOUSE SERVICES & OTHER
FY 71
6.6
FY 72
10.5
FY
INHIRECT
TOTAL
140.0
44.0
142.0
104.0
160.0
590.0
210.0
125.0
275.0
134.0
231.0
975.0
TITLE:
Director of
Technology
OATE:
PAGE
OF
-------
12. DESCRIPTION OF WORK:
.transportation noise abatement constitutes an important prcgram within
the Department of Transportation, with high priority and emphasis. This
importance is clearly evident in the Departmental budget submitted to
the Congress. The Transportation Noise Abatement program will receive
correspondingly high priority and attention ut TSC.
1. Noise Abatement
A. Surface Transportation Vehicle Noise Reduction:
No specific work at TSC is planned under this portion of the Depart-
mental noise abatement program. As noted in the Brief Technical Summary
above, however, TSC will provide technical support and suitable expertise
on call to assist the Sponsor in monitoring or directing projects in this
grouping.
B. Right-of-Way (Guideway) Noise Reduction:
Begin research and field measurements to assess the effectiveness
of' various types of noise barriers> highway depressions, and elevations,
in reducing the transmission of highway noises to wayside areas. This
-»ork will encompass the refinement and expansion of noise prediction
procedures along surface transportation guideways, including the effects
of various types and configurations of barriers in reducing noise levels
in adjacent areas. Actual field measurements of the effectiveness of
existing barriers will also be made, for comparison and validation of
the prediction procedures. The ultimate goal of this work is the devel-
opment of meaningful information to guide highway and guideway designers
in reducing noise exposure impact on neighboring land areas.
C. Research on Noise Generation Mechanisms:
(1) Jet Exhaust Noise Basic Research. Continue basic research
into the noise generation mechanisms of jet engine exhausts, begun
during Fiscal Year 1971. Initial contracted research began a system-
atic analysis of laboratory-scale jet flows, using a shock tunnel-and
cold gas jets to generate flow patterns. Shadowgraphic and holographic
techniques are in use to visualize the Shockwaves present in the jet
exhausts, for correlation with.simultaneous acoustic measurements.
These experimental results are being used to validate theoretical anal-
yses of the noise generation mechanisms, in order to permit an improved
understanding of these phenomena, leading to development of effective
noise suppression techniques. The Fiscal Year 1972 work will continue
••-.he analyses begun in Fiscal Year 1971, extending the experimental work
_o additional nozzle shapes and designs, and operating parameters. It
is anticipated that the second year of this research effort will pro-
vide definitive guidelines and potential approaches for suppressing
-------
jet exhaust noise. This work will extend through the summer of 1972
to take advantage of summer academic research at MIT.
(2) V/STOL Noise Basic Research. Continue research into the gen-
eration and propagation of noise into urban areas by V/STOL aircraft,
begun in Fiscal Year 1971. The previous work investigated two areas
of importance in assessing the potential impact of V/STOL operation
into city-center areas: (a) trade-off studies to relate noise character-
istics of possible V/STOL designs to their operating conditions, and the
probable effect on operating cost of imposed noise constraints; and
(b) theoretical and experimental studies of sound propagation into typ-
ical city-center environments. The goal of this work is an improved
understanding of V/STOL noise levels in urban areas in order to provide
better technical bases for future standards and certification criteria.
The Fiscal Year 1972 work will extend the studies begun in Fiscal Year
1971. Specifically, work will continue using laboratory scale models
to predict noise levels in a typical urban environment. Theoretical
studies of this problem will also continue, to ivnclude the effects of
non-specular reflections from building faces, and the limits imposed by
diffraction on the shielding of buildings. It is also planned to simu-
late an urban area surrounding a vertiport or stolport, such as that
proposed for a floating Manhattan stolport, and measure noise levels
associated with STOL aircraft operations. A second area of effort will
include actual field measurements of VTOL and STOL aircraft flying over
^pen terrain for calibration, and over city streets to validate labora-
cory simulations. These measurements will made by the TSC mobile
van and crew. The third area of effort will involve laboratory studies
of rotor and STOL propeller noise, for inclusion in further noise-design
trade-off studies of potential VTOL and STOL aircraft, including a tilt-
rotor VTOL concept and STOL configurations including fan jet noise and
lift-augmentation devices. As the result of this second year of study,
it is felt that substantial information will be available to guide
future designs of V/STOL aircraft for urban transportation. This work
will extend through the. summer of 1972 to take advantage of summer
academic work at MIT.
(3) Internal Combustion Engine Noise Research. Begin a study
of the most promising approaches to the reduction of noise radiated
from typical internal combustion engines used to power ground trans-
portation vehicles. Initial emphasis will be placed on diesel engines,
commonly installed in heavy trucks and buses, since these vehicles con-
stitute the loudest types commonly found on urban streets and interstate
highways. If feasible, this work will also be extended to other trouble-
some vehicles. It is planned that the ICE noise research will proceed
concurrently with other work at TSC in reducing exhaust emissions of
diesel engines and similar power plants appropriate to ground transpor-
'-ation. If the emission program fails to materialize at TSC, the Fiscal
fear 1972 work will develop a meaningful longer-term ICE noise reduction
^ r,f Q
-------
program, and begin an appropriate demonstration project, within the
funds available.
D. Noise Measurement, Analysis and Information:
(1) Continue a program of measurement of community noise character-
istics caused by transportation-related sources. During Fiscal Year
1971, a mobile noise measurement van was procured and outfitted at TEC
to permit field noise level analysis, and a crew of engineers and tech-
nicians was trained in its use. The van and crew conducted a three-
month survey of the noise levels present in the town of Medford, a sub-
urb of Boston. That project provided an in-depth analysis of community
noise levels. During Fiscal Year 1972, the van's equipment capabilities
will be expanded through the addition of a multi-channel tape recorder,
additional microphones, and other improved apparatus. In addition, port-
able equipment will be acquired for use in remote measurement of trans-
portation, noise levels at sites such as Pueblo,>/in subway stations, and
at similar locations where use of the van is inappropriate or inconven-
ient. Additional TSC personnel will be trained in the recording, meas-
urement, and analysis of transportation noises, to expand the ability to
perform field measurements, and to man an additional mobile van which
may be assigned to TSC, following completion of a research program at the
National Bureau of Standards, under the sponsorship of the Office of
Noise Abatement. The van(s) will continue the program of field noise
leasurements begun in Fiscal Year 1971, to provide measurements of air
and ground vehicle noises to compare with simulation model results, to
measure the abatement characteristics of barriers, roadway depressions,
and similar design characteristics for highway planning, to measure the
noise characteristics of new types of transportation vehicles (such as
the tracked air cushion type) for determination of their potential envi-
ronmental impact, and to survey further the noise levels existing in
American communities.
(2) Continue the refinement and expansion of the airport noise
exposure simulation, begun in Fiscal Year 1971, in order to assess and
compare alternative approaches to the reduction of the noise impact,on
airport neighbors. This developmental effort will concentrate on im-
proved interactive input and display techniques, in order to permit sim-
pler use of the simulation model by airport planners and similar groups.
In cooperation with the program sponsor, the simulation model will be
used in various analyses, such as the cost-effectiveness comparison of
airliner engine retrofit begun during Fiscal Year 1971 and continuing
into Fiscal Year 1972. In addition, physical elements included in the
simulation program will be refined and expanded to assure accurate rep-
resentation of the acoustical aspects involved.
3. INTERFACES:
The performance of this work will require the close coordination and
-------
cooperation of the Office of Noise Abatement, Office of the Secretary,
to insure that the actual work performed is meaningful and related to
.he overall program of the Office. Close contact and supervision will
also be required with those contractors which will perform selected
portions of the work program. Finally, continued close liaison with
other government agencies, such as the Department of Housing and Urb^m
Development regarding noise standards for land use, will be maintained,
to insure the widest possible benefit to the public from work accom-
plished at TSC.
14. SCHEDULES:
The following milestones are appropriate to each of the task areas
described above:
Task 1 A No specific work planned initially.
Task 1 B Traffic Noise Guidelines and Standards drafted - 1 Jan 1972
Summary report drafted - 30 June 1972
Task 1 C (1) First year's research completed - 1 October 1971
Second year's research completed- 1 October 1972
Task 1 C (2) First year's research completed - 1 October 1971
Second year's research completed- 1 October 1972
Task 1 C (3) Summary report drafted - 30 June 1972
Task 1 D (1) Technical reports o± each field measurement project as it
is completed
Task 1 D (2) Aircraft/Airport System Noise model ready for simple
interactive use and graphic display of results -
1 January 1972
15. PROCUREMENTS:
Research and development contracts are anticipated in three of the five
task areas, as outlined in the attached program summary. Equipment
procurements are planned to augment the mobile van's measurement cap-
abilities, and to expand the graphic display and interactive use of the
noise simulation models.
16. MANAGEMENT:
The Transportation Noise Abatement program will be managed within the
Electromechanical Branch, Mechanical Engineering Division of the
OS207 page 5 of 9
-------
'"echnology Directorate, Transportation Systems Center
4
17. REVIEW AND REPORTS:
The TSC Task Manager will furnish the Director, Office of Noise
Abatement:
a. Monthly technical progress reports
b. Annual summary report
c. Individual technical reports covering results of
important projects
d. Oral program reviews as required.
18. CONTROLS:
All work will be conducted with the close coordination of the Director,
Office of Noise Abatement, Office of the Secretary.
OS207 paqe 6 of 9
-------
FINANCIAL SUMMARY
TASK,
1A
IB
1C (1)
1C (2)
1C (3)
ID
IE
ADP
R&D IN-HOUSE
LABOR CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT SERVICES OTHER TOTAL
2V$105K $ 50K
V 21K 75K
V 21K 150K
I/ 42K
6/ 252K
0
$ 20K $175K
4K 100K
4K 17 5K
8K 50K
$ 125K $ &OK 38K 47 5K
0
10V$441K $275K
$125K
$ 60K
$ 74K $975K
Direct Labor @ $20K/MY
Overhead @ ,$22K/MY
$42K/MY
-------
a:
UJ
h-
2
UL)
O
W
S
UJ
I-
co
>-
CO
o
f-
?
o:
o
CL
co
2
<
a:
h-
FUNDING'. C • , -
. TITLt • Transportation Noise Abatement
t>
o
CO
0
Q.
BRIEF PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Perform work in two broad areas of transportation noise abatement : (1) continue measurement a.-..-
simulation modeling of community noise levels created by transportation-related sources; and \
(2) conduct research into the mechanisms of noise generation by jet engine exhausts, V/STOL \
aircraft, and internal combustion engines. \
r — —
fO
h-
U_
CM
U.
U.
CO
H
0
ro «
O —
CM c
frl
C" 4J
— c
~~> "
— i
M-4
«5 0)
•o
< ^
r-!
•H
O
u.
nl
to
~* -o
rrt li -^
OJ OX
Q PS fa
-^ d CD
^- 0) 4-1
d li, -. cd cd
E co\. CAI Q
o d
O < w
o -a
CD 01
VJ T3
tn . fa 0 /
fO
4J
0 13
cd < o ^
3(0
4-)
O 'O
~~ fa o
-H O C O &
O G <0 -^ >i EH Hld-PH WH
>i -H H > (0 S -H g
£.CO> -HjGU3 U3
Itn «HO) A XMC rnMC
m -H m w W rd -H p n3 -H
1 O M -P CO G M W to G M
•P-P >iC (d 0) >«US
CJ* (d 3 £*< Q)
•H T3 4J rd H ^ •-*
f4 < W ^ CM H CM
H r-t H
REMARKS:
LEGEND:
A SCHEDULED
& ACCOMPLISHED
>-
2
rr
I
CTl
m
O
CO
a)
ti>
(0
-------
cr
Ul
i-
Ul
o
CO
*5
Ul
1
f —
CO
^~
•^r
O
1
<
tr
o
a.
CO
z
tr
h-
r~
cr>
«
Z
Q
Z
U.
JJ
c
or
g
o
•P
id
§
Q)
Ul
•rH
O
•^
C
o
1
ortatj
ft
w
c
M
Ul
H
-•~
(^
O
CN
O
..
Q.
CL
O
Q.
E
O
CO
Ul
0
H
o
Ul
o
tr
Q.
u.
Ul
n:
CD
ro
u.
CJ
f--
u
u.
CO
o
o
ro
O
CM
u
(0
O "^
1 1 pj
*-> P ^1 cfl
C oS
2
<
2
u.
-»
Q
z
0
CO
<
-3
C
(U
01
c
£
3
C
•r-l
C
O
CJ
C
r-l (11
r-l E
.U -r-l
0) 3
d °"^\
u
QJ CJ^v,
> B
•rl CX
0 3
0) cr1
Pi W
4-1
C
0) u (ucutJ DC w
•rH a rH rH rH VH
Q) 'O 'O D -H fl) Q) -P (U
•rH (U In Id O MH -HO
O r-l Q) g -P ft £
ftW -OM H5--H Cfd
WCU-H (U C! O k(d M
UMO (Did1*-! -
2
cc
CTi
m
o
01
-------
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS CENTER
TECHNICAL PROGRESS REPORT
for June 1971
GENERAL WORK AGREEMENT. NO.: 73.-OS-2
PROJECT PLAN AGREEMENT NO.: OS-07-1
TITLE: Transportation Noise Abatement
TASK MaNAO^-P (T.qr.) : .7. P.. Wesler
APPROVED:
TASK MANAGER:
DIVISION CHIEF:
OPERATING DIRECTOR.
A. J. Rr Schneider
--
Gene G, Mannella
-------
TECHNICAL PROGRESS 1:-EPORT
GENERAL WORK AGREEMENT WO.: 71~O8~2
PROJECT PLAN AGREEMENT NO. : OS--07-1
TITLE: Transportation Noise Abatement
TASK MANAGE R ('.v <.: C} : J . E. We s 1 e r
1.0 SUMMARY
During Fiscal Year 1971, the following significant accom-
plishments were derived from the Transportation Noise Abatement
program at TSC:
a. A mobile noise measurement laboratory was purchased and
outfitted, and a crew of engineers and technicians was trained
to provide field measurements of community noise levels.
b. An extensive survey of community noise levels existing
in a typical metropolitan suburb was completed, by measuring
noise levels at 50 selected sites in Medford Massachusetts.
c. A brief, informal survey of noise levels present in the
Everglades of Florida was performed to document noise conditions
in that relatively uninhabited environment.
d. A computer program, initially developed by Serendipity,
Inc., under contract to the OST Office of Noise Abatement, was
adapted to the computers at TSC, and the program's capability
was expanded significantly to allow automatic calculation and
plotting of noise exposure contours around airports.
e. The expanded airport noise exposure computer program
was applied to an analysis of the cost-effectiveness of engine
retrofits for commercial airliners on a world-wide basis, in
support of the OST Office of Noise Abatement work within tKe
ICAO Committee on Aircraft Noise.
f. Three research contracts were negotiated with MIT for
laboratory studies of the mechanisms of jet exhaust and V/STOL
vehicle noise, with the goal of better understanding of these
noise-generation factors and of the most promising means for
noise reduction.
-------
g. The feasibility of adapting a split-beam laser veloci-
•ter as a remote sound and vibration detector was demonstrated
j_n the laboratory, and a patent application for this technique.
was submitted for legal processing.
h. The Task Manager for the Transportation Noise Abatement
program began to servo as the focal point at TSC for noise
abatement efforts, by participating in review procedures and
limited contracted research on tracked air cushion vehicle noise
sources and predicted performance.
2 • °
The work underway at TSC in the Transportation Noise* Abcite-
ment program during Fiscal Yeax 1971 was initially divided into
three general categories. As the work progressed during the year,
however, a fourth or miscellaneous category was created to en-
compass a number of smaller informal efforts performed in co-
operation with the OST Office of Noise Abatement. The technical
discussion which follows is organized along these four categories
of work.
2.1 Modeling and Field Measurement of Community Noise
Levels
oise Abatement, Serendipity, Inc., developed three simulation
models to calculate noise exposure conditions caused by aircraft
operations near airports, ground transportation vehicles along
guideways , and the composite community noise levels generated by
all modes of transportation. The original Serendipity computer
listing for the airport noise simulation model was delivered to
TSC in late September 1970, for adaptation to the computers at
TSC. The adaptation and expansion efforts culminated in the
Airport Noise Exposure Model MOD 4, which was 'frozen' at TSC in
May 1971. The details of this model were reported in the TSC
Technical Progress Report for May 1971, and need not be repeated
here. A formal TSC report, describing this model and serving as
a user's manual, has been drafted and will be issued in early
August 1971.
The second Serendipity model, for ground transportation
noise exposure simulation, was delivered to TSC early in calendar
year 1971. Because of the higher priority for the airport noise
model, only limited efforts were devoted to the so-called high-
way noise model. The only work accomplished has been a brief
review of the computer listing, in order to understand the pro-
cedures involved and the probable efforts necessary to adapt the
model to TSC computers and streamline its operation. The third
model, simulating composite community noise levels, was still
-------
under development by Serendipity at the end of the fiscal year.
^ceipt and. adaptation of this model at TSC is expected during
.. xscal Year 1972.
In the adaptation and expansion of the airport noise ex-
posure model, the specific application of the procedures to Logan
International Airport, Boston, \\-as used for learning purposes.
During the spring and summer of 197.1, TSC personnel worked '
closely with FAA regional personnel, and representatives of the
Massachusetts Port Authority (the operritors of Logan Airport) to
obtain meaningful airport information and to develop relevant
analyses. The results of all these analyses have been retained
at TSC and are considered entirely developmental in nature.
Nevertheless, these preliminary results have provided valusble
insight into noise problems at a U. S. Airport. A further adap-
tation of the Airport Noise Exposure Model MOD 4 was also applied
to an analysis of noise exposure levels at seven international
airports, for 1975 and. 1980, and for several alternative levels
of engine retrofit, in support of the OST Office of Noise Abate-
ment committment to the ICAO Committee on Aircraft Noise. This
ICAO work began to produce usable results only during June 1971,
arid will continue into Fiscal Yecir 1972.
The second major area of work during Fiscal Year 1971 under
the general category of community noise modeling and field
Tp.e ?. sv. remen t involved, the nvor^nT-r-> rnpnt ^nd oni~f i tti no of R mobile
oise measurement laboratory, and the training of a crew of
_ngineers and technicians to man that laboratory. Details of
the van and its included equipment were included in several
monthly Technical Progress Reports, and need not be repeated
here. As soon as it was available, and the crew familiar with
its operation, the van was used to survey noise levels existing
in Medford, Mass., a nearby suburb of Boston. Medford was
selected for this analysis because of its proximity to TSC, its
variety of environments (from busy industrial sites to a serene
park and reservior area), its ready availability of traffic flow
and demographic information, and (primarily) its inclusion of
major highways, railways, and Logan Airport overflights within
its boundaries. Noise level recordings and analyses were made
at 50 sites within Medford, with the sites selected randomly
throughout the town area. At five of these sites, analyses were
made throughout a 24-hour weekday period, and were analyzed in
hourly segments. At 45 additional sites, measurements were made
from 0730 to 0830 and from 1130 to 1230 on a weekday between
1 March and 15 May 1971. The format and method of presentation
of the measurements were included in the Technical Progress
Report for March 1971, and need not be repeated here. Pertinent
preliminary results have been relayed to the Serendipity, Inc.,
for inclusion in its continuing development of a composite
community noise level model. A forrr.al report is nearly complete,
and should be published early in August 1971.
-------
2.2 Research into Mechanisms of Jet Engine Exhaust Noise
This phase of the Fiscal Year 1971 program at TSC initiated
two research contracts at MIT, intended to provide a bettor
understanding of the physical phenomena governing noise genera-
tion by jet exhausts. The ultimate goal of such work is improved
approaches to the reduction of such noise. The first contract,
formally begun on 15 November 1970, involves the use of shadow-
graphic and acoustic analyses of jet flows produced in the MIT
laboratory by a shock tunnel technique. This device provides
repeatable brief-duration, high-velocity jets without elaborate
requirements for high temperature materials and anechoic surround-
ings. The results of a systematic study of two jet nozzle con-
figurations, under the direction of Dr. Jean Louis, is dup
30" September 1970.
The second research contract at MIT, formally begun on
1.5 February 1971, involves the use of optical holographic visual-
ization techniques, in correlation with acoustic measurements to
analyze jet flow shock'wave generation. Here, cold gas jets are
generated in the laboratory to provide the sound source. These
analyses, under the direction of Dr. Richard Salant, are due for
completion in draft report form on 14 March 1972.
As a portion of this program phase, preliminary development
of a laser sound probe was conducted at TSC to demonstrate, at
least in the laboratory, the feasibility of this approach to
.ie remote detection of sound and/or vibrations in a jet flow,
for example. An informal report describing the results of this
developmental effort will be issued during July 1971. Briefly,
through the use of laboratory equipment on hand at- TSC, a split-
beam laser velocimeter was fabricated and demonstrated capable
of detecting sound fields and surface vibration from a remote
point. TSC personnel participating in this developmental work
have prepared a patent disclosure covering the general concept.
The final report will assess the potential capabilities and
limitations of the approach, and will recommend further action,
if any, for future use.
2.3 Research into Noise Generation and Propagation by
V/STOL Vehicles
This phase of the Fiscal Year 1971 program at TSC initiated
one research contract at MIT to study, both experimentally and
theoretically, noise propagation into a typical city-center
environment from V/STOL vehicles, and to assess the design and
operating limitations which may be imposed on commercial V/STOL
operation by possible noise abatement restraints. This work,
formally begun on 15 October 1970 under the direction of Drs.
Richard Lyon and Sheila Widnall, is scheduled for completion on
30 September 1971. Dr. Lyon's portion of the study involves the
-------
theoretical and experimental analyser, o.i. noise propagation into
32:1 scale model of a city inf.orsoction , plus an alloy v/uy, was
fab.rieated in the laboratory at MIT, and sound .level measure-
ments using both stcady-sta. te and spark (.-impulse) sound sources
are being performed. To date, street-level sound levels produced
by typical VTOI. flyovers have been measured for a variety of
situations, and the results related to a comparable open-field
situation. The impulse sound source will be used in attempts to
ray-trace the sound paths among the scale-model "buildings."
Dr. Widnall's area of work responsibility includes simula-
tions of noise characteristics of VTOL aircraft elements, for
inclusion in sinulation models of urban no.i se propagation, and
V/STOL vehicle design -facto}: t?:adeoffs relative to operating
constraints possibly imposed by noise abatement procedures or
limitations. The results of the: entire contract efforts are re-
ported bi-monthly by the tv.'o Principal Investigators.
In-house at TSC, to augment the contracted work underway
at MIT, a brief analysis exc'Jiiinod the possibility of applying
optics], diffraction theory to the calculation of sound levels
among buildings at street level in an urban environment. Within
funding limiLatrons available for this small effort, a computer
program was prepared to calculate the sound field inside a two-
dimensional "channel", representing the canyon between two tall
1 • ">.i Iclings . Preliminary calculations demonstrated the increase
. -L sound level from an elevated source,- due to multiple reflec-
tions from the building faces. Brief details of this analysis
are appended as Attachment 1 to this report.
2.4 Miscellaneous Activities at TSC in Noise Abatement
Following informal discussions with the Director, OST Office
of Noise Abatement, a very brief analysis was performed to
determine the feasibility•of using a microwave link to transmit
acoustical measurements from a number of remote locations to a
central recording and analyzing van. Three basic systems were
examined for such use:
a. microwave relays
b. high-quality telephone lines
c. optical transmission links
A brief report of this study is appended as Attachment 2 to this
report. In summary, it appears that all three of the concepts
are feasible, and could be implemented in a resonably short time.
Reflecting the coordinating role of the Director, OST Office
of Noise Abatement, in consolidatina the noise abatement
-------
activities for the entire department, the Task Manager for the
•ansportation Noise program at 'J'SC has effectively begun to act
.o a focol point, for noise contrb.l and abatement activities at
TSC. As an example of this roDe, the Task Manager iuis actively
participated in work sponsored at. TSC by the Urban Mass Trims -
portation Administration in the development of tracked air
cushion vehicles. This participation included cooperation in the
drafting of noise level specifications for the TACV original].y
intended for ase at the Dul3.es Airport Access and later used as
the basis for two developmental contracts for TACV's for unde-
termined sites, participation in two proposal evaluation teams,
and management of a study contract (under UMTA funding) for the
analysis of TACV noise sources and characteristics. The details
of this contract were included in the Technical Progress Report
for April 3-971, and need not be repeated here. The final report
of that work is due 15 Ouly 1971.
3-° SIGNIFICANT DOCUMENTATION
No significant documentation has been published to date as
the result of the Transportation Noise Abatement program at TSC.
Formal reports are in draft describing the results of noise
measurements in the Everglades, the 7v.irpo.rt Noise Exposure
Model MOD 4, and the results of the noise level survey of Medford,
Massachusetts, and these will be published early in Fiscal Year
"° MILESTONES
All scheduled milestones for the Transportation Noise Abate-
ment program were met, as indicated on the attached Milestone
Schedule. In general, it. is felt that the entire program pro-
gressed well during this first year of its activity at TSC. The
only major schedule deficiency was the failure to achieve all
the required ICAO airport noise exposure analyses by the end of
the fiscal year. All other schedules were met as planned.
5 . 0 FINANCIAL. MANAGEMENT
See attached Financial Progress Report.
Attachments:
1 - Brief description of acoustic reflection program
2 - Brief report of remote data collection systems
3 -• Milestone Schedule
4 - Financial Progress Report
-------
Attachment 1
Brief description of acoustic reflection program to
calculate noise leva].s between buildings :
The geometry of the problem is shown in Fig. 1. A plane
acoustic wave is incident upon the channel so that the rays make
an angle 0 with the x-axis. The sides and bottom of the channel
(simulating the sides of buildings and a city street) are assumed
to be perfectly hard so that they impose upon the acoustic pres-
sure field, P, the boundary condition, oP/9n = 0, where 3/t)n
denotes the norniaJ derivative a'c each surface. This condition
determines the phase change experienced by the wave at the sur-
face and could be relaxed to take into account mixed boundary
conditions with losses if necessary.
To determine the sound pressure field at an arbitrary point
in the channel, it is Dieted first that there are at most four
non-zero contributions at each point. Denote the wave vector of
the incident wave by k'= (kx, ky). With the coordinate axes of
Fig. 1, kx > 0 and. ky < 0. The four possible contributions to
the pressure will therefore come from rays with the following
wave vectors:
Type
Vector
Diagram
(k , k )
x' y
-]v y
(k , -k )
x y
(-k , -k )
x y
In the above set, wave types 1 and 2 characterize descending
rays, while types 3 and 4 characterize ascending rays that have
been reflected from the bottom of the channel. The logic of the
computer program is designed to determine which, if any, of the
four ray types actually contribute to the sound pressure at any
point in the channel for any direction of incidence. For de-
scending rays a point in OBC is in shadow for types 1 and 2. If
a line with slope m = tan 6 is drawn through any point inside
this triangle, its x-intercept will be negative (to the left of
the origin) which corresponds to the fact that no point in cOBC
receives a direct ray. If a line of slope m - -tan 8 is d3:awn,
it intersects the line x = w in y > 0, which corresponds to the
fact that no ray reflected from the surface at x = w enters the
triangular region. Similar rules can be found to show that OAC
receives rays of type 1 but not 2, while ACD receives both types
1 and 2. The ascending ray diagram shows similar but displaced
regions for ray types 3 and 4. Note that the incident ray
bundle ab is split into two diverging bundles when it leaves the
-------
channel. Having determined which ray types are abile to roach
a particular point, the computer can then calcu.late complex
uplitudes of the resultant sound pressure.
Incident Bundle
Reflected Bundles
|«J W S*\
Descending Rays
Ascending Rays
Figure 1.- Reflection from a Channel
-------
Attachment 2
Brief report on remote data, collection systems:
Three basic systems were investigated:
1) Microwave relays
2) High-qucility telephone lines
3) Optical transmission
Mic r ow
ReJ. a y s_
a) As anticipated, a large number of companies a.re in a
position to supply microv.'ave links with widely varying capacity
and cost. These range from companies like GE and Raytheon that
manufacture complex and expensive equipment for long distance
communications systems, to those .like AIL and Microwtive Associ-
ates that specialize in smaller and less costly special purpose
equipment.
The two most, interesting proposals were made by these latter
organizations, both of which have considerable experience with
short range microwave relay links. AIL has marketed a Portable
Wireless Microphone which was originally designed for use at
the 1968 presidential conventions in order to transmit mobile
voice to the fixed-camera audio channel. They quote six one-way
1 i n k a a 1. $ 7 0,000.
Microwave Associates has no commercial system available..
However, they have proposed to assemble a system consisting of
six links to a central terminal which would relay one multi-
plexed signal to the recording van. Their estimated price in
February was $66,000, remarkably close to AIL's. The y Wave
Assoc. system would be organized as follows:
IF
Oscillator
Modulated
IF
Mixer
RF
Oscillator
—-f
Antenna V_
. 1
N channels similar to the above would transmit to a central
collecting point on a convenient high building. This central
repeater would have two receiving antennas, one for each 180°
sector, and one transmitting antenna. They would be connected
as shown on the following page:
-------
Ant.#1
Ch.1,2 , 3
Ant.
'^Filter
Ch.4,5 , 6
o-1) o-
Ant.#2
From the repeater the signal would be propagated down to the
suitably located mobile van where a single antenna would receive
the multiplexed RF and, feed it to a receiver which would provide
six separate audio outputs corresponding to the inputs.
Multiplexed
RF
; rj RCvr "^~-.I__
L_ I ^^
Ant.
Audio channels
1,2,3,4,5,6
Once the above system has been aligned it should give very
reliable, high quality service.
S?1 - Qualit y Tele phcme _Lin_es_
An inquiry with the New England Telephone Company revealed
that it would not be very difficult to rent telephone lines to
do the job at hand - in effect this would substitute existing
cables for the ad hoc connections that might otherwise be re- -
quired. Telephone lines are available in all urban areas. They
have the following characteristics:
Response: ± 1 db, 50-15,000 Ez
Normal use: High quality FM stereo transmission
Noise Level: -55 dbm
Circuit Loss: 20-25 db
-------
Maxinum Lc-^el: 8 vu (volume units)
(i.e, 0 db above zero vu, where
zero vu ~ 1 n\w fin 600 ohino at 1,000 Hz)
The telephone company representative is Mr. Bob Pierce
(743-3463). Ho indicated that it would take two weeks initially
to lay out th.e circuits. Subsequently, each hook-up would re-
quire 2--3 weeks j'.'or .installation, equalization, test find
measurement. The rates quoted are:
Installation $10« 00
Equalization, test and. measurement $15.00 ,
t
Use ehc'rge $4.10/mo. for 1st 1/4 mile
$1.85/nio. for each additional 1/4 mile
t
If this service were to be used on a continuing basis, Mr.
Pierce thought that it'would probably be advisable to equip
the van with a special patch panel.
From the point of view of cost, this system is clearly
competitive with, any other.
One possibility for line-of-sight transmission that should
not:, be overlooked is the use of modulated laser beams. A num-
ber of suitable commercial equipments are available, the most
practical of which seems to be that manufactured By Meteoro-
logical Instruments, Inc. of Bellmaur, N. J. Their modulated
lase.r, ML-382, costs $275 and is designed fo?: voice and data
transmission. The laser is intensity modulated with a 0-5 volt
signal, and capable of achieving 100% modulation up to fre-
quencies exceeding 100 KHz. The frequency response is flat
from D.C. to 100 KHz so that audio FM modulation can be used for
low distortion and noise. The receiving system for such a laser,
not including the receiving optics, is around $100. The ML-382
is a helium-neon laser which radiates in the red at a wavelength
of 633 nm. The maximum power output is one milliwatt.
Summary
Each of the three possible data communications systems
discussed above has advantages and disadvantages. The micro-
wave system is expensive. However, once operational it would
be quick to align, reliable, almost impervious to interference,
and would present no environmental hazard. The laser system is
cheap and easy to use, but only in clear weather. The hazard,
though mininal, is present and must be considered. Telephone
-------
lines obviously offer a cheap solution with, no compromise i-n
'uality. The disadvantages are primarily the long .lead time
required to set up the system in each location and secondarily
the restrictions on location imposed by the possible lack of
appropriate telephone connections.
It seems certain that one or more systems for simultaneous
data collection from multiple sites is feasible and could be
implemented in a reasonably short time.
-------
c\
rH
O
ro
o
I-
UJ
U.
O
C/)
<
CO
z>
UJ
S
<
"Z.
u
o
CO
t-
_J cr
Z) co O
Q
Ijj
X
O
CO
UJ
z:
o
h-
00
UJ
_J
o
CO I
r^
o
i
co
O
a:
o o
CO 2
2!
O <
a. c:
CO Q.
O
o
C\J ^
>
L'- O
o
—
s
LL
_ ">
^~
SM
U. o
z
o
IO
<
MILESTONE
Q
>
«3
O
fis*
. i
f*>
^
rJ
u»»
t>
•p
(U (0
r— 1
ro o TJ
W fl) rH >! rH C
D H tO 'O (0 3
X! co a 3 ,
O Q) fO CO Q) -P
S JH CQ rH flj flj w-M
i C CO -P W
giC^rHfdXJ 4J (0 <0
M (U M 0)
•Pf^C D " >O -PCn
•• 'rH S! rt; O 4J H 01
HOO r-lrHM VHC CO)
PJ O O -rH rH o -H FH O J^
44 WtJrtjxJfOfii 44 CnMCio
w-rjpqu.oEO) w (uacjrH
CO ^C_)MSICOO^ (0 CQ OQj
H H
^
o
CO
0)
to
(U
Pn W
(0 o
-H pt
O (U
0 rH
H rH
CO 0)
H > FH JH
H H (0
w 0) co rj
fd CQ CO
H E-i
2
g
CO
z 2
^ o
0 1- CO
r- ^
4 a. oc
. ^ 0
- § -
_ 0 Q-
« < ^
' r—
CJ CJ (_)
z
Q
CO
5
Z CO
•» o :D
O H- ^
, UJ (_
< a Q:
r- 5 a
5 O UJ
£ o cc
Q Q a
UJ UJ UJ
_J _J -1
b Q Q
UJ UJ UJ
0 CJ 0
co co to
ooo
LEGEND
]
c
U
l-
-------
h-
o:
o
CL
LU
or
CO
CO
LU
O
•r
CL
o
0?
rtj
S3
H
S
o o
o: a:
o i-
o. a:
ijJ O
at SC
(X)
CQ
l/i t/1
E -o
OJ C
^-> ro
•—i in
^
i- O
o c
to
H
CO
O
ex:
O
en
z:
o
0.
O
I
CO
O
O
Q.
O.
in s-
s- o
c to M-
rO 01 >*-
JC >- uj
X)
OJ
r— ^5
rO S- -U
+-> U • r—
c ••- a. a.
=> E
cf.
t—
O
1—
i*- 1/1
0) C
JC 0)
+-> a.
O x
LU
ex
•3
CT
UJ
u
0 +->
*>o c
o: o
o
t-> QJ
I- C
•u a.
c x
»— " UJ
to
0) Vt-
•,- QJ
rt> QJ
r- CO
to
•o
QJ -U
«C C C
• C 3
CL. 'O O
• •— e
a. CL
-------
OL:?AHrf-iF.!JT OF 7 KA!'->SPORT.'>T;
T/iANif-O.Tl ATIOS-SY iTlTf.iS CrlM'i.'fi
CAV.DRIOGr. MASS.
1
1. OH' A MO.
7_1--OF> __
4. TITLE:
Transportation Noise Abatement
5. SPONSOR:
Mr. Charles Foster, TST-50
:>ffice_of the Secretary of
Transpor tat ion
400 Seventh Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20590
PRO.UfCT PLAN AGREEMENT
REV. 140,
AFFECTS PAGES
1-4
3. DATE:
March 30, 1971
6. SPONSOR NO.:
7. TASK MANAGER:
John E. Wesler, TRE
DOT/Transportation Systems Center
55 Broadway
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142
6. RELATED PPAS:
9. BRIEF TECHNICAL SUMMARY: In cooperation with the Office of Noise Abate
nent (TST-50), the Transportation Systems Center will undertake a
nodeling and field measurement program to produce quantitative de-
scription of community noise resulting from transportation systems
caking into account the phenomena of noise generation and propaga-
tion; and assessing possible means of supressing or reducing trans
xxrtation generated noise. In addition to a variety of special
analyses conducted for TST-50, TSC will undertake the computer rao-
iel study of a selected city and sample field measurements to val-
idate these results. Research will also be undertaken to develop
pecdcc; additions tc our uiiclei'6Labeling of jet turbulence and sheer
Boundary parameters associated with high velocity jet noise. Fin-
"ally, TSC will undertake both in-house and with contract support,
a. study of V/STOL noise to delineate the area of most promising
aay-off through noise abatement research.
10. RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS:
DIRECT MAHYEARS
SALARIES & BENEFITS ?K
MAJOR EQUIPMENT
RESEARCH CONTRACTS
IN-HOUSE SERVICES «, OTHER
FY 71-
7.3
FY
FY
INDIRECT
148.0
51.0
142.0
68.0
171.0
TOTAL
580.0
(
11. APPROVALS:
TSC
r\
SPONSOR
TST
6L
TITLE:
Director of
Tschnclogy
Hrector, Office of >\7oise
Abatement
JTACC
-------
. or VJOVK :
Ta.sk 1 - U:iu£ij-. take a modeling and field nieasu'rment program to
asfii.nu lat.:; arid assess community noise .caused by trans-
portation systems -
a. Program and exercise TSC digital computers to
quantify the micro and macro noise environment of
an urban center (prescribed by TST-50) and compute
projected noise environments as influenced by postu-
lated noise abatement alternatives. (Basic computer
programs in Fortran IV are now becoming available
under contract DOT OS-A9-018.)
b Expand upon and refine existing theories of sound
propagation under conditions of complex urban
activity and mitigating structures, terrain and
vegetation.
c. Acquire and equip (with TST-50 concurrence) a hign
quality mobile noise laboratory with portable equip-
ment that will be set up at numerous sites within an
urban center approved by TST-50 for the measurement
and monitoring of noise including acquisition of
visual data and pertinent traffic flow, geographic
and demographic data.
d. Acquire noise data as prescribed by TST-5C to
quantify such relationships as highway traffic
flow parameters effecting roadside and community
noise levels, highway terrain and vegetation
parameters modifying nominal highway generated
noise levels; airport operational factors effecting
nearby community noise le,vels; overall city traffic
flow parameters effecting ambient urban noise levels.
Task 2 -
a. Initiate basic research contract with MIT (Prof.
Lewis. approx;--~$-35K)._,for the investigation of fluid
dynamic/turbulence/mixing parameters effecting
noise generation at high jet velocities.
b. As a supporting effort, utilize TSC optical insi_J.u-
mentation in conjunction with the ongoing research
on jet noise. TSC optical assistance is to aid in
the mapping of jet turbulence and sheer boundary
parameters for correlation with MIT acoustics and
fluid dynamics experimentation.
0507-3, page 2 of 4
-------
c. Based upon the experience and tx ning per above
and as qualified fluid dynamics personnel can be
acquired, develop independent program proposals
(J."or TST-50 approval) aimed at basic jet and aero-
mic noise abatement,.
Task 3 - Undertake contract studies ($75K) and in-house analysis
of V/STOL noise to ascertain areas of maximum payoff
through noise abatement research.
Each of the previously discussed tasks will start as soon as this
document is approved.
.13. .INTERFACES:
The interface problem in this program is substantial and will re-
quire close direction by the Office of the Secretary, Office of
Noise. Abatement.
14. SCHEDULES and DELIVERABLES :
Task l.a. - Begin dialog with DOT contractor,
1 September, 1970.
-- Airport 'Noise Model usable at TSC,
1 October, 1970.
- Highway Noise Mou^l us'able at TSC, --
1 July, 1971. ••:'/'•
- Begin ICAO airport analyses,
1 February, 1971.
- Report results of ICAO airport analyses,
1 July, 1971.
- Perform airport analyses, as directed by TST-50.
Task l.b. - Begin study of expanded model needs,
1 October, 1970.
- Report results of study,
1 July, 1971. iy
Task I.e. - Begin procurement of mobile van, . . .
1 September, 1970. :•:
- Van operational,
1 .February, 1971. <
Task l.d. - Select suburban area for noise survey, '.";'-
1 February, 1971.
- Begin suburban area noise survey,
1 March, 1971.
- Report results of suburban area noise survey,
1 July, 1971.
OS07-1 page 3 of 4
-------
Task 2.a. - Begin discussions with MIT,
1 otember, 1970.
•- Award research contracts,
1 February, 1971.
- Report results of research bi-monthly...
Task 2.b. - Begin feasibility study of sound probe,
1 August, 1970.
- Report results of feasibility study,
1 July, 1971.
Task 2.c. - Begin recruitment,
1 September, 1970. .. -.
Task 3 - Begin discussions with MIT,
1 September, 1970.
- Award research contract,
1 December, 1970.
- Report results of research bi-monthly.
- Begin in-house study,
1 January, 1971..
- Report results of in-house study,
1 July, 1971.
15. PROCUREMENT:
Principal items discussed in Item 14 above.
MANAGEMENT:
This program will be managed by the Mechanical Engineering Division
of the Technology Directorate with assistance from the Computer
..Division and Electromagnetic Division in response to technical dir-
ection from the Office of TSfoise Abatement, DOT (TST-50) .
17. REPORTING METHODS:
Quarterly reports with reviews and presentations as required
,..FjLr-st .report - draft copy - June 1, 1971
- final copy - July 1, 1971
OS07-J. page 4 of 4
-------
DOT-OS-A9-018 page 2.
Security of Report: Unclassified.
Procurement Method: Contract •- Cost Plus Fixed Pee
*Modification to contract signed 11/19/70 increased the cost by $16,£70
and covered escalation of Overhead and General and Administrative
rates during FY--1970.)
Modification to contract signed 12/31/70V increased the cost by an additional
$80,000 and covered an expansion of the scope of Task 1. Using the Aircraft/
Airport model developed for the Baltimore Washington Metropolitan Area, the
contractor, in cooperation v.'ith the Transportation Systems Center, will
develop and implement a research and demonstration program to measure and
evaluate an urban area in the Boston Metropolitan Area, and thereby validate
and provide more confidence in the methodology used for evaluating noise
exposure in urban areas.
-------
-i 5--M-iy--1-96-9-
Updated March 1970
DOT-OS-A9-036
..Start Date; 02 12 68
Estimated Complet ion Da Le : 08 69
Kind 'of Report : New
Perrorming Organization : University of Washington
Seattle, Washington 98105
Principal Investigator, Name: Dr. James D. Chalupnik, Associate Professor
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Responsible Government Orfianizat. ton. Name: Department of Transportation
Asst. Secretary for Research & Technology
Office of Noise Abatement
800 Independence Avenue, S.W
Washington, D.C. 20590
Responsible Government Individual , Name : Paullin, Robert L.
Chief, Regulatory Policy & Standards Div.
Office of Noise Abatement
Key Words; Criteria for measuring and evaluating transportation noise; sound
level scales; subjective response scales; laboratory testing methods;
field testing methods; unified noise rating system.
Title: Evaluating the Noises of Transportation - A Symposium on Acceptability of
Criteria for Transportation Noise
Summary; Define and evaluate the noises of transportation with an overall goal of
defining the requirements for uniform criteria and objectives for trans-
portation noise abatement. Identify and quantify the parameters which
characterize differences in the annoyance levels of different sources
of transportation. A thorough understanding as to the application of
differences in noise rating systems shall be developed such that an
ultimate solution of the noise rating problems, i.e., the unified noise
rating system, will result.
Resources Estimate. Funds; $24,402
Security of Report; Unclassified.
Procurement Method: Contract.
r, Funding Agencies : N / A
Final report received March 1970.
-------
1.5 May 196
Start JDa.te:. 01 04 69
: °9 69
PC r f_o rmi n g; 0 r ,?£: n i z a I i on s Name : Bolt Borauck & Newman
50 Moult on Street
Cambridge, Massachusetts
Zl'.LQ£^J)5J^_lE}££^Llil?i.°ll>_Ii5-Rnc • Franken, Peter A. , Vice President
Physical Sciences Division
Responsible Government Organization , Name : Department of Transportation
Asst. Secretary for Research & Technology
Office of Noise Abatement
800 Independence Avenue, S.U,
Washington, D.C. 20590
Responsible Government Individual , Name : Paullin, Robert L.
Chief, Regulatory Policy & Standards Div.
Office of Noise Abatement
Key Words ; Mass transit rail systems (subways); acoustical measurements and
studies; matrix of the acoustical environment.
Title: A Study for Research and Reporting on Mass Transportation Systems
f Subways) Acoustical Environment.
Summary: Perform a study by reviev>ing available technical reports' en the mass
transit rail systems now in existence in foreign cities such as Toronto,
Hamburg, London, Berlin; Paris, and Rotterdam. Select seven systems that
appear to have the lowest noise levels. Make acoustical measurements
and studies of these systems so as to complement existing data and
provide add-itional data necessary to present a complete matrix of the
Acoustical environment. Analyze the results of the studies and tests
and identify the parameters that define the systems acoustical environment.
Rank the systems studied.
Resources Estimate, Funds: $16,778
Secur±ty-of -Report-t — Unclassified
Procurement Method; Contract - fixed price.
P_til9 1'-Hir-^ lriL A f; on cj.es : N' /A
Final Report received February 1970.
-------
Ol'FICK OF NOISE ABATLKEKT, TRT-SO
DOT-OS -A5-OGG: -
. Nau;e. of other agency: FAA
Dfito of agreement: 21 1-fcy 1969
Tern for which agreement is effective:.; Complete: Deceaber 1970
Purpose of agreement: Support the engineering develc present of
selectable, glide; slope computers for
operational evaluation using FAA aircraft.
Financial details: $50,000 for tba procurenaat of 25 computers
at a rate of approximately 2 ynitc per f,;ont
Officer: roaintftining 'CogniK&nca: Mr. Charles K. Williaas.
DOT-03«A9-072:-
Ncms of other agency: HUD
Pate o£ figrco.r.xsat: 25 February 1969
Term for v.hich an.roeiaent is effective: Complete- June 30, 19/0.
of agree fiiettt: Provide funds to £&c£ liters ar.a extenc HUL'i
.rccefirch in conducting e series of Mt-f-ropolliMr.
Aircraft Noise Abste-Dcnt Tolicy Studies { K/0'.A ?f, )
details: Joint funded effort - $100,000 DOT/$10O,OC-C Fi)I>,
Officer maintaining cognisance: Mr. Cairles Hi Williams.
DOT-OS -A9 -059:-
of other agency: FAA
Date of agreement: 17 January 1969
Terra for which agreement is effective: Complete December 31, 1569.
Purpose oi: agreement: Provide financial support for a research sr.
development effort to exasiirie the problems
associated with VSTOL noise characteristics
This effort is an extension to ar» exist In?
contract between F/vA and Wyle .Laboratories.
Financial details: $40,000
Officer maintaining cognisance: Mr. Charles II. Williams
-------
9 July 1969
DOT-OS -A9- 118
3U 06 69
University of California, College of Engineering,
OfHce, of Research Services, Berkeley, Californie,
Professor' Robert Boron j'eff
Office of Reseax-eh Services
Al fcernate Inves'tiga_tor ; Professor H«, W. Soroka
Office of Research Service.'?
X£H^ Department of Transportation
AssC* Secretary for Research & Technolo3y
Office o:t Hoise Abatement
800 Independence Ave. S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20590
Paullin, Kobert L.
Chief, Rej;ulatory Policy & Standards Div.
of Noise Abatement
Key Words; Alleviation of environmental noise caused by transportation systems;
development of criteria for evaluating the acceptability of transportation
noise.
Tttle? Impacts and Alleviation of Transportation Noisa
; I-iake speciffc contributions to existing knovledge About the impact of
transportation noise on community, physical, social, and «conooiic tnviron-
efent; further explore methods for redacting transportation noise by
analyzing theli^ effectiveness, impact on system performance, cost,
feasibility, ard econoraic desirability; provide urban planners, trans-
portation system planners and operators, acousticians, governmental
agencies and others with better measures of the coranjunity cb»t of
transportation noise, and with better techniques for noise Alleviation.
Resourcc-g Eartifn^.te .._Fund_ s : 5 1 25 1 466
Security of ^ Report^ Unclassified.
Kocurement Method ; Contract.
-------
30 April 1970
S_tart_D_ate: 8 10 69
Estimated Cgmp 1 c.tip n_Pate : -30—66—70- J7 /"*• '^
Kind of Report: New
Performing Organization, Name: National Science Foundation
Washington, D.C. 20550
Principal Investigator, Name: Wallace Waterfall, Treasurer
~ Acoustical Society of America
Responsible Government Organization, Name: Department of Transportation
Assistant Secretary
for Systems Development and Technology-
Office of Noise Abatement
800 Independence Avenue, SW
Washington, D.C. 20590
Responsible Government Individual. Name: Robert L. Paullin
.Regulatory Policy and Standards Div.
Office of Noise Abatement
Key Words: Research in noise standards
T itie: Formulation of Noise Standards
Summary: Support the continuation of work by the Acoustical Society of America
dealing with the formulation of acoustical standards. The three
standards committees of the Acoustical Society (S-l - Acoustics,
S-2 - Shock and Vibration, and S-3 - Bioacoustics) will report
upon current engineering and scientific research designed to provide
technical bases for specifying standard methods for the measurement
of noise and vibration and defining acceptable limits for noise and
vibration by transportation equipment.
Resources Estimate, Funds: $21,400
Security of Report; Unclassified
Procurement Method: Interagency Agreement
-------
DOT-AS-OOOl'^
U p d a ';. c d September 3970
Start Date:
15 10 69
Estimated Completion Date: 07 70
Kind of Report: New
Performing Organization, Name: U.S. Department of Commerce
National Bureau of Standard;
Washington, D.C.
Principal Investigator, Name:
Paul J. Brown
Chief, Office of Vehicle Systems Research
Institute for Applied Technology, NBS
Responsible Government Organization, Name: Department of Transportation
Assistant Secretary
for Systems Development and Tedinology
Office of Noise Abatement
800 Independence Ave., S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20590
Responsible Government Individual, Name:
,- .Cour-La-s- W. Harry Close
Research Division
Office of Noise Abatement
Key Words: Study of tire sound generation
Title: Tire Acoustics Program
•Summary: Determine through a study of tire sound generation whether the
variations between tires can lead to an effective acoustical grading
.of tires. The two distinct areas of investigation are: a) the
physical distribution and characteristics of the sound generated by
a representative range of commercial tires under various conditions;
and b) a comparative assessment of the auditory responses to typical
noises generated by tires. — The use of NBS facilities and expertise
may provide an inhouse capability for measuring tire noise that could
lead to a federal rating system or a regulatory procedure for limiting
tire noise generation.
.Resources Estimate, Funds: $50,000
Security of Report: Unclassified.
Procurement Method: Reimbursable Agreement.
Draft report received.
-------
DEPAT-itlSMT OF TRANSPORTATION, OFFICE OF THE HECR'SIA^Y,
OFFICE OF HOIStf ABATEMENT - AUGUST 4 MARK - F:W2 COnGRKSSTOUAX, SUBMISSION
;•..•• l;i c:< ;".:'."'y>iv c! cvv.i:; ;•[;•>:••.•(.; io po;. •; i; •, t; :-: i'-.'>.y.:.. <.. c o'of. i..:a
." ••.-- U'-'^-r:, I; :r- r-..-.;.!:\;.',. :.}. '}"\;. ;•,•:; .••.: i't.h ;;! r. .!•;.::; i i j.^y-.:-.
;•: ^. (.';.;•:•;•.:•.'"• ; o -..•: .: vi-.i ^ * '. ;-..•-, .•;:• <: r..-. of Vi. S. j i •,/•.;;•! vy ;.ii.'
.r..; \ ;:;;•• .0:; C(>!:i; :r. ^-;; to Ji'cu'-i';'',• :;Ms;c. ir'y..1.: i~y. 'li'ii r- i1: \, '- ]' ••
!:••!.'•• in (iu: c.'.-•.•• nf !!io C'.rf(^:'i'- of v/c:- v }:;•., i J '.: ;~-L':' oi>-.:) ;• -..: ^',:';
rcf.c;'-.i'(.-)! iii i-.:;;/ocir^ f.:' iho Ijit'Tr^j.or.c.y A ii-'r. :•?.'! l-.'oi::i; A :.v t •:•';•.-: ciH
P)'opr.\:vi il/.X." P). /^<:jor c:'.ov!:;.r i:, ir t' j roc! i.:cl (o-.vai'(: t!i^
df-n'ior.:i! r:>''ion oi p-."•!: !:•".;"• 1 «".';.'j-1 i f;-l ion's of :'. ?i:. o-Y''-r'i:c'.;'.O!: l(-rh-
lUf!i;e(; to c-xi;;ti:i;; t van cport;-.'. iv.i- \chic:es ;'.:.•.' iho (.';:• vo!'.v.>;i:o.nt- o/.
j-cr-c;r.:'ch c^pp.bili-dc.r, It provide !;:e basis /or i.olulion of jirob-
lenio into !h- luturr.
a. Kyr/.'icc T)'? p.^jvorlntion Vehicle Noiic Reduction
This T>3'op~r-.r:i is cor.i^or,c-,1 of projcclr, iiilen;lcd to
tlciTiOriLtrJ-.tc ccor.oii'.io rno!'rir;cis of r.Tj-.:'..i::£ noise
gcncrplrii:! b'/. exist;:;<; lrinBj.o:-t?.vio-j vehicle.'.'.
Cor.'r;.c.t> v.'i'.! bo c,1:'. o. r •.:<:: ii.'.o v.ith «, covislic
roac.-.rcif Cirnii r.:-.c!/or r.^ar.v.faclurorr, ?.nJ oper-
{•.lori; of Vr;-:..n^;'.o:"i:-.lio:i vc-hiclos to c'ovc!;ip Or.d
clc:irjdnr.t rr.t c r.ic-ciificP.tior.s to vehicles v.-hich
incorpoiT-.lo rcccru rlhte--of-l!i i-arl roise reriuc-
tioti tcchnif.ui'.s. These '.iroi^cts will ticr.'.o.'istvate
noipe l e.h:clio:: :n truck e:.f :.•;•;.-s, '.: x;c"; t:.) o:-, co;;-
£trv.c.'.!c:i cquii-Tiv.t.'it. c.nc! r.ipss tr.-p.rif rail
voli ic! cs.
b. r,-:r,ht-cf- vr^y ;r;-^e-;-) X^LSC Rc-.h-uon
nci.-o t!T.:'..-.::-.i.-..-:-j:ij :;•.:..•>.•.-.!.•.:: by vc:'.:..'- J. I'.yi.-v.'-'.::;;•
on i,!r.hv.i.yi .-r:'/.^r .^i--.cr j,'. i'i' '.".v:\yr.. /•'•:> i 5 <:
-------
($ in 000}
enforcement problems encountered by slate
and local authorities will also be examined
to determine areas of possible refinement
and 'innovative methods of noise measurement.
The proposed v:ork v/ill demonstrate Improved
noise barrier design and noise enforcement
measurement techni ques .
c. Research on Noise Generation Mechanisms $450
This program will enhance the basic knov/ledge
needed for further understanding of funda-
mental noise generation and propagation
associated with jet noise. V/STOL noise
sources, and internal combustion engine
noise. The program will be supported both
by grants to appropriate universities and the
development of an in-house capability at the
Transportation Systems Center,
d. Noise Measurement, Analysis, and Information $50U
Tins program will provide further refinement
of techniques used to measure transportation
systems noise in metropolitan areas. It will
further -provide additional in-depth analyses
and refinement to mathematical models previously
developed to assist transportation system planners
and operators.' It will also provide incremental
support of a sophisticated noise information
retrieval and storage system.
e. Airport Noise Reduction Program $8,245
In the absence, oj additional advanced noise
reduction deV ice's and techniques, current
and futur-e aircraft will produce excessive
airport noise. In order to enhance cempat-
ability between the airplane and its airport
1-> ••>.»»
K-„-.::>
Revised
-------
]pri_n.A;:;^:[;G, JIHSFAKCH, A:".) nfivr.LOPi-'tNT
($ in 000)
neighbors, the research and technology
program for reducing airport noise must
be moved forward with all deli bora to
urgency. Several promising methods of
abating noise will be purged vigorously.
If possible, innovative methods will be
developed end tested to complement or
replace known technology. This work v/ill
be entirely complementary" to Federal
Aircraft Noise Abatement, programs.
(1) Exhaust Koise Suppressor
In order to provide significant noise
suppression for current and future
aircraft, suppression devices nrjst be
developed that have the potential of
substantial jot noise reduction. To
achieve this degree of engine exhaust
noise suppression, the feasibility of
developing efficient multi-tube nozzle/
lined ejector noise suppressors must be
"i D \fOc- --•• -j r i :> T { ""f I" t "; *j c ; •; •-• ; -; f i • " r; ••• ; \-j -] J I "j p, P 1 ! ! f ! P
devel op;v:erit of theory and ernp^nca'! data
for this type of noise control through
analyses and tests of: tube size, shape,
spacing, number and length, cooling methods,
•and material development. Variables' of
ejector design, such as area ratio, length,
and acoustic lining properties, will also be
analysed. This work will be initiated with
scale model suppressor development, but will
lead to full -scale demonstrations.
(2) Structure and Turbulence Investigations and
Related Demonstrations
Theoretical, and experimental studies will
be initiated to determine the overall
structuf'tj turbulence levels, and noise
source distribution in jet flov.-s to gain a
more complete understanding of the mechanisms
by which noise is generated. Without such
understanding, noise reduction must be pursued
using purely empirical approaches to suppression
and engine cycle chances. This effort will
involve lal: oratory c.nu scale model r^searcn.
TR-
Rcviscd
-------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
FY 1972 - Congressional Submission
k- Kn vi r onm eri ta ? Q u al ity Pr og r ant (Noi s e Suppr e s si on, ^--—
Sonic Boom, and Aircraft Emission) . . . /. $3, 500, 000
The objectives of those programs are to: (1) alleviate the aircraft noise
problem; (2) reduce the intensity and adverse effects of the eonic boom
phenomena; and (3) mitigate, the effect of aircraft emissions on the environ-
ment. Efforts to be accomplished are:
Noise Snpp_rcssiot/_$l. 850, OOP .
(a) Source, $7PtM
The work will involve investigations into the parameters that cause
or influence the actual generation of noise emanating from aircraft,
plxis development of guidelines for changes to the engine hardware
to minimize this noise. In addition, the effort will include develop-
ment of equipment or devices necessary to be installed, attached, or
actually built into engines.of various designs to suppress that noise
which is generated. Included are studies to improve techniques of
noise measurement, data reduction and analysis, plus refinement
of yardsticks for evaluation and rating of various levels of aircraft
noise.
(b) Transmission Paths, »150,000
This program concerns itself with efforts to minimize the noise by
proper consideration of the paths the noise takes to travel from its
source to the receivers. The work will involve development of
optimum safe t-peraticnal procedures da-ic-.ed to ir.iriiniisc noise.
The studies will cover the aircraft performance characteristics,
the safely aspects of rjoise. abateme/it procedure?, as well as t&e
noise exposure chat results from vario.o flight j-.j-ofi.lei i-;c] grouVid
353
-------
Oi-iei-'ilicih;-. IviolixJo-1 ;.;•< rtudi e:i U. i:;':prov'.- U- ch';k; v-.:;; of no::<.
nVs-as'.r.-i.-jKOiH' J::i.- r ethrri' on .'-lid .,-..•. 'Oyyi,;, n)i;'; r i • f j :M;J ;-ir:nt ..'-•- o.Ct'.i^-.
yardstic.hr. urea ) or evaluation ajjd j-a'.iu;; of various luvej^ c'uir,nn Re sponge )_, j; ^ -^ p <^ 0_
This, elf ort provide f; for the rcdv:c!icH, control, ;:nc3 c'.val\jat ion of noise
at tl'io •rc.-c eiA'iiij; end. The work v.'iJl involve, dcve) oping and refining
itcc;ept;;bl(i yai-c'tl^-h.x: i'c^r ov;-'.h:;ttJo:i and ya.ti'^g of various levels of
y ire-mil, noint, inv-i the dcvv-dopriiont c>£ [;uic1e3 inc:: for p] tinning for and
control of the residual i;uifu inlicrciit. in airplane ojjei'alion.s.
(d) Eyf.;teni /vr^ly :,i .f: , $-'jSO,_0_00
Thi .-"- i : vo;-1 ;•«'.] ,'•! i nvo) \'c. 5-' a ?:y ;;l.e7i)atic £;tudy o~' all facets of tlie aircraft
11 c-i ;.;*.-•. al.).:>_iiM p.Oiji pr (.;;!• t.Tn. Techni.cal, economic, social, operal i o;-,al,
and pny c!i;!lo;',icru aspect:; c•.'; d ind i:si rv '->o) i ci or for the re, f.O r.;.ti en of f\:l '\ VP.
8upers<»nJc or transonic commercial aircraft.
(a) Generation and Propagation, $600, 000
This subprogram is concerned with the reduction and control of sonic
boom by aerodynamic design and the investigation of parameters that
influence shock wave generation and propagation.
(b) Humaj^)\esjKms_e_L_$40^, 000^
This work involves investigation, into the psychological, physiological
and sociological factors nncl the interaction between these as related
to the effects of sonic boorn upon people and communities.
(c) Animal Response, $75 OOP
The objective of tlyif "psogram is to determine short and long-range
effects of sonic boorn on wild and domestic birds and animals and
aquatic life for'ms.
(d) Structural Response, $12_5_,_00p
The effects of isolated and repeated sonic booms on structures including
glass breakage will be investie?te'.'. Inr.li.'decl in the pr 07 r ».?••-. ;s the
development of tl'ie 5-jiecial inFtrvrr.entaticn and nnalysic r.-ioth .'•'cis req'sive
to properly ev'al'.i.v.tc: response to sonic V;oorns and superboo'ins .
-------
(?>) A.irej• aft TCn •; s si op.s , $4 i>0 ,- ()0M
(a) Trjmsm^&ipn Paths, v30p,_pqO_
This \vork includes; inve.1'v^'.-^ion o.f the effect of engine emissions at
altitude, engine ej-nissic..:^ dissipation rate.s under various meteorological
conditions, and analysis -•.•'' >->j ouiid operations to determine possible
procedural modification • 'o reduce pollution aucribable to aircraft and
aircraft related activities.
(b) Receiver (Human, Animal, Ecological), $150,000_
Investigations will be ir'. .'"'.,,.-!ef .-•••• •• ' • i-.->ns of aircraft engine emissions.
Stxidies also \vill include the effect of various concentrations of such
t-.rmssior.s nnd fall-out oi particulato matter on property as well as
on the ecology.
355
-------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
Active Studies '72
Study Title
Field Evaluation of Traffic
Noise Reduction Measurements
Relating Highway Design and
Environment to Abatement of
Ti'affic Noise
Pollution of Michigan Urban
Atmospheres by Highway
Generated Noise
Community Noise Survey and
Evaluation
Traffic Noise Near Highways
and the Effect of Design and
Environmental Variables
Type
NCHRP
HPR
(Maryland)
HPR
(Michigan;
Administrative
HPR
(California)
Current Funding
5 OK
42K*
17K*
12K*
*Federal funding = 70%
State funding = 30%
-------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Office', of the Secretary
(Office of Noise Abatement)
Tosit;i_on_Ti_tl_s
Director
Secretary
Chief. Plans & Programs Div.
Program Analyst
Program Analyst
Chief, Regulatory Policy & Stds. Div.
Operations Research Analyst
Secretary
Chief, Research Division
Mechanical Engineer
General Engineer
Secre.tarv
Series
Grade
1301
318
2101
345
345
1301
1515
318
801
830
801
318
17
9
16
14
9
16
15
7
16
.15
15
7
Federal Aviation Adirrinist ration
Systems Research and Development Service
(Noise Abatemeat Division)
Pos_ition_ .Title
Chief
Secretary
Program Analyst
Chief, Aircraft Noise Branch
Aerospace Engineer
Aerospace Engineer
Aerospace Enginer
Chief, Sonic Boom Branch
Psychologist
Series
861
318
345
861
861
861
861
861
180
Grade
16
7
14
16
15
15
14
16
15
-------
Transportation Systems Center
Mechanical Engineering Div,
(Elect roue civ n:l. oa 1 Branch)
in T ltle S Grade
Chief (detail from Coast Guard)
Special Projects Officer 301 14
Mechanical Engineer 830 • 14
Mechanical Engineer 830 13
Electronics Engineer 855 13
Electronlcy Technician 856 11
Engineering Technician 802 11
Clerk-Steno 301 5
Federal Aviation Administration
Office of Environmental Quality
The authorised staffing for the FAA, Office of Environmental Quality includes
i ~. -.„-.- f....,. -• „_,..•:, ...... ,1 ~>. .«-;•; : :- .., . •.. ff..':....,,''. \ .!.:.;-'! F-.-.-..-.-. '.-]-, ^. n.-:T..^T-*-m.-,-.i .•-,•?
Defense, responsibile for envlronraental research (noise, and pollution). There
are 3 - GS~l6s; 7 ~ GS-15s; ond 1 - CS-14. Disciplines represented in these
positions are: systems analysis, technical environmental planning, environmental
science, operations systems analysis, measurement and research planning.
-------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20590
SEP
Dr. Alvin F. Meyer
Director, Office of Noise Abatement
and Control
Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D. C. 20460
Dear Dr. Meyer:
The Office of Environmental Quality, within the Federal Aviation
Administration, has just completed the execution of a noise reduction
flight (operational) evaluation project. This project was performed at
our National Aviation Facilities Experimental Center near Atlantic City,
New Jersey, and constitutes but one of many projects this office has
programmed and directed toward the control and abatement of aircraft
noise.
The subject program objectives include the quantification of measured
and recorded reduction in aircraft noise through the use of various
operating procedures/techniques by the same aircraft. For a cross-
reference on the impact of noise reduction by aircraft type design the
same procedures were also evaluated for four different turbojet powered
airplanes.
Enclosed for your review and consideration are the program's past and
current progress reports (1-5). We intend to forward a copy of the final
report when such is complete. If there is additional program information
desired, please contact Mr. R. D. Shreve, EQ-20, Program Director.
We endorse and are looking forward to continued Federal coordination in
the process of resolution to the nation's environmental problems.
Sincerely,
Director
Office of Env/lronmental Quality
/
Enclosures
-------
prPARTMENT Of TRANSPORTATION
rnDLRAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
WASWNGTON. D.C. 20SSO
DATE: 19 A\lgy.St 1970
itftRf'O: NO-1*
SUBJECT: Operational/Procedural Noise Reduction Flight Program -
Progress Report No. 1
T0: Depxity Administrator
Through: PL^l
A program has been developed for the flight evaluation and data
analysis of potential noise reduction, specifically during the
approach to landing flight phase, associated with:
1. Configuration change (airframe/thrust)
2. Variable glide slope intercept altitude
3. Two-segment approach
4. Uniform (3°) vs variable glide slope angle
The flight program will be executed in such a manner GO as to develop
noise data which can be related to a base procedure/configuration,
thus enabling an incremental or delta noise.level to be identified with
each of the profiles flown.
This flight program, by necessity, requires the cooperative and
coordinated efforts .of several Offices and Services within the agency.
A task force made up of representatives from each of the Offices and
Services involved has been formed to ensure effective coordination
and expeditious completion of the program.
Under Secretary Beggs requested the program's schedule as spon. as
possible. It is anticipated that such a schedule will be available within
two to three weeks. Virtually, all of the programs' variables have
to be defined prior to establishing a sclvedule. The task force is
currently working on this program phase.
Y/hile final results rather than progress reports are the program's
.objectives, it is suggested that such reports on the program's status
can be helpful in identifying the program's achievements, program
delays and, in many cases, resolve situations before they become
-------
2.
program problems. With your concurrence, such reports.will
periodically be sent forth.
The Office of Noise Abatement's contact in regard to this program
development is Mr. R0 D. Shreve, NO-20.
^ Tf
r/rvi>
f^£r/?/?&M&
'•L&Z-
}-rf O/POWERS
Acting Director, Office of Noise Abatement, NO-1
-------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
WASHINGTON, D.C. irOSSO
DATE: 7 October 1970
iRTO: NO-1
SUBJECT: Operational/Procedural Noise Reduction Flight Program -
Progress Report No. Z
TO: Deputy Administrator
Through: PL-1
The development of the program's'scope, coordination requirements and
functional execution has been completed. In association with completing
the developmental task, certain key program elements have been
defined. Included are:
1. The flight phase will be executed on or about 5 April 1971. All
contributing program components; i.e. , site preparation, outside
contractual support, rescheduling of FAA airplanes, etc., will be
effected to ensure meeting the 5 April date.
2. NAFEC, Atlantic City, New Jersey, is the test site of prime
consideration.
3. Takeoff profiles will be flight evaluated as well as and supplementa.ry
to the prime objectives of approach profiles relative to potential
noise reduction.
4. The necessary funding for the program's execution, including all
support components, will be allocated through reapportionment
of the R&D budget in the FAA Office of Noise Abatement.
The decision to execute the flight phase during April 1971 was made in
lieu of attempts to establish an earlier program execution (Fa.ll of 1970)
only after due consideration had been given tp the practical analysis of
the factors required for program implementation. Such factors included:
(a) the possibility of inclement flight test weather anticipated for the late
Fall or early Winter season; (b) minimum time required for site
preparation and scheduling of on-site facilities; (c) sole source versus
competitive bidding on required contractual support; and (d) conflicts
created through the rescheduling of FAA airplanes, both for flight trainin.
and specified ground down time, required.
-------
2.
Of the various test site locations given consideration, NAFEC with its in-
house facilities, competent manpower and ground support equipment was
selected as the most desired and advantageous site offering support to and
compatibility with the objective requirements of this program.
The flight evaluation of various takeoff profiles has been included within the
program's scope. While it is recognized that takeoff profiles have been
evaluated in previous programs, the need for additional data acquisition exists.
Industry has either proposed or is executing various takeoff profiles which
tend to effect relief at a given point in the profile or are being adopted simply
as company noise abatement procedures. Industry is to be commended for the
initiative shown; however, this program will execute in summary these various
profiles to a much expanded data base. The noise levels, generated by these
various profiles will be measured and analyzed out to a 1.0 mile point. Such
evaluation will then include not only potential noise reduction close-in, but
also downstream of the highly impacted area. As an example - such data
would reveal the actual impact of the thrust cut versus no thrust cut as
identified with the cross-over or tradeoff in the various profiles relative to
the total noise exposure experience.
The program's task force is now in a position, relative to the key element
decisions, to structure the required details of program implementation. In
this regard, a task force meeting is called for Monday, October 12, 1970 at
9:30 a.m. in room 9C. The agenda for this meeting includes:
1. Final concurrence in the definition of the approach and takeoff flight
profiles.
2. Initiation of airplane leasing arrangements.
3. Scheduling of installation for required operational flight equipment and
rescheduling, where necessary, of flight training.
4. Scheduling of NAFEC facilities and site preparation.
5. Preparation of specific airplane flight performance values for both
approach and takeoff operation.
6. Review of acoustic contractual support.
7. Open review of progress or problems, if any, associated with the
April 1971 program execution.
-------
3.
Enclosed for the task.force member's consideration and guidance are the
program's scope, profiles, and scheduling. A concerned review of these
enclosures will contribute to the resolution of the agenda items for the
12 October meeting.
Thank you for your continued cooperation.
JOHN O'. POWERS
Acting Director, Office of Noise Abatement, NO-1
Enclosures
-------
W
O
.—i
O
C
W
H
h
U
.
o
o
«
OH
H
ffi
O
O
n
H
U
t>
Q
H
w
w
I— I
O
Q
W
U
O
O
1— I
H
W
A
O
O
CO
W
j>
H
O
W
*""3
PQ
O
ffi
H
W
pq
— i
O
H
w
0 H
W <
(J P4
o w
P! °
j Q
-( O PH
i *i—' J
•-^ (J *s
h co >
^. w
H Q
CO P
t> H
s s
t <
W H
S a.
< w
« u
ft, pj
rt w
s s
w w
0 ft
£ O
Si w
u w
ROACH-TO-LAND
CONFIGURATION
DIFFERENT GLID
PH
V-*J , .
^ t— < f\J
i
Q
ffi
U
H
OH
W
Q
a
w
w
Pu
co
O O
pq pq
2 S
»—« >—<
J J
U U
• •
-H fSj
Q
O
n
H
O
D
O
W
H
co
g
t-l
H
U
ID
P
W
ffi
O
PH
co
W
Q
E>
H
i— i
H
-------
=3=
-------
CO
o
w
CO
£
o
t—I
H
U
H
Z
W
S
&
O
^
w
!>
W
Q
o
o
o
CO
H
£
W
S
w
J
w
£
O
t—t
H
U
W
A
w
to
W
H
i—i
CO
H
«
o
&
&
o
CO
H
O
<
&
H
£
O
U
W
Q
M
CO
H
D
•O
h
W
O
>—(
>
«
W
to
Q.
£
<:
w
o
HH
to
h
O
><
U
£
W
o
O
o
n
H
<
g
Q
«
o
o
U
o
g
I—I
J
p
Q
W
K
U
w
H
ffi
O
M
J
h
-------
=»='
A
O
t— I
o
d
W
W
O
W
ffi
U
W
H
ffi
O
O
O
tf
P«
Q
W
co
t>
U
pq
O
H
co
W
£
<:
j
&
r-
i
PQ
1
U
Q
r-
i
PQ
CO
Q
W
co
<
W
CQ
o
H
J
W
H
<
s
n
X
o
«
PH
PH
<;
Q
o
n
rt
w
PH
2
o
i— i
H
D
U
W
X
W
J
<
H
0
H
a
W
H
£
rf
&
O
h
CO
W
H
S
^
O
f— I
H
t?
U
W
X
W
Q
§
Z
O
n
H
<
t— i
H
H-l
5
0
W
CO
O
PH
O
ff>
P-<
Pk
r-i
r~
o
t— i
•»
o
CO
.1
HH
l-<
rt
PH
-------
O
o
C£
Q_
LU
O
ZD
O
LU
OO
O
o
o
C£
Q.
Jj
<
2!
O
LU
Q_
O
CN
5!
CM
CQ
CO
O
CO
CM
I
o
l-»
CTi
CM
CM
00
CM
H
8
w
-------
OJ
O
r-l
O
d
W
CO
w
erf
w
cj
O
crf
o
o
o
w
o
z
M
ffi
o
o
crf
0,
X
w
U-l
o
•o
o
CO
4-1
o
-o
^
o
n
H
erf
c
o
0
t
h
1-
f
c
t
f
<
(J
CJ
CJ
<3^
o
rrf
ru
<
i-H
.
g
^
CN
k
g
3
Jj
-)
-1
J-l
3
:rf
3-1
•• i • '
; - i
! i 1
1 i i
X- ; -
i i i
] 1
; t ;
i ! j •
• i ' i
x x' ;, j
: i !
\ i \ \
..,.„-...., — ..,,».» ... ^«
• ' ! :
X X ! i
i ' j
: •' !
X X X X , X
; - '• i
i '
i
; : "W ^.
i W
M 1
S — *. /*~N t K
w w . <; i
i i ; i -<
II O -
[LI ' >! K •
^. ' S3! O O : t2
O . O' S MO
CJ CJ ' H ' X ; i-J
W
I
0
w
erf
,j
M
H
P-i O
!=>
erf o
O pcT
O
M
0
O
O
PH
<
W
~ o
CQ
Pi
O O
M
K H
c_) P-i
•< W
tJ O
erf X
w
SQ
§g
S3
H
D
O
O
0
-------
SC
o
r-t
O
d
W
W
Q
W
U
O
W
«
s
H
W
Q
W
n
-------
00
=tt-
W
W
Q
W
U
O
W
'A
W
pq
W
P
§
-------
V
M
3
u>
O
r-l
w
w
«
t>
Q
W
U
O
«
ft
W
H
Pi
W
Q
ro
W
ffl
0)
U
o «
S!
(U «>
« ft
^ ^
5?o
O
-------
•fc
4)
TO
O
,—1
O
W
W
Q
W
U
O
W
W
PH
W
Q
TO
O
-o
0)
-------
w
O
r-H
U
a
W
o
I
PQ
Q
W
O
o
Pi
PM
W
H
Pi
Rl
CD!
s;
-------
10
o
I—I
o
g
W
CJ
PQ
w
Pi
w
o
Pi
Pu
W
Pi
H
Pi
vO
Pi
W
CQ
M
H
Pi
Pi
3
o
CO
CO
w
-------
r>
O
w
O
O
pi
A<
w
Pi
Pi
<
PL,
M
O
Pi
W
PQ
FP
-------
O
ti
W
O
O
w
pi
H
W
O
Pi
w
o
M
H
w
pi
o
CO
in
W
-------
in
CO
o
I—I
o
d
W
00
O
O
C£L
Q_
2
1
u
o
c.?
1
pa
rF\
m
fe
o
CjJ
H
-t
0
0 /<-«.
0 fe)
«— •<
0
CO
o"
o"
+ o' o"
> H H
A
H
O CO
W ^3 P-,
W Pi <
P ! ^ , "]
en H f^<
M
CO
CM
x^N ^~N ^N
II II 11
"-C ,-
55 ©
O
O
m
H
o
CM ** s~^
+ hJ II
CNCO ^-^
> H
-t
V*> ;?
1^*1 ^
t-i
O
CM • •
+ OO
CM • •
> H H
•I
H
Q en
P H p^ t •]
00 H Pi ,
vO
ft
m
8©
H
„
l-J ^^v
< CO ||
fc v^
T
o
0
m
u
-^ o
< H Pi
t
o
0
o
CM • CJ
H- o o
CM • Pi
> H W
••} 4
H
C3 CO
W J3 PM
W Pi <
en H ft.
CO
A
r^
4J
to
^J
J^
-C
H
H
O
i-H
jQ
CO
O
•H
i— 1
CL.
CO
w
O
^2
II
1— 1
o
CJ
r-l
4J
02
3
^H
II
rJ
C/l
H
ration
^3
00
•H
<4-j
pj
0
CJ
«
CO
0
J^
t)0
•
X
CO
E
4-1
CO
4-J
r£
60
•H
i—4
M-l
r— 4
ai
j>
01
i— i
T3
CO
3
i— i
CO
60
C
•r-l
t)
0)
o
K
O
O
in
j_j
o
u-i
T3
0)
O)
a
r-l
Ol
>
O)
T—l
4-J
co
3
^_i
£
ii
o
o
m
H
retract speed
ex
CO
1 — i
P-*
II
Pi
PH
4-1
^£J
60
•f-l
01
3
co
co
0
M
60
.
X
cO
£s
-U
cd
X>
j~*
•A)
0
rO
£3 "rH
O r-l
o
•
60 Q)
C 4J
0) 3
0
C!
o a
w
H
o
0^
w
-------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL AVIATION 'ADMINISTRATION
\VASHINGTON. D.C. 2C590
»~i r i- t-1 (; .• i t
DATE:
E, 5 FEB1971
IN REPLY ^^ _„
REFER TO: EQ-20*
SUBJECT: Operational/Procedural Noise Reduction
.Flight Program - Progress Report No. 3
TO:
"Deputy Administrator
Through: PL-1
The cooperation-and coordinated efforts of the various Offices,
Services and Facilities in fulfilling their responsibilities (described
in the enclosure) toward the execution of this program has, to date,
been outstanding. "While certain problems have arisen, the willing-
ness displayed in their coordinated resolution is more'than worthy of
specific mention. Sincere appreciation is expressed to each task
force member foj-their obvious motivation and unqualified desire to
ensure a successfxil program.
At this point, the development of key program elements seems to be
t>n or ahead of schedule,, Specifically:
1. The RFP for acoustical contract support has been issued,
responses have been evaluated and currently final negotiations
are in process with the acceptable bidders,
Z. The RFP for lease arrangements of a B-707-300 series airplane
has been issued with respond and final contract anticipated soon,
3. Site leasing and preparation along with the scheduling of NAFEC
support facilities has either been completed or is progressing
with no apparent hitches,
4. The flight scheduling of the FAA and lease airplanes has been
firmed up, and
5, Operational instrumentation required in the evaluation airplanes
has either been scheduled or is installed.
The FAA Convair 880M will replace the heretofore scheduled Boeing
B-720 airplane due to a conflict arising in the instrumentation and
operational scheduling. This switch presents no problem to the program's
objectives as they are both turbojet four-engincd airplanes.
-------
There have been some changes and additions to the programrs task
force membership, as follows:
1. Mr. Jack Burke replacing Mr. D. G. Cockran from Airports
Service (AS-560),
2. Lt. Colonel R. Chubbay replacing Lt. Colonel T. R. Howell
from Systems Research and Development Service (RD-740),
3. The addition of Mr, Hugh Riddle from the^Bureau of National
Capital Airports (CA-5),
4. The addition of Mr. Harry R. Jackson from the Measurement
Branch, TechnicalFaciliti.es Division of NAFEC (NA-141), and
5. From the Department's Office of Noise Abatement, in addition
to Mr; Charles H. Williams, the program now has Dr. Gordan
Banerian (TST-50).
The program's definition and development has and will continue to be
enhanced by these new task force members and the functions they
represent.
In support of the program's objectives, arrangements are in process
to obtain stock footage film of the events and the methods and facilities
used in their development. With SAich stock footage, it is anticipated
that at a later date, subject to the Administrator's approval, an
operational movie could be developed. The intent of such a movie
would be to document both through "sight and sound" the potential
reduction in airplane noise exposure through operational techniques.
It is believed that the information contained in such a movie would be
of great benefit to the local authorities (airport-communities) when
reviewed in light of seeking operational noise reduction in their own
local noise sensitive areas,
A meeting is planned for the latter part of February with interested
industry and civic groups fbr the pxirpose of reviewing with them the
scope and objectives of this program. Particularly, the flight profiles
will be discussed. It is planned to invite- comments on the proposed
profiles and where reasonable and practical, if offered, adjust the
-------
departure profiles to those, by consensus of the task force members,
most meaningful for evaluation. Participants of the meeting will be
invited to send representatives to observe the flight evaluation itself,
especially industry pilot representatives will be encouraged to observe,
The task force members will be informed of the exact date, time and
place, soon.
JOHN O. POWERS, Acting Director
Office of Environmental Quality, EQ-1
Enclosure
-------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20590
DATEiC DEC 1370
IN PEPLY - . _ _ -
REFER TO: NO-20
•SUBJECT: Office/Service Responsibilities, RE: Operational/Procedural
Noise Reduction Program
TO:
Program Task Force Members
Through the combined efforts of the task force with support from the
Under Secretary and Administrator the subject program has been
outlined and scheduled. Sincere appreciation is expressed'for the
unqualified support given in obtaining this phage of program
development. With this phase accomplished, it is essential
to the success of the program's execution that each Office and/or
Service, by way of their task force representative, recognize
and fulfill their program support responsibilities.
The purpose of this memorandum is to assemble in one document
the responsibilities of each Office/Service as defined in previous
£ask force coordination meetings. The fulfillment of these
_ :-u:^:i:~~ in Ti-n" "nctcin'".,«..- ~^~, ..-..-.-.^^^v----, ^ ^ ^ _ .- „
with other Offices/Services. Thus, included with the listing of
responsibilities are areas considered as those of prime coordination;
accepting, that general coordination is required and anticipated
within the working structure of the program's task force.
The following items are defined as Key, but not to be considered
total, program support responsibilities for each of the contributing
Office/Service functions:
FLIGHT STANDARDS SERVICE (Thru FS-403)
1. The leasing of out-of-agency airplane (B-707, 320 B/C).
6uch leasing arrangements should include -
a. Consecutive calendar time of three (3) weeks
b. Option in flight hours to be flown
c. J-rease crew and required airplane logistics
d. installation and post evaluation removal of required
equipment and instrumentation.
-------
2. Scheduling of FAA airplanes (DC-9, B-720 and B-727)
a. Pre-evaluation ground time for those airplanes
requiring equipment and instrumentation installation,
and -
b. Airp'lane(s) at test site for not only program flight
evaluation but also for-pre-evaluation profile proficiency
flights.
3. Arrange foy required equipment and instrumentation for
segmented approaches, including manpower required for
such installation.
4. The assignment of FAA evaluation pilots for each of the
airplanes in the program, with support crews for the FAA
airplanes.
5. Establish for all of the evaluation1 airplanes for each of the
approach-to-land and departure profiles to be executed -
a. Thrust and performance values to be used, noting
operational limitations, - if such exist.
b. Airframe configurations, and
c. Flight deck procedures
6. Develop and submit a summary report, following the flight
evalxiation, concerning the pilots analysis of each profile
flown relative to normal procedures, as to;
a. Pilot workload relative to operations in low and high
density terminal areas,
b. Additional flight training requirements
c. Compatibility of procedure under all weather flight
conditions (VFR, 1FR, etc. ), and
d. Other reviews or comments
-------
- 3 -
COORDINATION
NO-20, FS-700, FS-160, NAFEC, AND AERONAUTICAL CENTER
AIRPORTS SERVICE (Thru AS-560)
1. Advise in the development of the program profiles,
2. Assist and monitor the program's execution,
3. Develop and submit a. summary report, following the flight
evaluation, concerning the potential use of such flight proccdxires
profiles within the airport system.
4. Act as the program's central information data release and
retrieval source for regional coordination.
COORDINATION
NO-20, AT, FS, AND REGIONAL OFFICES
AIR TRAFFIC SER'v'iCiO (Tn.ru /v'T-3iu;
1. Continue to advise and aid in the construction of the program's
development,
2. Assist and monitor the program's execution,
3. Identify the known or potential impact of implementing
operational procedural - flight profile modifications
on the air traffic control system. Specific reference
should be made regarding:
a. Raising the glide slope intercept altitude to 3000 feet,
b. establishing a uniform glide slope of 3 degrees.
Note: Such identification should include current and future
facilities and equipment
4. Develop and submit a summary report, based on the flight
evaluation, concerning ATS1 analysis of implementing any
such change in procedures or profiles (using specific
airports as examples).
-------
- 4 -
COORDINATION
NO-20, AS, AND FS
SYSTEMS RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICE (Thru RD-740)
1. Assist in procuring and making available, as per schedule, the
agency developed equipment (selectable glide slope computer)
for installation, as required, in the program's evaluation
airplanes.
2. Prepare all necessary briefing material required to implement
the functional operation of such equipment, and -
3. Assign qualified personnel(s) for:
a. The flight deck and operational'check out of the installed
equipment
b. Crew briefing on equipment, use and limitations, and
c. Continuing surveillance of installed equipment dviring the
flight evaluation execution, to ensure functional and
reliable operation.
COORDINATION
NO-20, FS, AERONAUTICAL CENTER, AND NAFEC
NATIONAL AVIATION FACILITIES AND EXPERIMENTAL CENTER
(Thru NA-141)
1. Acoustical measuring range site preparation, to include:
a. off airport land leasing
b. off airport land clearing
c. surveying, and
d. security surveillance at monitoring locations.
2. Availability and functional use of the Photothcodalite System
to include, tracking plots, digitalized tapes of tracking, time
synchronisation, etc.
-------
- 5 -
3. Supply and maintain communication network for central
acoustic station, ground to air, ground to ground, control
t.o\v e r, etc.
4. Supply and maintain required ground support equipment to
include vehicles, power units, etc.
5. Supply and operate land camera equipment, -. minimum of
two units.
6. Schedule send maintain control usage of the flight range and
•runway during the program's daily flight execution periods.
7. Logistics support for airplanes operational requirements,
fuel etc.
8. Assignment'and scheduling for manpower for the installation
itna maintenance of the evaluation airplane(s) operational
equipment and instrumentation (SGSC).
9. The acquisition of the required meterological data
COORDINATION
NO-20, NO-10, FS, AND AERONAUTICAL CENTER
BUREAU OF NATIONAL CAPITAL AIRPORTS (Thru CA-5)
1. Participate and advise in the practical aspects and
definition of the program's objectives, and
2. Evaluate and report on the program's execution as to
the potential modification of existing procedural and flight
profiles; wherein, such" modifications would produce
benefits/disbenefits to the airports operation and community
relief.
COORDINATION
NO-20, AT, AND AS
OFFICE OF NOISE ABATEMENT (Thr_u_N_q.-J_0)
1. Define the program's acoustical objectives and direct the
-------
- 6 -
attainment of all acoustical data required to fulfill these
objectives,
2. The procurement of required out-of-agency acoustical
contracts; covering, —
a. Acoustical measuring equipment
b. Acoustical data acquisition
c. Acoustical data reduction
d. Preparation and submission of final data report
3. Assign an on-site acoustical project coordinator to direct
and monitor-all acoustical aspects.of the program's
requirement.
4. Develop, if required, additional use and presentation of the
contractor's final data report,
5. Final approval in the selection and preparation of the acoustical
range monitoring sites
6. Develop and outline the program's weather data acquisition
requirements.
COORDINATION
NO-20, ACOUSTICAL CONTRACTOR(S), AND NAFEC
OFFICE OF NOISE ABATEMENT (Thru NO-20)
1. Direct and coordinate the over-all program development
and execution
2. Develop and submit a final program report to the Administrator
on the results of the program, to include,
a. An analysis of the data obtained relative to the program's
objective
b. Identify the benefits - disbcnefits regarding noise reduction
-------
- 7 -
through procedural/flight path modifications and their
operational implementation, and
c. Recommendations as to agency action relative to
over-all results of this program execution.
The above outline of Office/Service responsibilities to the program's
development and execution is not suggested to be complete as to the
definition and detail required for active fulfillment; this is properly
left to the task force leadership in each function. However, to
aid each task foyce representative in his respective action_a third
task force meeting has been set for 10:00 a. m^ on 12 January 1971
in FAA Conference Room 7A. During this 12 January meeting,
using the above outline as guideline reference, each task force
member is requested to present his plan of action including progress
to date, future scheduling with anticipated workload completion
dates, and identification to any conflicts 'or problems associated
with the fulfillment of his program support.
Progress Report Number 2, dated 7 October 1970 contained, as an
enclosxire, tentative scheduling for the program's development and
execution. While the over-all schedule had intentionally some
flexibility the flight execution portion was considered relative firm.
Since the issuance of this schedule FS has indicated that it would
serve their support function better if the following changes were
made in the airplane flight scheduling:
Week Of Airplane
April 5, 1971 FAA B-727 or B-720
April 12, 1971 FAA B-727 or B-720
April 19, 1971 Leased B-707 -320B/C
April 26, 1971 FAA DC-9
The option of the FAA B-727 and/or B-720 during the first two
v/eeks of flight evaluation is yet to be determined by FS as is
not considered critical to the program's scheduling. However,
for potential leasing or coiftractural reasons it is essential to
establish a specific flight date for the B-707 -320B/C. The
FAA DC-9 has earlier committments on the west coast, thus,
should be and is scheduled last.
-------
- 8 -
A revised flow chart of scheduling the program's development
and execution will be developed and issued following the more
specific dates presented for the various functions at the 12
January meeting.
Thank you for your past and anticipated continuing support to
this program.
R. D. SHREVE
Program Manager, NO-20
-------
2 2 MAR 1971
EQ-20
Operational/Procedural Noise Reduction
Flight Program - Progress Report No. 4
Deputy Administrator
Through:
On 26 February 1971, a meeting was held in Washington Headquarters
with interested groups of the aviation industry and civic organisations
for the purpose of coordination and review of the agency's subject
program. Nine interested groups were represented by thirty-five
attendees (see Enclosure 1 for listing of participants).
A detailed presentation was given of the basic subject program, plus
mention of the recently added "fly-by" data acquisition schedule
recommended by the Department. Much, discussion evolved relating
to the profiles and paths to be flown. Due to the varying suggestions
of many participants, it was requested that formal recommendations
be submitted to the program director within one week as to possible
modification, deletions or additions of the profiles presented. The
groups attending were invited to participate in the program, on -site,
as observers and in the case of pilots as active e valuators.
The program's task force met 9 March 1971 to make final decisions
on the flight paths and profiles, to be evaluated. The resulting decisions
were based on comments received and a redefinition of the profile
requirements subject to the inclusion of "fly -by" data acquisition,
now referred to as Phase II.
The approach-to-land profiles (Enclosure 2) have remained essentially
the same in total number and definition. The "clean" configuration
has been deleted as such serves little practicality in line operation
and more importantly the noise level data from this configuration can
now be obtained effectively from the fly -by runs. The departure
profiles (Enclosure 3) have been reduced in number and refined some-
what to reflect the submitted comments, where appropriate, as well
as final consensus of the task force members. The adjustments and/or
reductions in either the approach-to-land or departure profiles will
improve the program's definition and increase the value of its results.
-------
As follow-on action to the statements in the OA-l/TST-1 memorandum
of 23 February 1971, Enclosure 4, defines the purpose, objectives,
airplane configuration-thrust and airframe, and run scheduling for
the fly-by data acquisition. "While the requirements of data acquisition
for this addition to the basic program will increase the acoustical
contract costs by some fifty per cent, and flight time by approximately
.thirty per cent, concurrence is given to the Department's recommen-
dation, in that such efforts will produce needed and essential noise
level information.
Progress Report No. 3 reported on a conflict in scheduling and
availability of the agency's B-720 turbojet airplane to the program's
needs. Immediate action was taken to substitute the agency CV-880
turbojet airplane, only to find precommitted scheduling would not
permit such substitution. Currently, efforts are underway to resolve
the conflict.
A detailed flight plan is currently being developed to include
sequentially each event and all supporting requirements for the
successful execution of the event. This flight plan is to be completed
for task force review 23 March. Program personnel, along with
representatives of the acoustical contractor, have made a preliminary
survey of the test site including both the facilities and noise measuring
site locations. No apparent major problems exist regarding the site
at this time.
ORIGISAB S
JOHN 0. POWERS
JOHN O. POWERS, Acting Director
Office of Environmental Quality, EQ-1
4 Enclosures
-------
ENCLOSURE 1
FAA/INDUSTRY/CIVIC GROUP MEETING
OPERATIONAJL/PROCEDURAL._NQIS^iRg'DUCTJpN_FLIGHT PROGRAM
26 February 1971
ATTENDEES
Represented
Airport Authority
Metropolitan Areas
Airlines
Representative
Airport Operators Council
International
Airlines Transport Association
of America
National Business Aircraft
Association
Air Line Pilots Association
Federal Aviation Administration
Louis Achitoff (PONYA - New York)
V,'. L. Cleveland (Dacle County, Fla.)
D. N. Feinrian (Atlanta, G«or:;;ia)
J. J. Shelby (New York, New York)
L. Hinton (Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minn.)
Buck Schorr (Allegheny)
Harvey Thompson (Allegheny)
Paul A. Socierlind (Northwest)
H, B. Berminghoff (American)
Jack H. Graef (American)
Robert A. Rogers (American)
T. P. Ball (Delta)
Leo F. Duggan
Jack Koepke
William B. Becker
Larry Bedore
Harold "Marthinsen
Ivan Reddington
Andy D. Yates, Jr.
Oscar Bakke
J. O. Powers
Hugh Riddle (CA)
L. R. Merritt
M. E.' Russell
-------
ATTENDEES (Con't)
Federal Aviation Administration E. "W. Sellman
J. K. Power
C. Morrow
Harry Jackson (NAFEC)
\V. M. Frucht
J. P. Mays
II. A. Chubboy
J. Cruz
R. D. Shreve
Department of Transportation C. H. Williams
Gordon Banerian
-------
to
Pi
o
o
&
PL,
O
H
a
M
W
rs
o
M
a
o
x
PL,
PL,
t-i
4J
M-l
O
O
O
CO
4J
O
o
p?;
O
M
H
O
M
C"-,
O
u
a
o
o
pi
PL,
PL,
"*
f— 1
=2=
•
a
CM
.
1
W
1—3
H
x^
o
Oi
CM
1
X:
X
~j
X
i
•
j
/^'
W
1
P
1
PL,
1
••
O
0
m
!—(
\^s
j_J
''
Sf
o *
u5
J
»ta»-»-^iT
*V*M_ s
H
W
^
c5
w
CO
o
F:.
i
i
t
j
1
i
*~~7
•
1
I
;
V«w*«'.»-
x!
:
"w"
1
1
^£
1
»
o
o
o
to
N^X
W
PL,
O
CO '
Pd :
P
M
, i ,
a-
o
M
a ;
-*»jrj«
X
w"
a
^3
i
f
o
o
o
CO
^^x
w
PM
O
i_j
to
W
P
M
O
ts
o
§
0-1 •
-<
>J PL, in PQ
M <: o
W
P
i
PM
O OH
ei'--
H p2 w
O M
M a
LL, O
W O
o o
o
W
to
, __ to
o
: M w
: PL, PQ
3 Z
3 O O
^.O H
W
PQ W
U
hJ Z
M M
PM
w s •
to O •—<
w o
a w
H Pi H
o o
o
p a
W W H
-------
3
X
o
0
o
CO
C
1
o
CJ
f.
o
1
ffi
43
f.
PQ
1
*3*
IS
o
M
u
£5
fa
fa
o
H
S
fS
^
2;
H
O ££
^ PS <£
0 ^ W
•n A ,J
'Nl | O
•Z.
• Z
feS O PH
W PS <
P-C DH | 1
C/) H t<
Q
^d Je5
S r5
r-l
^
P^J
H
O j^
^ PS <
O ^ f-1
in /v rJ
rM CJ
•z.
• 2;
w o <:
o w
CM H 0
T T
-H
0
o
o o
CO
PS • •
fa H H
t
H
O CO
W DP*
W PS •<
P-I SE rJ
CO H fa
•
O
^
g H
CM
H
o pa 2;
""> g <
CM R W
trJ r-3
0 O
^S
r-l 2:
n-i PS W
K P-I rJ
> tJ CJ
2;
r-l
1
Pi
P4
W
• 2;
0 H 0
$ T
o
o
o
r-l
O
r— 1
+ 0 O
C\J * •
> H H
1
H
Q CO
W D P<
U PS <
P-I S rJ
CO H fa
•fj ^
CO
^
£J
o
CM
CM
+ I 0
PS
CMpj •
> t-J (-1
<
O
CM
CM •
+ 1 0
CMP-i
> W H
T
o
o
o
r-l
0
CM
+ O O*
CM . t
> H H
?
O OT
W tD CU
W ~ ^
co H fn
^
g
sf
^
^
o
CM
r— 1
+ i O
PS
CM P.. -•
^> f-v £H
W H
T
o
0
o
I-l
D
Nl
•(- 0* O*
CM . .
> H H
t
^ ^
=3 Crf <
X« P^ M
^ f-i U,
1 13
^
^
2;
o
CM
i — 1 •
+ i 0
PS
W t-i
T
o
o
0
o
CM
+ o" o
CM • •
> H H
T
CJ co
W O P-i
W PH
4J
CO
45
4J
rJTi
O
p
^
O
T3
O
r-l
-4^.
CM
£>
}_i
0
^4-1
CU
•o
J3
4-1
• r-l
4_|
4J
CO
t~.
O
4J
•H
O.
60
G
•rl
60
C
•rl
^t
ft
^
O
•rl
4J
CO
t-l
CU
I—I
CU
CJ
CJ
.w
CU
,>
CU
•H
r;
CJ
^^
^
I-l
•^-^
CO
rl
CO
, -|
CO
4-1
C
CO
e
o
^
»-i
CO
w
CO
CU
o
C
CU
T3
r-l
£J
O
£j
CO
cfl
CO
cu
C
1-1
60
C
CU
r— 1
r-l
CO
e
0
^
4J
CO
3
rl
4J
43
CJ
D
e
CO
«
CO
jj
P
O
0)
C
•r-l
60
CU
CU
a
o
43
4J
•rl
^
4-1
_r",
60
•rl
CU
Jj
M-l
(4-J
O
CU
CO
4J
.
X
CO
e
4J
CU CO
•H 4-1
604=
6C
CJ
•H
^
PS
CU
|L^
II
r—l
PS
U
•rl
r—l
"4-1
r-l
01
CU
1— 1
•o
C
CO
CO
60
C
•rl
4J
4J
CU
CO
o
•
H
*"O
C
CO
r-i
1
oi
P-I
M
pj
CU
CU
4-J
CU
43
CU
4-1
CO
•rl
•o
CU
g
CU
4J
C
•rl
60
C
•H
4-1
4-1
CU
CO
Pi
P-I
W
jg;
^
II
CN
PS
tJ
CU
I— 1
CO
CJ
•rl
1-1
o.
(X
CO
4-1
o
z
II
<^
z
•o
CU
CU
p.
CQ
4J
o
cd
rl
4J
CU
cm
co
r-l
fa
II
CO
PS
60
C
•rl
4J
4-1
CU
CO
m
O
cu
X
CO
H
0
d
•
H
4-1
CO
rl
A
H
43
£
•r-l
r-l
O
CU
4J
3
o
rl
£
M
11
s
p^
w
-------
OPERATIONAL/PROCEDURAL NOISE REDUCTION PROGRAM
PHASE II
Objective
The purpose of Phase II is to measure the sound propagation in the atmosphere
and to conduct an investigation of aircraft sideline noise propagation.
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) plans to catalog the noise
signatures of the aircraft in situ for Phase I of the program. This data
will be collected from flybys and the data vill also be used to produce
curves of Effective Perceived Noise Levels (EPNL) versus slant range. In
this form it can be introduced into a computer program to obtain a Noise
Exposure Forecast (NEF) for any airport if the flight paths and predicted
traffic are available. These forecasts can then be used to predict levels
of community reaction to aircraft noise and as a guide to land use planning.
The sound propagation data will be used to resolve discrepancies in
atmospheric absorption and propagation charts.
Proposed Course of Action
The objectives will be attained by analyzing acoustic data collected from
a series of flybys at 4,000', 1,000', 500', and 250' above ground level.
The runs will be as shown in Figure 1 from SW to NE over the centerline
of runway 04 at NAFEC. Three power settings will be sufficient to give
the required information—takeoff power, minimum power to maintain level
flight at approach speed, and cutback power after takeoff (EPR for equiva-
lent level flight with one engine out). Two measurement runs will be
scheduled for the low altitude runs, three for the higher altitudes, if
required.
Microphones will be located approximately 50* north of and parallel to
runway 31 at the following distances from the centerline of runway 04:
125', 500', 1,500', 4,000', and 7,000'. Data will also be recorded from
the microphone located one mile from the runway threshold. Level flight
is desired for all runs. The aircraft will be in the takeoff configuration
for those power settings associated with takeoff and in the landing
configuration for the minimum power runs. The following table shows the
altitude and power to be maintained throughout the run; i.e., from 2 n.m.
DME to the field until 3 n.m. DME from the fields
Table I
Run # Altitude (msl) Thrust
1 4076' 100%
2 4076' EPR for cutback
3 4076' Level fit. min.
A 1076' 100%
5 1076' Cutback
-------
Run #
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Table I (continued)
Altitude (msl)
10761
576'
576'
576'
326'
326'
326'
Runs 13-24 will repeat the above.
be made as required.
Level fit. min.
100%
Cutback
Level fit. min.
100%
Cutback
Level fit. min.
Extra runs at the higher altitudes will
The pilot of the test aircraft will report to NAFEC tower when he is two
miles out inbound. The command post will monitor tower frequency and will
direct the acoustic and tracking groups to commence taking data. The
command post will state "Run complete" when the test aircraft is 3 n.m.
to the northeast, at which time the test aircraft will enter a right-hand
racetrack pattern to get into position for the next run.
After the test aircraft has completed a run, the weather plane will make
a weather run on a heading of 040° commencing 500' above the test run
altitude and descending to make a low pass to the center of the field,
turn 90° left and flap at 126' msl out along the microphone array. The
weather plane will then fly to the southeast and orbit until the test
aircraft completes the next run.
-------
X /
\
» ft V
,'I/L A N T'l CV C'l-^f . .N '/. V: A tX\ /R'Cs T
/. ..- . > i ^
\c
/ v ~W '-•••
DIRECTION OF FLIGHT
(RIGHT HAND- RACE <
; PATTERN)'
"••>' .--"• ^*-'
FIGURE 1. PHASE I TEST LAYOUT
-------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
:: 24 AUG
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20590
DATE:
-------
draft acoustic'report indicates that an appreciable reduction in noise
exposure can be attained. Enclosed are preliminary data plots from three
of the airplanes evaluated (B-727, DC-9, and B-707-320B) for two approach-
to-land profiles and two departures. It is interesting to note that,
while the expected reduction in noise is gained between the approaches
shown, 1500 foot to normal glide slope (2.5° at NAFEC) versus the
3000 foot two segment to normal slope, the gains in noise reduction for
departures between using thrust cut at 1000 feet while holding climb-out
speed and takeoff configuration constant versus no noise abatement
procedure; i.e., clean up and accelerate to 250 knots at full thrust,
are marginal to negative depending upon what distance from brake release
a reduction is desired.
A final report, including recommendations, on the analysis of the total
evaluation will be prepared and sent forth as soon as possible after
receiving the final acoustic report, the pilot's procedural analysis, and
the review and comments from Air Traffic Service as to the impact on the
air traffic control system regarding the potential implementation of the
profiles and paths evaluated.
The success of the program's execution can be directly attributed to the
unqualified cooperation received collectively and individually from
project people, plus complete facility and logistic project support.
R. P. SKULLYj Director
Office of Environmental Quality, EQ-1
Enclosures
-------
o
r-
CO
W H
W M
CO O
H pd
O H
53 <
1
M
M
W
Pi
P-.
O
vD
O
O O
in o
X
w
to
<
a
§
Pi
W
1
CO
O
CM
O
O
O
oo
asioN aaAiaonad
-------
o
r-
co
f-q
£
W H
1 *l rri
w 2
CO O
M p*
O l-l
S -
fe O
O r^
td ifl
g w
<
H
""" ^™N
^
sg
z
M
M
W
Pi
PU
~* >wX
O
vO
O
O O
m o
o
o s
en O
w
g
^
C/5
M
O Q
O
CM
O
O
O
00
(9PN33) 13A3T 3SION Q3AiaO>I3a 3AII035.33
-------
3= <
O
1
M
w
I 1
1 INTERCEPT
^L APPROACH
0 S
0 Pi
u~> O
r-l 25
o-J
0 ^|
o '
CO
1
1
'N
j
/
/
^XV / E
^ \ / 0
\ g
i / \ g
O
Q
J
O
K
CO
W
-------
LU
O
n:
o
D_
Q_
O
ac
w
w
pi
g
I
O
zz
2
CO
M
CM Q
O
CM
O
O
O
oo
SSION aaAiaa>i2<3
-------
H K
PM O
W
W
t&
H
S
w
H
M
Q
O
CM
O
O
asiow
O,
O
oo
-------
CO
w
t-4 H
W <<
to p2
M O
O Pi
*3
e
ss
i^
CM
r-^
H
nJ
I
PU
O
vO
o
ro
§
X
H
W
in
<
s
FQ
W
O
co
M
O
o
o
o
oo
iaAai asiON aaAiaoaad
-------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
-------
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
SCIENCE AND EDUCATION STAFF
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20250
August 31, 1971
SUBJECT: Federal Noise Program Information
TO: Alvin F. Meyer, Jr., Director
Office of Noise Abatement and Control
EPA
Enclosed is information on activities
in USDA /related to noise.
/A
FRED H. TSCHIRLEY
Pesticides Coordinator
Enclosure
-------
FEDERAL NOISE PROGRAMS INFORMATION
I. Organizat ional
A. U. S. Department of Agriculture: Extension Service, Consumer and
Marketing Service, Agricultural Research Service, Cooperative
State Research Service, Forest Service.
B. Legislative Authorities: Clark-McNary Act of 192U; McSweeney-
McNary Forest Research Act of 1928; Smith-Lever Act; Agric. Exp.
Sta. Act of 1955 (Hatch Act of 188?, as amended).
II. Functional
A. Overall Program Objectives: (l) Conduct surveys as a part of
safety program to determine noise levels emanating from agricul-
tural sources, (2) conduct research on. noise propagation and
attenuation by vegetative screens.
B. Specific Programs:
1. The attenuation of noise by vegetation (Grant, Connecticut).
2. Noise and vibration of off-road equipment (Grant, Illinois).
3. Landscape ecology and stress physiology of plants (Grant, Ind.).
U. Safety and hazards - general (Grant, Nebraska).
5. Management characteristics of urban forest space (Grant, N.C.).
6. Extension education programs (visual aids and bulletins) on
noise abatement of farm machinery, sawmills, and on-farm
processing and personal protective equipment.
7. Effects of forest vegetation on noise attenuation (in-house).
8. Development of instrumentation for noise evaluation (in-house).
-------
2
9. Effect of sonic booms on behavior, reproduction, and growth
of farm-raised mink (cooperative research with Air Force,
University of Washington, and University of Alaska).
10. Survey to determine noise levels in meat and poultry plants
(integral part of safety program).
C. Procedures: The USDA programs related to noise are principally
research projects, usually designed to answer specific problems.
There has not been a coordinated thrust on an intensive scale.
The research has been done inhouse, by means of grants to State
agricultural experiment stations, and thru cooperation with
other government agencies. Cooperative efforts are conducted
as specific needs dictate.
III. Fiscal
A. Current program
1. Facilities have not been constructed only for the purpose
of research on noise. Minimal equipment is now available.
2. The current operating budget is about $250,000.
3. Approximately 5 scientific man-years.
B. Past and future plans
1. Past programs have been nominal—below current level.
2. Future programs will probably remain near the current level
although some increase can be expected in specific research
areas.
IV. Regulation and Certification: Not applicable.
-------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
-------
THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF COMMERCE
Washington, D.C. 20230
September 10, 1971
Dr. Alvin F. Meyer, Jr.
Director, Office of Noise
Abatement and Control
Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C. 20460
Dear Dr. Meyer:
This is in response to your letter of July 30, which requested
information about the Department of Commerce programs which
are directed toward noise abatement and control.
The enclosed outline summarizes the Department of Commerce
programs dealing directly with either noise abatement or
acoustics research and management. The programs are sponsored
by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NCAA)
and the National Bureau of Standards (NBS). In addition to
Departmental programs, NBS also performs noise-related research
for a number of other Federal agencies. It should be noted
that the Department of Commerce has no authority or responsi-
bilities in the area of noise regulation or certification at
the present time.
I hope that the information enclosed will be of assistance
to you.
Sincerely,
Sidney R. Caller
Deputy Assistant Secretary
for Environmental Affairs
Enclosure
-------
Date:
*tiw*-j»C».Liit itaJ ^i; •/* t* kiu Ci! C., L--ww..\—w
Washingtcrt, D.C. 20254
: September 2, 1971
ivcpiy to
Aitno': 421.14
subjoct: Request from EPA for Information Regarding
Department of Commerce Programs in the Area of
Noise Abatement and Control
To:
Dr. R. E. Ferguson
Scientific Assistant to
the Associate Director for Programs
Attached is the information requested by the Environmental Protection
Agency in their letter to Dr. Caller, Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Environmental Affairs, Department of Commerce dated 30 July 1971.
We have attempted to outline in detail the in-house funded programs
within the Department of Commerce which are directed toward noise
abatement and control. We further have outlined our acoustics research
such as the development and standardization of calibration procedures)
and have briefly described our work for other federal agencies.
I trust this information package will satisfy the original request and
will provide EPA with the Commerce program data which they need to
include in the discussion of the total Federal effort in their report
to the President and Congress.
DANIEL R. FLYNN, Chief
Applied Acoustics and Illumination
Sensory Environment Branch
Building Research Division, IAT
cc: Dr. Ambler
Dr. Willenbrock
Mr. Irwin
Dr. Wright
Mr. Achenbach
Dr. Cook
Mr. Greenspan
Mr. Thompson
Mr. Kramer
-------
Federal Noise Program Information
I. Organization - U.S. Department of Commerce
Within the Department of Commerce the National Bureau of Standards
(NBS) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
conduct research and measurement programs in acoustics, some of
which are directly related to noise abatement and control.
II. Function
A. Overall Program Objectives
1. NBS Role
Measurement plays a pervassiva role in assessing the
consequences of noise, its affect and control. Both the
assessment of noise problems and the assessment of
alternative strategies for noise abatement and control
ultimately rest on accurate, reliable, and relevant
measurement capability.
The NBS program being carried out within the Institute for
Basic Standards (IBS) provides the needed basic measurement
and calibration services, and extends the basic understanding
of noise generation and transmission. The role of the
Institute for Applied Technology (IAT) program is directed
toward specific and actual noise problems that are of urgent
importance to today's society.
2. NOAA Role
The general function of NOAA is to observe and collect
comprehensive data about the state of the oceans and
inland waters, of the upper and lower atmosphere, and
of the space environment. They conduct basic research in
atmospheric acoustics and the propagation of sound through
the atmosphere. Their mission in acoustics is not
specifically directed toward noise abatement and control
and hence is not discussed herein.
B. Specific Programs - NBS
1. IBS - Mechanics Division
The following projects of the Sound Section are directly
related to noise abatement and control.
Characterization of Reverberant Sound Fields
Objectives: Investigation of the physical properties
of various types of reverberant sound fields
and the physics involved in the transmission,
attenuation, and absorption of airborne and
structure-borne sound in materials ano strixve:cxtv%;s,
-------
Investigations aimed at resolving the controversies
involved in the use of human walkers, tapping
machines or other impact devices as standard
sources for- measurement of impact sound insulation
and surface noise radiation of flooring materials
and floor-ceiling assemblies.
Development of new or improvement of existing
methods for measurement of sound absorption
and sound power in reverberation chambers.
Investigation of Loudness? Noisiness, and Annoyance
Objectives: Investigate present methods of measuring
subjective loudness, noisiness, and
aversiveness of sounds. Develop new methods
for subjective measurement and correlate with
physical characteristics of acoustic stimuli.
Establish a more consistent psychophysical basis
for loudness and noisiness calculating algorithms
with application to noise abatement and control.
In addition to these activities, the Sound Section and the
Vibration Section are engaged in basic research activities
such as the development and standardization of calibration
procedures for microphones, audiometers, sound level meters,
earphones, vibration measuring systems, bone-vibrators,
artificial ears, and hearing aids.
2. IAT- Building Research Division
The following projects are now being conducted by the
Applied Acoustics and Illumination Section, Sensory
Environment Branch.
Building Acoustics
Objectives: Develop improved test methods for measuring
sound transmission through building component
systems, such as floors, ceilings, walls and
partitions; and through assembled components;
such as windows, doors, ducts, and plumbing.
To develop improved test methods for measuring
sound caused and distributed by internal
equipment such as air conditioners, elevators,
appliances, etc.
-------
Conduct psycho-acoustics studies in order to
minimize the effects of appliance and other
household noises on the normal living pattern
of the occupants. The research is directed
toward the identification of basic parameters
associated with "annoyance", the development
of a simulation program based on these parameters,
and ultimately the control of the unwanted noise
sources by demonstrating the adverse behavioral
consequences associated with them.
A second immediate goal is to develop methods of rating
and testing the overall acoustical performance of assemblies
of building elements and of entire buildings. Field measure-
ments of noise in buildings in use will be made and the
findings will be the base upon which laboratory evaluations
are planned. By linking field experience of users with the
laboratory test development, it is anticipated that the
standards and.codes derived will permit, innovative design
and construction techniques to be used in solution of the
noise problem. The requirements, criteria, and evaluative
tests developed would be the basis of standards for designers
and building contractors to use for noise control in buildings.
3. Other Agency Programs
In addition to in-house supported projects, the National
Bureau of Standards has a working budget of about $465,000
for other agency sponsored programs.
IBS
1. Department of Defense - a) Physical acoustics and
the properties of matter, b) measure the responses
of microphone systems designed for special applications.
2. HEW - prepare a book summarizing and interpreting
experimental results on the properties of the normal
human senses of sight, touch, and hearing from the
standpoint of being instruments for perception of
the physical world.
3. Veterans Administration - measurement of hearing
aids.
4. Bureau of Mines - noise control for mine safety.
IAT
1, Department of Transportation - measurements and
study of truck tire noise.
2. HUD - development of acoustical criteria for
"Operation BREAKTHPxOUGH" housing systems and
evaluation of these systems through review of
plans and testing.
-------
3. EPA - technical assistance for the preparation of
its report on noise and its effect on the public
health and welfare.
4. Justice - measurements and study of the noise
generated by sirens and horns and their effectiveness
as warning devices.
C. Procedures
Dr. Richard K. Cook serves as the Special Assistant (to the
Deputy Director of the National Bureau of Standards) for Noise
Abatement Programs. His duties include coordination of the
basic and applied research efforts within the Bureau.
Within the Building Research Division, Mr. Samuel Kramer, as
Federal Program Coordinator, serves as a liason for all other
agency programs. The IAT program is intended to complement
other agency programs so that NBS can provide the measurement
and information base needed by other Federal agencies and by
state and local governments to permit rational establishment
and uniform enforcement of standards and regulations for noise
control and abatement.
III. Fiscal
A. Current Programs
1. In addition -to the laboratory facilities (including a
large anechoic.chamber and reverberation room) and associated
equipment for acoustics research, the following real property
is utilized for noise programs.
a. facilities - $60,000
b. equipment - $210,000
2. Current Operating Budget - $500,000 (approximately $200,000
of which is directly applied toward floia* statement and
control).
3, Personnel - 24 professionals working on acoustics, including
physicists, engineers ai\» psychologists. [This is the total
staff. Not all of these people are working 09 projects
dealing with noise control],
4. Contracts, grants, loans, and subsidies
a. Contract ($8000) with Bickerdike, Allen, Rich and
Partners, London, England. The output of this contract
will be a report which will be used as a source document
for an NBS publication tentatively entitled "A Design
Guide for Protection Against Environmental Noise". Th»
-------
report (contractor's) will be a digest of European
information and data presented in a manner so as to
be easily understood by architects and urban planners.
b. Contract (.$33,000) with Owens-Corning Fiberglass
Corporation, Granville, Ohio. The objective of the
contract is to obtain meaningful data on the acoustical,
thermal, and infiltration performance of doors and
windows, and to relate this data to analytical or
empirical expressions which can ,be utilized in building
design.
B. Past and Future Programs
1. Past Programs
a. expenditures - a total of about $1,410,000 for the past
five years (approximately$180,000 specifically for
noise control).
b. facilities acquisitions - $60,000 for five years (These
are facilities specifically for noise control programs
and does not include the construction cost of the large
anechoic chamber and reverberation rooms).
2. Future Programs
A $200,000 increase in in-house funding has been requested
for FY-73. This increase would allow the National Bureau
of Standards to expand their efforts in the field of noise
control and abatement with expanded research programs in
both the basic and applied research areas. Present programs
would form the basis for expansion into new areas. Money
has been requested in the FY-73 budget to cover the planning
expenses for the design of an architectural acoustics and
noise control facility. If planning funds are approved for
FY 73, construction money would be requested in FY-74. The
estimated total cost of this facility is $6 million.
IV. Regulation and Certification
The Department of Commerce has no authority or responsibilities in
.the area of noise regulations or certification at the present time.
-------
SEP 1 0
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Rockville. Md. 20852
Mr. Alvin F. Meyer, Jr.
Director, Office of Noise Abatement and Control
Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D. C. 20460
Dear Mr. Meyer:
This is in reply to your letter to Dr. William Aron of NOAA on
the requested report dealing with Federal activities in noise
effects, abatement and control.
Without the benefit of an emission inventory of major noise
sources owned that will be requested by you in the future, our
activities in this area have been minimal. Accordingly at this
time, our report is submitted in the "negative."
Wiihin NOAA, complaints of noise affecting NOAA employees, the
General Radio Corporation Sound Survey Meter, Type 1555, is used
to get basic readings. If the levels of noise are above the
permissible levels as outlined in the Walsh-Healey Act, the
Medical Director of the Department of Commerce is notified who
then applies sophisticated audio testing leading to the necessary
adjustments to reduce such noise or provide personnel protection
equipment and/or reduce the exposure time of the personnel.
Sincerely,
E. F. McCann
Chief, Administrative Operations Div.
-------
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
-------
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20405
September 10, 1971
Dr. Alvin F. Meyer
Director
Office of Noise Abatement
and Control
Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D. C. 20460
Dear Dr. Meyer:
This letter is in response to your request of July 30, 1971, for
information on GSA's noise programs.
Because GSA has, at present, no formal noise pollution abatement
program underway, we cannot respond to your outline on a point-by-
point basis.
However, GSA is involved in developing noise pollution abatement
procedures for its construction and demolition operations as •well
as amending its procurement specifications to require quieter
products. Enclosed are copies of experimental noise regulations
and amended specifications. Shortly, three new lawn mower
specifications will be issued which will include maximum sound
level requirements.
I hope this information will be helpful.
call if I may be of further assistance.
Sincerely,
Please do not hesitate to
AARON J. WOLOSHIN
Executive Director
Office of Environmental Affairs
Enclosures
Keep' Freedom in Your Future With U.S. Savings Bonds
-------
35. NOISE POLLUTION -GSA -PBS Experimental Provisions
35.1 The requirements of this paragraph 35 provide for the
Contractor's active participation in (1) identifying the sources or
causes of excessive noise generated during the course of construc-
tion work, and (2) identifying practical and reasonable steps to be
taken for the purpose of reducing excessive noise and/or unnecessary
noise to the extent feasible in construction work, and (3) establish
by experience during the course of this contract a definition of
"excessive noise level."
35.2 The Contractor shall furnish and keep at the site, at all
times during the performance of work at the site, a General Radio
Company Type 1565A sound level meter, a Type 1562A sould level
calibrator and a Type 1556B impact noise analyzer, or such other
equipment as vail provide similar data and service of equal accuracy
as the foregoing. In addition to using the equipment to perform the
requirements set out in this paragraph 35, the Contractor shall make
it available for use by the Contracting Officer for purposes contem-
plated by this paragraph 35.
35.3 The Contractor shall make readings, calculations and analy-
ses, totalling the equivalent of an average of 5 per day during the
entire construction period, commencing with the first day of work
performed at the site. At his discretion, unless otherwise directed
by the Contracting Officer, the Contractor may make fewer than five
such noise level checks on those days when little work is being per-
formed and more than 5 such noise level checks per day when deemed
appropriate, so long as the total average is achieved. Radings
shall be taken from points on the periphery of the site nearest the
sources of greatest noise, as the Contractor may determine (except
as may be otherwise directed by the Contracting Officer).
35.4 The Contractor shall maintain in duplicate a daily record
Betting out the date and, with respect to each check made, the time,
the point of recording, the measurement, the source(s) or cause(s) and
the characteristics of excessive noise, together with any analyses,
comments or corrective action either initiated or to be discussed with
the Contracting Officer. At the end of each work week, the original of
the daily records for the week shall be forwarded to the Contracting
Officer with any comment or recommendations the Contractor may wish
to submit.
35.5 Excessive construction noise levels will be determined,
using Table 3-6 in the General Radio Company's Handbook of Noise
Measurement as a guide with respect to maximum permissible or accep-
table levels.
35.6 On his own initiative, after consultation with the Con-
tracting Officer, or at the direction of the Contracting Officer,
the Contractor shall take such action and shall require his sub-
contractors to take such action as may be appropriate and effective
to reduce or eliminate unnecessary noise and to reduce noise deter-
mined to be excessive, Provided^ however, that if such action entails
or will cause an increase in the cost of performing the work, the
Contractor shall initiate such action or require his subcontractors
to take such action only after consultation 'with the Contracting Offi-
cer and receipt of a written change order.
-------
OO-G-669e
April 10, 1967
SUPERSEDING
Int Fed. Spec. OO-G-00669d (GSA-FSS)
May 10, 1965 and
Fed. Spec. OO-G-669c
May 27. 1964
FEDERAL SPECIFICATION
GRINDER, PNEUMATIC, HORIZONTAL AND
VERTICAL
This specification was approved by the Commissioner, Federal Supply Serv-
ice, General Services Administration, for the use of all Federal agencies.
1. SCOPE AND CLASSIFICATION
1.1 Scope. This specification covers port-
able pneumatic tools for use in grinding,
snagging, and wire brushing that are most
generally used by the Federal Government.
1.2 Classification.
1.2.1 Types and sizes. Portable pneumatic
grinders shall be of the following types and
sizes as specified (see 6.2):
Type I.—Horizontal grinders.
Size:
2 inch.
2-1/2 inch.
3 inch.
4 inch.
6 inch.
8 inch.
Type II.—Vertical grinders.
Size:
4 inch.
6 inch—heavy duty.
6 inch—standard duty.
2. APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS
2.1 Specifications and standards. The fol-
lowing specifications and standards, of the
issues in effect on date of invitation for bids
or request for proposal, form a part of this
specification:
Federal Standard:
Fed. Std. No. 123—Marking for Domes-
tic Shipment (Civilian Agencies).
(Activities outside the Federal Government may
obtain copies of Federal Specifications, Standards,
and Handbooks as outlined under General Informa-
tion in the Index of Federal Specifications and
Standards and at the prices indicated in the Index.
The Index, which includes cumulative monthly sup-
plements as issued, is for sale on a subscription
basis by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S.
Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C.
20402.
(Single copies of this specification and other
product specifications required by activities outside
the Federal Government for bidding purposes are
available without charge at the General Services
Administration Regional Offices in Boston, New
York, Washington, D. C., Atlanta, Chicago, Kansas
City, Mo., Dallas, Denver, San Francisco, Los
Angeles, and Seattle, Wash.
(Federal Government activities may obtain copies
of Federal Specifications, Standards, and Hand-
books and the Index of Federal Specifications and
Standards from established distribution points in
their agencies.)
Military Specification:
MIL-P-12829—Packaging of Pneumat-
ic Hand Tools with Attachments and
Accessories.
Military Standards:
MIL-STD-105—Sampling Procedures
and Tables for Inspection by Attri-
butes.
MIL-STD-129—Marking for Shipment
and Storage.
(Copies of Military Specifications and Standards
required by contractors in connection with specific
procurement functions should be obtained from the
procuring activity or as directed by the contracting
officer.)
FSC 5130
-------
OO-G-669e
2.2 Other publications. The following: doc-
uments form a part of this specification
to the extent specified herein. Unless other-
wise indicated, the issue in effect on date
of invitation for bids or request for propos-
al shall apply.
National Bureau of Standards (NBS)
Handbook:
H28—Screw-Thread Standards for Fed-
eral Services.
(Application for copies should be addressed to
the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government
Printing Office, Washington, D. C., 20402.)
American Standards Association (ASA)
Publication:
ASA B7.1 - 1964—American Standard
Safety Code for the Use, Care and
Protection of Abrasive Wheels.
ASA B5.38 - 1958—Driving and Spindle
Ends for Portable Air and Electric
Tools.
(Application for copies should be addressed to
the American Standards Association, 10 East 40th
St., New York 16, N. Y.)
(Technical society and technical association speci-
fications and standards are generally available for
reference from libraries. They are also distributed
among technical groups and using Federal agencies.)
3. REQUIREMENTS
3.1 Illustrations. The illustrations shown
herein are descriptive, not restrictive, and
are not intended to preclude the purchase
of grinders otherwise conforming to this
specification.
3.2 Qualification. Portable pneumatic
grinders furnished under this specification
shall be products which have been tested,
and passed the qualification tests specified
herein, and have been listed on or approved
for listing on the applicable qualified prod-
ucts list.
3.3 Material. Material used in the con-
struction of the grinders shall be of a good
commercial quality suitable for the intend-
ed purpose. All materials used shall be free
from defects and imperfections that may
adversely affect the serviceability of the
finished product.
3.4 Screw threads. Threaded parts, includ-
ing screws, bolts, and nuts, shall conform
to the applicable requirements of NBS H28.
3.5 Identification of product. Grinders
shall be furnished with a nameplate. The
nameplate shall be marked in a plain and
permanent manner with the maximum speed
at no load and the maximum diameter of the
abrasive wheel recommended for use on the
grinder. The nameplate shall have the man-
ufacturer's model, type, or size designation,
together with the manufacturer's name or a
trademark of such known character that
the source of manufacture may be easily
determined.
3.6 Lubrication.
3.6.1 Primary lubrication. Grinders shall
be provided with an oil reservoir. The oil
reservoir shall be of sufficient capacity so
that one filling will supply lubrication to the
rotor, cylinder, and other moving parts in
the path of the air stream for at least 8
hours of continuous operation. The oil shall
be fed from the reservoir by an automatic
device that functions through an action de-
pendent upon the operation of the grinder.
The oil flow shall be regulated so that lubri-
cation will be sufficient without excessive
quantities of lubricant being discharged
from the grinder with the exhaust air.
3.6.2 Secondary lubrication. Conventional
type lubricating fittings or openings or oth-
er suitable means shall be provided for
introduction of sufficient lubricant for bear-
ings, gears, and other moving parts not lu-
bricated from the oil reservoir. The fittings
and openings shall be such that lubrication
is required only once in not less than 48
hours of actual operation. Where accepta-
ble prelubricated sealed bearings are used,
no external means of lubrication shall be re-
quired for these parts.
3.7 Air inlet connection. The air inlet con-
nection shall consist of a well-secured ferrous
-------
This document has been approved
for public release and sale; its
distribution is unlimited.
OO-G-669e
INTERIM AMENDMENT-3(NAVY-Ships)
July 22, 1971
SUPERSEDING^/
INTERIM AMENDMENT-2 (NAW-Ships)
December 15, 1969
INTERIM AMENDMENT
TO
FEDERAL SPECIFICATION
GRINDER, PNEUMATIC, HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL
This interim amendment was developed by the Department of the Navy, Naval Ship
Engineering Center, Center Building, Hyattsville, Maryland 20782, based upon currently
available technical information. It is recommended that Federal agencies use it in procure-
ment and forward recommendations for changes to the preparing activity at the address
shown above.
The General Services Administration has authorized the use of this interim amendment
as a valid exception to Federal Specification OO-G-669e and Amendment-1 dated May 24, 1968.
Page 1
1.2.1: Under type I, size, delete "2 inch" and "2-1/2 inches" and substitute the
following:
"2 inch
Style 1 - Extended spindle.
Style 2 - Short spindle.
2-1/2 inch
Style 1 - Extended spindle.
Style 2 - Short spindle."
2.1: Add:
"Federal Specification;
PPP-P-40 - Packaging and Packing of Hand Tools."
2.1: Delete:
"Federal Standard:
Federal Standard No. 123 - Marking for Domestic Shipment (Civilian Agencies)<
Military Specification;
MIL-P-12829 - Packaging of Pneumatic Hand Tools with Attachments and
Accessories.
Military Standard:
MIL-STD-129 - Marking for Shipment and Storage."
CHANGES FROM PREVIOUS ISSUE. THE OUTSIDE MARGINS OF THIS DOCUMENT HAVE BEEN MARKED "I"
(DELETIONS, ADDITIONS, ETC.) FROM THE PREVIOUS ISSUE HAVE BEEN
TO INDICATE WHERE CHANGES
MADE. THIS HAS BEEN DONE AS A CONVENIENCE ONLY AND THE GOVERNMENT ASSUMES NO LIABILITY
WHATSOEVER FOR ANY INACCURACIES IN THESE NOTATIONS. BIDDERS AND CONTRACTORS ARE CAUTIONED
TO EVALUATE THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS DOCUMENT BASED ON THE ENTIRE CONTENT AS WRITTEN IRRE-
SPECTIVE OF THE MARGINAL NOTATIONS AND RELATIONSHIP TO THE LAST PREVIOUS ISSUE.
FSC 5130
-------
00-G-669e
INTERIM AMENDMENT-3(NAVY-Ships)
Page 2
2.2: Delete in its entirety all reference to "American Standards Association (ASA)
Publications" and substitute the following:
"AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARDS INSTITUTE (ANSI)
ANSI B5.38-1958 - Driving and Spindle Ends For Portable Air and Electric Tools.
ANSI B7.1-1970 - American Standard Safety Code for the Use, Care and Protection
of Abrasive Wheels.
ANSI S5.1-1971 - Test Code for the Measurement of Sound from Pneumatic Equipment.
(Copies may be obtained from the American National Standards Institute, Inc., 1430
Broadway, New York, New York 10018.)"
3.2: Delete and substitute:
"3.2 Qualification. Portable pneumatic grinders furnished under this specification
shall be products which are qualified for listing on the applicable qualified products list
at the time set for opening of bids (see 4.2 and 6.3)."
3.3: Delete and substitute:
"3.3: Materials. The materials used in the construction of items and components shall
be sound, of uniform quality and condition, and shall conform in composition, heat treatment,
and suitability to the standard practices of manufacturers producing tools of the types
required in this specification. Equipment and parts shall be new and high grade commercial
quality."
3.6., 3.6.1, and 3.6.2: Delete and substitute:
"3.6 Lubrication.
# "3.6.1 Primary lubrication. Grinders shall be provided with an oil reservoir, either
built-in or of the airline lubricator type. Capacity of the reservoir shall assure metered
lubrication of all moving parts in the air stream, from one filling, for a minimum operating
period of 8 hours.
# "3.6.2 Secondary lubrication. Grinders requiring periodic lubrication of parts other
than those in the air stream shall be provided with external means of applying the required
lubricant without disassembling the tool."
Page 3
After 3.9, add the following as 3.9.1:
$ "3.9.1 Sound pressure level. The sound pressure level shall not exceed 95 dbA for all
sizes in any prescribed microphone location."
Pages 4 and 5
I 3.17.1: Delete and substitute:
"3.17.1 Styles and handles. Size 2 inch and 2-1/2 inch grinders shall be style 1 or 2.
Style 1 grinders shall have an extended spindle enclosed in a metal housing. The outside
dimension of the extension housing shall not exceed 2 inches; the length shall be not less
than 2 inches and the shape shall be such as to afford a grip for two-hand operation of the
tool. Style 2 grinders shall have a short spindle with the abrasive wheel adapter close-
coupled to the body of the grinder and without an intentional extension. Grinder sizes
larger than 2-1/2 inches shall be provided with either a straight or spade handle, as
specified (see 6.2) and the housing at the spindle end shall be of such shape as to function
as a handgrip for two-hand operation of the tool."
Page 2
of 4 pages
-------
OO-G-669e
INTERIM AMENDMENT-3(NAVY-Ships)
Page 6
4.1: Delete and substitute:
'4.1
Responsibility for inspection. Unless otherwise specified in the contract or
ali
purchase order,the supplier is responsible for the performance of all inspection require-
ments as specified herein. Except as otherwise specified in the contract or order, the
supplier may use his own or any other facilities suitable for the performance of the inspec-
tion requirements specified herein, unless disapproved by the Government. The Government
reserves the right to perform any of the inspections set forth in the specification where
such inspections are deemed necessary to assure that supplies and services conform to
prescribed requirements."
4.2, line 3: Delete "Bureau of Ships" and substitute "Naval Ship Engineering Center".
4.2, line 9: Delete "Provisions Governing Qualification" and substitute "Provisions
Governing Qualification SD-6".
Add the following paragraphs:
"4.6.3 Sound pressure level test. Sound pressure levels shall be taken at an unobstruc-
ted distance of one meter from the tool, both in the "free running" and "on load" conditions.
The sound pressure level test shall be conducted in accordance with the applicable provisions
of ANSI S5.1, except as modified herein. The acceptable limits shall be as specified in 3.9.1.
# "4.6.3.1 Acoustical calibration. The entire instrumentation system shall be calibrated
before each test series, allowing a minimum instrument warmup period of 5 minutes if transis-
torized and 1/2 hour if vacuum tube. Recalibration shall be performed if any instrument
adjustment is necessary during progress of the test.
"4.6.3.2 Background sound level. The ambient noise level shall be at least 10 dbA less
than the measurement taken with the tool running, in all tool and microphone orientations.
In addition, the sound produced by the energy absorbing device, used in the "on load" test,
must be at least 10 dbA below the machine's own sound output."
# Paragraphs 5.1, 5.2, 5.2.1, 5.2.2: Delete and substitute:
"5.1 Preservation, packaging, packing, and marking. Grinders shall be preserved,
5.1 Preservation, packaging, packing, ana marking. Grinders shall be preserved,
packaged, packed,and marked in accordance with PPP-P-40 as specified for the applicable
level."
Page 8
Add the following new paragraph:
"6.1.3 Maximum sound pressure levels have been-set to insure against occupational
noise-induced hearing losses. The tools covered by this specification are considered to be
used in bursts of 20 minutes duration with 5 minutes off between bursts over an exposure
period of 8 hours."
6.2, (b): Delete and substitutes
"(b) Type, size, style, if applicable, and handle configuration required (see
1.2.1, 3.17.1 and tables I and III as applicable).
6.2, (g): Delete and substitute:
"(g) Marking requirements (see 5.1)."
6.3: Delete and substitute:
"6.3 With respect to products requiring qualification, awards will be made only for
products which are at the time set for opening of bids, qualified for inclusion in applicable
Qualified Products List QPL OO-G-669, whether or not such products have actually been so
listed by that date. The attention of the suppliers is called to this requirement, and
manufacturers are urged to arrange to have the products that they propose to offer to the
Federal Government tested for qualification in order that they may be eligible to be awarded
contracts or orders for the products covered by this specification. The activity responsible
for the Qualified Products List is the Naval Ship Engineering Center, Prince George's Center,
Page 3
of 4 pages
-------
OO-G-669e
INTERIM AMENDMENT-3(HAVY-Ships)
Page 8 (cont'd.)
Center Building, Hyattsville, Maryland 20782, and information pertaining to qualification
of products may be obtained from that activity. Application for Qualification tests shall
be made in accordance with "Provisions Governing Qualification SD-6" (see 6.4)."
Add the following as 6.4:
"6.4 Copies of "Provisions Governing Qualification SD-6" may be obtained upon applica-
tion to Commanding Officer, Naval Publications and Forms Center, 5801 Tabor Avenue, Phila-
delphia, Pennsylvania 19120."
Preparing activity:
Navy - SH
(Project 5130-N208)
Page 4
of 4 pages
-------
00-G-669e
AMENDMENT-1
May 24, 1968
FEDERAL SPECIFICATION
GRINDER, PNEUMATIC
HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL
This amendment which forms a part of Federal Specification 00-G—669e,
dated April 10, 1967, was approved by the Commissioner, Federal Supply
Service, General Services Administration, for the use of all Federal
agencies.
PAGE 2
Paragraph 2.2: Delete in its entirety all reference to "American Standards Association (ASA)
Publications" to end of paragraph ending with "agencies.)" and substitute:
United States of America Standard Institute (USASl) Standard;
B7.1-1964 - American Standard Safety Code for the Use,
Care, and Protection of Abrasive Wheels.
(Applications for copies should be addressed to the United States of America Standard Institute,
10 E. 40th St., New York, N.Y. 10016.)
(Technical society and technical association specifications and standards are generally available
for reference from libraries. They are also distributed among technical groups and using Federal
agencies.
PAGE 3
Paragraphs S.12 and 3.13: Delete "ASA B5.38 and ASA B7.1" and substitute "USASI B7.1".
PAGE 5
Paragraph* 3.17.3 and 3.18.3: Delete in their entirety.
PAGE 7
Table V, item 1, line 2: Delete "ASA" and substitute "USASI".
Table V, itea 14, line It Delete "not type specified".
PAGE 8
Paragraph 6.2 (e): Delete in Its entirety.
V. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICEj 1968 0 - 342-601 (3021)
FSC 5130
-------
OOG-669e
fitting, threaded with internal American
Standard taper pipe threads (NPT) or in-
ternal Dryseal American Standard taper
pipe threads (NPTF). The air inlet shall be
fitted with an air strainer or screen which
shall be effective in retaining solid particles
in the compressed air supply. The strainer
or screen shall be of such design that it can
be easily removed for cleaning.
3.8 Bearings. All rotating parts of the
grinder shall be provided with commercial-
ly available rolling contact bearings. The
rotor shaft shall be provided with ball bear-
ings. Needle and roller bearings, which are
primarily designed for radial loads, shall
not be used in a thrust position. If open type
bearings are used, they shall be suitably
housed and adequately sealed to prevent
leakage of lubricant and entrance of dirt
and dust.
3.9 General construction. Grinders shall be
of rugged construction so as to withstand,
without failure, treatment likely to be en-
countered under general service conditions.
Grinders shall be self-contained, readily ac-
cessible for adjustment or replacement of
parts. Parts which require lubrication shall
be properly enclosed so as to prevent en-
trance of foreign particles and leakage of
lubricant. Working parts exposed to wear
shall be of sufficient hardness to withstand
the service required. Parts shall be prop-
erly finished by machining or grinding to
dimensions within limits established by good
commercial practice. Similar parts shall be
interchangeable and of good fit when as-
sembled with relative parts of the same
size, type, and make. Grinders shall be re-
liable and effective when operated on com-
pressed air lines at gage pressures between
80 and 100 pounds per square inch (p.s.i.).
3.10 Housing. Housings shall be strong
enough to prevent indentation under service
conditions. When threaded fasteners are uti-
lized to assemble adjacent housing compo-
nents, through bolting shall be used in pref-
erence to tapped holes. Capscrews, if used,
shall engage threads in ferrous housings or
ferrous inserts in nonferrous housings by
not less than a length equal to the pitch di-
ameter of the fastener thread. Where fer-
rous inserts are not used in nonferrous hous-
ings, capscrews shall engage threads by not
less than a length equal to 1-1/2 times the
pitch diameter of the fastener thread. All
threaded fasteners shall be secured with
suitable locking devices.
3.11 Motor. The motor shall be of the ro-
tary vane type. The rotor shall consist of
one or more elements accurately balanced
with the rotor shaft, and shall be propelled
by compressed air through the attendant ac-
tion of vanes or blades made of suitable com-
position.
3.12 Spindle arbors. Spindle arbors shall
be of the size specified (see tables I and
III) and shall conform to the applicable re-
quirements of ASA B5.38.
3.13 Abrasive wheel guards and flanges.
Each grinder shall be furnished with wheel
guards and flanges conforming to ASA B7.1.
They shall be suitable for use with the maxi-
mum diameter and thickness grinding wheel
to be used with the grinder specified.
3.14 Throttle. Grinders shall be provided
with a nonleakable, manual throttle for ad-
mitting and shutting off the supply of com-
pressed air. The throttle shall be conven-
iently located for easy manipulation by the
operator while both hands hold the grinder
in the operating position.
3.15 Speed regulation. Except as specified
in 3.17.2, grinders shall be provided with a
governor to automatically regulate the speed
of the rotor. The governor shall prevent
excessive speed when the spindle is free of
load, and maintain efficient operating speeds
under all normal loads applied to the abra-
sive wheel. In the event of failure of the
governor or any of its parts, the spindle
shall not maintain dangerously high speeds.
At all normal loads, the spindle speed shall
be controlled so that there will be no abrupt
8
-------
OO-G-669e
TABLE I. Type I, horizontal grinders, dimen sional and weight requirements
Size
of
grinder
Inches
2
2-1/2
3
4
6
8
Maximum wheel capacity (inches)
Peripheral grinding
straight type
Hard
organic
bond
Diam-
eter
2
2-1/2
3
4
6
8
Thick-
ness
1/2
1/2
1/2
1
1
1
Vitrified
bond
Diam-
eter
1-1/2
1-3/4
2
3
4
6
Thick-
ness
1/2
1/2
1/2
1
1
1
Radial
wire
brush
Diam-
eter
—
—
—
4
6
8
Buffing
wheel
Diam-
eter
—
—
—
—
6
8
Air
inlet
nominal
pipe
size
Inch
1/4 or 3/8
1/4 or 3/8
3/8 or 1/2
3/8 or 1/2
3/8 or 1/2
3/8 or 1/2
Standard
spindle
arbor
dia.
Inch
3/8
3/8
3/8
5/8
5/8
5/8
Maximum
weight1
Pound*
5
6
6
10
12
16
i" Without abrasive wheel, wheel guard, or wheel flanges.
TABLE II. Performance requirements for types I and II grinders
At specified toique
At no load
Type I,
horizontal
Inches
2
2-1/2
3
4
6
8
Type II,
vertical
Inches
4
6- (heavy
duty)
6- (standard
duty)
Specified
torque
Ft. Ibs.
0.15
.20
.65
1.5
1.5
2
3
2
3
Speed
(min.)
R.p.m.
11,000
9,500
6,000
6,000
6,000
5,000
3,500
4,500
3,500
Air
consumption
(max.)
Cu.
ft./min./hp.
80
65
60
50
40
30
35
35
30
Speed
(max.)
R.p.m.
18,500
15,000
12,000
9,000
9,100
6,200
4,700
6,000
4,600
Air
consumption
(max.)
CM. ft./min.
32
27
35
45
52
37
30
30
30
or erratic variations affecting grinding op-
erations.
3.16 Method of drive. The rotor and abra-
sive wheel spindle shall be directly coupled,
with no intermediate gearing, so that the
speed of both is the same.
3.17 Type I, horizontal grinders. Type I
grinders shall be similar to figure 1 and
shall conform to the applicable requirements
of tables I and II.
FIGURE 1. Type I, horizontal grinder.
3.17.1 Handles. Grinders, except sizes 2
and 2-1/2 inch, shall be provided with either
a straight or spade handle. The housing at
the spindle end of grinders, 9 inches or more
in length, shall be of such shape as to per-
-------
OO-G-669e
mit a secure handgrip. The bodies of sizes
2- and 2-1/2-inch grinders shall be of such
shape as to permit a secure comfortable
handgrip.
3.17.2 Speed regulation. Grinders shall be
equipped with a governor in accordance
with 3.15, except that sizes 2- and 2-1/2-inch
grinders may be designed to inherently reg-
ulate the supply of air to limit the spindle
speed at no load. The spindle speed at no
load shall be in accordance with the maxi-
mum allowable no load speed specified in
table II when supplied with air at a gage
pressure of 90 pounds p.s.i. (see 4.6.1).
3.17.3 Throttles. Horizontal grinders shall
be furnished with lever-style throttles, un-
less otherwise specified (see 6.2).
3.18 Type II, vertical grinders. Type II
grinders shall be similar to figure 2 and
shall conform to the applicable require-
ments of tables II and III.
FIGURE 2. Type II, vertical grinder.
3.18.1 Spindle arbor. Spindles shall be
adaptable for use with depressed center
abrasive wheels, cup-type wire brushes, and
sanding pads.
3.18.2 Handles. Vertical grinders shall
have two straight handles whose lon-
gitudinal axis shall be parallel to the grind-
ing face of the abrasive wheel. Handles shall
be located at such an angle from each oth-
er as to facilitate handling and operation
of the grinder when in use.
3.18.3 Throttles. Unless otherwise speci-
fied (see 6.2), vertical grinders shall be
furnished with thumb-flip (butterfly) throt-
tles.
3.19 Accessories or extra equipment.
When accessories or extra equipment are re-
quired, they shall be as specified (see 6.2).
3.19.1 Belt grinding attachment. When a
belt grinding attachment is required, the
length and width of the belt accommodated
shall be as specified (see 6.2). The belt grind-
ing attachment shall consist of an offset
bracket, driver wheel, contact wheel, offset
shaft, and other parts needed for operation.
3.20 Instruction book. One copy of an in-
struction book consisting of the manufac-
turer's standard commercial instructions
and parts list, bound together, shall be fur-
nished with each grinder.
TABLE III. Dimensional and weight requirements for type II vertical grinders
Size
of
grinder
Inches
4
6 (standard
duty)
6 (heavy
duty)
Maximum capacity (inches)
Cup-type wheel
Eesinoid
and
rubber
bond
Diameter
4
6
6
Vitrified
bond
Diameter
4
5
Cup-
type
wire
brush
Diameter
5
6
6
Sanding
disc
Diameter
5
7
9
Depressed
center
abrasive
wheel
Diameter
1
9
Air inlet
nominal
pipe
Size
Inch
3/8 or 1/2
do.
do.
Standard
spindle
arbor
thread
(UNC
series)
In. thd.
5/8
5/8
5/8
Maximum*
weight
Pounds
8
9
12-1/2
1 Without abrasive wheel, wheel guard, or wheel flange.
-------
OO-G-669e
3.21 Workmanship. The grinder and ac-
cessories shall be free from all imperfec-
tions which may adversely affect the gen-
eral appearance, function, or serviceability.
4. QUALITY ASSURANCE PROVISIONS
4.1 Responsibility for inspection. Unless
otherwise specified in the contract or pur-
chase order, the supplier is responsible for
the performance of all inspection require-
ments as specified herein. Except as other-
wise specified, the supplier may utilize his
own facilities or any commercial laboratory
acceptable to the Government. The Govern-
ment reserves the right to perform any of
the inspections set forth in the specification
where such inspections are deemed neces-
sary to assure that supplies and services
conform to prescribed requirements.
4.1.1 Inspection of materials and compo-
nents. In accordance with 4.1, the supplier
is responsible for insuring that materials
and components used were manufactured,
tested, and inspected in accordance with the
requirements of referenced subsidiary spec-
ifications and standards to the extent spec-
ified herein, or, if none, in accordance with
this specification.
4.2 Qualification testing. Qualification
testing shall be conducted at a laboratory
satisfactory to the Bureau of Ships. Quali-
fication tests shall consist of the tests spec-
ified in 4.3. Tests shall be conducted on each
type and size of grinder for which qualifi-
cation is desired. Application for qualifica-
tion tests shall be made in accordance with
"Provisions Governing Qualification" (see
6.3).
4.3 Qualification tests.
4.3.1 Service test. Upon satisfactory com-
pletion of the examination specified in 4.5
and the performance tests specified in 4.6,
the grinder shall satisfactorily complete 150
hours of actual work under practical serv-
ice conditions. The test shall determine the
ease of operation, general serviceability, and
durability of the tool. Failure during the
service tests of any components of the tool,
exclusive of abrasive wheels, sanding discs,
and wire brushes, shall be cause for failing
the qualification test.
4.3.2 Examination after service test. Up-
on completion of the service test, the tool
shall be disassembled and the various parts
examined. Any tools having broken, cracked,
or deformed parts shall be cause for fail-
ing the qualification tests. Tools satisfac-
torily completing the service test shall
again be subjected to the performance tests
specified in 4.6.
4.4 Quality conformance inspection pro-
cedures. Sampling procedures shall be in
accordance with MIL-STD-105. Data for
sampling shall be as stated in table IV.
4.5 Examination.
4.5.1 Visual examination. Each sample
unit shall be examined for any nonconform-
ance in design, material, finish, coating, con-
struction, workmanship, and marking. De-
fects are listed in table V.
TABLE IV. Sampling data
Category San?le
unit
Visual examination
Dimentional and weight
examination
Testing
Preparation for delivery
1 complete grinder
or accessories
1 complete grinder
1 complete grinder
1 grinder prepared
for delivery
Inspection
level
S-4
S-4
Acceptable
quality
level
2.5
4.0
S-2 ; 6.5
I
II 4.0
AQL expressed
in terms of
Defects per hundred
units
Defects per hundred
units
Defects per hundred
units
Defects per hundred
units
Reference
4.5.1
4.5.2
4.7
4.8
-------
OO-G-669e
TABLE V. Classification of defects
TABLE VI. Coupling requirements
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Defects
Aroors, guards, and flanges do not con-
form to ASA Safety Code.
Type and size not as Specified.
Grinder not readily adjustable or parts not
readily replaceable.
Motor not rotary vane type.
Material nonconforming; evidence of un-
authorized material used.
Lubricated parts enclosure nonconforming.
Nuts or bolts not secured by a suitable lock-
ing device.
Component part missing.
Similar parts not dimensionally and func-
tionally interchangeable.
Air inlet connection not as specified, dam-
aged, or missing.
Air strainer missing or damaged, not read-
ily removable.
Nameplate nonconforming, illegible, incor-
rect, or missing.
Handles not as specified, or damaged.
Throttle nonconforming, not type specified,
damaged, inoperable, or missing.
Spindle not as specified, dimensioning not
within specified tolerances.
Rotor nonconforming or damaged.
Bearings not as specified, broken, cracked,
or pitted.
Lubrication of grinder not as specified;
evidence of oil leakage.
Method of drive nonconforming.
Accessories or extra equipment not as speci-
fied.
4.5.2 Dimensional and weight examination.
Each sample unit shall be examined for
any nonconformance with dimensional and
weight requirements.
4.6 Test procedures.
4.6.1 Performance test conditions. All
performance tests shall be based on opera-
tion of the tools with compressed air at a
gage pressure of 90 pounds p.s.i., measured
as close to the grinder as practicable. Test
tools shall be connected to the air supply
by means of a 10-foot length of 5/8-inch
inside diameter hose provided at the tool
end with a coupling conforming to table VI.
Air inlet connection
nominal pipe size
Inch
1/4
3/8
1/2
Inside diameter of
hose coupling:
Inch
0.250
.375
.500
4.6.2 Air consumption, speed and torque.
Grinders shall be subjected to a test to de-
termine compliance with the requirements
for air consumption, speed, and torque. The
speed test shall also verify compliance with
3.15.
4.7 Examination of preparation for deliv-
ery. An examination shall be made to deter-
mine that preservation, packing, and mark-
ing as required by section 5 are complied
with. Defects shall be scored as specified
in the following table.
Examine
Markings (ex-
terior and
interior)
Preservation
Weight
Workmanship
Defects
Omitted; incorrect; illegible; or im-
proper size, location, sequence, or
method of application.
Preservative improperly applied or
missing.
More than specified.
Loose strapping, flaps not sealed.
5. PREPARATION FOR DELIVERY
5.1 Preservation, packaging, and packing.
Grinders shall be preserved, packaged, and
packed in accordance with MIL-P-12829, as
specified for the applicable level.
5.2 Marking.
5.2.1 Military requirements. Interior pack-
ages and shipping containers shall be
marked in accordance with MIL-STD-129.
5.2.2 Civil agency requirements. Interior
packages and shipping containers shall be
marked in accordance with Fed. Std. No. 123.
6. NOTES
6.1 Intended use.
shall
Type I. Type I, horizontal grinders
be suitable for grinding with a
-------
OO-G-669e
straight-type, hard, organic bond abrasive
wheel and shall be suitable for use with
radial-type and cup-type wire brushes. The
2- and 2-1/2-inch size grinders shall be used
primarily for close quarter and internal
work, such as in grinding the inside of weld-
ed pipe flanges, small radii, and corners.
The 4-, 6-, and 8-inch size grinders shall be
used primarily for grinding rough edges of
plates, shapes, and castings.
6.1.2 Type II. Type II, vertical grinders
shall be suitable for grinding and snagging
with cup-type or depressed center abrasive
wheels, and for use of cup-type brushes
and sanding discs.
6.2 Ordering data. Purchasers should select
the preferred options offered herein and in-
clude the following information in procure-
ment documents:
(a) Title, number, and date of this speci-
fication.
(6) Type and size required (see 1.2.1 and
tables I and III, as applicable).
(c) Accessories or extra equipment re-
quired (see 3.19).
(d) When belt grinding attachment is re-
quired and length and width of
belt accommodated (see 3.19.1).
(e) Type of throttle required if differ-
ent (see 3.17.3 and 3.18.3).
(/) Selection of applicable levels of pres-
ervation, packaging, and packing
(see 5.1).
(g) Marking requirements (see 5.2).
6.3 With respect to products requiring
qualification, awards will be made only for
such products as have, prior to the time
set forth for opening of bids, been tested and
approved for inclusion in Qualified Products
List (QPL) OO-G-669, whether or not such
products have actually been so listed by
that date. The attention of the suppliers is
called to this requirement, and manufac-
turers are urged to arrange to have the prod-
ucts that they propose to offer to the Feder-
al Government tested for qualification, in
order that they may be eligible to be award-
ed contracts or orders for the products cov-
ered by this specification. The activity re-
sponsible for the qualified products list is
the Naval Ship Engineering Center, Depart-
ment of the Navy, Washington, B.C., 20360,
and information pertaining to qualification
of products may be obtained from that activ-
ity. Application for qualification tests shall
be made in accordance with "Provisions Gov-
erning Qualification." (Copies may be ob-
tained from the Commanding Officer, Naval
Supply Depot, 5801 Tabor Ave., Philadelphia,
Pa., 19120.)
MILITARY CUSTODIANS:
Army—GL
Navy—SH
Air Force—69
Review activities:
Army—GL
Navy—SH, YD
Air Force—69
User activity:
Army—MO, WC
Preparing activity:
GSA—FSS
U.S. OOVEHNMENT PRINTING OFPlCEl 1967—£53334/264
Orders for this publication are to be placed with General Services Administration, acting as an agent
for the Superintendent of Documents. See Section 2 of this specification to obtain extra copies and
other documents referenced herein. Price 5 cents each.
8
-------
OO-D-691d
February 28, 1967
SUPERSEDING
Int. Fed. Spec. OO-D-00691c (GSA-FSS)
May 12, 1965 and
Fed. Spec. OO-D~691a
November 5, 1957
FEDERAL SPECIFICATION
DRILL, PNEUMATIC, PORTABLE; AND
BORER, WOOD, PNEUMATIC
This specification was approved by the Commissioner, Federal Supply Service, General Services Admin-
istration, for the use of all Federal agencies.
1. SCOPE AND CLASSIFICATION
1.1 Scope. This specification covers portable pneumatic drills and pneumatic wood borers, for drill-
ing holes in medium steel and in wood, that are most generally used by the Federal Government.
1.2 Classification.
1.2.1 Types and styles. Portable pneumatic drills and pneumatic wood borers shall be of the follow-
ing types and styles, as specified (see 6.2):
Type I—Drills.
Style A—90° angle head.
Style B—360° angle head.
Style C—Straight drive.
Type II—Wood borers.
Type III—Corner drills.
2. APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS
2.1 Specifications and standards. The following specifications and standards, of the issues in effect
on date of invitation for bids, or request for proposal, form a part of this specification to the extent
specified herein:
Federal Specification:
GGG-C-350—Chuck, Drill; and Arbors and Keys, Drill Chuck,
Federal Standard: '
Fed.—St. No. 123—Marking for Domestic Shipment (Civilian Agencies).
(Activities outside the Federal Government may obtain copies of Federal Specifications, Standards, and Hand-
books as outlined under General Information in the Index of Federal Specifications and Standards and at the prices
indicated in the Index. The Index, which includes cumulative monthly supplements as issued, is for sale on a subscrip-
tion basis by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402.
(Single copies of this specification and other product specifications required by activities outside the Federal Gov-
ernment for bidding purposes are available wthout charge at the General Services Administration Regional Offices in
Boston, New York, Washington, D.C., Atlanta, Chicago, Kansas City, Mo., Dallas, Denver, San Francisco, Los Angeles,
and Seattle, Wash.
(Federal Government activities may obtain copies of Federal Specifications, Standards, and Handbooks and the
Index of Federal Specifications and Standards from established distribution points in their agencies.)
FSC 5130
-------
OO-D-691d
Military Specification:
MIL-P-12829—Packaging of Pneumatic Hand Tools with Attachments and Accessories.
Military Standards:
MIL-STD-105—Sampling Procedures and Tables for Inspection by Attributes.
MIL-STD-129—Marking for Shipment and Storage.
(Copies of Military Specifications and Standards required by contractors in connection with specific procurement
functions should be obtained from the procuring activity or as directed by the contracting officer.)
2.2 Other publications. The following documents form a part of this specification to the extent
specified herein. Unless otherwise indicated, the issue in effect on date of invitation for bids or request
for proposal shall apply.
National Bureau of Standards NBS Handbook:
H28—Screw Thread Standards for Federal Services.
(Application for copies should be addressed to the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Print-
ing Office, Washington, D.C., 20402.)
American Standards Association (ASA) Publication:
B5-10—Machine Tapers; Self-Holding and Steep Taper Series.
(Copies may be obtained from the American Standards Associations, 70 E. Forty-fifth St., New York 7,
N.Y.)
(Technical society and technical association specifications and standards are generally available for
reference from libraries. They are also distributed among technical groups and using Federal agencies.)
3. REQUIREMENTS
3.1 Illustrations. The illustrations shown herein are descriptive and not restrictive, and are not
intended to preclude the purchase of drills and borers otherwise conforming to this specification.
3.2 Qualification. Drills and borers furnished under this specification shall be products which have
been tested and passed the qualification tests specified herein, and have been listed on or approved for
listing on the applicable qualified products list.
3.3 Material. Material used in the construction of drills and borers shall be of a good commercial
quality suitable for the intended purpose. All materials used shall be free from defects and imperfections
that may adversely affect the serviceability of the finished product.
3.4 Interchangeability. All parts having the same manufacturer's part number shall be constructed
to definite standards, tolerances, and clearance in order that such parts may be completely interchange-
able and may be replaced or adjusted without requiring modification.
3.5 Screw threads. All threaded parts, including screws, bolts, and nuts, shall conform to the
applicable requirements of NBS H28.
3.6 Identification of product. Drills and borers shall be marked in accordance with manufacturer's
standard practice so that the part number and source of manufacture can be easily determined.
3.7 Lubrication.
3.7.1 Primary lubrication. Drills and borers shall be furnished with an oil reservoir. The oil reser-
voir shall be of sufficient capacity so that one filling will supply lubrication to the rotor, cylinder, and
-------
OO-D-691d
other moving parts in the path of the air stream for at least 8 hours of continuous operation. The oil
shall be fed from the reservoir by an automatic device that functions through an action dependent upon
the operation of the drill or borer. The oil flow shall be regulated so that lubrication will be sufficient
without excessive quantities of lubricant being discharged with the exhaust air.
3.7.2 Secondary lubrication. When required, conventional type lubrication fittings or openings or
other suitable means shall be provided for introduction of sufficient lubricant for bearings, gears, and
other moving parts not lubricated from the oil reservoir. Lubrication shall be required only once in not
less than 48 hours of actual operation. No external means of lubrication shall be required for pre-
lubricated sealed bearings.
3.8 Air inlet connection. The air inlet connection shall consist of a well secured ferrous fitting
threaded with internal American standard taper pipe threads (NPT) or internal dryseal American stand-
ard taper pipe threads (NPTF). The air inlet shall be fitted with an air strainer or screen (20 mesh or
finer) which shall effectively retain solid particles in the compressed air supply. The strainer or screen
shall be of such design that it can be easily removed for cleaning.
3.9 Bearings. Except as otherwise specified herein, all rotating parts shall be provided with com-
mercially available bearings. Roller bearings, which are designed primarily for radial loads, shall not
be used in a thrust position. Open type (needle) bearings shall be suitably housed and sealed to prevent
leakage of lubricant and entrance of dirt and dust. If sleeve bearings are used, they shall be the sintered,
metal powder, oil-impregnated type.
3.10 General construction. Drills and borers shall be of rugged construction so as to withstand,
without failure, treatment likely to be encountered under general service conditions. Drills and borers
shall be self contained, readily accessible for adjustment or replacement of parts. Parts which require
lubrication shall be properly enclosed so as to prevent entrance of foreign particles and leakage of lubri-
cant. Working parts exposed to wear shall be of sufficient hardness to withstand the service required.
Parts shall be properly finished by machining or grinding to dimensions within limits established by good
commercial practice. Drills and borers shall be reliable and effective when operated on compressed air
lines at gage pressures between 80 and 100 pounds per square inch p.s.i. Reversible drills and borers
shall be furnished with a conveniently located mechanism for reversing the rotation of the spindle.
3.11 Housing. Housings shall be strong enough to prevent breakage or indentation under service
conditions. When threaded fasteners are utilized to assemble adjacent housing components, through
bolting shall be used in preference to tapped holes. Cap screws, if used, shall engage threads in ferrous
housings or ferrous inserts in nonferrous housings by not less than a length equal to the pitch diam-
eter of the fastener thread. Where ferrous inserts are not used in nonferrous housings, cap screws shall
engage threads by not less than a length equal to 1-1/2 times the pitch diameter of the fastener thread.
All threaded fasteners shall be secured with suitable locking devices.
3.12 Motor. The motor shall be of the rotary vane type. The rotor of the motor shall consist of one
or more elements accurately balanced with the rotor shaft and shall be propelled by compressed air
through the attendant action of vanes or blades made of suitable composition.
3.13 Speed. The no-load speed of the drills and borers shall be automatically regulated, consistent
with the requirements stated herein. There shall be no abrupt or erratic speed variations affecting
drilling and boring operations when tested in accordance with 4.8.
3.14 Handles. The handles of drills and borers shall be as specified herein.
3.15 Throttle. Drills and borers shall be provided with a nonleakable manual throttle for admitting
and shutting off the supply of compressed air, and for gradually regulating the speed of the tool. The
throttle pi drills and borers shall be as specified herein.
3.16 Spindle. Taper spindles shall conform to ASA B5-10 for the size specified herein for drills and
borers, as applicable. The spindle for drills and borers shall be as specified herein.
3.17 Type I drills. Type I drills shall be suitable for drilling holes in medium steel with the size
high speed twist drill of a diameter corresponding to the size of the drill. Unless otherwise specified
3
-------
OO-D-691d
(see 6.2), the drills shall be nonreversible, shall conform to the requirements in table I for the size speci-
fied (see 6.2), and shall conform to performance characteristics specified in table II. Reversible drills
shall conform to the performance characteristics specified in table II, except that the speed at specified
torque shall be determined by multiplying a factor of 3/5 to the value specified and the air consumption
at specified torque shall be determined by multiplying a factor of 5/3 to the specified value (in both
directions).
Table I. Type I drills, sizes, and capacities
Size
1/4-high speed
1/4-medium speed
1/4-low speed
3/8-high speed
3/8-medium speed
1/2
7/8
1-1/4
2
3
At spindle
1/4-inch chuck1
1/4-inch chuck1
1/4-inch chuck*
3/8-inch chuck1
3/8-inch chuck1
No. 2 ASA Morse
taper socket
No. 3 ASA Morse
taper socket
No. 4 ASA Morse
taper socket
No. 5 ASA Morse
taper socket
No. 5 ASA Morse
taper socket
Air inlet
connection
nominal pipe size
Inch
1/4
1/4
1/4
1/4
1/4
1/2 or 3/8
1/2 or 3/4
1/2 or 3/4
3/4 or 1
3/4 or 1
Weight
(max.)
Pounds
4-1/4
6
6
8
8
152
26
39
45
85
1 For type of spindle on
2 If furnished with chuck,
which chuck is mounted, see 3.17.6.1.
add 2 pounds.
Table II. Type I drills—performance characteristics
Size of drill
Inches
1/4-high speed
1/4-medium speed
1/4-low speed
3/8-high speed
3/8-medium speed
1/2
7/8
1-1/4
2
3
Specified
torque
Ft. Ibs.
0.75
2.0
2.6
2.5
6.0
10
30
50
80
200
At specified torque
Speed
(min.)
R.P.M.
1,400
950
500
700
450
500
300
290
150
100
Air consumption
(max.)
Cu. ft./min./h.p.
70
65
40
75
65
40
35
37
37
38
At no load
Speed
(max.)
R.P.M.
3,200
2,200
1,000
1,600
900
1,000
500
450
300
150
Air Consumption
(max.)
Cu. ft./min.
26
38
30
35
40
35
35
60
60
80
3.17.1 Style A, 90° angle head. Style A drills shall be furnished with a 90° angle head and shall
be similar to figure 1.
-------
OO-D-691d
r
Body Grip
Handle
Figure 1. Type I, style A, 90° angle head drill.
3.17.2 Style B, 360° angle head. Style B drills shall be furnished with an adjustable 360° angle
head in the 1/4-inch size only, and shall be similar to figure 2.
Body Grip Handle
Figure 2. Type I, style B, 360° angle head drill.
3.17.3 Style C, straight drive. Style C drills shall be similar to figure 3. The 1/2-inch and larger
drills shall be similar to figure 4.
-------
OO-D-691d
Figure 3. Type I, style C, straight drive drill, *4- and %-inch sizes.
3.17.4 Handles. Drills of 1/4- and 3/8-ihch sizes shall be equipped with open pistol grip or body
grip handles, as specified (see 6.2). Drills 1/2-inch size and larger shall have "live" handle and a
"dead" handle secured to opposite sides of the housing perpendicular to the spindle axis. The "live"
handle shall be provided at its outer end with an air inlet connection, as specified in table I. The
"dead" handle shall be removable for operation in confined spaces.
3.17.5 Throttles. Drills of the 1/4-, 3/8-, and 1/2-inch sizes shall be provided with trigger, button,
or lever style throttles. Drills 1/2-inch size and larger shall be provided with a lever or sleeve style
throttle on the live handle.
3.17.6 Spindles (styles A and C).
3.17.6.1 Sizes 1/4- and 3/8-inch. Nonreversible 1/4-inch size drills shall be furnished with a 3/8-24
threaded spindle. Reversible 1/4 inch size drills shall be furnished with a number 1 male Jacob taper
spindle. Nonreversible 3/8 inch drills shall be furnished with a 1/2-20 threaded spindle. Reversible
3/8-inch size drills shall be furnished with a number 2 male Jacob taper spindle.
3.17.6.2 Sizes 1/2-inch and larger. The drills shall be furnished with spindles having standard ASA
Morse taper sockets as shown in table I.
3.17.7 Chucks.
3.17.7.1 Styles A and C, 1/4- 3/8-, and 1/2-inch sizes. The 1/4- and 3/8-inch size drills shall
be furnished with medium duty (minimum) chucks, in accordance with GGG-C-350, type I, class 1
-------
OO-D-691d
Dead Handle
Figure 4. Type I, style C, straight drive drill, %-inch size and larger.
or 2, as applicable (see 3.17.6.1). When specified (see 6.2), the 1/2-inch size shall be furnished with
a medium duty (minimum) chuck in accordance with CGG-C—350, (size as specified).
3.17.7.2 Style B. The style B drill shall be furnished with a miniature, special-purpose, jaw-type
chuck, with a 1,/4-inch capacity. The chuck shall be capable of securely gripping standard straight-
shank drills within its capacity. Suitable means shall be provided for manually loosening and tighten-
ing the drill chuck.
3.17.8 Feed screw. Unless otherwise specified (see 6.2), drills of 1/2-inch size and larger shall be
equipped with feed screws having four radiating arms for handfeed control. The feed screw shall be of
such design that it cannot be unintentionally screwed entirely out of the body of the drill. The feed
screws shall be of such construction that there will be no unsteadiness when the drill is operated with the
feed screw at its maximum extension. The end of the feed screw projecting into the body of the drill
shall be fitted with an ejector for forcing tools out of the socket by turning the feed screw handle. Drills
equipped with a socket external to the body of the drill shall have tool ejection accomplished by means
of a driftpin. The outer or external end of the feed screws shall be fitted with a hardened steel center.
3.18 Type II wood borers. Wood borers shall be suitable for boring holes in dry, well seasoned oak
hardwood with the maximum size of wood bit, in inches, corresponding to the rated size of the wood
borer, when operated at ai: air pressure of 90 pounds p.s.i. Wood borers shall be reversible and shall be
similar to figure 5, and shall conform to table III, in both directions.
3.18.1 Handles. Wood borers shall be equipped with a "live" handle, a "dead" handle, and a spade
or breast handle. The "live" and "dead" handles shall be secured to opposite sides of the housing, per-
pendicular to the spindle axis. The "live" handle shall be provided at its outer end with an air inlet
connection on nominal pipe size, as specified in table III. The "dead" handle shall be removable. The
spade or breast handle shall be located at the end of the housing opposite the chuck and suitably in line
with the axis of the chuck.
3.18.2 Throttle. Wood borers shall be provided with lever or sleeve style throttles on the "live"
handle.
-------
OO-D-691d
Figure 5. Type II, wood borers.
Table III. Type II, wood borers:
Dimensions and performance characteristics
Size
Inches
1
2
4
Chuck size
for wood-
bit shanks
(Dia.)
Inch
1/2
1/2
1/2
At no-load
Speed
(max.)
R.p.m.
1,000
850
500
Air
consumption
(max.)
C.f.m.
35
85
85
Horsepower
(min.)
3/4
1-1/2
2
Air inlet
connection
nom. pipe size
Inch
1/2
1/2 or 3/4
1/2 or 3/4
ASA Morse
taper
socket in
spindle
Number
2
2
3
Weight
(max.)
Pounds
17
35
35
3.18.3 Spindle. Wood borers shall be equipped with spindles having standard A.S.A. (Morse) taper
sockets of the sizes shown in table III, threaded externally on its outer end in accordance with the manu-
facturer's standard practice, and shall be furnished with hucks suitable for retaining shanks of the sizes
shown in table III.
3.19 Type III corner drills. Corner drills shall be suitable for use in close places where an ordi-
nary drill cannot be operated. Corner drills shall be constructed with the spindle at one end and the
motor at the opposite end of the housing. Corner drills shall be similar to figure 6 and shall conform
to the dimensions in table IV for the size specified (see 6.2). Corner drills shall be reversible and shall
conform to the performance characteristics specified in table V, in both directions, and shall be furnished
with a feed screw.
3.19.1 Handle. Corner drills shall be equipped with a "live" handle suitably in line with the longi-
tudinal axis of die air motor and at the opposite end of the housing from the spindle. The handle shall
be provided at its outer end with an air inlet connection of nominal pipe size, as specified in table IV.
3.19.2 Throttle. Corner drills shall be provided with a lever or sleeve style throttle on the "live"
handle.
8
-------
OO-D-691d
Ratchet-tg«^HanfUe(far f>ed screw)
Figure 6. Type III, corner drills.
Table IV. Type III corner drills—dimensions
Size
7/8
1-1/4
3
A.S.A. (Morse) taper
socket in spindle
Number
3
4
5
Air inlet
connection
nominal pipe
size
Inch
1/2 or 3/4
1/2 or 3/4
1/2 or 3/4
Weight
(max.)
Pounds
40
50
60
Approach
(max.)
Inches
1-9/16
1-9/16
2-3/8
3.19.3 Spindle. Corner drills shall be equipped with spindles having standard A.S.A. (Morse) taper
sockets of the sizes shown in table IV.
3.19.4 Feed screw. Feed screws furnished with the corner drills shall conform to 3.1718, except
that the feed screw shall be actuated by a reversible ratchet-type handle or other suitable mechanism,
operable within the width of the drill body, for hand-feed control.
-------
OO-D-691d
Table V. Type III, corner drills—performance characteristics
Size
Inches
7/8
1-1/4
3
Specified
torque
Ft.-lbs.
20
40
100
At specified torque
Speed
(min.)
R.p.m.
180
135
90
Air consumption
(max.)
Cu. ft./min./hp.
60
55
45
At no-load
Speed
(max.)
R.p.m.
450
300
150
Air consumption
(max.)
Cu. ft./min.
45
65
65
3.20 Accessories or extra equipment. When accessories or extra equipment are required, they shall
be as specified (see 6.2).
3.21 Instruction book. One copy of an instruction book consisting of the manufacturer's standard
commercial instructions and parts list, bound together, shall be furnished with each drill and borer.
3.22 Workmanship. Drills and borers shall be of the best quality, free from imperfections which
will adversely affect their general appearance, function, or serviceability.
4. QUALITY ASSURANCE PROVISIONS
4.1 Responsibility for inspection. Unless otherwise specified in the contract or purchase order, the
supplier is responsible for the performance of all inspection requirements as specified herein. Except as
otherwise specified, the supplier may utilize his own facilities or any commercial laboratory acceptable
to the Government. The Government reserves the right to perform any of the inspections set forth in
the specification where such inspections are deemed necessary to assure that supplies and services con-
form to prescribed requirements.
4.1.1 Inspection of materials and components. In accordance with 4.1, the supplier is responsible
for insuring that materials and components used were manufactured, tested, and inspected in accordance
with the requirements of referenced subsidiary specifications and standards to the extent specified herein,
or, if none, in accordance with this specification.
4.2 Qualification testing. Qualification testing shall be conducted at a laboratory satisfactory to the
Bureau of Ships. The tests shall consist of the visual, dimensional, and weight examination of 4.4.1 and
4.4.2, the performance tests of 4.7, followed by the qualification tests of 4.8. After satisfactory comple-
tion of the tests of 4.8, the drill or borer shall be disassembled and the various parts examined. Any part
broken, cracked, or deformed shall be cause for rejection. The drill or borer shall then be reassembled
and again subjected to the tests of 4.7. Tests shall be conducted on nonreversible and reversible drills of
each type, style, and size and on each size of borer for which qualification approval is desired. Applica-
tion for qualification tests shall be made in accordance with "Provisions Governing Qualification" (see
6.3).
4.3 Quality conformance inspection.
4.3.1 Inspection lot. Drills and borers of the same type, style, and size shall be considered a lot
for the purpose of quality conformance inspection.
4.3.2 Sampling procedures. Sampling procedures shall be in accordance with MIL—STD—105. Data
for sampling shall be as stated in table VI.
4.4 Examination.
4.4.1 Visual examination. Each sample unit shall be examined for any nonconformance in design,
material, finish, coating, construction, workmanship, and marking. Defects are listed in table VII.
10
-------
00-D-691d
INTERIM AMENDMENT-6 (GSA-FSS)
December 28. 1970
SUPERSEDING
Interim Amendment-5 (NAVY-Ships)
May 15, 1970
INTERIM AMENDMENT
TO
FEDERAL SPECIFICATION
DRILL, PNEUMATIC PORTABLE; AND BORER, WOOD, PNEUMATIC
This Interim Amendment was developed by the Standardization Division,
Federal Supply Service, General Services Administration, Washington,
D. C. 20^06, based upon currently available technical information..
It is recommended that Federal agencies use it in procurement and
forward recommendations for changes to the preparing activity at the
address shown above.
The General Services Administration has authorized the use of this
Interim Amendment as a valid exception to Federal Specification 00-D-&91d.
EASE 1
Paragraph 2.1, under "Federal Specification": Add "PPP-P-^O Packaging and Packing of Hand Tools."
PAGE 2
Paragraph 2.1: Delete "Military Specification" and "MIL-P-12829".
Paragraph 2.2 Other publications. Add the following:
"CAGI-FNEUROP Test Code for the Measurement of Sound from Pneumatic Equipment.
(Copies may be obtained from Compressed Air and Gas Institute, 122 East U2nd Street, New York,
New York 1001?)."
Paragraph 3.2: Delete and substitute:
"3.2 Qualification. Drills and borers furnished under this specification shall be products
which are qualified for listing on the applicable qualified products list at the time set for
opening of bids (see k.2 and 6.3)."
Paragraph 3-3! Delete and substitute:
"3.3 Materials. The materials used in the construction of items and components shall be
sound, of uniform quality and condition and shall conform in composition, heat treatment and
suitability to the standard practices of manufacturers producing tools of the types required
in this specification. Equipment and parts shall be new and high grade commercial quality."
PAGES 2 and 3
Paragraphs 3.7, 3.7.1 and 3.7.2: Delete and substitute:
"3.7 Lubrication. The drills and borers shall be designed so that oil may be applied to all
components that require lubrication. Provisions shall be made for the oil to be manually applied
directly into the tool or automatically supplied through the air pressure line."
FSC 5130
-------
00-D-691d
PAGE 3
Add the following:
"3.10.1 Sound pressure levels. The sound pressure levels measured at an unobstructed distance
of one meter, shall not exceed, the following limits on the A weighted scale in any microphone location
(see 4.7.1):
90 dbA —•
100 dbA --
— Type I, styles A, B, and C in sizes 1/2 inch and smaller.
— Type I, styles A, B, and C in sizes 7/8 inch and larger;
type II; and type III."
PAGE 4
Table I: Delete and substitute:
TABLE I. Type I drills, sizes, and capacities
Size
1/4-high speed
1/4-medium speed
1/4- low speed
3/8-high speed
3/8-medium speed
1/2-pistol grip
1/2
/
7/8
1-1/4
2
3
At spindle
1/4- inch chuck]j/
1/4- inch chuckl/
1/4- inch chuckl/
3/8- inch chuckl/
3/8- inch chuckl/
1/2-inch chuck
Ho. 2 ASA Morse
taper socket
Ho. 3 ASA Morse
taper socket
Ho. 4 ASA Morse
taper socket
No. 5 ASA Morse
taper socket
Ho. 5 ASA Morse
taper socket
Air inlet
connection
nominal pipe size
1/4
1/4
1 /4
1/4
1 / 4
1/4 or 3/8
1/2 or 3/8
1/2 or 3/4
1/2 or 3/4
3/4 or 1
3/4 or 1
Weight
(max.)
4-1/4
6
6
8
8
12
15£/
30
39
45
85
For type of spindle on which chuck is mounted, see 3-17-6.1.
If furnished with chuck, add 2 pounds.
Table II: Delete and substitute:
TABLE II. Type I drills—performance characteristics
Size of drill
Inches
1/4-high speed
1/4-medium speed
1/4- low speed
3/8-high speed
3/8-medium speed
1/2
1/2 (pistol grip)
7/8
1-1/4
2
3
Specified
torque
Ft. Lbs.
0.75
2.0
2.6
2.5
6.0
10
8
30
50
80
200
At specified torque
Speed
(min.)
R.P.M.
1,400
950
500
700
450
500
450
300
290
150
100
Air consumption
(max.)
Cu. Ft. /min. /h. p.
70
65
55
75
65
40
45
35
37
37
38
At no load
Speed
(max.)
R.P.M.
3,200
2,200
1,000
1,600
900
1,000
1,200
500
450
300
150
Air consumption
(max.)
Cu. Ft. /min.
26
38
30
35
4o
35
40
35
60
60
80
-------
00-D-69ld
PAGE 5
Paragraph 3.17.3: Delete and substitute:
"3.17.3 Style C. straight drive. Style C drills shall be similar to figure 3. Unless otherwise
specified (see 6.2), the 1/2-inch and larger drills shall be similar to figure L,. When specified
(see 6.2), 1/2-inch drills shall be similar to figure 3 with pistol grip live handle forward of
position illustrated. (This option negates spindle requirement of table I and the throttle require-
ments specified in 3.17.5 when exercised)."
PAGE 6
Paragraph 3.17.6.2: Delete and substitute:
"3.17.6.2 Sizes 1/2 inch and larger. Unless otherwise specified (see 6.2), the drills shall be
furnished with spindles having standard ASA. Morse taper sockets as shown in table I. When specified
(see 6.2), 1/2-inch size drill spindles shall directly accept a 1/2-inch chuck commercially rated
medium duty without the use of an intermediate adapter or shank."
PAGE 10
Table V: Delete and substitute:
TABUS y. Type III, corner drills—performance characteristics
Size
Inches
7/8
1-1/4
3
Specified
torque
Ft. Lbs.
100
160
250
At specified torque
Speed
(min.)
R.P.M.
180
100
70
Air Consumption
(max.)
Cu. Ft./min./h.t).
45
45
45
At no load
Speed
(max.)
R.P.M.
450
300
150
Air Consumption
(max.)
Cu. Ft. /min.
55
65
65
Paragraph 4-.1: Delete and substitute:
"4.1 Responsibility for inspection. Unless otherwise specified in the contract or purchase order,
the supplier is responsible for the performance of all inspection requirements as specified herein.
Except as otherwise specified in the contract or order, the supplier may use his own or any other
facilities suitable for the performance of the inspection requirements specified herein, unless
disapproved by the Government. The Government reserves the right to perform any of the inspections
set forth in the specification where such inspections are deemed necessary to assure that supplies
and services conform to prescribed requirements."
Paragraph 4.2, line 2: Delete "Bureau of Ships" and substitute "Naval Ship Engineering Center".
Paragraph 4.2, last line: Delete "Provisions Governing Qualification" and substitute "Provisions
Governing Qualification SD-6".
PAGE 12
Add the following:
"4«7.1 Sound pressure level test. The sound pressure level test shall be conducted in accordance
with the applicable provisions of the CAGI-PNEUROP Test Code except as modified herein. The
acceptable limits shall be as specified in 3.10.1.
-------
00-D-691d
PAGE 12 (CON.)
4.7.1«1 Acoustical calibration. The entire instrumentation system shall be calibrated oefore
each test series allowing a minimum instrument warm-up period of 5 minutes if transistorized and
1/2 hour if vacuum tube. Recalibration shall be performed if any instrument adjustment is necessary
during progress of the test. All instrumentation (except microphone) and test personnel shall be as
remotely located as practicable so that the measured data will be unaffected by a nonstationary
observer.
4.7.1.2 Background sound level. The ambient noise level shall be no greater than 10 db less
than the measurement taken with the tool running in all tool and microphone orientations. In
addition, the sound produced by the energy absorbing device, used in the "on load" test, must be at
least 10 dbA below the machine% own sound output."
Paragraphs 5.1 and 6.2 (g) delete "MIL-P-12829" and substitute "PPP-P-40".
Paragraph 6.1: Add the following:
"Maximum sound pressure levels have been set to insure against occupational noise-induced hearing
losses. The tools covered by this specification are considered intermittent duty tools, used in
short bursts of 2 minutes duration or less. The exposure time for tool sizes up to and including
1/2 inch is four hours. The larger sizes are considered to be less intermittent and have an exposure
time of two hours.
Paragraph 6.2: Add the following:
"(i) Specify when 1/2-inch style C drills shall be similar to figure 3 (see 3.17.3), have a
spindle for accepting 1/2-inch drill chucks directly, (see 3.17.6.2) and be furnished with a 1/2-inch
chuck commercially rated medium duty."
PAGE 13
Paragraph 6.3: Delete and substitute:
"6.3 With respect to products requiring qualification, awards will be made only for products
which are at the time set for opening of bids, qualified for inclusion in applicable Qualified
Products List QPL OO-D-691, whether or not such products have actually been so listed by that date.
The attention of the suppliers is called to this requirement, and manufacturers are urged to arrange
to have the products that they propose to offer to the Federal Government tested for qualification
in order that they may be eligible to be awarded contracts or orders for the products covered by
this specification. The activity responsible for the Qualified Products list is the Naval Ship
Engineering Center, Center Building, Prince George's Center, Hyattsville, Maryland 20782 and informa-
tion pertaining to qualification of products may be obtained from that activity. Application, for
Qualification Tests shall be made in accordance with Provisions Governing Qualification SD-6
(see 6.3.1).
u *
6.3.1 Copies of Provisions Governing Qualification SD-6 may be obtained upon application to
Commanding Officer, Naval Publications and Forms Center, 5801 Tabor Avenue, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania 19120."
-------
OO-D-691d
Table VI. Sampling data
Category
Visual examination
Dimensional and
weight examination
Testing
Preparation for
delivery
Sample
unit
One complete
drill or
borer
cc
It
One complete
drill or
borer prepared
for delivery
Inspection
level
II
II
S-4
S-2
Acceptable
quality
level
(AQL)
1.5
1.5
1.5
4.0
AQL expressed
in terms of
Percent
defective
cc
Defects per
hundred units
Defects per
hundred units
Reference
4.4.1
4.4.2
4.5
4.6
Table VII. Classification of defects
Defects
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
Type, style, or size, not specified.
Style of handle, not as specified.
Drill or borer incomplete, parts missing.
Drill or borer, not securely assembled; fasteners, not secured with suitable
locking device.
Spindle, not as specified.
Chuck, not as specified.
Marking missing, illegible, or incorrect.
Drill or borer, not provided with secondary lubrication fittings or primary lubri-
cation device.
Air-inlet connection damaged or not as specified.
Air strainer damaged, missing, or not easily removable.
Handles, not removable when required.
Throttle, not as specified.
Material poor quality, defective, or unsuited for purpose intended.
Like parts from same manufacturer not interchangeable.
Bearings, not as specified or not adequately-protected from dirt and foreign
matter.
Poor workmanship in fabrication.
Tapped holes under minimum depth specified or not reinforced, as applicable.
Table VIII. Classification of preparation for delivery defects
Examine
Defects
Markings (exterior and
interior)
Materials
Workmanship
Contents (exterior and
interior container)
Omitted; incorrect; illegible; improper size, location, sequence,
or method of application.
Any component missing or damaged.
Inadequate application of components such as incomplete closure
of container flaps, loose strapping, inadequate stapling.
Distortion of container.
Number per container is more or less than required. Net weight
exceeds requirements.
11
-------
OO-D-691d
4.4.2 Dimensional and weight examination. Each sample unit shall be examined for any noncon-
formance with dimensional and weight requirements.
4.5 Testing. Each sample unit shall be tested in accordance with 4.7.
4.6 Inspection of preparation for delivery. The preservation, packaging, packing, and marking
shall be examined for conformance with the requirements of section 5. (See tables VI and VIII.)
4.7 Performance tests. All performance tests shall be based on operation of the tools with compressed
air at a gage pressure of 90 pounds p.s.i. measured as close to the tool as practicable. The tools shall
be tested for air consumption, speed, torque, and horsepower, as specified in the applicable table. The
tests shall also determine compliance with the throttle, rotational, and reversability action, as applicable.
The test tools shall be connected to the air supply by means of a 10-foot length of 5/8-inch inside diam-
eter hose.
4.8 Qualification tests.
4.8.1 Types I and III drills. The drills shall be tested by actual drilling, for 150 hours, medium
steel using the maximum size high speed twist drill corresponding to the rated size of the drill. The
medium steel test material shall have a minimum Brinell hardness of 112, and shall be 1-inch thick when
testing the 1/4-, 3/8-, 1/2-, and 7/8-inch size drills; and 1-1/2-inch thick when testing drills that are
1-12 inch size and larger.
4.8.2 Type II, wood borers. The borers shall be tested by actual boring, for 150 hours, dry, well
seasoned oak hardwood 1-1/2-inches thick, using the maximum size of wood bit, in inches, correspond-
ing to the rated size of the borer.
5. PREPARATION FOR DELIVERY
5.1 Preservation, packaging, and packing. Preservation, packaging, and packing shall be in accord-
ance with MIL-P-12829. Levels of preservation, packaging, and packing shall be as specified (see 6.2).
5.2 Marking.
5.2.1 Military agencies. In addition to any special marking required by the contract or order (see
6.2), interior packages and shipping containers shall be marked in accordance with MIL—STD—129.
5.2.2 Civil agencies. In addition to any special marking required by the contract or order (see 6.2),
interior packages and shipping containers shall be marked in accordance with Fed.-Std. No. 123.
6. NOTES
6.1 Intended use. Pneumatic drills covered by this specification are intended for drilling holes in
metal, using twist drills. Wood borers are for use in drilling holes in wood, using wood bits.
6.2 Ordering data. Purchasers should elect the preferred options offered herein and include the
following data in procurement documents:
(a) Title, number, and date of this specification.
(W' Type, style, and size of drill or borer required (see 1.2.1 and tables I, III, and IV).
X-c) If reversible type I drill is required (see 3.17).
(d) Style of handle grip required for type I drills (see 3.17.4).
(e) If feed screw is not required on type I drills (see 3.17.8).
(f) Accessories or extra equipment, when required (see 3.20),
(g) Applicable levels of preservation, packaging, and packing required (see 5.1, and MIL-P-12829).
(h) Special marking, if required (see 5.2).
12
-------
OO-D-691d
6.3 With respect to products requiring qualification, awards will be made only for such products
as have, prior to the time set for opening of bids, been tested and approved for inclusion on Qualified
Products List OO-D-691, whether or not such products have actually been so listed by that date. The
attention of the suppliers is called to this requirement, and manufacturers are urged to arrange to have
the products that they propose to offer to the Federal Government tested for qualification, in order
that they may be eligible to be awarded contracts or orders for the products covered by this specifica-
tion. The activity responsible for the qualified products list is the Naval Ship Engineering Center, De-
partment of the Navy, Washington, D. C., 20360, and information pertaining to qualification of prod-
ucts may be obtained from that activity. Application for qualification tests shall be made in accordance
with "Provisions Governing Qualification." (Copies may be obtained upon application to Commanding
Officer, Naval Supply Depot, 5801 Tabor Ave., Philadelphia, Pa. 19120.)
MILITARY CUSTODIANS: Preparing activity:
Army—GL GSA-FSS
Navy—SH
AirForce-69 CIVILIAN AGENCIES:
HEW
Review activities: COM—NBS
Army—GL, MO VA
Navy—SH
Air Force—69
User activities:
Army—WC
Navy—MC, YD
U. S. Government Printing Office: 1967.
Orders for this publication are to be placed with General Services Administration, acting as an agent for the Super-
intendent of Documents. See section 2 of the specification to obtain extra copies and other documents referenced
herein. Price 10 cents each.
13
-------
00-W-891e
August 25, 1967
SUPERSEDING
Int. Fed. Spec. 00-W-00391d(GSA-FSS)
May 13, 1965 and
Fed. Spec. 00-W-391c
December 19, 1963
FEDERAL SPECIFICATION
WRENCH, IMPACT, PNEWiATIC, PORTABLE
This specification was approved by the Commissioner, Federal
Supply Service, General Services Administration, for the use of
all Federal agencies.
1. SCOPE AND CLASSIFICATION
1.1 Scope. This specification covers portable pneumatic impact wrenches, for tightening
and loosening bolts and nuts, that are most generally used by the Federal Government.
1.2 Classification.
1.2.1 Sizes. The wrenches shall be furnished with the following square male drive sizes, ss
specified (see 3.11 and 6.1):
Size 3/8 (lA-inch capacity).
Size 1/2 (3/8-inch capacity).
Size 5/8 (5/8-inch capacity).
Size 3A (3A-inch capacity).
Size 1 (1-lA-inch capacity).
Size 1-1/2 (l-3A-inch capacity).
2. APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS
2,1 Specification and standards. The following specifications and standards, of issues in
effect on date of invitation for bids or request for proposal, form a part of this
specification to the extent specified herein.
Federal Standard;
Fed. Std. !,ro. 123 - Marking for Domestic Shipment (Civilipn Agencies).
(Activities outside the Federal Government may obtain copies of Federal Specifications,
Standards, and Handbooks as outlined under General information ir. the Index of Federal
Specifications and Standards and at the prices indicated in the Index. The Index, which
includes cumulative monthly supplements as issued, is for sale on a subscription basis
by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C., 20lj02.
(Single copies of this specification and other product specifications required by activities
iutside the Federal Government for bidding purposes are available without charge at the General
Services .Administration Regional Offices in Boston, New York, Washington, D. C., Atlanta, Chicago
Kansas City, Mo.,; Ft. Worth, Denver, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Seattle, Wash.
(Federal Government activities may obtain copies of Federal Specifications, Standards,
and Handbooks and the Index of Federal Specifications and Standards from established
distribution points in their agencies.)
Military Specifioatipn8
MIL-P-12329 - Packaging of Pneumatic Kand Tools with Attachments and Accessories.
Military Standard:
MH-SID-129 - Marking for Shipment and Storage.
F3C 5130
-------
00-W-891e
(Copies of Military Specifications =nd Standards required by contractors in connection with
specific procurement runcticns should be obtained from the procuring activity or as directed by
the contracting officer.)
2.2 Other publications, The following documents form a part of this specification to the
extent specified herein. Unless otherwise indicated, the issue in effect on date of invitation
for bids or request for proposal shall arroly.
l.'atipnsl Bureau of Standards (NBS.) Handbook:
K25 - Screw-Thread itandards for j&'clersl Services.
(Application for copies should be addressed to the Superinxendant of Documents, U. S. Government
Printing Office, Washington, 0. C., 20^02.)
United States of America Standards Institute (USASI) Publication!
B5.33 - 1958 - Driving and Spindle Ends for Portable Air and Electric Tools.
(Copies r.ay be obtained from the United States of America Standards Institute, 10 East liOth Street,
:;ew York, i;.Y. ,10016.)
(Technical society and technical sssociation specifications and standards are generally available
for reference from libraries. They are also distributed among technical groups and using Federal
agencies.)
3.1 Illustrations. The illustrations shown herein are descriptive, and not restrictive, and
're not intended to preclude the purchase of wrenches otherwise conforming to this specification.
3.2 Qualification. Portable pneumatic impact wrenches furnished under this specification shall
be 9 product which has been tested, and passed the qualification tests specified herein, and has
been listed on, or approved for listing or. the applicabls qualified products list.
3.3 Material. Material used in the construction of the wrenches shall be of a good commercial
quality suitable for the intended purpose. All materials used shall be free fror defects and
imperfections that may adversely effect the serviceability of the finished product.
3.U Screw threads. All threaded parts, including screws, bolts, and nuts, shall conform to the
applicable requirerants of NBS H28.
3.5 Identification of product. Wrenches shall be marked in a plain and permanent manner, such
that the source of manufacture csn be easily determined.
3.6 Lubrication.
3.6.1 Primary lubrication. Wrenches shall be provided with an oil reservoir. The oil reservoir
shall be of sufficient capacity so that one filling will supply lubrication to moving parts in the
path of the air stress for at Is^st 8 hours of continuous operation. The oil shall be fed from the
reservoir by sr. automatic device that functions through an action dependent upon the operation of
the wrench. The oil flow shall be regulated so that lubrication will be sufficient without excessive
quantities of lubricant being discharged with the exhaust air.
3.6.2 Secondary lubrication. Conventional type lubricating fittings or openings or other suitable
means shall be provided for introduction of sufficient lubricant for bearings, gears, and other moving
parts not lubricated from the oil reservoir. The fittings and openings shall be such that lubrication
is required only once in not less than k& hours of actual operation. Where acceptable prelubricated
sealed bearings are used, no external means of lubrication 'shall be required for these parts.
3.7 Air inlet connection. The air inlet connection shall consist of a well -secured ferrous
fitting threaded vith internal American Standard taper pipe threads (NPT) or internal Dryseal
American Standard taper pipe threads (HFTF) in sizes specified in table I. The air inlet shall be
fitted with an air strainer or screen (20 mesh or finer) which shall be effective in retaining
solid particles in the compressed air supply. The strainer or screen shall be of such design that
it can be easily* removed for cleaning.
-------
This document has been approved
for public release and sale; its
distribution is unlimited.
OO-W-891e
INTERIM AMENDMENT-S(NAVY-Ships)
July 30, 1971
SUPERSEDING!/
INTERIM AMENDMENT-4(NAVY-Ships)
October 23, 1970
INTERIM AMENDMENT
TO
FEDERAL SPECIFICATION
WRENCH, IMPACT, PNEUMATIC, PORTABLE
This interim amendment was developed by the Department of the Navy, Naval Ship Engineer-
ing Center, Center Building, Prince George's Center, Hyattaville, Maryland 20782, based upon
currently available technical information. It is reconuoended that Federal agencies use it
in procurement and forward recommendations for changes to the preparing activity at the address
shown above.
The General Services Administration has authorized the use of this interim amendment
as a valid exception to Federal Specification OO-W-891e.
Page 1
1.2.1: Delete and substitute:
"1.2.1 Sizes. The wrenches shall be furnished with the following square male drive
sizes, as specified (see 3.11 and 6.1):
Size 3/8 (1/4-inch capacity), straight drive.
Size 3/8 (I/4-inch capacity), angle drive.
Size 1/2 (3/8-inch capacity), straight drive.
Size 1/2 (3/8-inch capacity), angle drive.
Size 5/8 (5/8-inch capacity).
Size 3/4 (3/4-inch capacity).
Size 1 (1-1/4-irich capacity) .
Size 1-1/2 (1-3/4-inch capacity)."
2.1: Add:
"Federal Specification;
PPP-P-40 - Packaging and Packing of Hand Tools."
2.1: Delete:
"Federal Standard;
Federal Standard No. 123 - Marking for Domestic Shipment (Civilian Agencies).
Military Specification;
MIL-P-12829 - Packaging of Pneumatic Hand Tools with Attachments and Accessories.
Military Standard;
MIL-STD-129 - Marking for Shipment and Storage."
-/ CHANGES FROM PREVIOUS ISSUE. THE OUTSIDE MARGINS OF THIS DOCUMENT HAVE BEEN MARKED "I"
TO INDICATElniE'RE"'CHANGES {DELETIONS, ADDITIONS, ETC.) FROM THE PREVIOUS ISSUE HAVE BEEN
MADE. THIS HAS BEEN DONE AS A CONVENIENCE ONLY AND THE GOVERNMENT ASSUMES NO LIABILITY
WHATSOEVER FOR ANY INACCURACIES IN THESE NOTATIONS. BIDDERS AND CONTRACTORS ARE CAUTIONED
TO EVALUATE THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS DOCUMENT BASED ON THE ENTIRE CONTENT AS WRITTEN IRRE-
SPECTIVE OF THE MARGINAL NOTATIONS AND RELATIONSHIP TO THE LAST PREVIOUS ISSUE.
FSC 5130
-------
OO-W-891e
INTERIM AMENDMENT-5(NAVY-Ships)
Page 2
2.1: Delete source paragraph for Military Specifications and Military Standards.
2.2: Delete in its entirety all reference to "American Standards Association (ASA)
Publications" and substitute the following:
"AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARDS INSTITUTE (ANSI)
ANSI B5.38-1958 - Driving and Spindle Ends For Portable Air and Electric Tools.
ANSI S5.1-1971 - Test Code for the Measurement of Sound from Pneumatic Equipment.
Inc
(Application for copies should be addressed to the American National Standards Institute
., 1430 Broadway, New York, New York 10018.)"
3.2 Delete and substitute:
"3.2 Qualification. Portable pneumatic wrenches furnished under this specification
shall be products which are qualified for listing on the applicable qualified products list
at the time set for opening of bids (see 4.2 and 6.3)."
3.3: Delete and substitute:
"3.3 Materials. The materials used in the construction of items and components shall
be sound, of uniform quality and condition and shall conform in composition, heat treatment
and suitability to the standard practices of manufacturers producing tools of the types
required in this specification. Equipment and parts shall be new and high grade commercial
quality."
3.6, 3.6.1, and 3.6.2:
"3.6 Lubrication.
Delete and substitute:
* "3.6.1 Primary lubrication. Wrenches shall be provided with an oil reservoir, either
built-in or of the airline lubricator type. Capacity of the reservoir shall assure metered
lubrication of all moving parts in the air stream, from one filling, for a minimum operating
period of 8 hours.
# "3.6.2 Secondary lubrication. Wrenches requiring periodic lubrication of parts other
than those in the air stream shall be provided with external means of applying the required
lubricant without disassembling the tool."
Page 3
After 3.10, add the following paragraph as 3.10.1:
# "3.10.1 Sound pressure level. The sound pressure level shall not exceed the following
decibel limits on the A weighted scale in any prescribed microphone location (see 4.8).
95 dbA
103 dbA
Sizes 1/2 inch and smaller
Sizes 5/8 inch and larger
Table I: Delete and substitute:
" Table I - Weight, dimensional and performance requirements.
Spindle
size
Inches
3/8
1/2
5/8
3/4
1
1-1/2
Weight
max.
Pounds
5
7
12
19
35
73
Length
max.
Inches
9-1/4
10-5/8
12
16
21-1/8
25-5/8
Spindle
offset
max.
Inches
1-1/4
1-3/8
1-5/8
2
2-1/2
3
Air y
inlet
(NPT-NPTF)
Inch
1/4
1/4
1/4
3/8
3/8
1/2
Air consumption—
at load
max.
CFM
15
30
35
50
60
85
Time to twist
specimen 180°
max.
Seconds
5
5
5
5
8
10
— Other air inlet sizes will be permitted provided adapters are furnished in the sizes
2/
which will permit connections of air hoses in accordance with this table.
— Air consumption at load measured during test specimen twist test.
Page 2
of 4 pages
-------
OO-W-891e
INTERIM AMENDMENT-5(NAVY-Ships)
Page 6
3.15: Delete and substitute:
"3.15 Angle drive. When specified (see 6.1), the 3/8 and 1/2 inch size wrenches
shall be of the angle drive type with the axis of the drive shaft 90° from the axis of the
wrench housing. Angle drive wrenches may exceed the length requirements of table I by no
more than 4 inches. "*
# 3.19, line 1: Delete ("torque)" throughout.
4.1: Delete and substitute:
"4.1 Responsibility for inspection. Unless otherwise specified in the contract or
purchase order,the supplier is responsible for the performance of all inspection require-
ments as specified herein. Except as otherwise specified in the contract or order, the
supplier may use his own or any other facilities suitable for the performance of the in-
spection requirements specified herein, unless disapproved by the Government. The Govern-
ment reserves the right to perform any of the inspections set forth in the specification
where such inspections are deemed necessary to assure supplies and services conform to
prescribed requirements."
4.2, last line: Delete "Provisions Governing Qualification" and substitute "Provisions
Governing Qualification SD-6".
Page 7
# 4.6.1, line 3: Delete "SAE grade 1" and substitute "plain carbon (1020 series}".
# 4.6.1, lines 4 and 5: Delete "maximum hardness of 95" and substitute "hardness of
60-70".
Table IV: Delate and substitute:
TABLE IV. Dimensions of test specimens
• • "! "— 17
, Spindle ; Nominal—
: size | hex, size A,
i inches j inches
\ 3/8 ! 1/2
' 1/2 I 5/8
; 5/8 1 7/8
j j
3/4 1
1 1-1/8
^ 1-1/2 1-3/8
Overall
length B,
inches
4
4-1/4
4-1/2
4-1/2
4-1/2
5
"C" length,
inches,
± 0-005
0,500
.750
J .000
1.000
1.000
1.500
"D" diameter,
inch
+ 0.0005
0.250
.320
I
.430
.510
.680
1.000
"E" diameter
inch
+ 0.005
0.480
.680
.680
.880
.980
1.000
— Distance across flats of hexagon bar.
Page 8
Figure 6: In the drawing, delete "Bolt" and substitute "Test specimen".
Page 9
4.6.2, last sentence: Delete "bolt".
Add the following paragraphs:
"4.8 Sound pressure level test. The sound pressure level test shall be conducted in
accordance with the applicable provisions of ANSI S5.1, except as modified herein. The test
fixture shall be equivalent to figure 18 of ANSI S5.1 and the acceptable limits shall be
as specified in 3.10.1.
Page 3
of 4 pages
-------
OO-W-891e
INTERIM AMENDMENT-5(NAVY-Ships)
Page 9 (cont'd.)
4.8.1 Acoustical calibration. The entire instrumentation system shall be calibrated
before each test series^allowing a minimum instrument warmup period of 5 minutes if trans-
istorized and 1/2 hour if vacuum tube. Recalibration shall be performed if any instrument
adjustment is necessary during progress of the test.
4.8.2 Background sound level. The ambient noise level shall be at least 10 dbA less
than the measurement taken with the tool running in all tool and microphone orientations.
In addition, the sound produced by the energy absorbing device used in the "on load" test
must be at least 10 dbA below the machine's own sound output."
5.1: Delete and substitute:
"5.1 Preservation, packaging, packing, and marking. Impact wrenches shall be preserved,
packaged, packed, and marked in accordance with PPP-P-40. The level of preservation, pack-
acing, and packing shall be level A, B, or C as specified (see 6.1)."
5.2, 5.2.1 and 5.2.2: Delete in their entirety.
6.Kg) : Delete.
Add the following new paragraph:
"6.2.2 Maximum sound pressure levels have been, set to insure against occupational
noise-induced hearing losses. The tools covered by this specification are considered inter-
mittent duty tools, used in short bursts of two minutes duration or less, 0.5 "on-fraction".
The exposure time for tool sizes up to and including 1/2 inch is four hours. The larger
sizes are considered tc be less intermittent, and have an exposure time of two hours."
Page 10
6.3: Delete and substitute:
"6.3 With respect to products requiring qualification, awards will be made only for
products which are at the time set for opening of bids, qualified for inclusion in applicable
Qualified Products List QPL OO-W-891, whether or not such products have actually been so
listed by that date. The attention of the suppliers is called to this requirement, and
manufacturers are urged to arrange to have the products that they propose to offer to the
Federal Government tested for qualification in order that they may be eligible to be awarded
contracts or orders for the products covered by this specification. The activity respons-
ible for the Qualified Products List is the Naval Ship Engineering Center, Prince George's
Center, Center Building, Hyattsville, Maryland 20782, and information pertaining to quali-
fication of products may be obtained from that activity. Application for Qualification
tests shall be made in accordance with "Provisions Governing Qualification SD-6" (see 6.3.1).
*
"6.3.1 Copies of "Provisions Governing Qualification SD-6" may be obtained upon appli-
cation to Commanding Officer, Naval Publications and Forms Center, 5801 Tabor Avenue,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19120."
Under "Preparing activity": Delete "GSA-FSS" and substitute "NAVY - SH".
Preparing activity:
Navy - SH
(Project 5130-N209)
Page 4
of 4 pages
-------
OO-W-891e
AMENDMENT -1
October 16, 196?
FEDERAL SPECIFICATION
WRENCH, IMPACT, PNEUMATIC, PORTABLE
This amendment, which forms part of Federal Specifi-
cation OO-W-891e, dated August 25, 1967, was approved
by the Commissioner, Federal Supply Service, General
Services Administration, for the use of all Federal
agencies.
Page 3, Table I, column 7: For Spindle size 1, delete "5" seconds
and substitute "8" seconds.
Page 7, Table IV: Delete and substitute:
" T*P^f IV. Dimensions of test specimens
Spindle
size
inqhes
1-1/2
Nominal^
hex, size A,
inches
1/2
5/8
7/8
1
1-1/8
1-1/8
Overall
length B,
inches
4
4-1/4
4-1/2
4-1/2
4-1/2
"C" length,
inches, jjD. 005
0.500
.750
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.-500
"D" diameter,
inch, ± 0.0005
0..250
.320
.430
.510
.680
1.000
"E" diameter,
inch, ± 0.005
0.480
.680
.680
.880
.980
1.000
Distance across flats of hexagon bar.
Page 10j "Preparing activity:";
"Navy - SH".
Custodians:
Army - GL
Navy - SH
Air Force - 84
Review activities:
Army - GL
Navy - SH
Air Force - 84.
User activities:
Navy - YD, MC
Civilian Agency Interest:
GSA -FSS
Delete "GSA-FSS" and substitute
Preparing activity:
Navy - SH
(Project 5130-OU9)
FSC 5130
-------
00-W-891e
3.8 Bearings. .^11 rotating parts of the wrenches sLsll be provided with commercially available
bearings. The rotor shrift sr-^ll b- provide.! v;ith ball bearings. Needle and roller bearings, which
are primarily designed for radial loads, nh^ll not 'ie used ir; a thrust position. If ope:; type bearings
ere uoed, they shall be suitably housed and r.dequs\-c-Iy sealed to prevent leakage of lubricant and
entrance of dirt and durt. The drive end of the spi;:J?.e may be supported by •- suitable inserted
sliding cor.tr-ct type '"--ring (sleeve bj=rir>f}.
3.9 C-eneral construction, '..'ranches shall "oa of rugged construction so as to withstand, without
failure, treatment li'.-raly to be encountered under general service conditions. I'.'rsnch3s shall be
self-contained, readily accessible for adjustment or replacement of parts. Parts which require
lubrication shc.ll be properly enclosed so as to prevent entrance of foreign particles and leakage
of lubricant. V'or'cir.g -.ar'os exposed to wear shall be cf sufficient hardness to withstand the service
required. Parts shall be properly finished by '-achirdng or grinding to dimensions within limits
established by good cormr.ercisl practice. Similar narts shall be interchangeable and of good fit
when assembled with relative parts of the same size, type, and make. Wrenches shall be reliable
and effective when operated on compressed air lines at gage pressures between 80 and 100 pounds per
square inch (p.s.i.).
3.10 Housing. Housing shall be strong enough to prevent indentation under service conditions.
V/hen threaded fasteners are utilized to assemble adjacent housing components, through bolting shall
be used in preference to t=pnped holes. Cap screws, if used, shall engage threads in ferrous housings
or ferrous inserts in nonferrous housings by not less than a length equal to the pitch diameter of the
fastener thread. lihere ferrous inserts are not used in nonferrous housings, cap screws shall
engage threads by net less than length equal to 1-1/2 times the pitch diameter of the fastener thread.
ill threaded fasteners shall be secured with suitable locking devices.
3.11 Spindle, The drive end of the spindle shall be wear-resistant. The drive end, when fitted
with a socket, shall not show excessive run-out which may adversely affect operation of the wrench.
The drive end of the spindle shall conform to USASI B5«38 for the nominal square male drive size, as
specified for the applicable size wrench in table I.
3.12 Operation. The vrenches sh~ll be reversible. The rotational direction of the wrench shall
be controlled by a conveniently located mechanical device which is independent of the throttle. The
rotational control shall be plainly and permanently marked to indicate direction of rotation.
3.13 Inpaot unit. Wrenches shall contain an impact unit which is actuated by the motor. The
impact unit shall be designer ~co convert torque from the motor into rotaiy impacts and to transmit
the so impacts to the spindle.
3.1k Sizes. The wrenches shall confora to the requirements of table I for the size specified
(see 6.1), and shall be similar to figures 1, 2, 3, U, or 5, as applicable. The performance criteria
of table I applies to the wrenches in the forward(counterclockwise rotation of the spindle looking
at the front of the wrench) direction only:
Weight, dimensional and performance requirements
Spindle
size
Inches
3/8
1/2
5/8
3/1
1
1-1/2
Weight
max.
Pounds
5
7
12
19
35
73
Length
max.
Inches
9-lA
lo-S/8
12
16
21-1/8
25-5/8
Spindle
offset
rax.
Inches
1-iA
1-3/8
,;>ir
inlet
Cl.TT-NPTF)
Inch
lA
1/U
1-5/8 * lA
2
2-1/2
3/8
3/8
3 1 1/2
Air consiJKT>tioni'/
at load
D3X.
C?N
15
30
3?
50
60
85
Time to twist bolt
soecimen 180°
max.
Seconds
5
<
5
5
5
10
I/ Air consumption at load measured during test specimen twist test.
-------
00-W-891e
FIGURE 1. Pistol style handle.
FIGURE 2. Body grip style handle.
FIGURE 3. Closed style handle.
-------
00-W-891e
FIGURE U. Fixed handle or grip.
FIGURE 5« Body grip style iiandle, angle drive.
-------
00-W-891e
3.15 Angle drive. When specified (see 6.1), the 1/4 and 3/8 inch wrenches shall be of the
angle drive type with the axis of the drive shaft 90° from the axis of the wrench housing.
3.16 Handles.
3.16.1 Sizes 3/8 and 1/2 inch. Each wrench of the 3/8 and 1/2 inch size shall be equipped
with a pistol-style handle (fig. 1) or a body grip-style handle figure 2 or 5 (when applicable),
as specified (see 6.1). The pistol-style handle tool shall be fitted with the air-inlet con-
nection at the base of the handle. The body-grip style handle tool shall be fitted with the
air-inlet connection at the end of the housing opposite the spindle.
3.16.2 Sizes 5/8 to 1 inch. Each wrench of the 5/8 to 1 inch size shall be equipped with a
closed-style handle (fig. 3) located at the end of the housing opposite the spindle or a pistol-
style handle (fig. 1), as specified (see 6.1). Sizes 5/8 to 1 inch wrenches shall be fitted with
the air-inlet connection at the base of the handle. Wrenches furnished with closed-style handles
shall be equipped with a removable "dead" handle located in or on the housing, perpendicular to
the spindle axis and to the plane of the closed-style handle.
3.16.3 Size 1-1/2 inch. Each wrench of the 1-1/2 inch size shall be equipped with a fixed
handle or grip (fig. 4) located at the end of the housing opposite the spindle, a removable "dead"
handle located in the side of the housing perpendicular to the spindle axis, and a "live" handle
in the side of the housing in alignment with the "dead" handle. The "live" handle shall be fitted
with the air-inlet connection.
3.1? Throttle. Wrenches shall be provided with a nonleakable manual throttle for controlling
the supply of compressed air. Throttles shall be of such design that the speed can be regulated
during the operation. Wrenches of the 1/4 to 1 inch sizes shall be equipped with a trigger,
button, or lever style throttle on the handle. Wrenches of the 1-1/2 inch size shall be equipped
with a sleeve or lever style throttle on the "live" handle.
3.18 Accessories or extra equipment, '//hen specified (see 6.1), accessories or extra equipment
shall be furnished.
3.19 Air volume (torque) regulator. The wrenches shall be furnished with an air volume (torque)
regulator. The regulator may either be built into the wrench or furnished separately. It shall
have varying degrees of restriction for regulating the volume of air flow. When in the wide open
position, the wrench air consumption shall not exceed that shown in table I.
3.20 Instruction book. One copy of an instruction book consisting of the manufacturer's
standard commercial instructions and parts list, bound together, shall be furnished with each wrench.
3.21 Workmanship. The wrenches and accessories shall be free from all imperfections which
will adversely affect the general appearance, function, or serviceability.
>*•. QUALITY ASSURANCE PROVISIONS
4.1 Responsibility for inspection. Unless otherwise specified in the contract or purchase
order, the supplier is responsible for the performance of all inspection requirements as specified
herein. Except as otherwise specified, the supplier may utilize his own facilities or any commercial
laboratory acceptable to the Government. The Government reserves the right to perform any of the
inspections set forth in the specification where such inspections are deemed necessary to assure
that supplies and services conform to prescribed requirements.
IK 1.1 Inspection of materials and components. In accordance with 4.1, the supplier is responsible
for insuring that materials and components used were manufactured, tested, and inspected in accordance
with the requirements of referenced subsidiary specifications and standards to the extent specified
herein, or if none, in accordance with this specification.
4.2 Qualification tests. Qualification tests shall be conducted at a laboratory satisfactory
to the Naval Ship Engineering Center and shall consist of the tests specified in 4.6 and 4.7, and
the examination specified in 4.4. Tests shall be conducted on each size impact wrench for which
qualification is desired. Application for qualification tests shall be made in accordance with
"Provisions Governing Qualification" (see 6.3).
4.3 Quality conformance inspection.
4.3.1 Inspection lot. Wrenches of the same size shall be considered a lot for the purpose of
quality conformance inspection. Inspection shall include the examination of 4.4, the test of 4.6,
and the inspection for delivery of 4.5.
-------
00-W-891e
4.3.2 Sampling procedures. Sampling procedures shall be in accordance with MIL-STD-105. Data
for sampling shall be as stated in table II.
TABLE II._ Sampling data
Category
Visual examination
Dimensional and
weight examination^
Testing for quality
confornance
Preparation for
delivery
Sample unit
One wrench
One wrench
One wrench
One wrench
packaged for
dejiverv
Inspection
level
II
II
II
II
Acceptable
quality
level
1*5
1.5
1.5
4.0
AQL expressed
in terms of
Percent defective
Percent defective
Percent defective
Percent defective
Reference
4,4.1
4,4.2
4,6
4.5
4.4 Examination.
4.4.1 Visual examination. Each sample unit shall be examined for any nonconformance in design,
material, finish, construction, workmanship, and marking. Defects are listed in table III.
. TABLK III. Classification of defects
Ho.
Defects
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Material nonconforming.
Wrench not easily adjustable or parts not easily replaceable.
Lubricated parts enclosure nonconforming.
Similar parts not diraensionally and functionally interchangeable.
Air-inlet connection not as specified, damaged, or missing.
Air strainer mission or damaged, not easily removable.
Marking, nonconforming, illegible, incorrect, or missing.
Handles not as specified or damaged, not removable, when required.
Throttle nonconforming, damaged, inoperable, or missing.
Spindle not as specified.
Bearings not as specified, broken, cracked, or pitted.
Lubrication of wrench not as specified: evidence of oil leakage.
4.4.2 Dimensional and weight examination. Each sample unit shall be examined for any
nonconformance with dimensional and weight requirements.
4.5 Inspection of preparation for delivery. The preservation, packaging, packing, and marking
shall be examined for conformance with the requirements of section 5.
4.6 Test specimen twist test. Sample wrenches shall be subjected to a test to determine compliance
with the twist time requirements specified in table I, for the applicable size wrench being tested.
^.6.1 Apparatus. The test set-up shall consist of a fixture for holding the test specimen, similar
to that shown in figure 6. The specimen shall be machined from annealed, unfinished hexagon bar stock,
conforming to SAE grade 1 commercial steel, having a minimum tensile strength of 55,000 p.s.i., con-
taining not more than 0.05 percent phosphorus and 0.06 percent sulphur, with a maximum hardness of
95 on the Rockwell B scale. The specimen shall be of the shape shown in figure 7 and the dimensions
specified in table IV for the size wrench being tested.
TABLE IV. Dimensions of test specimens
Size of
wrench,
inches
1/4
3/8
5/8
3/<*
1-1/4
1-3/4
Nominal!^
hex, size A,
inches
1/2
5/8
7/8
1
1-1/8
1-3/8
Overall
length B,
inches
4"
4-1/4
4-1/2
4-1/2
4-1/2
5
"C" length,
inches, ±0.005
0.500
.750
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.500
"D" diameter,
inch, + 0.0005
0.250
.320
.430
.510
.680
1.000
"E" diameter,
inch, ± 0.005
0.480
.680
.680
.880
.980
1.000
I/ Distance across flats of hexagon bar.
-------
ROTATING SOCKET
SPECIMEN
BOLT Mia FIXTURE
BRAKE-USED FOR ADJUSTING
V
AIR PRESSURE
0
o
ALIGNMENT PUSHING
FOR ROTATING SOCKET
STE.EIL BASE: PLATE:
30" x /Q" x 3"
FIGURE 6. Cross sectional drawing of "Time to Twist" set-up for pneumatic wrenches.
1
! i./"
^
C
^
F
I
i
///
r*~;2 ~*"
R •
)/0/?
D
^ /"
^ L
Ap/a
; — »*•
5
•
1
f
i
i"
r+x -*i
-- / x- • M.
"* /^ ^
^
FIGURE ?. Hexagon bar twist test specimen.
8
-------
00-W-891e
k.6.2 Procedure. A test specimen of the applicable size shall be mounted in the test fixture.
The air supply to the wrench shall be adjusted by a means of a pressure regulator to a constant air
pressure of 90 p.s.i. while the tang is rotating at approximately 15 revolutions per minute. The
wrench shall then be mounted on the test specimen, vising a socket of the same hexagon size as the
hexagon size of the test specimen. The wrench shall be allowed to impact until the specimen tvists
90°. Using this initial 90° twist as a datum point, the wrench shall again be allowed to impact for
the time specified for the applicable size wrench being tested (see table l), and the test specimen
shall have twisted an additional 180°. The time required to twist the specimen and the ail-
consumption, while impacting, shall be recorded. Three runs shall be made with each size wrench being
tested and the average values obtained for air consumption and time to twist the bolt specimen.
Average values exceeding those specified in table I shall be cause for rejection. If a bolt specimen
breaks prior to being twisted 180°, it shall be discarded and a new specimen substituted.
k.J Service test (qualification testing only). Each size wrench submitted for qualification
testing (see k.2) shall complete 150 hours of actual work under practical service conditions. Each
shall first be inspected in accordance with k.k and shall be tested in accordance with k.6. The
wrench shall then be put into field use to determine the ease of operation, general serviceability,
suitability, and durability of the tool. Failure during the service test of any components of the
tool, exclusive of attachments, shall be cause for rejection. After the service test has been
completed, the wrench shall be completely disassembled and all parts examined. Any part broken,
cracked, or defoimed, or not in accordance with the requirements of this specification, shall be cause
for rejection. Wrenches completing the service test and disassembly examination shall be reassembled
and once again subjected to the test of k.6.
5. PREPARATIOK FOR DELIVERY
5.1 Preservation, packaging, and packing. Jfopact wrenches shall be preserved and packaged in
accordance with MIL-P-12829A, level A or C, as specified (see 6.1). Packing shall be in accordance
with MIL-P-12829A, level A, B, or C, as specified (see 6.l).
5.2 Marking.
5.2.1 Civil agencies. In addition to any special marking required by the contract or order
(see 6.1), interior packages and shipping containers shall be marked in accordance with Fed. Std.
No. 123.
5.2.2 Military agencies. In addition to any special marking required by the contract or order
(see 6.1), interior packages and shipping containers shall be marked in accordance with MIL-STD-129.
6. ITOTES
6.1 Ordering data. Purchasers should select the preferred options offered herein and include
the following data in procurement documents:
(a) Title, number, and date of this specification.
(b) Size required (see 1.2.1 and 3.1k, table l).
(c) Whether wrenches of the 3/8- and 1/2-inch size shall
be of the angle drive type (see 3.15).
(d) Handle style required, as applicable (see 3.16).
(e) Accessories or extra equipment, when required (see 3.18).
(f) Applicable preservation, packaging, and packing require-
ments (see 5.1).
(g) Special marking, if required (see 5«2).
6.2 Definitions.
6.2.1 Spindle offset. The spindle offset, specified in table I, is defined as the distance
from the center line of the spindle to the edge of the wrench housing, measured one inch from
the base of the spindle on the housing (for example see fig. l). For the angle drive type, see
figure 5.
-------
00-W-891e
6.3 With respect to products requiring qualification, awards will be made only for such
products as have, prior to the time set for opening of bids, been tested and approved for
inclusion on Qualified Products List (QPL) OO-W-891, whether or not such products have actually
been so listed by that date. The attention of the suppliers is called to this requirement, and
manufacturers are urged to arrange to have the products that they propose to offer to the Federal
Government tested for qualification, in order that they may be eligible to be awarded contracts
or orders for the products covered by this specification. The activity responsible for the
qualified products list is the Naval Ship Engineering Center, Washington, D. C., 20360, and
information pertaining to qualification of products may be obtained from that activity. Application
for qualification tests shall be made in accordance with Provisions Governing Qualification.
(Copies may be obtained from the Commanding Officer, Naval Supply Depot, 5801 Tabor Ave.,
Philadelphia, Pa., 19120.)
MILITARY CUSTODIANS: Preparing activity;
Army - GL GSA-FSS
Navy - Sh
Air Force - 69
Review activities;
Army - GL
Navy - Sh
Air Force - 69
User activities;
Navy - MC, YD
S. Government Printing Office; 1967 0 - 302-603 (874)
Orders for this publication are to be placed with General Services Administration, acting as an
agent for the Superintendent of Documents. See section 2 of this specification to obtain extra
copies and other documents referenced herein. Price of this specification 10 cents each.
10
-------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
-------
United States Department of the Interior
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20240
Dr. Alvin Meyer, Director
Office of Noise Abatement and Control
Environmental Protection Agency
1750 K Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
Dear Dr. Meyer:
Attached is the information you requested on Federal
noise programs as they relate to the Department of
Interior.
You will note that at this time, the Departments' noise
activities are extremely limited, with only one program,
specifically budgeted for noise abatement and control.
One should not overlook the fact, however, that our in-
terests are a good deal broader and that interference by
noise in recreation, wildlife protection etc. are to some
extent subsumed in other on-going program activities. We
are also participating in an FAA sponsored study on the
frequency and nature of sonic booms occurring over our
western National Parks. The Bureau of Mines is also in
the process of formulating a fairly extensive future pro-
gram relating to the study of noise control in mines. De-
tails of this program are still being reviewed internally.
Please let me know if any further information would be use-
ful to you.
Sincerely yours,
Martin Prochnik
Deputy Science Adviser
Enclosure
-------
Department of Interior Noise Programs
I. ORGANIZATIONAL
CFR Title 41-Chapter 14, CFR Title 50-Chapter 4, CFR Title
36-Chapter 1, CFR Title 30-Chapter 1, CFR Title 43-Chapter
II, Act of May 28, 1936 (16 USC 460, Federal Coal Mine Health
and Safety Act of 1969 (Subpart F of Part 70, Subchapter 0,
Chapter I, Title 30 CFR.)
II. FUNCTIONAL
B. Specific Programs and Research
1. The Department is assisting an FAA funded project which
is monitoring the frequency and characteristics of sonic booms
over certain of our western National Parks. No funds are
assigned directly to this support function. Results of this
monitoring assist in achieving park management objectives
such as protection of wildlife, geologic and archeologic
features and protecting the recreational use of the parks.
2. The Bureau of Mines has instituted a training program
for Inspectors who will survey noise conditions in mines.
This monitoring is being done to assure compliance with
noise standards for underground mines that were set by the
Department of Health, Education and Welfare. As of August
13j 1971 approximately 1150 persons have been qualified to
conduct noise measuring surveys.
3. The Bureau of Mines is also in the process of initiating
a research program related to the noise problem and related
hearing loss by miners. This would involve the assessment of
presently used machinery and the design and evaluation of
modified equipment that would reduce noise output and con-
sequent hearing damage. Specific research items include the
design of noise dosimeters, the identification of noise
sources in underground mines and the screening of noise
frequencies in order to improve communication.
C. PROCEDURES
Problem areas are usually first identified in the field by
personnel in a positions to directly observe negative effects.
Corrective action and associated research would normally be
handled at an Agency level if significant funds or policy
decisions are involved. Specific actions to abate and
control noise include the training program described above,
and research on noise dosimeters, noise sources and
communication being undertaken at the Bureau of Mines
Laboratory in Pittsburgh.
-------
Coordination with other Federal agencies is mostly through
inter-agency committees dealing with noise and informal
working relationships between groups and individuals of
different agencies concerned with noise.
In-house capability is essentially limited to the mine
inspector corps now in the process of being trained and a
small group of Bureau of Mines Specialists headed by John
N. Murphy of the Pittsburgh Mines and Safety Office of the
Bureau. The Office of the Science Adviser has picked up a
certain amount of familiarity with noise problems in acting
as the central coordination point on noise matters for the
Department of Interior.
D. A working draft has been prepared on a new program
dealing with all perspectives of the coal mine noise problem.
This program is now under internal review and cannot there-
fore be fully described at this time. It involves an
evaluation of the current noise situation in mines, measuring
noise and the design of new equipment that would ameliorate
noise problems.
III. FISCAL
A. Current Programs
The training program for coal mine noise inspectors did not
require incremental outlays in facilities or equipment. Its
cost is subsumed under other activities of the Coal Mine
Health and Safety Program. The sonic boom monitoring program
for the western parks is funded by the FAA. Supporting costs
for Interior are included under other operating programs of
the National Park Service.
Future Interior program plans in the noise field are almost
entirely limited to the coal mine noise study noted above.
Facilities costs and personnel costs for the on going noise
programs of the Bureau of Mines (other than the training
program) are estimated at $45,000 for the in-house research
described above and $19,000 for an acoustical research inven-
tory contracted to Hydrospace Research Corp. F. Y. 1972 work
has tentatively been slated to include a continuation of the
ongoing research at Pittsburgh ($144,000) and a $70,000
project at the Rolla, Missouri Laboratory of the Bureau of
Mines an the development of noise abatement material.
An unspecified amount of research support is slated for other
noise research identified by the Bureau as having high priority,
A3 noted above, this overall F.Y. 1972 program is still under
internal review.
-------
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
-------
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20550
September 1, 1971
Dr. Alvin F. Meyer, Jr.
Director
Office of Noise Abatement and Control
Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C. 20460
Dear Dr. Meyer:
In response to your letter of July 30, 1971, please find enclosed
the National Science Foundation's contribution to a report to
Congress on noise in accordance with Title IV of the Clean Air
Act of 1970. In general, this material follows the outline
enclosed with your July 30 letter.
If you or your staff have any questions concerning this information,
I should be glad to try to answer them or to put you in touch with
knowledgeable members of the Foundation's staff.
Sincerely yours,
7
G. R. Toney '
Special Assistant
National and International Programs
Enclosure
-------
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
August 30, 1971
FEDERAL NOISE PROGRAMS INFORMATION
I. Organizational
A. National Science Foundation
B. The Foundation is authorized by its enabling act, the National
Science Foundation Act of 1950 (as amended), "to initiate
and support scientific research, including applied research,"
among other functions. There is no legislative requirement
or authority for the Foundation to engage specifically in
research on noise, its effects and control, and acoustics.
II. Functional
A. Overall objectives are to support meritorious proposals for
research on noise effects, noise control, and acoustics.
B. Six research projects funded in FY 1970 and four funded in
FY 1971, all for 24 months, are still ongoing.
1. Description: See attachments.
2. Objectives
a. The program objectives are met by the principal
investigators' carrying out their research on the
problems proposed for investigation.
b. The program is evaluated by assessing the results of
each research project as they appear in publications
and reports in the professional literature and at
scientific meetings. The criteria used in this
evaluation are those normally applied: the validity
of results with respect to the problems investigated,
the adherence to the research plan, the contribution
to the body of knowledge in the field, and the use-
fulness of the results toward furthering subsequent
efforts.
C. Procedures
1. Several areas appear to the Foundation to merit consideration
as priorities for support, owing to a) the lack of funda-
mental knowledge of auditory processes, b) the neglect of
certain noise problems in recent reviews and reports, c) the
recognized need for updating information, and d) the developing
sense of urgency for progress in the solution of noise problems.
-------
- 2 -
a. Anatomical and behavioral studies of the auditory
systems of human beings, other primates, and some
lower forms of animal life, including 1) the
structures of the lower auditory system and the
auditory behavior which may depend upon these
structures, 2) the role of signal transients, and
3) the spectral cues in the localization of sounds.
b. Noise effects on, and protection of, ^'blue-collar"
workers in factories, transportation systems, and
boiler/utility rooms of buildings.
c. Noise reduction in industrial equipment and machinery
through design and the setting of standards.
d. Reduction of noise through design of equipment for
homes, apartments, and dormitories.
e. Involving industry in the above and other problem
areas which would benefit from an industrial engineering
approach.
f. Support of conferences of selected participants (including
those from Congress) for stimulation of action in
specific areas of noise abatement susceptible to
engineering solutions.
2. The Foundation has taken no specific actions to abate or
control noise.
3. Coordination of Foundation programs with similar or related
efforts by other agencies is customarily carried on through
both formal mechanisms and informal communication. In noise
research, for example, membership on the Noise and Radiation
Panel of the FCST Ad Hoc Committee on Environmental Quality,
R. & D., establishes a formal contact with the other Federal
programs.
4. The Foundation performs no in-house research. Its capability
consists of scientists serving on the staff as directors
of programs supporting scientific research and education
in the sciences. Consultants acting as proposal reviewers
and as members of advisory committees and panels may have
scientific, engineering or industrial experience in noise
programs.
-------
- 3 -
5. There are no specific plans for upgrading noise programs in
the Foundation. However, increased awareness of the role
played by noise in daily life is expected to result in a
greater number of worthwhile proposals for noise-related
research.
For the near future the Foundation will continue to support
unsolicited meritorious proposals and will encourage the
submission of proproals from academic and other groups
engaged in research on noise problems and acoustics.
III. Fiscal
A. Current Program
1. The total real property value of facilities and equipment
used for Foundation-supported noise research cannot be
determined. The Foundation funded equipment purchases for
noise research amounting to $99,200 in fiscal years
1968 through 1971.
2. The Foundation has no specific allocation of FY 1972
funds for noise research. Support of proposals in all
fields of science is generally decided on the basis of
merit, as determined by outside reviews and staff
evaluations.
3. Personnel
a. The Special Engineering Program director and secretary
spend approximately 15 percent of their working time
on the program subdiscipline, Acoustics and Noise Control,
In the Psychobiology and the Neurobiology Programs, two
program officers and a secretary devote about 12.5
percent of their effort to audition proposals.
b. Proportional salaries for noise program management in
the three program areas amounts to about $15,000
annually.
4. Contracts, grants, loans, and subsidies
a. Six current projects funded in FY 1970 for 24 months
are 80 to 90 percent completed. Four research projects
funded for 24 months late in FY 1971 are 10 to 15
percent completed.
b. Funding by project: See attachment.
-------
- 4 -
c. Total research expenditures for ongoing projects
FY 1970 $197,000
FY 1971 175.000
Total $372,000
B. Past and Future Programs
1. Past programs
a. For FY 1969 through FY 1971, the total of 23 grants for
noise-related research amounted to $641,000.
b. In the fiscal years 1968 through 1971 the Foundation
awarded a total of $99,200 in grants for equipment
acquisitions for research on noise and acoustics.
2. No projections for future noise research have been made.
However, dependent upon the number and quality of proposals
and available funds, it is expected that obligations for
research on noise problems and acoustics and for facilities
acquisitions will increase.
IV. The Foundation has no authority or responsibility for regulation or
certification of activities in the field of noise pollution.
Attachments: 11
-------
Attachment
O
o
o
o
o
^
CO
0
o
m
co
CO
0
o
0
^T
CM
0
o
m
i —
CM
0
o
CO
0
CO
0
o
CTi
^
m
o
o
o
o
CO
o
0
o
o
«^-
o
o
rH
O
o
0
o
CM
r^
CO
§
Cfl CO
S g
O ^
CM
-a-
CN
CM
st
CM
rl d
Pw M
d
O
CO
•rl
t-l
cfl
S
"-j
(-1
d)
CO
cfl
13
C
cfl
rl
O
CO
cfl
O
•H
(fl
rH
O
u
m
O
CO
n
S-l O
CU O
CO H
W iH
•H &
d)
O
g
<
•
&
G
O
t-H
CO
CO
r>-
M
M
O
CO
d
o
4J
CO
O
m
0
00
cfl
0
•rl
43
O
MH
0
•
P
•
H
M
sa
cfl
rH
rH
0
Pi
1
•
O
g
MH
O
.
P
•
4-1
4-1
•rl
PM
14-1
O
.
P
•
*~1
CU
3
rl
3
•
P
rH
rH
CU
d
rl
O
U
•
Cfl
0
14-1
O
.
P
cfl
42
V-i
P
.
rH
rH
M
<4H
0
*
P
•
P
*"O
^_l
0
d
CO
4-1
o
cu
•rn
O
rl
P.
00
•S
o
6C
C
O
U-l
o
00
•H
1
Title
and Anatomical
tion of the Auditory
CO
CO -H
\ [ _| _l
O M
•H CU
K* K*
cfl d
43 M
0)
m
Mammals
a
•rl
a
CU
CO
Cfl
ansients: A Study
n
H
O
•H
4J
CO
3
O
a
rm Parameters
o
4H
cu
^
Cfl
m
o
orcement by Structural
4H
(3
•H
0)
fVj
Tj
PI
3
O
cfl
13
0
•H
4-1
O
CO
rl
CU
4-1
(3
M
CO
cu
4J
rH
•H
O
•H
4J
CO
o
<4H
O
CU
0
d
CO
O
MH
VJ
cu
P-l
CU
r;
H
Stimulation of Subcortical
rH
Cfl
O
•H
J-l
4-1
O
CU
rH
W
Centers
fr
o
4J
•H
13
^4
00
d
•rl
CO
CO
CU
O
O
rl
PM
rH
Cfl
00
•H
CO
0
4-1
•rl
3
O
CO
cu
•rl
T)
3
4-1
Cfl
rception of Temporal
cu
PM
t^>
rl rl
O 0)
4J 13
•H M
13 O
rj
•<3
f Masked Binaural
o
d
o
•H
4-1
o
CD
4-1
cu
Q
CO
rH
Cfl
d
00
•rl
Cfl
al and Behavioral
Sound Reception
O MH
•H 0
00
O CO
rH CU
0 -H
•H *"O
co 3
43 Cfl
PM
itory Mechanisms
13
rH
Cfl
rl
4J
d
cu
c_>
H
O
H
-------
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
PROJECT
SUMMARY
NAME OF INSTITUTION (NSF Directory Name)
Boston University
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR SOCIAL SECURITY NO.
HARRISON, J. M.
PROPOSAL NUMBER
B020103
ADDRESS OF INSTITUTION (Include branch /c*mpa* 4 component)
Boston, Massachusetts 02215
DIVISION (OFFICE)
Biological and Medical Sciences
SECTION
PROGRAM
Psychobiology
TITLE OF PROJECT
Behavioral and Anatomical Investigation of
the Auditory System in Mammals
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED WORK (limit to 22 pica or It elite typewritten line*)
This research project is a two year renewal of GB-?6l7. The work of.this laboratory
is concerned with the systematic exploration of the structure of the lower auditory
system and with the investigation of auditory behavior which may depend upon these
structures. According to the program outlined, the PI plans to continue work in
^oth the anatomical and behavioral areas. The goal of the anatomical work is three-
old. It includes; (l) Description of cochlear nucleus and superior olivary complex
in primates. The PI will investigate the cochlear nucleus and superior olivary complex
in one (or more) species of large primate and to relate this to the auditory system in
man. (2) Comparative variation of the superior olivary complex in primates. The PI
plans to follow up the comparative work on the superior olivary complex, particularly
in primates, as it is profitable to study auditory structures in primates as a guide
to understanding the system in man. (3) Analysis of cellular organization of rat
cochlear nucleus. It is planned to continue the study of Golgi stained rat material
(about 100 brainstems) prepared by Fedlman ('69). The behavioral study includes: (a)
comparative behavioral study of localization and (b) acquisition of the discrimination
of location by man.
NSF Form 4, March 1968
FY-70
INSTRUCTIONS FOR USE
1. Program Office will complete all items appearing on the first copy; place Proposal Folder copy in the folder;
retain Program Suspense copy; and place other copies inside the folder envelope with carbons intact.
2. Grants Office will post grant number, amount granted and inclusive project dates on the S.I.E. copy and
make distribution of remaining copies.
1. PROPOSAL FOLDER COPY
-------
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
PROJECT
SUMMARY
NAME OF INSTITUTION WSF Directory Nam,)
University of Chicago
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR SOCIAL SECURITY NO.
ZERLIN, Stanley
PROPOSAL NUMBER
BOISIS^
ADDRESS OF INSTITUTION (Include branch /campus it component)
Chicago, Illinois 60637
DIVISION (OFFICE)
Biological and Medical Sciences
SECTION
PROGRAM
Psychobiology
TITLE OF PROJECT
Acoustic Transients: A Study of Waveform Parameters
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED WORK (limit to 33 pica or It elite typewritten Hnet)
Transient signals have been used extensively in studies of binaural interaction. One
of the reasons for the general lack of coherence in this area is our inability to
describe the effects of transients on the cochlea and on the neural patterns resulting
from transient stimulation.
It is not clear whether the cochlea performs predominantly a time (waveform) analysis
or a Fourier (frequency) analysis on transient signals. Cochlear models suggest the
former, while most psychoacoustic work has assumed the latter. It is this investi-
gator's contention that cochlear processing of transients more closely approaches a
waveform analysis.
The main emphasis of this psychoacoustic research is to clarify the relation between
(1) acoustic transients and their displacement patterns on the basilar membrane (2)
these displacement patterns and the resultant neural activity. These dependencies
will be investigated through the interaction of timing signals arising from the two
ears. Improved understanding of the parameters underlying transient stimulation
will then allow study of the relations between transient and sinusoidal excitation.
Clarification of both areas is an essential step in determining the extent to which
the cochlea acts as either a spectrum or a waveform analyzer.
NSF Fpiia4, March 1968
F Fpiia4,
INSTRUCTIONS FOR USE
1. Program Office will complete all items appearing on the first copy; place Proposal Folder copy in the folder;
retain Program Suspense copy; and place other copies inside the folder envelope with carbons intact.
2. Grants Office will post grant number, amount granted and inclusive project dates on the S.I.E. copy and
make distribution of remaining copies.
1. PROPOSAL FOLDER COPY
-------
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUND A I ION
PROJECT
SUMMARY
NAME OF INSTITUTION (NSF Directory N*mt)
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
ADDRESS OF INSTITUTION (Includ* branch/c*mpam * component.)
School of Engineering
Cambridge, Massachusetts
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
Crandall, Stephen H.
SOCIAL SECURITY NO.
DIVISION (OFFICE)
SECTION
PROPOSAL NUMBER
K010160
3cial Engineering
TITLE OF PROJECT
Sound Reinforcement by Structural Interaction
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED WORK (limit to 23 pica or 18 ellta typewritten linos)
The acoustical design of concert halls and auditoriums is only imperfectly undertood,
and designs are still based to a considerable extent on tradition and experience. The
factors influencing the excitation of a concert hall by individual instruments are even
less well known, and the important problem of "bass weakness", a lack of excitation by
cellos and stringed basses, has hardly been investigated. With the help of a grant from
,ie National Science Foundation Dr. Stephen Crandall at the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology will undertake a study of this problem. He will look specifically at the
mechanism of energy transmission from the end pin of the instrument to the stage floor
and the following reradiation from the floor to the walls and to the air in the hall,
with the hope of being able to enhance the energy transfer. The study will involve
both analytical aspects and experimental work with actual musical instruments, the
latter in both laboratory and concert hall settings.
3Z.5 K
I- Y 70
NSF Fotm 4, March 1968 /
INSTRUCTIONS FOR USE
1. Program Office will complete all items appearing on the first copy; place Proposal Folder copy in the folder;
retain Program Suspense copy; and place other copies inside the folder envelope with carbons intact.
2. Grants Office will post grant number, amount granted and inclusive project dates on the S.I.E. copy and inp;,-..
make distribution of remaining copies. 1JOU.
7/23/69
\. PROPOSAL FOLDER COPY
-------
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
PROJECT
SUMMARY
NAME OF INSTITUTION (NSP Directory Nam*)
University of Missouri-Rolla
PRINCIPAL
PROPOSAL
INVESTIGATOR SOCIAL SECURITY NO.
Gatley, William S.
NUMBER
K010844
ADDRESS OF INSTITUTION (Includ* branch /cfmpu* * component)
Rolla, Missouri
DIVISION (OFFICE)
Engineering
SECTION
PROGRAM
Special Engineering
TITLE OF PROJECT
The Performance of Acoustic Filters
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED WORK (limit to 22 pica or IS tlllf typewritten llnea)
The proposed research program will complement and extend work now being
completed under NSF Research Initiation Grant GK-14&L. The objectives
of this project are to evaluate basic acoustic filter elements using
elementary theory and specially-designed equipment,and to investigate the
influence of size, temperature, steady flow and intense sound levels on
the performance of acoustic filters. The proposed research will, in
part, complete this investigation for certain classes of silencers, with
the ultimate goal of developing a systematic procedure that is applicable
to a wide variety of noise control problems. Such a procedure, if avail-
able, would greatly reduce the trial-and-error testing of prototypes and
make possible the incorporation of effective noise control into the initial
design of new products.
NSF Form 4, March 1968
INSTRUCTIONS FOR USE
1. Program Office will complete all items appearing on the first copy; place Proposal Folder copy in the folder;
retain Program Suspense copy; and place other copies inside the folder envelope with carbons intact.
2. Grants Office will post grant number, amount granted and inclusive project dates on the S.I.E. copy and
make distribution of remaining copies. MSO'lpW
9-H-69
1. PROPOSAL FOLDER COPY
-------
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
PROJECT
SUMMARY
NAME OF INSTITUTION (NSF Directory None)
University of Pittsburgh
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR SOCIAL SECURITY NO.
COIAVTTA, Francie B.
PROPOSAL NUMBER
B017U18
ADDRESS OF INSTITUTION (Include branch /cempuu It component)
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213
DIVISION (OFFICE)
Biological and Medical Sciences
SECTION
PROGRAM
Psychobiology
TITLE OF PROJECT
Electrical Stimulation of Subcortical Auditory Centers
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED WORK (limit to 32 pica or IS elite typewritten tinea)
It is generally recognized from work on human patients that sensory experiences pro-
duced by cortical stimulation are crude and unnatural, perhaps because of the diffi-
culty involved in entering the nervous system at its level of greatest organizational
complexity. A number of recent animal experiments suggest that subcortical brain
-timulation shows promise as a technique for producing sensory experiences and con-
.•olling their qualities, presumably because the artifical nature of the stimulus is
progressively reduced as the neural impulses are transmitted upward through the CNS
to the cortex.
Previous experimental work in this laboratory suggests that electrical stimulation of
subcortical brain regions, when combined with behavioral training and testing of exper-
imental animals, can provide a means of studying coding and transmission of sensory
information by the CNS. The present program will continue and extend this line of
investigation. /
V _ . . /
NSF Form 4, March 1968
FY-70
27,
INSTRUCTIONS FOR USE
1. Program Office will complete all items appearing on the first copy; place Proposal Folder copy in the folder;
retain Program Suspense copy; and place other copies inside the folder envelope with carbons intact.
2. Grants Office will post grant number, amount granted and inclusive project dates on the S.I.E. copy and
make distribution of remaining copies.
I. PROPOSAL FOLDER COPY
-------
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
PROJECT
SUMMARY
NAME OF INSTITUTION WSF Directory N*mo)
Purdue University
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR SOCIAL SECURITY NO.
SORKIN, Robert D.
PROPOSAL NUMBER
B014039
ADDRESS OF INSTITUTION (Include branch /campuQ i component)
Lafayette, Indiana 4?90?
DIVISION (OFFICE)
Biological and Medical Sciences
SECTION
PROGRAM
Psychobiology
TITLE OF PROJECT
Studies of Auditory Signal Processing
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED WORK (limit to 22 pica or If fllta typowtlttm linn)
This project consists of a two-phased investigation of some fundamental aspects
of the hearing mechanism, the two phases of the research to proceed concurrently.
Phase one consists of monaural investigations of the adaptive character of auditory
behavior in signal detection situations. Phase two consists of a program of bin-
aural experimentation on the phenomenon of two-channel detection, as embodied in
contralateral cueing and simultaneous detection situations. This phase of the
study represents an empirical extension of the traditional Masking Level Differ-
ence (MLB) data and an attempt to evaluate a class of interaural cross-correla-
tion models as appropriate descriptions of behavior in contralateral .cueing and
simultaneous detection situations.
NSF Form 4, March 1968
FY 70
3 0, 3 C o
INSTRUCTIONS FOR USE
1. Program Office will complete all items appearing on the first copy; place Proposal Folder copy in the folder;
retain Program Suspense copy; and place other copies inside the folder envelope with carbons intact,
2. Grants Office will post grant number, amount granted and inclusive project dates on the S.I.E. copy and
make distribution of remaining copies.
1. PROPOSAL FOLDER COPY
-------
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
PROJECT
SUMMARY
NAME OF INSTITUTION INSF DIRECTORY NAh
Cornell University
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
NEISSER, Ulric
WILCOX, Gordon W.
^E)
SOCIAL SECURITY NO.
579 30 7292
385 32 9750
PROPOSAL NUMBER
PIB1283
ADDRESS OF INSTITUTION (INCLUDE BRANCH/CAMPUS & COMPONENT)
Ithaca, New York 1^850
DIVISION (OFFICE) AN D DIRE C T OR A TE
Biological and Medical Sciences
SECTION
PROGRAM
Psychobiology
TITLE OF PROJECT
Auditory Perception of Temporal Order
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED WORK (LIMIT TO 22 PICA OR 18 ELITE TYPEWRITTEN LINES)
It has recently been reported that listeners cannot determine the order in
which four cyclically-presented noises are occurring, if each one lasts only
200 msec. The Investigators have discovered, however, that subjects can easily
tell whether the orders of two such sequences are the same or different. To
elucidate this discrepancy, a systematic study of temporal-order perception
will be made, both as a function of method of presentation and of stimulus duration.
Two theoretical approaches will guide this research. First, a model has
been developed with the above observations which is consistent with the general
approach of signal detection theory. This leads to specific predictions about
the relative difficulty of various sequences. Second, since the view that
cognitive processes are "constructive" is particularly applicable to the
perception of temporal order, an attempt will be made to study perceptual learning
as it occurs in these tasks, and also to examine the short term or "echoic"
memory involved in comparing two sequences.
C e - 2 & '// 2
M/ «v
FY 71
INSTRUCTIONS FOR USE
I. Program Office will complete all items appearing on the first copy; place Proposal Folder copy in the folder;
retain Program Suspense copy; and place other copies inside the folder envelope with carbons intact.
2. Grants and Contracts Office will post grant number, amount granted and inclusive project dates on the S.I.E. copy and
make distribution of remaining copies.
NSF Form 4. Jan. 1970
1. PROPOSAL FOLDER
-------
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
PROJECT
SUMMARY
NAME OF INSTITUTION (NSF Directory Name)
University of Georgia
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR SOCIAL SECURITY NO.
WILBANKS, William A.
PROPOSAL NUMBER
B023936
ADDRESS OF INSTITUTION (Include branch / campus & component)
Athens, Georgia 30601
DIVISION (OFFICE)
Biological and Medical Sciences
SECTION
PROGRAM
Psychobiology
TITLE OF PROJECT
Detection of Masked Binaural Signals
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED WORK (limit to 32 pica or It elite typewritten lines)
The research described in this proposal represents a two-year renewal of re-
search on binaural hearing initiated under NSF Grant GB-8290. The PI is specifi-
cally concerned with the problem of how the binaural system detects weak signals
in the presence of noise. The research which he plans is based upon the view that
an appropriate model of the binaural system is a cross-correlation mechanism that
.ieves an improved signal-to-noise ratio over that required for monaural detec-
tion by detecting the change in the cross-correlation of the noise when the signal
is added. This improvement in detection that occurs when listening is done bin-
aurally has come to be called the masking-level difference or MLD. The specific
aims of the research are: (1) to determine by means of parametric experiments
the functional relationship between the detection performance of human observers
and the change in the cross-correlation of the stimulus events to which the observer
is responding: (2) to determine by means of parametric experiments the relationship
between the human observer's use of a rating-scale in detection experiments and the
stimulus for binaural detection: and (3) to continue the research initiated under
NSF Grant GB-8290 on the frequency limits of binaural signal detection as a function
of noise level.
NSF Foim 4, March 1968
FY 71
INSTRUCTIONS FOR USE
1. Program Office will complete all items appearing on the first copy; place Proposal Folder copy in the folder;
retain Program Suspense copy; and place other copies inside the folder envelope with carbons intact.
2. Grants Office will post grant number, amount granted and inclusive project dates on the S.I.E. copy and
make distribution of remaining copies.
1. PROPOSAL FOLDER COPY
-------
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
PROJECT
SUMMARY
NAME OF INSTITUTION (NSF Directory Name)
University of Illinois at Urbana
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR SOCIAL SECURITY NO.
SALMON, Michael
PROPOSAL NUMBER
B020766
ADDRESS OF INSTITUTION (Include branch /campui & component)
Urbana, Illinois 61801
DIVISION (OFFICE)
Biological and Medical Sciences
SECTION
PROGRAM
Psychobiology
TITLE OF PROJECT
Physiological and Behavioral Studies of Sound Reception
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED WORK (limit to 22 pica or IS elite typewritten line*)
On this research project, electrophysiological and behavioral experiments
will examine the acoustical signaling system of fiddler crabs. From pilot exper-
iments it has been shown that fiddler crabs possess a communicatory system based
upon vibrational stimuli that is analogous to many vertebrate and insect "calling"
ystems in which air- or water-borne sound is utilized.
The specific objectives of this project are:
1. To define the sensitivity of selected species of fiddler crabs to pure tonal
vibrations under laboratory conditions, and to natural sounds under field
conditions;
2. To determine the nature of the behavioral response by females to acoustic
stimuli provided by conspecific males during the reproductive period;
3. To establish the sensory basis for sound localization of males by females; and
4. To identify the physical and temporal properties of the courtship signals to
which the males and females respond.
, Cf 6 / £ ;;;.-
NSF Form 4, March 1968
FY 71
INSTRUCTIONS FOR USE
1. Program Office will complete all items appearing on the first copy; place Proposal Folder copy in the folder;
retain Program Suspense copy; and place other copies inside the folder envelope with carbons intact.
2. Grants Office will post grant number, amount granted and inclusive project dates on the S.I.E. copy and
make distribution of remaining copies.
1. PROPOSAL FOLDER COPY
-------
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
PROJECT
SUMMARY
NAME OF INSTITUTION (NSF DIRECTORY NAME)
Stanford University
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR SOCIAL SECURITY NO.
DEWSON, James H. Ill
PROPOSAL NUMBER
B025869
ADDRESS OF INSTITUTION (INCLUDE BRANCH/CAMPUS & COMPONENT)
Stanford, California 94305
DIVISION (OFFICEI AND DIRE C TOR A TE
Biological and Medical Sciences
SECTION
PROGRAM
Psych obiolosy
TITLE OF PROJECT
Central Auditory Mechanisms
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED WORK (LIMIT TO 22 PICA OR 18 ELITE TYPEWRITTEN LINES)
In this project, continuous performance functions will be derived for the
auditory sequence discrimination abilities of normal and unilaterally deafened
monkeys. These functions will define, at three major stages of the experiments,
the levels of difficulty of discrimination as a direct function of (a) the type
of auditory sequencing (b) its duration, and (c) the controlled delay time in-
^rvening between stimulus offset and the availability to the animal of the
response keys.
Seriatim surgical lesions will be made in all the experimental animals.
After initial learning, unilateral ablations of the cortex of the superior tem-
poral gyrus will be made and then, after retraining, midline section of the
anterior commissure and corpus callosum will be made.
Side of ablation and status of peripheral organ will be balanced to allow
two basic questions to be answered: (1) Is there a relationship between ear
and cerebral hemisphere in the performance of a learned conditioned auditory
sequence discrimination? (2) What is the nature and extent of interhemispheric
coordination in post-ablation performance.
G 6 -2
6-0,1 00 I ^
' I
>
FY 71
INSTRUCTIONS FOR USE
1. Program Office will complete all items appearing on the first copy; place Proposal Folder copy in the folder;
retain Program Suspense copy; and place other copies inside the folder envelope with carbons intact.
2. Grants and Contracts Office will post grant number, amount granted and inclusive project dates on the S.I.E. copy and
make distribution of remaining copies.
NSF Form 4, Jan. 1970
I. PROPOSAL FOLDER
-------
THE POSTAL SERVICE COMMISSION
-------
POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT
BUREAU OF RESEARCH AND ENGINEERING
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20260
Dr. Alvin F. Meyers, Jr.
Director
Office of Noise Abatement and Control
Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D. G. 20460
Dear Dr. Meyer:
In response to your letter of August 10, 1971, we are pleased to
advise you that Mr. Richard W. Flohr has been designated as the
contact for your office with the Postal Service. Mr. Flohr can
be reached on 737-7314 or 961-7903.
The major emphasis in noise reduction effort in the Postal Service
is in the workroom area. Public nuisance noise has not been a
problem in Postal operations and we have no record of any complaint
from neighborhoods adjacent to post offices.
The information requested in the Federal Noise Program's Information
Outline is attached hereto.
Sincerely,
Allen
Director for Engineering
Engineering and Logistics Department
Mail Processing
-------
FEDERAL NOISE PROGRAMS INFORMATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
.AGENCY
I. Organizational
A. Parent Agency, etc: Systems Engineering Design
Branch, Mail Processing Group, U. S. Postal
Service.
B. Legislative Requirements, etc.: None
II. Functional
A. Overall Program Objectives:
(1) Determine the feasibility and cost of lowering
noise levels in existing postal equipment.
(2) Provide standards for the development of
new postal equipment.
B. Specific Programs and Research
(1) "Sound and Vibration Control in Post Office
Facilities" - (Project # 70300) This project
utilizes a typical mechanized post-office to identify
existing noise sources, determine what must be
done to reduce noise levels (in steps) to HC-70,
NC-65, and NC-60 at operator positions, and
then implement prototype modifications. It
witJL thus be possible to determine what the
cost of a nationwide noise reduction would
be to achieve any desire noise level. The
project is now at the stage of modifying
equipment to achieve a maximum sound level of
NC-70, to be accomplished by mid-October.
(NOTE: Present maximum noise levels are in the
NC-85 range, with none of the levels exceeding
Walsh-Healey Act requirements.)
(2) "OCR Model I Noise Reduction" (Project 71198)
This project somewhat parallels the above
des-cribed project, in that it concentrates on
a single item o~f equipment also included in
the first project. The OCR (Optical Character
Reader) is the n.oisiest item of postal equip-
ment and has tfrus been singled out for this
special effort. Analysis and development will
be similar to the above project, except that
the two goals established are 70 and 65 dBa.
This project is not yet under contract.
-------
- 2 -
(3) Postal Service Specification POD-N-00-458 (RDE),
"Noise, Acoustic, Maximum Levels for Equipment;
And Test Procedures For" - This specification is
used in conjunction with the development of new
postal equipment, to provide operator position
noise levels not exceeding NC-60. The specifica-
tion has only recently been issued and it is not
yet known if the stringent requirements can be
met without undue expense, and sacrifice in equip-
ment operability.
C. - Procedures
(1) Identi-'fication of problem areas and research needs:
Problem areas were identified through employee
complaints. Rather than try to resolve individual
complaints, it was decided to prepare a compre-
hensive program to evaluate all noise producing
equipment culminating in the cibove mentioned
projects. The ultimate goal is maximum sound
reduction at minimum cost by cost-effectively
evaluating all feasible equipment and architectural
modifications.
(2) Specific actions to abate and control noise:
See Item LIB.
(3) Procedures for coordination with other Federal
Agencies: None
(4) Extent of inhouse capability: Fully knowledgeable
in state of the cirt techniques in measuring,
analyzing, and correcting noise problems. However,
limits on staff and equipment dictate the use of
consultants such as the National Bureau of Standards
and. IIT Research Institute.
(5) Proposed new procedures to upgrade programs: None,
pending results from the projects discussed in IIB.
D. Future Program Proposals and Objectives: None
III. Fiscal
A. Current Program
(1) Real property value of facilities and equipment used for
noise programs: None
(2) Current operating budget (FY 72): None for facilities.
See Items 3 and 4 below.
-------
(3.) Personnel
(a) Current authorization by type and
number: No one is assigned full
time to noise reduction programs.
Project Managers are generally at
PS-17 (equivalent to GS-14) level
and Project Engineers at the PS-15
(equivalent to GS-13) level.
(b) Salary, totals for program operation
and contract management: Approx.
$15,000 per year.
(4) Contracts:
Project 70300 (See Sect. IIB): $150,000 this
Fiscal Year. Project now 30% complete.
Project 71198 (See Sect. IIB): Estimated
cost $20,000; contract not yet awarded.
B. Past and Future Programs
(1) Past Programs: Expenditures for personnel
and contracts approx. $250,000. There has
been no facilities acquisition for the pur-
pose of noise control.
(2) Future Program Plans: This will depend
largely on the results of the current
projects. No change in personnel level
is anticipated.
IV. Regulation and Certification
A . Authority and Responsibilities: Not applicable
B. Actions taken to Implement Regulation and Certi-
fication Requirements: Not applicable, since
sound levels are below the levels prescribed in
the Walsh-Healey Act.
-------
ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION
-------
DRAFT
CGWelty
Atomic Energy Commission Contribution
to Information
for the ONAC Report
to Congress on
Noise Pollution Control Activities
The AEC's contribution to the ONAC report will be minimal due to the
absence of signigicant environmental noise problems in all areas of AEC
programmatic and regulatory authority. The information provided below
is organized according to the outline, "Federal Noise Program Informa-
tion" enclosed in the ONAC letter of July 30, 1971.
I. Organizational
A. Parent Agency is i-'ue Atomic Energy Commission witn subdivisions
as follows:
1. General Manager - Responsible for AEC's Operational Programs
including research, development and production and associated
activities.
2. Director of Regulation - Responsible for AEC's Regulatory
Program under which the nuclear activities of others are
licensed and regulated.
B. Legislative requirements and authorities for the respective AEC
Programs are as follows:
1. For the General Manager's Operational Programs:
a. Public health and safety requirements set forth in the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended.
b. Title IV of the Clean Air Act of 1970.
2. For the Director of Regulations Regulatory Program:
a. The National Environmental Policy Act as it applies to
nuclear activities licensed and regulated by the AEC.
II. Functional
A. Overall Program Objectives
1. General Manager: To protect the health and safety of the
public as required by the Atomic Energy Act, to assure
compliance with any environmental noise standards established
pursuant to the Clean Air Act and to implement the policies
and objectives of NEPA.
-------
2. Director of Regulation: To implement the policies and objectives
of NEPA.
B. Specific Programs and Research. In the absence of environmental
noise problems withing the scope of activities for which the
General Manager and the Director of Regulation are responsible,
there are no specific AEC programs for environmental noise control
or research.
C. Procedures
1. General Manager; Existing management review and appraisal
programs would identify any significant noise problem areas.
New procedures to upgrade these programs are not needed.
/5 £ M. e-
-------
UNITED STATES
ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20545
SEP 7 1971
Mr. Alvin F. Meyer, Jr.
Director, Office of Noise Abatement
and Control
Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D. C. 20460
Dear Mr. Meyer:
This is in response to your letter of July 30, 1971, to Mr. Joseph
DiNunno. The letter was forwarded to my office for reply.
Information on AEG noise pollution control activities is provided
in the enclosure to this letter and in accordance with the subject
headings appearing in your outline. The AEC's contribution to the
ONAC report to Congress will be minimal due to the absence of sig-
nificant environmental noise problems in those activities for which
the AEC has programmatic or regulatory authority.
For purposes of the ONAC inventory of objectionable noise complaints,
our survey of the activities of AEC contractors and licensees indi-
cates that there have been no complaints of objectionable environ-
mental noise due to these activities.
Sincerely yours,
Martin B. Biles, Director
OS:PC:CGW Division of Operational Safety
Enclosure:
As stated above
-------
Atomic Energy Commission Contribution
to Information
for the ONAC Report
to Congress on
Noise Pollution Control Activities
The AEC's contribution to the ONAC report will be minimal due to the
absence of significant environmental noise problems in all areas of
AEC programmatic and regulatory authority. The.information provided
below is organized according to the outline, "Federal Noise -Program
Information" enclosed in the ONAC letter of July 30, 1971.
I. Organizational
A. Parent Agency is the Atomic Energy Commission with sub-
divisions as follows:
1. General Manager - Responsible for AEC's Operational
Programs including weapons development and produc-
tion, reactor research and development, and physical
and biological research.
2. Director of Regulation - Responsible for AEC's
Regulatory Program for the licensing and regula-
tion of nuclear materials and facilities.
B. Legislative requirements and authorities for the respective
AEC Programs are as follows:
1. For the General Manager's Operational Programs:
a. Public health and safety requirements set forth
in the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended.
b. Title IV of the Clean Air Act of 19VO.
c. The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.
2. For the Director of Regulation's Regulatory Program:
a. Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended.
b.. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.
-------
II. Functional
A. Overall Program Objectives
1. General Manager: To protect the health and safety of
the public as required by the Atomic Energy Act, to
assure compliance with any environmental noise standards
established pursuant to the Clean Air Act and to imple-
ment the policies and objectives of NEPA.
2. Director of Regulation: To implement the policies and
objectives of the Atomic Energy Act and NEPA as they
apply to licensed activities regulated under the Atomic
Energy Act.
B. Specific Programs and Research. In the absence of environ-
mental noise problems within the scope of activities for
which the General Manager and the Director of Regulation
are responsible, there are no specific AEC programs for
environmental noise control or research.
C. Procedures
1. General Manager: Existing management review and
appraisal programs would identify any significant
noise problem areas. New procedures to upgrade
these programs are not needed.
2. Environmental noise effects of AEC licensed activities
would be requested pursuant to AEC regulations imple-
menting the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
in 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix D.*
D. Future Program Proposals and Objectives. There are none
required.
III. Fiscal
Not applicable.
IV. Regulation and Certification.
See II. C. 2. above.
*Currently under revision in light of Calvert Cliffs1*Coordinating
^Committee Inc., et al. v. AEC et al., Nos. 24839, 24871 (D.C. CA,
July 23, 1971)
-------
FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION
-------
-------
FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20426
IN REPLY REFER TO:
PWR-ER
Mr. Alvin F. Meyer, Jr. ••;,,,
_ . . ;; j. i J ! J .'
Director
Office of Noise Abatement and Control
Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D. C. 20420
Dear Mr. Meyer:
This is in reference to your letter of July 30, 1971 addressed
to Mr. A. F. Bochenek of our staff, requesting information about the
Commission's activities which result in noise and its programs for
noise abatement and control.
As a regulatory agency, the principal activities of the Commission
consist of regulation of wholesale rates of electricity moving in
interstate commerce, licensing of non-Federal hydroelectric projects
and the primary transmission lines associated with these projects,
and the regulation of some aspects of the natural gas industry. None
of these responsibilities entail operations which result in noise
generation. The Commission conducts no programs related to noise
abatement. We feel, therefore, that the Commission's work is not
affected by Section 402(c) of the Clean Air Act of 1970.
Although we are not directly involved at present in noise pollution
problems of the utilities, there are some, problems and probably will be
more as time passes. We would be glad to participate in local meetings
related to noise problems and shall appreciate your continuing to notify
us of the schedules. You may direct such notices to me in the future.
Very truly yours,
Chief, Bureau of Power
-------
STATE DEPARTMENT
-------
-------
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
WASHINGTON
IN REPLY REFER TO:
September 1, 1971
Mr* Alvin F. Meyer, Jr,
Director, Office of Noise Abatement and Control
Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D, C. 20460
Dear Mr. Meyer:
The Department of State does not have at present a noise abate-*
ment program*
Facilities used by the Department of State in the United States
are acquired through the General Services Administration who
are responsible to see that the space is adequate to permit
employees to work in healthful surroundings, and that noise
level tolerances are met*
Equipment used is purchased from reputable manufacturers and
produces the least amount of operating noise possible*
A negative report is therefore submitted on information re-
quested in paragraph two of your letter of July 30*
The Department is in full accord with the noise abatement
program and will assist and support the program in every way
possible*
Sincerely yours,
Max
Safety Director
-------
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
-------
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
CHATTANOOGA.TENNESSEE 374O1
September 2, 1971
Dr. Alvin F. Meyer, Jr.
Director of the Office of Noise
Abatement and Control
Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D. C. 20460
Dear Dr. Meyer:
This is in reply to your request that we supply Federal
noise program information. TVA has done a limited amount
of work in the area of community noise control, although
no formally organized approach has yet been undertaken on
an Agency-wide scale.
The enclosed information follows the outline suggested in
your letter to James A. Oppold.
Sincerely yours,
F. "fe.'Gartrell, Dr. P. H.
Director of Environmental
Research and Development
Enclosure
-------
NOISE CONTROL PROGRAM
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
I. Organizational
A. Parent agency, department, etc.
Tennessee Valley Authority
Office of Health and Environmental Science
Division of Environmental Research and Development
Industrial and Radiological Hygiene Branch
B. Legislative requirements and authority for noise function and finding
Tennessee Valley Authority Act as amended
II. Functional
A. Overall program objective
To identify and control all noise sources associated with operation of
TVA facilities which may be a public nuisance or hazard
B. Specific programs and research (by individual projects)
No research is being conducted by TVA in community noise.
1. Effects of gas turbine generating plant on community noise
levels - T. H. Allen Steam Plant, Shelby County, Tennessee,
and Colbert Steam Plant, Colbert County, Alabama
a. Description
Community noise levels will be studied to determine the
influence of gas turbine noise.
b. Objective
(1) Is the program meeting desired objectives? So far, it is.
(2) What criteria are used to evaluate the program?
The incidence and nature of noise complaints from
residents of the community
C. Procedures
1. Identification of problem areas and research needed. How are
priorities assigned?
-------
1. (Continued)
Research is needed on improved methods of predicting noise
levels from proposed new plants and on improved methods
of measuring, analyzing, and controlling noise.
Priorities are assigned with respect to expected noise levels
at the nearest community residence. Highly populated
residential areas are given highest priority.
2. Specific action to abate and control noise
When complaints come to TVA from the community, an
investigation is made of the noise source. Sound measurements
are made and controls implemented if needed. For instance,
emergency relief or vent-down valves may be equipped with
mufflers. Air blast circuit breakers near residential areas
are being installed with noise mufflers.
3. Procedures of coordination with other Federal agencies
Every effort is made by TVA to coordinate and cooperate
with other Federal agencies in industrial hygiene, radiological
health, and other areas of environmental control. The same
policy would be followed in community noise studies.
4. Extent of inhouse capability including consultant usage
The Industrial and Radiological Hygiene Branch is staffed
with six industrial hygiene engineers and four engineering
aides. This staff carries out most of the activities in
noise assessment and control. No specialists in noise are
employed and no consultants are retained.
5. Proposed new procedures to upgrade programs
A standard containing engineering criteria for noise control
will be developed as soon as consensus noise standards are
made available to TVA. The Industrial and Radiological Hygiene
Branch hopes to employ a professional acoustical engineer for
use in noise abatement activities. An engineering aide to
the acoustical engineer will also be employed.
D. Future program proposals and objectives
Community noise effects and control are treated in environmental
statements for TVA projects. No specific proposals have been made
for community noise control. The major noise problems in TVA
involve the occupational environment, particularly in the steam-
electric generating plants.
-------
III. Fiscal
A. Current program
1. Real estate value of facilities and equipment used for
noise programs
Estimated $12,000 to $15,000 as of end of fiscal year 1971
for noise surveillance and monitoring only. Estimates not
presently available of additional costs involved for
control of noise at TVA installations.
2. Current operating budget (fiscal year 1972)
No specific funds are designated for community noise study
and control. These are activities funded from the general
industrial hygiene budget.
3. Personnel
a. Current authorization by type and classification
No technical persons have sole responsibility in community
noise assessment and control. Six industrial hygiene
engineers and four engineering aides are assigned as
need'ed to community noise problems when they arise.
b. Salary totals for program operation and contract
management
See items 2 and 3 above
4. Contracts, grants, loans, and subsidies
None
B. Past and future programs
1. Past programs
a. Expenditures for past 3-5 years
Community noise efforts are requiring about 2 man-years
per year (about $40,000 in fiscal year 1971) plus the
purchase of noise-measuring and analyzing instrumentation
(approximately $5,000 in fiscal year 1971).
b. Facilities acquisitioned for past 3-5 years
None
-------
2. Future program plans
a. Projected facility costs
None
b. Projected personnel levels
Acoustical engineer, fiscal year 1972
Industrial hygiene engineer, fiscal year 1972
IV. Regulation and certification
A. Authority and responsibilities
Authority and responsibility for noise control are vested in
the TVA organization responsible for the operation of the
facilities involved. TVA plans to develop standards and
criteria for use by design and operating organizations in
community noise control.
B. Actions taken to implement regulation and certification
requirements
TVA has no regulatory authority with regard to control of
communi ty no is e.
-------
TREASURY DEPARTMENT
-------
-------
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20220
AUG 30 1971
MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. Alvin F. Meyer, Jr.
Director, Office of Noise Abatement and Control
Environmental Protection Agency
FROM: Richard E. Slitor
Assistant Director, Office of Tax Analysis
SUBJECT: Federal Noise Programs Information
On the basis of a canvass of the various Treasury bureaus, offices,
and services, it seems fair to say that the Department has no substantial
noise emission problems affecting the public and no very substantial pro-
cedures or programs dealing with noise effects and abatement in the occu-
pational noise area.
The major problems of external noise seem to be in the Bureau of
the Mint. These are discussed in the attached report by Mr. Sidney F.
Carwile, Acting Director of the Mint. The Mint also has a substantial
problem of internal or occupational problem noise in connection with
its coin stamping machines which produce coin blanks and then stamp
them into coins. This is handled in part by acoustical tiles but
chiefly by employees' ear protective devices. Other sound damping
measures such as protective panels around the machines would inter-
fere unduly with operations.
The Bureau of Engraving and Printing has some internal or occupa-
tional noise problems which are discussed in the attached report from
Mr. W. R. May, Safety Officer, Office of Industrial Relations, Bureau
of Engraving and Printing.
The Internal Revenue Service has corrected minor occupational
noise problems in"the use of certain mechanical devices in handling
taxpayer forms. This problem was encountered and surmounted some
years ago. At the present time they have whatever occupational noise
problems are associated with large computer installations and process-
ing centers. These are deemed to be minor and no corrective programs
seem to have been called for to date. A copy of the Internal Revenue
Service report is attached. (TO be supplied.)
The Secret Service operates or manages several firing ranges for
pistol and rifle practice. Their noise problems, almost entirely in-
ternal in character, have been dealt with by conventional methods,
-------
- 2 -
including the use of sound absorbent materials, acoustical baffles, and
ear protectors for employees exposed to the sound of firing. A copy
of their report is attached. (To be supplied.)
This brief report is designed to cover both the inventory of known
noise emission sources which are objectionable per Section U02(c) of
Title TV and the comprehensive information requested for use in the
report to Congress in accordance with the instruction outline contained
in your letter of July 30.
Attachments
-------
OPTIONAL TOnM NO. 10
MAY 1062 COITION
GSA FPMR {*i CFR) 101-11.6
UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT
Memorandum
TO : Mr. Richard E. Slitor DATE: August 25, 1971
Asst. Director, Office of Tax Analysis
treasury Building, Room ^205
FROM : Jg&^
Sidney F. Carwile
Acting Director of the Mint
•* ' Federal Noise Programs Information
Confirming your recent detailed discussion vith Mr. Johnson on
the need for detailed information on Federal Noise Programs Informa-
tion, both external emissions, and internal noise control, we are at-
taching a report for the Environmental Protection Agency.
Buy U.S. Savings Bonds Regularly on the Payroll Savings Plan
-------
Federal Noise Programs Information
I - Organizational
A - This report covers the entire Bureau of the Mint, Treasury De-
partment, who operate coinage mints in PhiladelpMa, Pa., Den-
ver, Colorado and San Franciso, California. There is also a
United States Assay Office at New York, with a Bullion Deposi-
tory at West Point, New York and our Bullion Depository at Fort
Knox, Kentucky, where the Nations stock of gold is stored.
B - We currently have n6 need for Legislation or Special Authority
for Noise Function and Funding.
II - Functional
A - The overall program objective of the Bureau of the Mint would
be to eliminate all external noise emissions affecting the ge-
neral public. We wish also to maintain at an absolute minimum
the internal noise that may be detrimental to the welfare of our
employees.
B - Specific Programs:
1. Currently we have three sources of external noise emissions
that have caused public complaint. They are the noise emis-
sions from oar scrubbers on our melting furnace exhausts at
our Philadelphia Mint, noise emissions from our rolling mills
at our Denver Mint, and noise emission from our presses at
the San Francisco Assay Office which is currently minting coins.
2. Our objective is to cut down if not completely eliminate these
external emissions.
a - Our current program has not fulfilled our objective.
b - No specific criteria is used to evaluate the program.
We have somewhat minimized the effect but not cured it.
c - Procedures
1. The problem areas are known and many attempts have been made
to improve the condition. The priorities are in the order
as mentioned in B - 1.
2. No specific action other than our own efforts.
3. No coordination with other Federal agencies.
4. Consultants and field teams from PHS have been made aware
of our problems, with nothing tangible offered.
5- No contemplated new procedures being planned.
d - Future Program Proposals and Objectives
We are continuing our efforts to erradicate the external
noise from our scrubbers in Philadelphia. In Denver, the
proximity of our rolls to the windows, which have to be opened
in the summer, have made this project almost unsurmountable.
In San Francisco, the noise coming out of open windows is dif-
ficult to overcome in our neighborhood.
-------
(2)
III - Fiscal
A. Current Program
1,2,3; & ^ no appropriated funds for our requirements, nor has
any specific personnel been expressly assigned to any of the
projects.
B. Past and Future Programs
la. - On a continuing basis, ve have done what could be done
to keep noise at a minimum. The record of expenditures
for this purpose has not been detailed.
1 b. - No facility acquisitions in the past 3 to 5 years.
2 a. - There is no current knowledge of what projected facilities
costs may be.
2 b. - No knowledge of projected personnel levels in any facili-
ties. These vary considerably with our production re-
quirements .
IV - Regulation and Certification
A - We are knowledgeable of our authority and our responsibility to
make corrections.
B - Prior to the Clean Air Act of 1970, we did improve on a continu-
ing basis our noise problems. We have never accomplished all
that needs to be done. The use of noise absorbing devices is not
too practical in some of our facilities. With sufficient funding
and the use of accoustical experts, eithsr from government or the
private sector, much may be accomplished. The Office of Noise
Abatement and Control may be interested : n visiting our facilities
and on a first hand basis, become knowledgeable of our problems.
It will be noted that in Philadelphia, the external emission of
noise from our rolls and stamping presses is not a factor due to
the design of our new building. Our external emission problem
in this facility is only from the exhaust of our scrubbers. In
Denver and San Francisco, we are operating in old buildings and
at times with the windows open, the external emissions are quite
high. Denver is in the process of building a new facility at a
new location and a newer design would eliminate many of its cur-
rent problems. San Francisco has a facility in a highly populated
neighborhood and some definite changes may be called for here.
-------
UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT
Memorandum,
BUREAU OF ENGRAVING AND PRINTING
TO : Mr. Richard E. Slitor
Assistant Director
Office of Tax Analysis
The Department of the Treasury
FROM : w. R. May, Safety Officer
Office of Industrial Relations
DATE: AugUSt 25, 1971
SUBJECT: Federal Noise Programs Information
According to information from our Office of Engineering, Office
of Research and Technical Services, and the Safety Office, this Bureau
does not have any noise problems that have an effect on the public
welfare.
The few internal noise problems that might have had an effect on
our employees were corrected by the installation of acoustical tile,
changing air motors to electric motors on a panagraph machine, and
providing employees with earmuffs and cotton ear plugs.
We have the capability to take audiometer readings and they are
taken when we feel the sound levels might be high due to some new
equipment installations.
In summary, the Bureau of Engraving and Printing does not appear
to have any noise emission problems that meet the criteria mentioned
in Mr. Alvin F. Meyer, Jr.'s letter of July 30, 1971.
-------
UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT
/P/l PYYI f- T n 11 ii'i >' fni
. VJL. LUL^J I LLll(A-lA,n I
TO : Mr. Richard E. SIitor
Office of Tax Analysis
FROM : Chief, Administrative Operations
Division, U.S. Secret Service
SUBJECT: Noise Abatement and Control
DATE: August 31, 1971
U.S. Secret Service
File No. 616.92
As you know, the U.S. Secret Service does not operate
any noise producing items that would affect the general
public. However, our employees are subjected to noise
in firing ranges that exceed safe levels.
The Department of Health, Education, and Welfare conducted
a study recently which included certain recommendations
on noise control in firing ranges. As a result of their
findings, we have instituted the following controls:
1. All shooters must wear protective ear muffs
or ear plugs when firing.
2. All range officers and firearm instructors
should wear protective ear muffs or be fitted
with custom ear plugs 0
3o Shooters in waiting areas should stand away
from the open door to the firing ranges unless
they wear ear protection.
4. A hearing conservation program wb _ch must
include periodic audio-metric testing for
employees of the firing range hau been insti-
tuted.
5. Ear protection and a hearing conservation
program has been extended to all of our
firing ranges.
6. Ranges under construction will include rigid
specifications to insure that maximum noise
control measures have been included.
Please contact me at extention 8558 if you require
further information. j
M. Kerrreklian
Buy U.S. Savings Bonds Regularly on'the Payroll Savings Pit
•m
-------
r?
V'l £/•*"''•> <*?*•':•,•J '" :"-t^--'-
• iiV /i> 5«i««;y (•„-.,>.:•,/ it
tQ. Mr. Richard Slitor, Assistant Director
Office of Tax Analysis, Department of the Treasury
frorn: Chief, Protective Programs Branch A:FM:PR
subject: Noise Control
As requested, attached is the portion of our regulations in the
Internal Revenue Manual pertaining to identifying and reporting
hazardous conditions which might be injurious to our employees. These
requirements have been in effect in the Treasury Department for many
years.
I am not aware of the existence of any specific noise problem
affecting Service employees nor have any been reported to my office
in recent years. The only incident I recall occurred in the late
50"s, I believe, in our Southwest Region. An employee alleged a
hearing loss as a result of operating a bursting machine. We had the
Public Health Service make a survey and provide recommendations upon
which we acted at the time.
If there are any noise problems in the Service, they would
probably be in the computer rooms at our key da-:a processing facilities.
However, we do not believe that noise in this acea exceeds any
established standards. Since we are not aware c T any problem, we do
not have any positive program of control.
I am not aware of any noise emission problems emanating from
any Service installation which affects the public.
Edward E. Dougherty
Attachment
-------
.
VICE
Date o« Issue:
October 17, iSSB
Purpose
This Memorandum transmits revised text for IRM 1(16)
10, Safety Program.
Removal and Insertion of Pages
Remove
Table of Contents 1(16)00 — 1(16)66
Text 1(16)00 — 1(16)15.3
Exhibits 1(16)10-1 — 1(16) 10-9—Cont.
Insert
Table of Contents 1(16)00 — 1(16)66
Text 1(16)00 — 1(16) 16.7: (4)
Exhibits 1(16)10-1 — 1(16) 10-11—Cont.
Nature of Changes
This Section has been changed to conform with the new
Treasury Regulations for Reporting Accidents, Conduct-
ing Investigations and Processing Claims and Treasury
Regulations under the Military Personnel and Civilian
Employees' Claims Act of 1964. Other changes have been
made to provide uniformity of terminology, establish pro-
cedures for determining eligibility for safely awards, and to
reflect other changes in the program. Some of the more
significant changes are:
IRM 1(16) 11.4 has been amended to assign the National
Office Facilities Branch the responsibility for the accident
and fire prevention programs for the National Office com-
plex.
IRM 1(16)11.5 and other subsections, as appropriate,
have been amended to require the preparation of Optional
Form 26, Data Bearing Upon Scope of Employment of
Motor Vehicle Operator, in addition to the Standard Form
91 for each automobile accident.
IRM 1(16)11.6 has been changed to provide a more
specific criteria for participation in field Federal Safety
Councils.
IRM 1(16)12.3 has been added to require each region
and the National Office Facilities Branch to submit a
monthly memorandum report showing mileage driven by
Service-owned or operated vehicles.
IRM 1(16)13.6 has been added to reflect reports re-
quired of the field and the National Office Facilities Branch.
IRM 1(16)14.32 and 1(16)14.33 have been changed to
broaden the criteria for informal and formal investiga-
tions. Formal investigations will not be required unless
property damage exceeds S250 and other criteria are met.
This change has been reflected throughout the section
wherever applicable.
IRM 1(16)14.34 has been added to establish procedures
specifically for reporting accidents involving GSA vehicles
to the GSA Motor Pool Manager. This report is in addition
to accident reports required elsewhere in IRM 1(16)10.
IRM 1(16)14.41 has ben amended to require that
Standard Form 91 and Optional Form 26 be forwarded to
the supervisor within 21 hours after the accident. It also
requires the supervisor to forward necessary reports v.illiin
48 hours after the accident; eliminates notification of an
employee's return to duty status; and requires instead that
an estimate of the man days of expected loss be shown in
Item 21 on Standard Form 92.
IRM 1(16)14.42 has been amended to no longer require
the preparation of the Annual Federal Tort Claims Report
but includes a requirement for an Annual Report on Claims
Paid Under the Military Personnel and Civilian Employees'
Claims Act of 1964.
IRM 1(16)14.52 has been added to establish procedures
for handling claims filed by Service employees under the
provisions of the Military Personnel and Civilian Em-
ployees' Claims Act of 1964.
IRM 1(16)14.53 has been added to clarify those cir-
cumstances when an employee may advise private parties
of their rights to file claim against the Service without such
advice being considered encouraging or soliciting claims.
IRM 1(16)14.6 has been added to require reporting to
his supervisor immediately any citations for a traffic viola-
tion resulting in an accident while on official business and
to provide legal counsel to any Service employee in this
connection.
IRM 1(16)15.1 through 1(16)15.23 have been changed
to show the use of the Commissioner's Safety Award which
replaces the Secretary's Safety Award; to change the period
for permanent pc session of the Annual Regional and
Annual Service C'_ ter Safety Awards; to include the In-
ternal Revenue Ser/ice Data Center as being in competition
for the Commissii ner's Safety Award; and to reflect that
the disabling injuries at service centers will now be changed
against the regional disabling injury frequency rate in
determining the winner of the Annual Regional Safety-
Award.
IRM 1(16)15.3 has beeji added to require maintenance
of accident statistics by regional and district offices, service
centers, and the National Office Facilities Branch for deter-
mining eligibility for safety awards; sets forth the proce-
dures to be followed in computing eligibility; and requires
notification to the Protective Programs Branch, National
Office, when components become eligible for an award.
IRM 1(16)16 has been added to provide guidelines and
procedures for a Board of Inquiry in determining the cause
of all work-connected accidents or occupational diseases
which result in death or serious injury to Service employees
or to non-Federal persons as a result' of Service activities,
and recommending corrective action to prevent recurrences.
MT 1(16)00-13
(10-17-66) !R
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
-------
Tlii; iiruLulme ui-o irtjiiirrs a repon to (he Aseiitanl Re- CR ] (16)0-1, Amend, 2. tinted November 8, 1963
f;ion:i! Commissioner (Admin istiation'. or the Assisli'.nt
(liiniiiii.-sioiicr (Adniini.'-tivtJon I f(T N.iiional 0;Ti<:e cm- 'J Jie f'i>\(is, \i\ TWX or tolfpli'ine \villiin Ui hours after sucli
a. ' ;it or occiipjilioinil disease. '1'lic infonnation will be. 1 (16) 00 1 L, dated Dca-niber 28, 196-L
in. diiilcly fonvaidfd by TWX or l.-Itphone to the Chief, 1(16)00-15, dated January 25, 1965
PruU-clive Programs Branch.
[Efrecf on Oilier Documents
The follow ins, Manual Supplements remain in effect
supplementing IRM 1 (10) 10: BRUCE McNAiR
CR 1116)0-1, dated December 27, 1961 Director, Facilities Management Division
MT 1(16)00-18 (10-17-66) !R Manua!
OFFICIAL USE OMIY
-------
TAi>lic OF CGMTuNTS
J (16)00 SAFETY; PHYSICAL AND DOCUMENT
SKCl'RITY
1(16)10 Safely Program
IO6)11 Gmier.il Provisions
1(16)11.1 Scope
1(16)11.2 Authority
1(16)11.3 Objectives
1(16)11.4 Responsibilities
1(16)11.5 Training nnd Education
1(16)11.6 Additional Acrident Prevention Activities
1(16 U2 Motor Vehicle Safety
1(16)12.1 Driving Permits
1(16)12.2 Inspections
1(16)12.3 Monthly Mileage Reports
1(16)13 Physical Hazards in Offices
1(16)13.1 Appointment of Safety Inspectors
1(16)13.2 Frequency of Inspections
1(16)13.3 Duties of Safety Inspectors
1(16)13.4 Reports—Field
1(16)13.5 Reports—National Office
1(16)13.6 Reports—General
1(16)13.7 Correction of Hazards
1(16)14 Accidents, Reports, Investigations, Claims
1(16)14.1 General
1(16)14.2 Definitions
1(16)14.3 Accident Reports and Investigations
1(16)14.31 General
1(16)14.32 Informal Investigations
1(16)14.33 Formal Investigations
1(16)14.34 Investigations Involving GSA Vehicles
1(16)14.4 Action Required
1(16)14.41 Informal Investigations
1(16)14.42 Formal Investigations
1(16)14.5 Claims
1 (16) 14.51 Tort
1(16)14.52 Military Personnel and Civilian Employees'
Claims Act of 1964
1(16)14.53 Encouraging Claims
1(16)14.6 Suits
1(16)15 Safety Awards
1(16)15.1 General
1(16)15.2 Eligibility
1(16)15.21 Commissioner's Safety Award
1(16)15.22 Internal Revenue Service Annual Regional
Safety Award
1(16)15.23 Internal Revenue Service Annual Service
Center Safety Award
1 (16) 15.24 National Office Annual Safety Award
1(16)15.3 Reports and Statistics
1(16)16 Board of Inquiry
1(16)16.1 General
1(16)16.2 Board Objectives
1(16)16.3 National Office
1(16)16.4 Initial Reporting of Serious Injuries or Deaths
1(16)16.5 Calling of Board
1(16)16.6 Board Membership
1(16)16.61 Chairman
1(16)16.62 Other Members
1(16)16.63 Board Chairman Responsibilities
1(16)16.64 Employee Rights
1(16)16.7 Report of Board
1(16)20 Civil Defense Program
1(16)20.1 Introduction
1(16)21 General Provisions
1(16)21.1 Authority
1(16)21.2 Policy
1(16)21.3 Background
1(16)21.4 Responsibilities
~\( 16) 21.5 Training in Emergency and Disaster Procedures
7(16)22 Organization Within Office Buildings
1(16)23 Civil Defense Evacuation and Shelter Drills
1 (16)24 Mfnionmdum of Hiulerstatulinp fjct'vecn the Treasury
Department and the Federal Civil Defense Admin-
istration
1(16)30 Raft-guarding of Documents
I (16> 31 Defense Information
1(16131.1 Authority and References
1(16)31.2 Dcfmilions
1(16)31.3 Classification Authority
1(16)31.4 Responsibilities
1(16)31.5 Clearance for Access to Classified Information
1(16)31.6 Custody and Safekeeping of Classified Documents
1(16)31.7 Custodian's Responsibility
1(16)31.8 Changes of Lock Combinations
1(16)31.9 Dissemination Outside the Executive Branch
1(16)31.(10) Information Originating in Another Department
or Agency
1(16)31.(11) Replies and Transmitlals
1(16) 31.(12) Reproductions
1(16) 31. (13) Destruction
1(16)32 Nondefcnse Information
1(16)32.1 Need for Security Measures
1(16)32.2 Protection Requirements
1(16)32.3 Labeling
1(16)40 Safeguarding of Property
1(16)41 Introduction
1(16)42 Policy
1(16)43 Responsibility
1(16)44 Property Protection
Id 6) 44.1 General
1(16)44.2 Security Factors
1 (16)45 Security Standards and Measures
1(16)-15.1 Money
1(16)45.2 Checks, Stamps, Non-Negotiable Instruments
1(16)45.3 Narcotics
1(16)45.4 Firearms
1(16)45.5 Confiscated Property
1(16)45.6 Alcohol Products
1(16)45.7 Technical Equipment
1(16)46 Security Equipment
1(16)46.1 Types
1(16)46.11 Alarms
1(16)46.12 Record Containers, Safes and Vaults
1(16)46.2 Use
1(16)46.21 Locking
1(16)46.22 Combinations
1(16)46.23 Surveys
1(16)47 Physical Protection Measures For Tellers and Cashiers
1(16)47.1 Safety of Personnel and Visitors
1(16)47.2 Instructions
l'(16)50 Identification Media
1(16)51 General
1(16)51.1 Scope
1(16)51.2 Responsibilities
1(16)51.3 Restrictions and Penalties
1(16)51.4 Protection of Identification Media
1(16)52 Pocket Commissions
1(16)52.1 Authorized Use
1(16) 52.2 Description
1(16)52.3 Authorizing Officers
1(16)52.4 Issuing Officers
1(16)52.5 Employees Authorized to Hold Pocket Commis-
sions
1(16)52.6 Issuance Procedures
1(16)52.7 Supplies
1(16)52.8 Disposition
1(16)52.9 Lost or Stolen Commissions
1(16)53 Employee Identification Cards
MT 1(16)00-18 (10-17-66) IR Manual
OFFICIAL USE OHLY
-------
111615-!.:!
) ( 16)5.11
] 1 16 J 53.5
l(x' ".'to
] I 3.7
1(161 54
1(16)55
1(56155.1
1 (10)55.2
1(16)50
1(16)56.1
1(16(56.2
1(16)56.3
1(16156.4
1(16)56.5
1 ( 16 1 56.6
1 ( 16) 56.7
Aiillmri/.i'd l;se
Description
l:>.es
licspor.siliililics
Supplies
Issuance Procedure?
Di; position
Special lluiklinp; I'^ssrs
Aiit.imoliik1 hionlifn nlinn Cards
PUI-IKIM:
Rcsponsil)i!itics
Use
Authorized Personnel
Authority to Issue
Control of Bailees
Suitplics
Disposition
1(16157.'
1 1 16)57.^
1( 16157.3
1 1)6)57.4
1 ( 16) 57.;>
1 ( 16161
1(16)61.1
1(16)61.2
1(16161.3
1(16)61.4
1(16)62
1(16)62.1
1(16)62.2
1(16)63
1(16)64
1(16)65
1(16)66
Aiiniuil lirvicv,- iiinl
General Provisions
Authority
Policy
DeCuiilions of Ti-ruis liscd
Kos|ioiisihility
i)jivcr Qualificiilion Ki'i|i]iremi-nls
Physical Fitness
Kniicl Test
Identifieiition Card in Possession of Driver
Kenewal of Identification Caids
Susjicnsion or Revocation of Identification Cards
Disciplinary Measures
MT 1(16)00-18 (10-17-66) IR Manual
OFFICIAL USE OULY
-------
1(16)0
Safety; Physical an
Document,
St
1(16)10
SAFETY PROGRAM
»16)11 General Provisions
1(16)11.1 SCOPE
(1) Accidents involving Government properly and em-
ployees represent great annual loss, not only in money but
in employee efficiency and suffering resulting from injury
or death occurring in many such accidents. A large per-
centage of the yearly accident total can be prevented and
loss to the Government can be materially reduced if every
employee of the Internal Revenue Service accepts his or
her responsibility for maintaining a constant personal effort
to prevent accidents.
(2) The Internal Revenue Service safety program is
aimed at preventing accidents and consists generally of the
promotion of "safety-consciousness" among employees
through training and education; participation in fire drills;
enforcement of safety instructions: indoctrination of per-
sonnel in safe driving practices; as well as other methods
which tend to ensure the safely of employees and to sub-
stantially reduce accidents and injuries. In addition, the
program includes the immediate reporting and investigation
of accidents; prompt analysis of accidents and corrective
action to prevent recurrence; inspections for physical
hazards in offices and elimination of such hazards when
discovered; and specific rules for use and inspection of
motor vehicles.
16)11.2 AUTHORITY
Public Law 357, approved October 14, 1949 (wh'ch
amends the "Federal Employees' Compensation Act"),
authorizes and directs the heads of all agencies and de-
partments to develop, support and foster organized safety
programs for the purpose of reducing he number of acci-
dents and injuries among Government mployees.
1116)11.3 OBJECTIVES
It shall be the objective of the Internal Revenue Service
to reduce to an absolute minimum the number of accidents
and injuries to employees and to the public as a result of
its operations; to encourage safe practices; and to eliminate
work hazards and health risks.
1(16)11.4 RESPONSIBILITIES
(1) The Assistant Commissioner (Administration) has
overall responsibility for the development, coordination and
administration of the Service program for accident and fire
prevention, accident reporting, and handling of claims.
(2) The Protective Programs Branch, A:FM:PR, is
directly responsible for the formulation and coordination
of the overall Service safety program; the development of
accident reporting procedures; the final review of all
accident reports for adequacy and for ensuring that all
•lecessary corrective action has been taken; for maintain-
•-» the original files of accident reports submitted in
•.ordance with prescribed procedures; and settling and
coordinating the handling of all claims submitted under the
Federal Tort Cl.iims Act and the Military Personnel and
Civilian rmployees' Claims Act of 1964 (P. L. 88-558).
(«~i; Regional Commissioners are responsible for the
safety of all personnel under their jurisdiction and shall
ensure the installation and development of adequate acci-
dent and fire prevention programs within their respective
regions. Officials, supervisors, and employees in the. offices
of the Regional Inspector and Regional Counsel are re-
quested to cooperate and participate in these programs.
(4) The National Office Facilities Branch, is responsible
for developing and administering adequate accident and
fire prevention programs for the National Office complex.
(5) Supervisors and officials at all levels in both the
National Office and the field are responsible for the day-to-
day operation of safety programs within their organiza-
tional units. They are expected to train all employees in
safe practices, to make every effort possible to correct
safety and fire hazards, and to reduce accidents through
such methods as:
(a) Enforcement of compliance with specific safety
instructions;
(b) Prompt investigation and analysis of accident
reports with corrective action, when necessary;
(c) Periodic inspections during the day of space not
constantly occupied by personnel where a definite fire
hazard exists;
(d) Establishment of "No Smoking" areas where fire
hazards exist: and
(e) Encouragement of employees to participate in
first aid and other types of training in safety.
(6) Employees shall report all physical and health
hazards to their supervisors.
(7) Responsibility for coordinating the safety program
should be vested at all major levels in one person who
should be designated as safety officer.
1(16)11.5 TRAINING AND EDUCATION
(1) "Safety-consciousness" among employees should be
promoted through such methods as:
(a) Procuring and using, where necessary, technical
and educational publications, posters, and other material
from the National Safety Council and other sources;
(I>) Discussing specific safely problems at staff meet-
ings and employee meetings, as appropriate; and
(c) Introducing safety into training programs for
employees engaged in duties which experience has shown
produce frequent injuries.
(2) Safety training should be made available to safety
inspectors, key supervisors, persons responsible for a
safety program, or other employees as appropriate. Such
training is authorized under the Government Employees'
MT-1(16)00-18 (10-17-66)
OFFICIAL USf. ONIY
IR Manual
1(16)11.5
-------
SAFETY 1'ROCUV-,'
(1(16)11.~> TRAILING Ai\D EDVC.ATlON—C.om.)
T -lining Act and may ho provided by the Department, of
,or or non-Govrnuneiiiid source;, such us the .National
Safety Coinicil.
(3) All employees should ix: instructed as to the loca-
tion of the ii(-.arest fire alarm box; bow an alarm runs! be
turned in; i>:sponsibility for turning in alarm immediately;
the need for closing windows and doors and leaving the
building without crowding and undue lir»te in tbe event
of fire; location of tbe emergency room or first aid sta-
tion; tbe need for treatment; and tbe proper reporting of
injuries or accidents.
(4) The Treasury Department Safety Council "Driver's
Manual" should be made available to each driver of Gov-
ernment-owned vehicles and privately-owned vehicles on
official business. These drivers should be instructed as
to their responsibility for safe driving; for reporting acci-
dents; and for keeping a Form 2021, Vehicle Accident
Instructions, on their person, a SF-91, Operator's Report
of Motor-Vehicle Accident, Optional Form 26, Data Bear-
ing Upon Scope of Employment of Motor Vehicle Operator,
arid any other required forms in their vehicles at all times.
Vehicles used by enforcement personnel need not contain
these items if the official in charge of the activity feels
that they might cause the identity of the employee to be-
come known and result in danger to the employee or a
lessening of the effectiveness of his enforcement activities.
This does not, however, exempt enforcement employees
'••om completing the required forms in the event of an
;cident.
1(16)11.6 ADDITIONAL ACCIDENT PREVENTION
ACTIVITIES
(1) Additional aids in the development of an effective
accident prevention program are:
(a) Arranging through General Services Administra-
tion, the Department of Labor, or oily appropriate agency
for occasional safety inspections by safety engineers or
other trained personnel, when deemei necessary, in addi-
tion to our own periodic inspections;
(b) Arranging for occasional inspections for fire haz-
ards by the fire department or other appropriate local
organizations;
(c) Where necessary in small offices, establishing
first aid stations maintained by an employee trained in
first aid who would be responsible for treatment of minor
injuries, arranging ambulance service, maintaining lists
of emergency telephone numbers, making referrals, in co-
operation with the responsible supervisory officials, to the
proper Federal medical officers, and other related assign-
ments. Personnel officials have primary responsibility for
the employee health program which includes* all of the
activities itemized in this paragraph. (Criteria for estab-
lishing first aid stations can be found in the Treasury
Personnel Manual, 792) ;
(d) Conducting fire drills, as necessary, for purposes
MT 1(16)00-10 (10-17-66) IR Manual
1(16)11.5 OFFICIAL USE ONLY
of teslin;:; cvhc.iiation plans and instructing employees.
The size find training of building fire organizations will,
of course, depend on the extent to which fnv, hazards exist,
building construction and the like. For instance, if the
building is one having a high potential fire hazard, periodic
drills to acquaint employees with the best manner of evacu-
ation in event of fire should hi; held, and there should be
well-trained employees who can handle the initial fire
fighting duties until the arrival of the fire deportment. On
the other band, such extensive an organization and train-
ing is not necessary in a reasonable fire-resistant building.
The degree of preparation is a matter of judgment, to be
determined locally, with the determination being made on
the basis of providing the maximum protection for Interna]
Revenue Service employees. Local fire departments and
GSA will aid in determining the fire hazard potential of
buildings; and
(e) Representation, active participation, and attend-
ance at meetings of Field Federal Safety Councils in all
cities in which Service offices of at least 50 employees are
located. If, in the opinion of the responsible official, there
are reasons why continued participation in the activities
of a local Council are no longer warranted, a memorandum
containing the circumstances and a recommendation should
be forwarded through channels to the Chief, Protective
Programs Branch, for further action.
1(16)12 Motor Vehicle Safety
1(16)12.1 DRIVING PERMITS
No employee shall be permitted to drive a Service-
owned vehicle, or a privately-owned vehicle on official
business, unless he has a driving permit for operation of
the type of vehicle to be used, and his physical condition
is such that he is capable of driving the vehicle in a safe
manner.
1(16)12.2 INSPECTIONS
(1) Each Government-owned vehicle must be periodi-
cally examined to determine whether it is in safe mechani-
cal operating condition. Cars not in such condition shall
be placed "out of service" until properly repaired.
(2) No seized cars, particularly those which have been
adapted by the installation of more powerful engines than
normal or have had other basic adaptations, shall be used
until they are examined by a competent mechanic and de-
clared to be in safe mechanical operating condition.
1(16)12.3 MONTHLY MILEAGE REPORTS
(1) Each region and the National Office Facilities
Branch will submit to the Protective Programs Branch
A:FM:PR, a monthly memorandum report (Report Symbol
NO-A:FM-01) showing mileage driven by these two cate-
gories of vehicles:
(a) Internal Revenue Service-owned and GSA as-
signed;
(b) Commercial and GSA Pool vehicles.
(2) This report is due in the National Office by the
15th of ihe month following the reporting period.
-------
SAFETY PROCRAM
f 1(16)12.3 MONTHLY MILEAGE REPORTS-CmM.)
(3) Since this information is normally available on
a quarterly basis, estimates \\ill be submitted for the
^t and second months and the report for the third month
..ill be adjusted to reflect actual mileage for the quarter.
1U6113 Physical Hazards in Offices
V
1(16)13.1 APPOINTMENT OF SAFETY INSPECTORS
(1) Each Regional Commissioner will ensure the ap-
pointment of safely inspectors for the regional office and
a!l district and local offices.
(2) Each Division Director will appoint safety inspec-
tors for all National Office space occupied by his division.
(3) A sufficient number of safety inspectors should he
designated so that no individual spends more than four
hours per quarter (including time for filling out reports)
in safety inspection duties, and each inspector should,re-
ceive a definite assignment of space to he inspected.
1(16)13.2 FREQUENCY OF INSPECTIONS
(1) Inspections of all office space for physical hazards
shall be made once each quarter, but special inspections are
required immediately:
(a) When there has been a major shift of furniture
or equipment within the same general area or a move from
one office to another;
(b) Upon the installation of equipment which might
contain or create safety hazards; and
(c) Whenever the existence of a hazard becomes
:own to the person responsible for safety inspections, and
he believes an inspection is necessary prior to taking cor-
rective action.
1(16)13.3 DUTIES OF SAFETY INSPECTORS
Safety inspectors will inspect the oTice space assigned
to them for the hazards listed in Par II of Form 1775,
Report of Physical Hazards in Offices, vsee Exhibit 1(16)-
1O-1), as well as any other hazards thc.t may be observed.
If a hazard is discovered which can he corrected "on the
spot," the safety inspector should advise the person in
charge of the immediate area and see that the correction
is made. If this does not remedy the situation, the Form
1775 is to be completed and forwarded for action to the
official in charge of the office or the Divisiorf Director.
1(16)13.4 REPORTS—FIELD V
(1) Form 1775 with explanations and recommendations
will be completed and forwarded by local offices to the
district office and by the district offices to the regional
office for those hazards which cannot be corrected locally
or require the expenditure of funds which the particular
office is not authorized to obligate. Report Symbol NO-
A:FM-22 is assigned.
(2) The Assistant Regional Commissioner (Adminis-
tration) should promptly telephone, if the situation is
serious enough, or send a memorandum report to the Pro-
Vtive Programs Branch, A:FM:PR, when it is deter-
mined that a hazard exists which cannot be corrected by
the regional office. General Services Administration, or
other responsible agency for lack of funds or for any other
reason. The report should cover details of the problem
including steps taken to eorrecl the condition, estimate of
funds required, and recommendations for National Oflice
action. Report Symbol NO-A:FM-22 is assigned. xx
/1(16)13.5 REPORTS—NATIONAL OFFICE '""'
(1) Each Division Director will see that an original
memorandum report of any unusual items or items of in-
terest in connection with general hazards found and cor-
rected within the division is sent to the Facilities Manage-
ment Division, A:FM:N, as they occur. Report Symbol
NO-A:FM-54 is assigned.
(2) On the basis of the safety inspection reports, each
Division Director will follow normal requisitioning pro-
cedure in the preparation of requests for correction of
minor hazards, such as those requiring installation of
electrical outlets, moving of furniture, etc. The completed
Form 1775, Report of Physical Hazards in Offices, should
be attached to the requisition and forwarded to the Facili-
ties Management Division, A:FM:N, for action. If the
hazard cannot be corrected for lack of funds or for any
other reason, a memorandum report should be forwarded to
the National Office Facilities Branch, A:FM:N, in which
a complete explanation of the situation and recommenda-
tions, as to corrective action are made.
1(16)13.6 REPORTS—GENERAL
(1) Each regional office and the National Office Facili-
ties Branch, is to report by memorandum, original only, to
the Protective Programs Branch, A:FM:PR, as they occur,
any unusual items concerning general hazards found and
corrected that could he used to promote the accident pre-
vention program (Report Symbol NO-A:FM-54).
(2) One copy of regional, district, service center or
National Office issuances concerning accident prevention,
not otherwise required to he furnished the National Office,
should be forwarded to the Protective Programs Branch,
A:FM:PR, in order to keep the National Office informed of
accident prevention activities.
1(16)13.7 CORRECTION OF HAZARDS
Every employee shall cooperate with the safety inspec-
tors in making "on the spot" correction of hazards. Every
reasonable effort will be made by all responsible officials
to correct hazards.
1(16)14 Accidents, Reports, Investigations,
Claims
1(16)14.1 GENERAL
(1) An effective accident prevention program requires
prompt reporting and investigations of accidents and cor-
rective action when indicated, in order to:
(a) Aid in eliminating causes of accidents;
MT 1(16)00-18 (10-17-66) IR Manual
OFFICIAL USE ONLY 106)14.1
-------
(b) Help in obtaining faei;i:: Govemnient against claim:; or suits or aid in the
^.edition of elainj- in the Gov; i i,';:f!,i's favor; and
(<•) Protect tin1 rights of iriji're.l employees (.-ec lil-'u
19201.
1(16)14.2 DEFINITIONS
(1) As used in these instructions, the following terms
mean:
(a) Accident is an occurrence or mishap which:
1 Takes place while the employee is on official duty
and causes his injury, death or occupational disease;
2 Causes injury or death to any other person if
an Internal Revenue Service employee on official duty is
involved or the event occurs on property under Internal
Revenue Service jurisdiction;
3 Causes damage to property of the Internal Rev-
enue Service;
4 Causes damage to property of others if:
a Internal Revenue Service equipment or prop-
erty is involved, or
h An Internal Revenue Sen ice employee on offi-
cial duty is implicated.
(b) Motor Vehicle is any self-propelled powered de-
vice by which a person or properly may be transported,
excluding self-propelled devices operated within a build-
ing for loading and transporting purposes, such as fork
lifts, baggage carriers, elevators, etc.
(c) Federal employee is an employee of any depart-
ment or agency of the Federal Government while acting
within the scope of his official duties.
(tl; Non-Federal person is any nerson not employed
by the Federal Government. (For t'le purpose of these
instructions this includes all Federal employees while not
on official duty or while acting outsid the scope of their
employment. I
(e) Disabling injury is an accidental injury or oc-
"SL'^ational disease which occurs in the course of employ-
ment and renders an employee unable to return to a
regularly assigned job on the following day or shift or to
perform a regularly established job on any day or shift
subsequent to the day of injury.
(f) Informal investigation consists of the completion
of the required accident reporting forms and does not
normally require a separate written report.
(g) Formal investigation is a thorough and detailed
inquiry made by Inspection and requires a written report
covering all facts obtainable pertaining to the accident.
1(16)14.3 ACCIDENT REPORTS AND
INVESTIGATIONS
1(16)14.31 General
The type, of report or investigation required will he
determined by the type of accident involved. The guides
MT 1(16)00-10 (10-17-66) IR Manual
1(16)14.1 OfFICIAL USE OKLY
set out below do not cover all possible type/ of dccidontr.
bu! ill") du outline in geneial terms J ules for determining
.ictif.M required. \Vheic the circumstances do not fall
within ll-.--;*' general ruli-s. accidents should be. called to
the al^'ntii/n of the Protective Progj ams Hia.'ic.h v.ilh re-
quest f.,j specific handling instructions. (See Exhibit
1(16)10 '2. I In tho.se c;r-f? where it is admini.Miatively
determined that a formal investigation is not warranted, an
informal investigation should be conducted in lieu thereof.
1(16)14.32 Informal Investigations
(1) Informal investigations and reports will be made
under the following circumstances:
(n) Accidents involving solely disabling or non-dis-
abling personal injury or dealh of an Internal Revenue
Service employee while in a duty status and acting within
the scope of employment. Only an informal investigation
is required because such an accident falls within the pur-
view of the "Employees' Compensation for Injuries" statute
(See HIM 1920). However, a formal investigation may
be made in lieu of an informal for death or serious injury
when it is necessary for the Board of Inquiry to properly
discharge its responsibility. In this case the formal in-
vestigation should be requested under authority or IRM
(b) Motor vehicle accidents eausing damage solely
to Government-owned cars, regardless of amount of dam-
age, except if the damage is $250 or more and the circum-
stances indicate a reasonable possibility of a claim against a
non-Federal person (See IRM 1 (16) 14.33: (1) (b) ) ;
(c) All motor vehicle accidents causing solely dam-
age to cars owned by employees and being operated on a
reimbursable basis in the conduct of Internal Revenue
Service business, regardless of amount of damage;
(<1) When other Government property is damaged to
an extent of more than $25 but less than $250, and the
circumstances indicate the possibility of a claim against a
non-Federal person (s I ;
(e) As a result of any fire involving or occurring on
property under Internal Revenue Service jurisdiction, re-
gardless of amount of damage; and
(f) When private property is damaged to an extent
of less than 8250 as a result of Internal Revenue Service
activities.
1(16)14.33 Formal Investigations
(1) Formal investigations will be conducted and reports
prepared under the following circumstances:
(a) When a non-Federal person suffers a personal
injury or death as a result of an accident involving Internal
Revenue Service activities unless the Assistant Regional
Commissioner (Administration) with the Concurrence of
the Regional Counsel in the field or the Director, Facilities
Management Division, with the concurrence of the Chief
Counsel in the National Office, determine from the circum-
stances that a formal investigation is not warranted;
(b) When Government propeily is damaged to an
extent of $250 or more under circumstances which indicate
a reasonable possibility of a claim against a non-Federal
-------
(1 tl(,) >-!,''•:> FORMAL /:\!'t^riGAT10'\S-- Cunt.)
person!1 >. except where there is a clenr MIOV.!::;; thai1 pay-
ment, for daimijies lias been 01 v.'ill be made mu!rr private
insuranco coverage of UK: party at faull:
(<•) When private propeily is damaged to an extent
of $250 or more as a result of internal Revenue Service
activities, except as follows:
1 Damage to cars owned by employees and being
operated on a reimbursable basis;
2 Where there is a clear showing thai payment
for damages lias been or will be made under private in-
surance coverage of the party at fault; and
(cl) When specifically requested by competent au-
thority.
(2) Formal investigations will incorporate all reports
(except C.A. Forms, Standard Form 91A, Investigation
report of Motor Vehicle Accident, and Standard Form 92,
Supervisor's Report of Accident) completed by the em-
ployee involved and his supervisor, as well as a detailed
narrative statement by the investigator.
1(16)14.34 INVESTIGATIONS INVOLVING GSA
VEHICLES
In addition to other required reports of motor vehicle
accidents, any accident involving a General Services Ad-
ministration vehicle shall be reported to the GSA Motor
Pool Manager. The initial notification shall be by tele-
phone, if possible, to the Motor Pool Dispatcher, and fol-
lowed up by written report to the. Manager of the Motor
Pool Unit within 48 hours from the time of the accident.
Copies of Standard Forms 91, 91 A, and Optional Form 26,
or the formal investigation without exhibits, may be used to
satisfy the written report requirement.
1(16)14.4 ACTION REQUIRED
1(16)14.41 Informal Investigations
(1) In accidents involving inforn '1 investigations (see
IRM 1(16)14.32), the following employees will take the
following actions as a minimum:
(a) Employee involved in accident:
1 Render all possible assistance to the injured;
2 Obtain names, addresses, and telephone numbers
of witnesses;
3 Notify appropriate local authorities immediately
of the accident;
4 Notify supervisor immediately regarding the ac-
cident;
5 Take action to prevent additional damage to,
or loss of. Government or private property; and
6 Prepare Standard Form 91, Operator's Report of
Motor-Vehicle Accident, (see Exhibit 1(16)10-3) and
Optional Form 26, Data Bearing Upon Scope "of Employ-
ment of Motor Vehicle Operator (see Exhibit 1 (16) 10-40 >
and forward to supervisor within 24 hours after the acci-
dent. Indicate on the SF-91 estimated dollar value of dam-
ages to all cars involved, whether employee's vehicle was
jovernmcnt-owned or personally-owned, and whether the.
vehicle was equipped with seat belts and if ;•<">, wIiciriHV
or not they were being used at the time of the accident.
If they were being used, a brief statf•merit on their effect ive-
nes.-; in preventing more serious injury should be included.
(Note: Completion of Standard Form 91 and Optional
Fo;;n 26 is required for ALL motor vehicle accidents, in-
cluding those which occur while the employee is using
his personally-owned car cm official business. If the em-
ployee involved in the accident is incapacitated, it shall
be, the responsibility of any other Internal Revenue Service
employee present to take the above actions.)
(b) Supervisor oj employee:
1 Upon receipt of report of accident, obtain infor-
mation necessary to determine type of investigation called
for and whether any other action is required. (If infor-
mation indicates necessity for formal investigation, see
IRM 1(16)14.42(1) (b) for action to be taken) ;
2 See that all required forms, including SF-91 A
(Exhibit 1(16)10-5) or 92a (Exhibit 1(16)10-6), as
appropriate, are completed promptly and forwarded
through channels to the Chief, Administration Division, the
Assistant Regional Commissioner (Administration), or to
the Director, Facilities Management Division, Attention
A:FM:N, if the accident involves a National Office em-
ployee. Standard Form 92 (Exhibit 1(16)10-7) is re-
quired whenever an employee is injured. It is forwarded,
within 48 hours after the accident, through channels to the
regional office, or to the Director, Facilities Management
Division, Attention A:FM:N, if the accident involves a
National Office employee. It is reviewed to determine
whether proper corrective action was taken and whether
additional accident prevention measures are needed. If
it is a disabling injury, the SF-92 is forwarded to the Pro-
tective Programs Branch, A:FM:PR; otherwise, it is re-
tained by the regional office or the National Office Facilities
Branch for National Office employees. (Note: If the Stand-
ard Form 92 is for an employee of the Office of the Re-
gional Counsel or Regional Inspector, it is forwarded to
the Office of the Chief Counsel or the Assistant Commis-
sioner (Inspection) for review of corrective action taken
and completion. It should then be forwarded to the
Facilities Management Division, A:FM:N, "for review and
statistical purposes.) Refer to Exhibit 1(16)10-2 for
other retpuired forms;
3 If the employee involved, in the accident is in-
jured and his return to duty status cannot be shown on the
Form 92, Supervisor's Report of Accident, (see Exhibit
1(16)10-7), an estimate of the number of days the em-
ployee is expected to lose will be shown in Item 21 of the
Standard Form 92;
4 Take all action possible to remove the cause of
the accident or prevent a recurrence. Such actions may
include:
a Recommendations to administrative officials for
elimination of physical hazards responsible for the acci-
dent ;
MT 1(16100-18 (10-17-66) IR Manual
OFFICIAL USE ONLY 1(16114.41
-------
1) D^.ciplinaiy a< lion against (lie rmp!i>\re in-
\; -fl. where justified, in accoidance with established
pi v .edurcs;
c Transmission of (-op-, of Standard Form 92 to
GSA or other agency responsible for maintenance of the
building with a request for necessary corrective, action; and
5 See that the employee is aware that ihe Bureau of
Employees' Compensation requires the submission of CA
forms for purposes of employee compensation. Instructions
on the preparation and submission of these forms is con-
tained in IRM 1920. The submission of these forms to the
Bureau of Employees' Compensation should be made
promptly. Any reports submitted later than 60 days after
the date of the accident will he considered late and a
detailed report to the Chief, Protective Programs Branch,
A:FM:PR, fully explaining the delay, will be required.
(c) Chief, Administration Division:
1 Review all accident reports received to ensure
that:
a AH possible, steps have been taken at the dis-
trict level to prevent similar accidents,
h All forms have been submitted and are com-
plete (see Exhibit 1(16)10-2) ; and
2 Forward all accident reports and pertinent memo-
randums to the Assistant Regional Commissioner (Ad-
ministration) after the required action has been completed.
(tl) Assistant Regional Commissioner (Administra-
•):
1 Review all accident reports to determine if ad-
ditional action is necessar) to remove hazards so as to
prevent similar accidents and to ensurs that all required
administrative action has been accomplished;
2 Review accident statistics in t' e region to deter-
mine any significant accident patterns t at would indicate
need for preventive action and utilize t^iis information in
determining what areas of the safety program should be
emphasized;
3 Ensure that all possible efforts are made to effect
satisfactory settlements for damage to Internal Revenue
Service property by non-Federal persons. When there is
clear liability for property damage on the part of the non-
Federal person and an apparent ability to pay, every effort
should be made to collect the full amount of damages.
However, where there is a question as to liability or ability
to pay, the Assistant Regional Commissioner, with the
concurrence of the Regional Counsel, is authorized to ac-
cept whatever settlement is considered satisfactory in the
best interests of the Government without referral to the
National Office.
a When fault or liability is admitted or circum-
stances indicate that the non-Federal person or his insur-
ance company is agreeable to accepting liability, the em-
MT 1(16)00-18 (10-17-66) IR Manual
.,16)14.41 OFFICIAL USE ONLY
p!o\ec involved should immediately vcqui-sl authority for
repair or restoration at a local garage or shop acceptable
to bot!: parties with billing direct to the non-Federal per-
son or his insurer. As soon as repair or restoration has
in-en completed., a statement to that effect will be for-
v. aided to the regional office. If a release from further
liability for repair or restoration of the Government
property involved is required, a request for preparation
of such release will accompany the statement. A mem-
orandum must accompany the Standard Form 91, Opera-
tor's Report of Motor-Vehicle Accident, and Optional Form
26, Dala Bearing Upon Scope of Employment of Motor
Vehicle Operator, stating either that the case was settled
satisfactorily at the local level or the details of why appro-
priate arrangements for repair, restoration or settlement
could not be made locally.
h In cases involving damage to Service prop-
erty where the circumstances appear to warrant repair or
restoration of such property at the expense of a non-
Federal person and such person has not agreed informally
to accept liability, the details of the circumstances involved
should be reported in a memorandum which should be
submitted with the accident investigation report through
normal channels to the regional Facilities Management
Branch for referral to Regional Counsel for processing.
Regional Counsel will then prepare, over his signature, a
formal demand for payment of damages, if appropriate. If
the collection efforts are successful, a memorandum report
should be forwarded by Regional Counsel to the Chief of
the regional Facilities Management Branch together with
any remittance received. If Regional Counsel's collection
efforts are unsuccessful and the amount claimed by the
United States does not exceed S5,000 exclusive of interest
and costs, Regional Counsel will determine whether or not
to request the United States Attorney to institute suit to
recover for the damages to the Government property. If
it is determined not to request the institution of suit, the
Chief of the regional Facilities Management Branch should
be so advised. If the institution of suit is requested, a
copy of the letter to the United States Attorney will be
forwarded to the Protective Programs Branch, Facilities
Management Division, National Office, Attention A :FM:PR,
together with the original of the accident Investigation
report. A copy of the letter to the United States Attorney
will also be forwarded to the Chief of the regional Facil-
ities Management Branch. In the event collection efforts
are unsuccessful and the amount claimed by the United
States exceeds $5,000 exclusive of interest and costs, four
copies of the accident investigation report will be pre-
pared and Regional Counsel's complete file, including a
copy of the demand letter and any reply thereto, and three
copies of the accident investigation report will be for-
warded by Regional Counsel to the Chief Counsel, Atten-
tion CC:AT, for consideration of legal action to recover.
A copy of the transmittal letter, together with the original
of the accident investigation report, will be forwarded to
the Protective Programs Branch, Facilities Management
Division, National Oflice. A copy of the transmittal letter
will also be forwarded to the Chief of the regional Facilities
Management Branch; and
-------
SAFETY PROGRAM
(l(lfi)llAl INFORMAL INVESTIGATIONS—
Com. (2))
4 Ensure that all Standard Form? 92 on disabling
njuries ;ind all informal automobile accident investigation
reports are submitted !o the Chief, Protective Programs
Branch, A:FM:PR, uilliin ,'>0 days after occurrence.
1(16)14.42 Formal Investigations
(1) In accidents involving formal investigations (see
IRM 1(16)] 133). employees will take the following
action:
(a) Employee involved in accident: Same as required
for informal investigation (see IRM 1 (16) 14.41: (1) (a) ).
However, notify your supervisor promptly if the insurance
company of the party at fault pays or agrees to pay all
damages.
(b) Supervisor of employee:
1 As soon as assured that a formal investigation is
required, telephone or wire the Regional Inspector, report
the circumstances of the accident and request investigation
be started immediately. If the employee is assigned to the
National Office, the supervisor will contact the Director,
Internal Security Division. If the supervisor later receives
information as to settlement of damages or other informa-
tion which may render the completion of the formal investi-
gation unnecessary, he will promptly report such infor-
mation to the appropriate Inspection official;
2 Prepare a brief memorandum outlining the facts
of the accident and forward this, with the required forms,
except the SF-02, if one is required (see Exhibit 1(16)10—
2), properly completed, to the Regional Inspector or Di-
rector, Internal Security Division, if the employee is
assigned to the National Office; and
3 Forward the SF-92 to the Chief, Administration
Division, the Assistant Regional Commissioner (Adminis-
tration), or the Director, Facilities Management Division,
as applicable.
(e) Chief, Administration Division:
1 In any accident arising out of the activities of
the Service, other than a motor vehicle accident, in which a
non-Federal person sustains or alleges to sustain personal
injury, see that SF-92a is prepared for each injured and
made part of the formal investigation;
2 Review SF-92 for completeness, and appro-
priateness of corrective action;
3 Take all possible steps to prevent similar acci-
dents; and
4 Forward the SF-92 to the Assistant Regional
Commissioner (Administration) at once.
(d) Inspection: Upon receipt of information indicat-
ing a necessity for a formal investigation of an accident,
the Director, Internal Security Division, or the Regional
Inspector, as applicable, shall:
1 Notify the Chief, Administration Division, the
Assistant Regional Commissioner (Administration), or the
Director, Facilities Management Division, A:FM:N, as
appropriate, that the accident has occurred and that In-
spection is instituting an investigation;
2 Complete the investigation as quickly as possible
and set forth the findings on Form 2028, including infor-
mation prepared in the format as shown in Exhibit 1 (16)-
10-8, using SF-94, Statement of Witness, (see Exhibit
1(16) KM/), as required;
3 Forward original and two copies of the report
to the Assistant Regional Commissioner (Administration)
or, if National Office personnel are involved, to the Director,
Facilities Management Division, Attention A:FM:N;
4 Where information is reported or developed dur-
ing the investigation that satisfactory settlement of dam-
ages has been accomplished or other circumstances be-
come known which may eliminate the need for completing
the investigation, such information will be discussed with
the appropriate Administration official to arrive at a de-
cision as to discontinuance or completion of the investi-
gation. In doubtful property-damage-only cases and in
all personal injury cases, the Administration official should
seek the concurrence of the Regional Counsel or Chief
Counsel, as appropriate; and
5 If DO investigation is accomplished and no in-
vestigative report is written, the accident reporting forms
received will be forwarded as provided in 3 above.
(e) Assistant Regional Commissioner (Administra-
tion) :
1 Complete all applicable action required in IRM
2 Give thorough review to all formal investigation
reports received from the Regional Inspector for indica-
tions of possible excessive claims;
3 Request the Regional Counsel to review the re-
port of investigation if:
a Claim made appears to be excessive,
b There is a question as to the extent of injury
to a non-Federal person or damage to non-Federal Property,
c Such K 'iew appears necessary to protect the
interests of the Government;
4 Upon request of the Regional Counsel, make ar-
rangements for physical examinations of. non-Federal
persons at the nearest Public Health hospital or clinic or
by a private physician. Such examination will be per-
formed only upon the authority of the Regional Counsel,
who must also initial the voucher for payment for such
examination. To make these arrangements a letter should
be addressed to the head of the hospital or clinic, including
the name and title of the Internal Revenue Service em-
ployee involved in the accident and name and address of
the office where he is employed. Include a carbon copy
of the letter with the original and request the Public Health
facility to attach the carbon copy of your letter to the re-
imbursement voucher when forwarded for payment. An
approved private physician may be used if a monetary
saving to the Government is indicated. (See pamphlet
"Medical Facilities Available to Employees of the U. S.
Government Injured in the Performance of Duty Under
MT 1(16)00-18 (10-17-66) IR Monoal
OFFICIAL USE ONLY 1(16)14.42
-------
SAFETY PROGRAM
(1 (16)14,12 FORMAL INVESTIGATIONS—Cont.)
fix--federal Employees' Compensation Act of September
7 )l6, as amended"); and
5 Forward original of the investigative report, with
exhibits, to the Chief, Protective Programs Branch,
A:FiM :PR. One copy of the report may be forwarded to the
activity concerned, if deemed appropriate. In most in-
stances this will be the Chief, Administration Division, dis-
trict office. Board of Survey action may be required in con-
nection with damage to motor vehicles or other property or
Board of Inquiry action in connection with a death or
serious injury. In such a case, the regional office copy
may be used when appropriate.
(f) Protective Programs Branch:
1 Review all accident reports forwarded from field
offices and those pertaining to National Office personnel
or. property, to ensure that all required and appropriate
measures have been taken in relation to the accident pre-
vention program;
2 Where necessary, arrange for review of accident
reports by the Office of the Chief Counsel;
3 Maintain files of all types of accident reports re-
ceived, compile accident statistics and prepare reports re-
quired under the Treasury Department Safety Program;
4 Send a copy of the approved recommendations of
the Chief Counsel on claims to the region concerned. This
is an information copy and may or may not be accompanied
• suggestions as to recommended action; and
5 Keep records of all claims and suils against the
Internal Revenue Service under the Federal Tort Claims
Act and the Military Personnel and Civilian Employees'
Claims Act of 1964.
1(16)14.5 CLAIMS
1(16)14.51 Tort
(1) The Federal Tort Claims Act authorizes the head
of each agency to settle or reject claims against the Gov-
ernment for -$2,500 or less, and permits individuals to file
suits against the Government for properly loss or damage,
personal injury or death caused by the negligence or wrong-
ful act or omission of a Government employee acting within
the scope of his employment. The Commissioner has
delegated settlement authority to the Assistant Commis-
sioner (Administration), the Director, Facilities Manage-
ment Division, the Chief, Protective Programs Branch,
and the Safety Management Officer, A:FM:PR.
(2) Claims should be filed with the Commissioner of
Internal Revenue, Washington, D. C. 20224, and should
be made on Standard Form 95, Claim for Damage or In-
jury (see Exhibit 1(16)10-10). When a claim is pre-
sented at a field office, it should be forwarded immediately
through the Assistant Regional Commissioner (Adminis-
tration), to the Chief, Protective Programs Branch,
A:FM:PR.
MT 1(16)00-18 (10-17-66) IR Manuol
1(16)14.42 OFflCIAL USE ONLY
(3) Upon receipt of a claim the Protective Programs
Branch will attach nil pertinent data, including the investi-
gative report and forward the case to the OfTire of the
Chief Counsel, which will prepare a memoiandum to the
Safety Management Officer, A:FM:PR, containing a rec-
ommendation on the disposition of the claim.
(4) All claims should be promptly date stamped by the
office first receiving them.
(5) If the Chief Counsel's recommendation is for ap-
proval, he will also prepare a letter for the signature of
the Safety Management Officer, notifying the claimant that
his claim has been approved. He will also complete three
copies of Standard Form ] 145, Voucher for Payment
Under Federal Tort Claims Act. The memorandum, letter
and voucher forms will be attached to the investigative file
and forwarded to the Chief, Protective Programs Branch.
A:FM:PR, for further action.
(6) If the recommendation is for disapproval, a letter
to the claimant, briefly outlining the reasons, shall be pre-
pared by the Chief Counsel for the signature of the Safely
Management Officer, A:FM:PR, and will be forwarded to
that division with the file and the recommendation.
(7) If the Safety Management Officer, A:FM:PR,
concurs in the recommendation of the Chief Counsel, he
will sign the memorandum as evidence of his agreement
and will sign the letter to the claimant. If the recommenda-
tion is for approval, the original of the SF-1145 will be
forwarded with the letter to the claimant for his signature.
(8) Upon return of the signed Standard Form 1145, the
Protective Programs Branch will forward it, with two cop-
ies and a copy of the approved recommendation, to the
Fiscal Management Division for payment. When the claim
is paid the Fiscal Management Division will return one
copy of the Standard Form 1145 to the Protective Programs
Branch showing dat: of payment.
1(16)14.52 Militar Personnel and Civilian
Employees' Claims Act of 1964
(1) Public Law '-J8-558, as amended, Military Person-
nel and Civilian Employees' Claims Act of 1964, authorizes
the head of each agency to settle claims against the Gov-
ernment for §6,500 or less (§10,000 or less for Coast
Guard) and permits employees to file claims against the
Government for damage to, or loss of, personal property
incident to their service where possession of such property
is determined to be leasonable, useful, or proper under the
circumstances. The Commissioner has delegated settlement
authority to the Assistant Commissioner (Administration),
the Director, Facilities Management Division, the Chief,
Protective Programs Branch, and the Safety Management
Officer, A :FM:PR.
(2) Treasury Department Regulations, Military Per-
sonnel and Civilian Employees' Claims Act of 1964, dated
October 20, 1965, provides detailed information as to the
types of claims covered by this Act.
(3) Claims should be made on Treasury Form 3079
(see Exhibit 1(16)10-11) according to instructions on the
reverse side of the form and forwarded through channels
lo the Protective Programs Branch, A:FM:PIi.
-------
SAFETY PROGRAM
(1(J6)1
-------
SAFETY PROGRAM
(1(16)1-1:6 Sl:ITS--Ccmt.)
lel]))' thereof, to the Regional Counsel or. in the case of
National Office employees, to llir Chief Counsel, Attention
CC:AT. The employee concerned shall also promptly stih-
mit to his immediate supervisor, in triplicate, a signed
report describing the duties lie was performing at the
time the accident occurred, the place where the trip origi-
nated, his intended destination, and any oilier information
heaving on the question of whether he was acting within
the scope of hi? office or employment at the lime of ihe
incident out of which the suit arose, unless such informa-
tion was previously reporled to his immediate supervisor
on the Optional Form 26 prepared at the time of the acci-
dent. If the employee was driving a privately-owned vehicle
at the time of the accident which gave rise to the suit, he
shall at the same time also furnish his supervisor, in
triplicate, a copy of any automobile liability insurance
policy held by him. The employee sued will thereafter
render any assistance and give any additional information
that the United States Attorney may desire.
(5) The employee's immediate supervisor shall pre-
pare a signed report describing the nature of the driver's
duties, the instructions—if any—given him, his authorized
destination, the conveyance authorized, whether he had
departed from the route authorized or disobeyed any in-
structions given him, whether he was engaged in the
i' herance of his own personal interest in any way, and
fa..y other relevant data, unless such information was previ-
ously reported on the Optional Form 26 prepared at the
time of the accident. The employee's and supervisor's
reports involving field employees and employee's automo-
bile liability insurance policy, if any, shall he promptly
forwarded, in triplicate, to the Regional Counsel. Reports
nvolving National Office employees will be forwarded to
ihe Chief Counsel, Attention CC:AT.
(6) The Regional Counsel shall promptly furnish the
United States Attorney for the judicial district embracing
the place wherein the action or proceeding is brought with
information concerning the commencement of such action
or proceeding, all process and pleadings, or an attested
true copy, the reports of the employee and supervisor, and
a copy of the employee's automobile liability insurance
policy, if any. The Chief Counsel shall furnish the same
information with regard to suits involving National Office
employees.
(7) The Regional Counsel shall forward, in duplicate, to
the Chief Counsel, Attention CC:A.T, copies of the same
information and all documents furnished the United States
Attorneys. The Chief Counsel will in turn forward one
copy to the Chief of the Torts Section, Civil Division, De-
partment of Justice, if the amount sought exceeds $5,000
or if the Department of Justice otherwise requests it.
MT 1(16)00-18 (10-17-66) IR Manual
1(16)14.6 OFFICIAL USE ONLY
(8) The Regional Counsel or the Chief Counsel will
kc»p the. Assistaul Regional Commissioner (Administra-
tion), or the Dirccior, Facilities Management Division, as
appropriate, or their desigriees, currently informed of ihe
stains of all sails which are within the purview of the
Federal Tort Claims Act.
(9) A copy of IRS Document No. 5418, "Lawsuits
Affecting Internal Revenue Service Drivers," shall be fur-
nished to each employee who has occasion to drive a ve-
hicle on official business.
(10) Should a suit (not arising out of the operation of
a motor vehicle) be filed against an employee of the In-
ternal Revenue Service, or if an employee is charged with
violation of criminal laws, as a result of the performance
of his official duties, it should be reported immediately to
the Regional Counsel (Chief Counsel in the case of Na-
tional Office employees I. In the case of civil suits, the
employee should also furnish a copy of any insurance
policies that may cover his liability. If the employee
desires legal representation by the United States Govern-
ment, he should so advise the Regional Counsel or the
Chief Counsel, as the case may be. Prompt notification
is necessary since it may be found desirable to remove the
case to a United States District Court which, in a civil
action, must be effected within 30 days from the date the
complaint was served on the employee, and in a criminal
case the removal must be effected before trial. (Under
ordinary circumstances, a request for the United States
Attorney to afford legal counsel is made through the Na-
tional Office. When time does not permit, the United
States Attorney will, upon request of the local official in
charge, afford legal counsel to Government employees who
are sued civilly, or charged with violation of criminal laws,
as a result of the performance of their official duties.
Should such a request for'legal counsel be made locally to
the United States Attorney, a report thereof should be
made as soon as possible through channels to the Director,
Facilities Management Division, by the local official who
made1 the request.)
(11) Reporting Traffic Citations: As a plea of guilty
in traffic court may be introduced as evidence in a civil
action, it is imperative that all Service employees obtain
legal counsel if they are cited for a traffic violation while
in performance of official business resulting in an accident,
before entering such a plea in court. It is the responsi-
bility of the individual driver who is cited for a traffic
violation resulting in an accident, to report such incident
to his supervisor immediately. The supervisor will be re-
sponsible for reporting the incident to the legal counsel of
his office. IN NO CASE SHOULD A SERVICE EM-
PLOYEE PLEAD GUILTY TO A TRAFFIC VIOLATION
CHARGE RESULTING IN AN ACCIDENT WITHOUT
ADVICE AND COUNSEL OF A REPRESENTATIVE OF
THE CHIEF COUNSEL'S OR REGIONAL COUNSEL'S
OFFICE.
-------
SAFETY PROGRAM
1! 16115 Scrs-fy Awards
1(16)15.1 GENERAL
(1) There are four type? of safely awards issued to
major organizational components of the Service for out-
standing safety performance:
(a) The. Commissioner's Safety Award, in the form
of a certificate signed )>y the Commissioner, is presented to
designated organizational components to recogni/.e out-
standing performance over a sustained period of time.
(h) The Internal Revenue Service Annual Regional
Safety Award, in the form of a plaque, is presented each
year to the region with the lowest disabling injury fre-
quency rate during the preceding year.
(c) The Internal Revenue Service Annual Service
Center Safety Award, in the form of a plaque, is presented
each year to the service center with the lowest disabling
injury frequency rate during the preceding year.
(cl) The National Office Annual Safety Award, in the
form of a plaque, is presented each year to the major
functional area in the National Office with the lowest dis-
abling injury frequency rate during the preceding year.
1(16)15.2 ELIGIBILITY
1(16)15.21 Commissioner's Safety Award
(1) Each regional office, each district office, each service
center, the National Computer Center, the Data Center,
and the National Office will be eligible to receive this award
for the completion of 1,000,000 man-hours of work with-
out a disabling injury or one year without a disabling in-
jury, whichever occurs first.
(2) Since regional offices are directly responsible for
field activities of the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and
Appellate Divisions, disabling injuries involving employees
of those divisions, regardless of the employees' location at
the time, will be charged to the regional office.
(3) Disabling injuries involving employees of the
offices of the Regional Counsel and the Regional Inspector
will be charged to the office of the Chief Counsel and the
Assistant Commissioner (Inspection), respectively.
1(16)15.22 Internal Revenue Service Annual
Regional Safety Award
(l)Eligibility for this award is limited to entire re-
gions, including injury experience of the service centers.
The region with the lowest disabling injury frequency rate
(number of disabling injuries per million hours worked)
during the calendar year will be presented the plaque in the
spring of the following year.
(2) The region which wins this plaque may retain it
for one year. At the end of that year they will receive a
small plaque as evidence of having won the award.
(3) A legion winning the Award three tiroes during a
10-year period will gain permanent possession of the
plaque.
1(16)15.?3 Internal Revenue Service Annual
Service Center Safety Award
(1) The service center with the lowest disabling injury
frequency rate during the calendar year will be presented
this plaque in the spring of the following year.
(2) The. winning service center may retain the plaque
for one year. At the end of that year, they will receive a
small plaque as evidence of having won the Award.
(3) A service center winning the Award three limes
during a 10-year period will gain permanent possession
of the plaque.
1(16)15.24 National Office Annual Safety Award
(1) An awards program has been established among
the major functional areas in the National Office. They are
the functional areas of each Assistant Commissioner and the
Chief Counsel. The injury experience of the employees of
the offices of the Regional Counsel and the Regional In-
spector will be included in the appropriate functional area
for this purpose.
(2) The functional area with the lowest disabling in-
jury frequency rate during the calendar year will be
presented a plaque in the spring of the following year. The
plaque may be retained for one year. In the event of a
tie, the winning functional areas will each retain the
plaqi'e for an appropriate portion of the following twelve
months.
(3) A functional area winning the Award three times
during a 10-year period will gain permanent possession
of the plaque.
1(16)15.3 REPORTS AND STATISTICS
(1) Each regional office and the National Office Facili-
ties Branch will, when appropriate, submit a memorandum
to the Chief, Protective Programs Branch, National Office,
recommending the issuance of the Commissioner's Safety
Award to the eligible component. If the award covers
twelve months without a disabling injury, the date of in-
jury and name of the employee who was injured on tbe
day before and, if any, after tbe period of eligibility will
be included.
(2) If the award covers one million man-hours of work,
or more, without a disabling injury, the figures and method
used for computation and dates involved will be included.
The following simple method should be used in this
computation:
MT 1(16)00-18 (10-17-66) IR Manual
OFFICIAL USE ONLY 1(16)15.3
-------
(1(16)15.3 REPORTS AND STATISTICS-CO,a.)
Method of Computation
(Standard man-hours per yc;ir fur each employee =- 2080)
Formula: I)a\s or Employees '
Periods of 1 monlli I Number of
nr- Tnnro '
Periods less
than 1 month
Months >< Hours X ojirn!',; =: Man-hours
Numl.ier of
Months X 173 per mo. - X Number = Total
X Number — Total
J
~\ Number of
f- working X 8 per day
j days
1 On rolls at the end of month or nearest the end of month, as shown in the monthly
Personnel Report.
- For December use 177 hours.
Example:
A district with 950 employees each month for the period
January through July with no disabling injuries until
July 15.
January 1 — June 30 6 X 173 X 950 =: 986,100
July 1—July 15 11 X 8 X 950 — 83,600
"Total 1,069,700
(3) The National Olhce Facilities Branch will maintain
statistics and determine eligibility for the National Office
Annual Safety Award.
(4) The Protective Programs Branch. National Office,
will maintain statistics to confirm eligibility for the Awards
nd for other purposes, and will prepare and forward
Awards to eligible components upon request.
1(16)16 Board of Inquiry
1(16)16.1 GENERAL
(1) Boards of Inquiry are set up to determine the cause
of all work-connected accidents or occupational diseases
which result in death or serious injury to Service employees
or to non-Federal persons as a result of Service activities,
and recorhmend corrective action to prevent a recurrence.
(2) A serious injury is, for this purpose, one which
results in a loss of time from work of 30 or more calendar
days. The Board will also consider suicides and heart at-
tacks only if alleged to have occurred as a result of over-
work, job-pressures, or a similar work-connected cause. It is
not the intent that every suicide or heart attack case be a
matter requiring Board attention. Some disabling injuries
resulting from falls, improper lifting, or other causes may
not be immediately discernible as a serious injury. How-
ever, if it later appears likely that, as a result of the initial
injury, there will be a loss of time from work of 30 or more
calendar days, or if death results, the report required in
IRM 1(16)16.4 will be submitted.
1(16)16.2 BOARD OBJECTIVES
(1) The Board has the following two major objectives:
MT 1(16)00-18 (10-17-66! If? Manual
1(16)15.3 OFFICIAL U3E ONLY
(a) Determine from a review of the report of in-
vestigation or by other means, the circumstances and cause
of the accident which resulted in the serious injury or
death; and
(b) Make recommendations for corrective action to
prevent a recurrence of similar accidents.
1(16)16.3 NATIONAL OFFICE
The Nitional Office Board of Inquiry will follow field
procedures except that substitutions in IRM 1(16)16.4
through 1(16)16.62 will be made as follows:
Director, Facilities Management Division, for
Assistant Regional 'ommissioner (Administration)
National Office Safe'y Officer for
Regional Safety Oftcer
Assistant Commissioner for
Assistant Regional Commissioner
1(16)16.4 INITIAL REPORTING OF SERIOUS INJURIES
OR DEATHS
(1) It remains the responsibility of each supervisor to
see that accident reports are promptly prepared and sub-
mitted. An initial report or notice of a work-connected
death or serious injury of a Service employee or non-
Federal person will be submitted by TWX or telephone to
the Assistant Regional Commissioner (Administration)
within 48 hours after the accident. The information re-
ceived by the regional office will be forwarded immediately
via TWX or telephone to the Chief, Protective Programs
Branch (A:FM:PR). The initial report should cover as a
minimum the following information:
(a) Name of deceased or injured
(b) Federal or non-Federal person
(c) Job title
-------
SAKLTY PROGRAM!
(l()f,))f>/> IMTIAI. REi'ORTIXC OF SKR'GUS
IK JURIES OR DEATH—Com.)
(«!) Circumstances an
-------
SAFETY I'HOCli -\;\!
1(16)16.7 /\r/'<">/\T OF llO.'lRI-> - Cont.) hy I'.!'.- Hoard shall he taken ]>y the Regional or National
„ . , , .... , Oiiii-i; Safety OlTkei.s to ensure appropviale reconinu-nila-
thc Assistant Cuniims.-ioiifr of the activity 01 the emmo)i:e . . ,.,. c ''. V , ,,
1 tions are put into pr,:cti''c. Ihc ber\!i:e Safety Management
11 u • Oflicer will coorilinate iinjilcmeatation of those recom-
(4) The iiccepsary follow-up on rcconiniemlaliojis made mendatioiis which are, of Service-wide significance.
MT 1(16)00-18 (10-17-66) IR Manual
1(16)16.7 OFFICIAL USE ONLY
-------
SAFETY PROGRAM
EXHIBIT 1(16)JO-1.
REPORT OF PHYSICAL HAZARDS IN OFFICES
Report Symbol No-A: FM-22
DATC RCPORT SUBMITTED
March 23, 1$66
This form woo developed for use by persons in supervisor/ capacity for determining the physical conditions in their work area which
inherently, or though explication or use, present accident hazards to personnel.
TO:
Facilities Management Division
A:FM:PR
FROM: (Name. Section, RoonJVo. Telephone Ho.)
John Jones, Safety Inspector
Room 3118, Ext. 2700
PART I - IDENTIFICATION DATA (Area Covered by Survey)
(Check which)
[jTj NATIONAL OFFICE
Q REGIONAL OFFICE (Specify)
BUILDING . . , „
Internal Hevenue
IF NATIONAL OFFICE (Specify Division)
Fiscal Management Division
IF REGIONAL OFFICE (Specify Ollice in Region}
"fiozlilfo ""Washington, D. C.
20224
PART II - INSPECTION DATA
INSTRUCTIONS
Listed in Column (a) below are "Items and
Conditions*" that may In some instances endanger the physical
well-being of employees. A few examples will illustrate. Pro-
truding nails or screws may cause tripping hazards or puncture
wounds; Improper illumination such as shadows, glare, lights
out, etc., may cause tripping and falling hazards; Improperly
stacked materials may fall and injure someone; improperly lo-
cated extension cords and telephone wires may cause falls from
tripping; open file or desk drawers nioy cause someone to bark
shins or fall;if glass-top desks are permitted, cracked, checked
or broken glass may cause serious lacerations; loose or exces-
sively vibrating fans may fall and injure persons nearby; blocked
aisles will hamper emergency exits; poorly arranged desks may
cause ^indue crowding and hamper egress. For each item or con-
dition that is applicable to the working area, indicate whether
or not a hazard exists by checking "Yes" Column (b) or "No"
Column (c). For each existing hazard (Items and Conditions*
rhecked "Yes"), pertinent "Comments and Recommendations"
for remedial action will be made in Column (d). Items and con-
ditions peculiar to the working area, that are not listed in Column
(a), should be added in the space provided in Section F.
ITEM
NO.
ITEMS AND CONDITIONS
(a)
HAZARD
EXISTS
YES
(b)
NO
(c)
LOCATION. O*WENTS. AND RECOMMENDATIONS
CONCERNING HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS
(d)
SECTION A - TRIPPING, SLIPPING AND FALLING
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
FLOORS AND STAIRWAYS
«*TEB. OIL. SOAP. ETC.
HIGHLY POLISHED SURFACES
TORN OR LOOSE COVERING
ROUGH OR SPLINTERED SURFACES
PROTRUDING NAILS. SCREVJ . ETC.
HANDRAILS
ILLUMINATION
TREADS
PROJECTING OUTLETS
EXTENSION CORDS
LADDER
WASTEBASKETS
X
X
X
Lx
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Torn rugs Room 3118 need repair
Provide outlet in Rm. 3111 to eliminate
cord across aisle.
SECTION B • TIPPING AND FALLING OBJECTS
13
14
15
16
17
FILE CABINETS
LOCKER SHELVES
CEILING AND LIGHTING FIXTURES
PLASTER
STACKED MATERIALS
X
X
X
X
X
Cracked and falling in Rm. 3123
SECTION C • COLLISIONS AND OBSTRUCTIONS
18
19
20
21
22
U. S.
AISLE CONDITIONS
VALVES AND PIPES
PENCIL SHARPENERS
DESK AND FILE CABINET DRAWERS
eeHKvmsautaaoaaeaKx Door Stop
X
E
X
X
X
X
Door stop was removed Rm.
never replaced.
3120 and (OVER)
FORM I77S (3-54);
MT 1(16)00-18 (10-17-66) IR Manual
OFFICIAL USE ONLY 1(16)10-1
-------
EXHIBIT .1(10) 10-1—Ct,ni.
PAST 1! - INS."
ITEV
NO.
f TFMS A.ND CONDITIONS
| (0)
^C; IOU' rsATA (Cc,;v.ii.u«d)
HAZARD
YES
(b)
t.o
(c)
LOCATION. COMMENTS. AND
CONCEFJJING HAZARDOU
(d)
— — ... "~" "
KllCOr.t/r/vDATIOf.'S
S CONDI TlOtJS
SECTION D - ECUIf'MEMT
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
OFFICE MACHINES
WIRING, SWITCHES OR CORDS
PLUMBING FIXTURES
FUNS' 1 TURE
COLLIES
MAIL CARTS
GLASS DESK TOPS
WASTE PAPER BASKETS
EDGES OF METAL EQUIPMENT
ELECTRIC FANS
INSECURELY PLACED EQUIPMENT
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Door check hanging loose Km. 3119
SECTION E • FIRE AND PANIC
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
DISPOSAL OF PAPER AND WASTE
STORAGE FACILITIES FOR FLAM/AK.ES
DISPOSAL FACILITIES FOR SMOKERS
FIRE ESCAPES AND EXITS
HOCOUACY
Al SLES LEADING TO
ACCESS TO
SIGNS AND LIGHTS
FIRE PROTECTIVE EOU 1 PMFJVT
( ACCESSIBILITY
COND 1 Tl ON
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
SECTION F - OTHER
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
WORKING SPACE
SANITARY Cr"*DITIONS
POISONOUS Oft OBNOXIOUS fUMCS
A 1 SL £ W i 0 TH
HOUSEKEEPING
VENTILATION
STORAGE OF POISONOUS SUBSTANCE
STEAM PIPES
Broken window pane
_x_
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Room 3108
OTHER OBSERVATIONS
I believe the hazardous condition of door stops in Room 3119 and 3120 to be
the most serious. They should be corrected at once.
SAFETY INSPECTOR'S SIGNATURE
FORM 177S (3-54)
MT 1(16)00-18 (10-17-66) IR Manual
1(16)10-1 OFFICIAL USE ONLY
-------
SAIT.TY PROGRAM
EXHIBIT 1(16) 10-2
ACCIDENT F.:i.'FO:>TiNG FORMS AND INVESTIGATIONS
Circumst;]
Other
Motor than
vehicle motor
accident vehicle
accident
Federal Employees
Compensation
Act
Investigation required
Informal Formal
Disabling or non-disabling injury SF--91* SF-92"
or death to Service employee on SF-91A-
duty. SF-923
OF-26'
See IRM 1920,
Employees'
Compensation
for Injuries
All cases "
Any injury or alleged injury to SF-911
to non-Federal person. OF-261
Properly damage only:
1. To Service property SF-91'
SF-91A*
OF-261
SF-92al
All
All cases except—*
When damage is
$250 or more and
there is a reason-
able possibility of
a claim against a
non-Federal person (s).
SF-923
If damage is more
than 825 but less
than $250 and there
If damage is $250
or more and there
is a reasonable pos-
is a reasonable pos- sibility of a claim
sibility of a claim
against a non-Fed-
eral person (s).5
against a non-Federal
person (s)."'
(a) Fire SF-92^
2. To non-Federal properly SF-911 SF-92a<
SF-91A-
OF-26'
All cases
If damage is less
than $250
If damage is $250
or more G
1 Form to he completed by employee involved.
-Form to be completed by person making investigation and immediate supervisor of employee. It should also be reviewed and signed
or initialed by the Regional Safety Officer. If no investigating officer is appointed, Item '. ' on the form should be marked "Not Applica-
ble." This form is not required if formal investigation is conducted.
;1 Form to be completed by supervisor.
J Form to be completed by appropriate official and made part of formal investigation v hen appropriate.
"If properly damage caused by Service employee, reporl should he made in accordance with provisions of IRM 1(14)40 and Board of
Survey will recommend to Survey Officer the fixing of responsibility.
''If accident invclves solely damage to a car owned by an employee and being operated on a reimbursable basis in the conduct of
official business, only an informal investigation is required regardless of amount of damage.
~' Formal investigation may be required under IRM 1 (1C) 14.33: (1) (dl if determined necessary for Doard of Inquiry action.
Titles of Forms:
Standard Form 91 —Operator's Report of Motor-Vehicle Accident
Standard Form 91A—Investigation Report of Motor Vehicle Accident
Standard Form 92 —Supervisor's Report of Accident
Standard Form 92a —Report of Accident Other than Motor Vehicle
Standard Form 26 —Data Bearing Upon Scope of Employment of
Motor Vehicle Operator.
MT 1(16)00-18 (10-17-66) IR Manual
OFFICIAL USE ONLY 1(16)10-2
-------
SAFETY PROGRAM
EXHIBIT 1(16)10-3
oo
It
1°
h
83
Sy
X*
o
". C
j
4J
x
•H
O
13
d
CO
i .
d >
C 6
1 |
5 ^
* .— <
= CO
C CM
t?
" 1
P X
2 a>
5 H
i
S
I
o
"? "~*
j CN
— 1
'it **^
a. •
P Q
CO
CO
X
0)
H
en
CO
rH
rH
CO
Q
. o
AOORCSS (Stn«.
3 River
S g
2 3
loimjo
1
X
4J
IJ
O
d
W
c
•H
O
00
CQ
CO
3
M
U
U)
a)
C
-H
n
3
rH
03
•i-|
O
•H
O
C
O
,
CO
CD
a
H
rH
rH
<0
»
M
CO
EC
2
i/^
CM
O
o
**Q
1)
11
d
to
to
*J
<0
0)
3
c
cy.
rH
f •*
i £
5
c •
» ^
i •§
i §
B S
4J
CO
u
to
o
rH
CO
CO
CO
*
IH
C
O
^
0
3
3
O
rH
CO
4J
0
d
•o
•H
•o
M
•o
d
CO
d
ex
CO
0
o
4-1
CO
-
]
3
^
*
]
5
i
i
1
j a
1 rj
-5 ^
* ^
1 <
* d
3 o
' g
•3 01
X d
* CO
* 01
7 *H
1 r>
S Q
1
Or IVXIQENT
0
4J
d
o
MH
^j
X
cX
iH
cu
X
4J
O
o
4J
CO
T3
rH
3
O
u
M
v
o
CD
"g
CO
C
V.
co
S
4J
C
t;
t
CJ
co
OJ
C
O
(0
OJ
t»
l-
o
t-
JQ
•a
01
4J
cc
1-
41
0
0
•o
c
cc
O
d
4J
3
X
O
f^
CO
ct
'-
n
Q
a)
X!
4J
MH
O
d
^
o
IH
fC
f-
V.
t-
c
M-
M-
0
>
T3
a
4-1
ct
t>
4-
HI
^
a
4.
a
4J
C
5
0
C(
l:
a
l-
a
M.
0.
I-
c
d
1-
0,
S
1
t>
t-
CC
C
vO
rH
K
3
C
CO
01
CO
»
tf
C ^J
•u
3
o
1
1
a
3 ^
3 •*
g *»
a >
3 w
1
CO
ON
s ^
|
i u
2 CO
5 ^
i w
o
o
-o
J-I
at
•U
Q
""*
T3
CO
i-H
0)
1
t-l
CO
^
O
4J O
QJ O
rH LO-
IN
A
1 -S i
i C 1£
§ >w S
J.
a a !
* in 1
£
Q
M
t3
ca
C
m
P
o
3
QJ
<4-l
J-i
o
O
"O
a)
d
P
4J
D.
OJ
_,
V
rt
•u
r~
^j
01
4J
CO
0)
tn
e
t>
*H
tn
0)
0)
.£>
Q
-o
CD
M-l
•H
CO
(j
(U
X
4J
(U
_v
tn
*rH
*o
c
0
CO
-o
OJ
u
§
o
^o
c
*H
QJ
O
\->
u^
^
*
N
lioiuinoi uun jo isn nm.iiaom* jo imnjins s.iomuo
nn
MJ
(T.
rH
W
4
0
0
w
<
M
-o •»
»
U
2
WCREO AIJ- C
: 1 Mi O— 7M-»«
J> Z
^ O
\\
\\
Z *
=
MT 1(16)00-18 (10-17-66) IR Manual
Ili6)10~3 OFFICIAL USE ONLY
-------
SAFETY PROGRAM
EXHIBIT 1(16)10~3~-Coiif.
E
S
s
1 WHERE WAS 1
1
£
V MtOKAl AIO mWOtCO. STAT
None
a)
•H
tH
B*
o
0
•o
c
to
VJ TJ
(1) -i-4
TJ TO
t shoul
edical
o
r-l -0
u
•D w
^» E
li
IF OTfCR 3R;vrR 07 PERSONS '"
RELATE CONVERSATION AMD N*«
Mr. Toreeson
j
a
r
c.
<
£
I
c,
b)
a
a
u
c
c.
a
E
a
4J
o
c
T:
&
«
4.
*-'
3
<
j
J.
•I
<
(ft 4
ol c
(0
!)
II o
•« ; ^
. i • i ui
lift ^
iiij IL
<
D
1 H
r ' '
I]!1!8
ill
III
K
Q
PM
o (0
r CO
S £
w C
d ^
M n
8
*
«:
f-
K
V
«
c
T-
R ""
u
i
13110,1 am »uiiuu
Hi*
y
X
e
I
i
>
i
d
5
* t(
1 5
i
o
1 *
p
I
c
Q)
T3
M
U
V
4-t
O
1 -8
x -H
s «
§ -13
» tl
S 0
S ^
s
c
a
<
|
•
• i-
1 °
S %
" 4J
S ca
s *
1
1
1
»TE SPEED
X
§
*
7
J
i
(a
5
s
s
Q- Z"
A Jl
6"1
—
\. ^* j " N--— — ^
( ^
U
U)
H
_y *
1
O
rH
ft,
«
i
o
«N
*
|
t
t
<
»
S
1 1
7
i
|
^ E
1 n
! ^
*•
?
i
!
»
|
K fl
1 *"
S S
«
o
o
M-t
O
4J
B
0
44
c
•H
§>
•H
0)
(X
*" 0
7 to
*
1 u
1 8
t M
3
K ** Id
1 ^ °
Duaoav iiu
MT 1(16)00-18 (10-17-66) IR Manual
OFFICIAL USE ONLY 1(16)10-3
-------
SAFETY PHOGRAM
EXHIBIT 1(16)10-1
VPTI C
MY
GSA C
NO. 2
OPERATOR'S
VEHICLE OWNERSHIP
URING WHICH ACCIDENT OCCURRED
DETAILS OF TRIP D
HAL FCKM as DATA BEAK(KG upON SCOp.£ OF £ I.PLO Yf.'.3i JT 0 17 MOTOR VEHICLE OPERATOil
67 5026-101 INSTRUCTIONS. This loim is lo be filled out by tho operolor ut the time cmd at th.j seme of the accident, Insolar
as possible, a*id attached to th1? completed L'tttidaid Polin 91, Operator's Report o[ K^otor Vehicle Accident.
1 . NA>-4£
Thomas V T.andvni pb t
3. AGENCY NAME AND DtGlrmiNG DATE OF DUTY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax Division
Internal Revenue Service
pont-hv^f ppojfinfll nffirp Jan 4 11^
5. lfc«tOIATE SUPERVI&OFT(Atr71cy
Marvin P. Jones
7. VEHICLE IS (Check one only}
X a- GOVERNMENT -OWNED b. NOT GOVERNMENT. OWNED
Tn ?141
lldenlilicalion No.) (License No.)
8. KAS THIS VEHICLE ASSIGNED TO OPERATOR BY A GSA MOTOR POOLT
YES X NO
// "V'ES* give details and location of the CS/t Motor Poo/.
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax Division
Internal Revenue Service
Southwest Regional Office
11. OTIGIN Southwest IRS Regional Office
1114 Commerce St., Dallas. Texas
To interview confidential informant
16. HOW DID OPERATOR RECEIVE AUTHORITY FOR TRIP!
ORALLY X WRITTEN AUTHORITY
Cive details:
By memorandum from supervisor in
charge assigning me to this case.
18. VAS TRIP MADE WITHIN ESTABLISHED WORKING HOURS'
X YES NO
// 'NO' explain.
Special Investigator , A&TT - GS 11
6. ESTABLISHED V10I;K ! NG HOURS
FKOM 8:15 A.M. I10 A.M.
1 ._ P.M.! 4.45 P.M.
6. SUTERVlSOh'S T 1TLE
Supervisor in Charge
8. IF BLOCK 7b. IS CHECKED, IS TITLE 10 VEHICLE REGIsn.rrtseZ^aJ ^S*£2^**g^i^ /? D*TE
/T&t/'Z'Z^-c-*! V. JfO7VZ~G^ April 6. 1966
U.S CO-AjL/MlNI PAINTING OrriCE 11U O—A4II10
MT 1(16)00-18 (10-17-66) IR Manual
1(16)10-4 OFFICIAL USE ONLY
-------
SAFETY I'HOGRAM
EXHIBIT 1(16)10-5
kU
ff
^
»
?
[
i
CN
' CT>
• ^'
CO
CN
(-1
C
K
C
-^
o
^J
•o
Ol
p
•o
t -H
i s
<•
I
TO
i— t
i-l
aj
Q
flf
•H
VJ
O
0)
•H
U
M
0)
3 """*
1 •*
1
5
3
<
1
5
9 !
J C ft
a S
T: S
•r =
t;
4-
0
3
M-
1 ^
U s
nil
J 9
Hi
DL:
<
s e
•• ul
5JL
s
s »
g f
an
M
" 5 1
HP
I
Z
i
u
ii
> s
1 f
nn
i
5
|
2
il
a
j
Z
i
i
(j
C
c
z
fi
i
s
s
•o
• r-t
1-J
CJ
•o
01
)y
if-i
•O
a)
w
3
CM
2 o;
| fi
a
1
i
\
3
z
f
w
c
!s
u
u
to
CO
-H
4-1
0
i
* 01 2
2 1-1
3 £>
" to
U
•i-4
t— (
(X
Ou
to
4J
O
7
='
8
S
^
5
H
i
~
t
i
I
}
"g
S"
<
DO
1
8
<
j
Z
4
wl
i
e
s > i
! i|
02™
I I 5
I J Z
DDD
1 *Mi
1 1 1 1 1 i i i3
2 1 1 i I i 1 il
UO*a,~™5
5zz:Zz.5£..]2*
*- o 5 ? z ?-j ¥? !?j
* ^ >• « S j£ 5s 5*
Z O C > > >* >< >«
aaaannDD
s| ! g
1 elf I ?s
-1 ^ i 3 Pi ^-I?
j S | * 8 lf|e|fgS
i If s s i §1 si fs 1*
z SS 5 S S S8«8S><
1 DDDDDDDD
g
1
«=»
K
^
^
HAH MOTOR
1—
3C
a
tx
1
E
I
s
^
J w
5 §
S
I
<
U
i
|
e
I
-i
"2
§
I
S
*
ti
1
i
g
d
1
1
t
s
g
s
X?l
SSJ
nb
I ! f
0DD
! s
9 - 1
I i i '
tin inn
8 ^
I 8 f
1 I ll*
i 1 ss §
« * ^ -
DDDD
|
i « M
? < -< °i
I i^ll
liliil
_' ti X V
LJ[Q Lj m
CO
1
o
t-t
x-v
vD
i— (
!-<
4J
•H
Ja
•H
•g
X
w
01
0>
CO
4J
C
01
•o
ti o
0
c
C
Ol ,
ivenue S
a,
» E
Tnternal
1
Ik H
0 Z
O U
S 0
w «f
STANDARD FORM 1IA (REV. JUNE IW)
INVESTIGATION R
MOTOR VEHICLE ,
"
(j
i
C
r
?; •>
d)
Ml
3.
ct
e
c
c
u
"5
'c
^
<
J
•
«
i
ct
g
^
g
1
§
{5
DD t
I * -
STANCE IO NtARE
0
5
i
I
IT
i
i
f ACCOCNT IN CITV. GIVE OTY OR (OWN *
Dallas
8 1
i j
B
1
1
s
(CMrMWM)
Texas
E
n
si
«
•c
2
i
O
1
I
I
K OF ACCIDENT
S
g
|
i
i
0)
g.
01
>*
<
rj
o
j
tj
?.
j|
ij
il
j-
• 's
I
si «
1 ^ -r4
[It "
1| |
j| S
1 «
HOTfc CHECK AND COMPLETE ON£.
Klihwor tvtv«, bcWtt, railroad M
*i Mf diitaiK*.
Q AI wnwtcnoH WIIH - We
*
\
1
i
D
1
l ;
J C
I 1
1
g
0
f
j^
f
I
a. FEDEBU. VEHICLE (Fti.) M-l 01
5 0) JC
•O
C
to CO
1 Is
S-0-0
PAIITI Of VtHlCLE DAMAGED AMD NATUM
Right fr. fender
grill, radiator,
scraped
01
•i-t
o
Ol
(V-.Ntfc— T)
Westsid
I
I4J
to
5 3
0
(L
|i
if
i l
Is
n
EZ
y
t
is
i
;
ys
II
f, •
21s
5
In
^ i
I
I
i
2
|
j
T
j.
5 i
a
OISIANU IKAVtU
1
t
I
oo
CN
VO
CO
I ^
£ X
5 U
i H
Sj S
!i E
jjo
<
Q
1
a
1°
ISl
fi
i i
B
l!
'-'
ID
1 1
*H
i 6
i i
a
ID
01
55
3
LINUIAIION Of KIU
•
1
i
i
!
4
I
L
fcF
§
to
Ol
61
U
0
H
I „
« CO
; W
i
E
i*
yi
6
•H
X
n
i ct
Street
Texas
e •
i-i in
.w n
CN cc
go. 0
•o
a
O to
CA co
X
V4 0)
•1-1 .
cc. to
CO
O r-
CM to
-* O
3
i
i
i «
t CO
> CO
3
!
I
!| «>
1"
j
t3 »— <
|s
O
CO
u
•H
X
O
•s
I-l
•H
cr
i-i
-
o
a
w
u
i
p-
T
|
6
1 PROMULGATED By BUREAU OF THE BUDG
MT 1(16)00-18 (10-17-66) IR Manual
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
1(16)10-5
-------
SAFKTY I'KOGHAM
EXHIBIT 1(16) 1 ()-,>—C,»>t.
1
©
o- S
lJ'?< i
t p l^r^
•f 1 + a 5 * / / \
a J f tlpj( " )
1 1 s " NIB
25 -I Q 0 o':* §
g £ 5 S JS5 *
g S - < -
>i.
as -5 B
If! Q
ill T
• 1| 1
ts ^ ° $
E ij gfl
iMl
lljjg
•s i £ K
JifH
iilis
s J" "
\
/ X"
•K
t
i-^s
] .
!T3
•CU
..PL,
/?*.
(
(
C
c
C
c
ra
ij
tj
0
4J
TO
00
•H
4J
CO
CU
>
c
M
,0
C
01
>
•H
^i
•o
60
• H
CD
.0
CO
CO
CU
I—,
.^j
(-{
CU
•o
01
PL,
>w
o
CU
4-J
TO
>-.
01
t— 1
,Q
TO
d
o
CO
CO
CU
*X3
C
TO
CO
60
CU
t— I
(U
4J
CD
3
j^
CU
>
pj
o
6
01
C
0
_r!
4J
M
O
C
c.
o
CO
TO
g
O
LW
3
O
TJ
d)
i-.
^^
3
CX
.^
r—4
fj
CU
"O
•o
3
CO
CN
QJ
, — |
O
>H
X
CU
>
C
CU
JJ
•a
CU
CU
P.
CO
CU
J3
4-J
O
13
^-,
3
O
u
0
•H
%
„
}_i
CO
U
•0
Ii)
CU
^c1.
4J
CH
O
4-1
f3
O
^i
•^1
4-J
.C
oo
C
60
•H
CO
c'
o
•f-i
CO
•H
l-H
0
0
CU
4J
•o
•H
O
>
O
4J
a)
e
4-1
•H
•a
CU
tx
o
4J
CO
^
IT
< •<]
a
C
J..
n
C
4~
0)
£
H
CC
•i-
U
s
_l
Jf
s
>'.'
?§
p
r— f
t— 1
TO
S
u
0
o
4-1
o
60
O
.CU
>,
J3
•a
CU
c
to
•H
CO
CO
<
t
5,
-'O
5i
1 8
•'o -
'" '<
4J
3
O
•O
CU
r— t
rH
3
Vj
>
-H
\-t
'O
M
0)
X
JJ
P. O
i >i
b' I-H
•*• iJ
s £
1 2
1 3.
$ CU
i <
^
*
1
^
tx
c
H
O
O
r-H
3
0
C
4-1
H
S
c
61
D
0
u
O
4-f
3
1
S
5
3
4
I
i
?
6t
C
^
•H
"0
O
4-1
Ci
0
roper attenti
fx
,s
-V2
fs
%
~—
rivers .
TJ
3
i
*
5
TH) (J
O .r
o a
CO
o ?
CO 1
c
0) c
a) a
>•.•+
o a
1-1 T:
E '
W '
1 T
i u
ii
5 «
i 4.
-—
s
J
1
I
CU
i TO
•< E-i
.1 "
"* p
. £
H
•* t-C
•t 4-J
0
J
-------
SAFETY I'HOGKAM
EXIHHIT 1(16) 10-6
StAndurd 7-Vrm !>2o.
CIRCULAR A-5(i'.lV.)
REPORT OF ACCIDENT OTHER THAN MOTOR VEHICLE
DEPARTMENT OR ACENCY
Internal Revenue Service
NAME AND ADDRtpj OF LOCAL REPORTING ORGAfilZAT ON
Boston District Office - 174 Ipswich Street
TIME «ND
PUCE
OF
ACCIDENT
£
O
t.
K<*
P
£
PROPERTY DAMAGED
FULL DESCRIPTION
OF ACCIDENT
(Utf Rerersa Side, If tffcofsarjr)
WITNESSES
2:30
3-23-66 p.m. R«om 324
NAMES
Mrs. Ada Gculd
Acciu:«r OCCURRED in—
OPtnAII'JM OrtRAllCN
Y
, Boston, Mass.
ADDRESSES
1308 Rountree Drive ,
Boston, Massachusetts
NATURE AND EXTENT OF INJURIES
Broken left arm, bruises and contusions.
NAME OF OWNER
Mrs. Ada Gould
DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION OF PROPERTY
When Mrs. Gould fell and was injured
stockings.
Both dress and stockings badly torn
ADDRESS OF OWNER
Same as above
, she also tore her dress and her
- irreparable.
Mrs. Oould had called at the office to obtain assistance in connection with
completing a form required by Internal Revenue Service. In walking across
the floor in Rrr. 324 she stumbled over a raised electrical outlet. It had
been installed ; or the operation of an office machine which had been moved.
The outlet was o/erlooked and had not been removed. In falling she tried
to catch herself with her left arm and the weight caused a fracture.
IMPORTANT. — Be particular to secure the names and addresses of witnesses, bystanders, or persons in the immediate
vicinity who may have seen the accident or heard any statement made by the person injured.
NAMES
George 0. Stand ish
Melvin Hardesty
DATE Of THIS REPORT TrOE OR POSITION
MSreh 25, 1966 Collection Officer
ADDRESSES
District Office, Boston
32 Dodge Street, Holyoke, Mass.
SIGNATURE OF PERSON EXECUTING THIS PCJ&M
/ /f r~A- ^ ' /
/<3^*^^ Oi jaA^-^^1^
MT 1(16)00-18 (10-17-66) IR Manual
OFFICIAL USE ONLY 1(16)10-6
-------
SAFKTY PROGRAM
EXHIBIT 1(16)10-7
SUPEfa'ISOR'S RES'ORT OF ACCiEENT
DO KOT USE fC:'. HOTCR VEillCIX OR ;;K::!^t*-/ f\.* 't_ ^*-*^— O~-0~J(^*-s*"
14. COMMENTS ON ADEQUACY OF CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN. OR PLANNED. INCLUDit^PROGRESS ON PENDING ACTIONS
Adequate corrective action has been taken by rerouting the cord under
the desk so that it is no longer a hazard.
25. DATE TITLE (CiriY/'an or military) "" SIGNATURE OF REYIEWINS^IFFICIA.!. .
2-23-66 Chief, Office Audit "fj^i^t^^' /Cc^^^vc-tfX^
Branch Perry / . ^Kitchens l°~~*°
i
cc
081-1
MT 1(16!OG-18 (10-17-66)
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
IR Manual
1(16)10-7
-------
S/VFETY PROGRAM
EXHIBIT 1(16)10-7—-Con*.
-»+i C W
•g£ "5
I
I
S
1
I
MT 1(16)00-18 (10-17-66) IR Monual
1(16)10-7 OFFICIAL USE ONLY
-------
SAFETY PROGRAM
EXHIP.IT 1(16) 10-8
),ACE OF EMPLOYMENT—State in detail the place of
employment. Example: If Government employee—Super-
vising Internal Revenue: Agent, Audit Division. Internal
Revenue Service. Chicago, Illinois. If non-Government
employee -Accountant. Argo Laundry, 22 West LaSalle
Street, Chicago, Illinois.
PLACE OF ACCIDENT AND DATE—Give exact descrip-
tion of place of accident and the hour and date.
INVESTIGATIVE OFFICER'S SKETCH—If an automo-
bile accident, attach a sketch which shows in black the.
relative positions of the colliding vehicles or of the vehicle
and pedestrian just before the collision. Show in red their
relative positions just after the collision. Label the com-
pass directions, streets, and every object detected and in-
dicate measurements showing by dotted lines the course
followed by each vehicle and add any explanatory statement
that would aid in the understanding of the occurrence.
DUTY STATUS—If a Government employee is involved,
determination should be made if be was engaged in the
performance of official duty at time of accident. If not. or
in doubt, give detailed statement of facts.
NATURE OF INJURY—State extent of personal injury. In
such cases, it is important that medical testimony be secured
as soon after the' accident as possible as to the extent of
le injuries.
MEDICAL ATTENTION—Give name and address of
physician (s) who attended injured private individuals,
time of attendance and name and address of hospital, if
any.
REPORT OF DEATH—If accident resulted in death of
private party give exact time, date, place, and immediate
cause and in addition, names, relationship, and addresses
of all persons known to be dependent in any degree upon
the decedent at time of death. Include copy of death
certificate.
PROPERTY DAMAGE—Photographs should be obtained,
if deemed necessary and such is possible, showing the ex-
tent of the damage to Government or privately-owned
vehicle (s) or property in addition to the estimated cost
of repairs furnished by a reputable contractor after per-
sonal examination. If a non-Federal person is liable for
damages to Government property, make a statement as to
any action taken by responsible officials to effect a satis-
factory settlement.
GOVERNMENT VEHICLE AND DRIVER—If Govern-
ment vehicle is involved, give, make, year, model, service
number, name and age of driver, title, and station. Stale
if there is any indication Government vehicle was not in
proper operating condition or was not properly serviced.
PRIVATE VEHICLE, OWNER, AND DRIVER—If
private vehicle is involved, give make, year, model, license
number, name and add re; s of owner, name, age and address
of driver, and driver's license number.
PHYSICAL ELEMENTS PRESENT—Slate physical ele-
ments present such as condition of weather and light at
time of accident or condition of flooring or stairways,
roadways, etc., as appropriate. These data should be ob-
tained from witnesses and local Weather Bureau. Whether
traffic signals or streetcar loading platform at scene; if
so, relationship to accident.
POLICE REPORT—If city, State, or other enforcement
officials or guards reported on the accident, attach copy of
report, including copies of police photographs related to the
accident.
TRAFFIC REGULATIONS VIOLATED -Quote or attach
copy of traffic regulations violated, if any.
WITNESSES—List witnesses and exhibit numbers of state-
ments. All statements by witnesses should be set forth on
SF's94 (see Exhibit 1(16)10-9), if available; otherwise,
in any practicable format.
EXHIBITS—Each statement or report of interview of a
witness, as well as photographs and other documentary
evidence, should bf given an exhibit numbe.r and arranged
in appropriate forn Signed statements should be obtained
from all witnesses.
NARRATIVE STATEMENTS—Include any other perti-
nent facts not inclu led in the report elsewhere. An investi-
gative report shall not include opinions of tjie investigator
as to the merits of or legal liability in the ease, but if there
is conflicting testimony, the investigator's, opinion as to
the credibility of the various witnesses should be given.
Set forth any information which would be helpful in mak-
ing a determination as to whether the accident was caused
by willful misconduct by the person sustaining the injury
or property damage; whether the parties involved were
under the influence of liquor; whether there was negligence
or contributory negligence by either party; and whether
any unsafe actions or practices of violations of safety
regulations may have contributed to the accident.
MT 1(16)00-10
OFFICIAL USE
(10-17-66)
Manual
1(16)10-8
-------
SAIK'IV 1'KOGRAM
by Hunv.iocbc Iluils
CiicuUr A-5 (Kcv.)
Yes
STATEMENT OF WITNEOT
2. WHEN DID IT *UP!'E.M ( T:r:t snl tidt} 3. WM^r-.L r V.J IT HA,YIN| (.s.'^<( htdifr. fl-4 <•;';;
/bout 8:45 a.m. Lemon Avenue and Westi-ide Drive,
4/4/66 [Dallas, Texas
4. TELL IN JOUR OWN WAY HOW THE ACCIDENT HAPPENED
I was standing at the bus stop near Lemon Avenue and Weslside Drive wh» n 1
noticed a car coming up Leirion at what appeared to be a reasonable rate of speed,
Just before the car got to Westside Drive a Plymouth which had been stopped at a
stop sign palled out and started to turn left. The car coining up Lemon could not
stop in time and hit the Plymouth.
5. WHERE WERE YOU WHEW THE ACCIDENT OCCURRED!
Waiting at the bus stop on Lemon Avenue, opposite where V.'estside Drive cornts
intc
6. WAS ANYONE INJURED. AND If SO. EXTENT OF INJURY If KNOWN!
The driver of the plymouth was rubbing his left shoulder, but he said it was
nothing serious.
7. DESCRIBE THE APPARENT DAMAGE TO PRIVATE PROPERTY
The rear end of one car was pretty well dented.
I. DESCRIBE THE APPARENT DAMAGE TO GOVERNMENT PROPER.'Y
The front end of the Ford was smashed in, particularly on the right side and the
radiator was leaking.
9. IN TRAFFIC CASES STA
APPROXIMATE EPLED
lid line to thow path bcTorc accident d_"~2 ""^
Broken line after accident — — — [ J> ~\
3. Show pedestrian by ......... . .... .......... ^ £)
4. Show railroad by | | | |-| j | | H i H "H ' f I"
5. Give name* or r.umbcn of itrcc'j or h'mhwey*
6. Indicate north by arrow in .hii circle 0V
\ \ \ I I
A \ \ i
4-
1
1
'111
_ _ V.
\ _
\
\\v~
_L —
-> oz>T
1 l&|° ""
| J^ Stop
Sign
MT 1(16)00-10 (10-17-66) IR Manual
1(16)10-9 OfFICIAL USE ONLY
-------
SAFKTY PROGRAM
EXHIBIT i (iu) 10-9--c<>m.
FID; KKI j.n),j-
-------
^AI•T;^Y PKfKVKAM
EXtimiT 1 (SO-) !0-10
Standard J-'on.i S5
CLAEM FOK DAMAGE OH
(C/se arfc'i'rIU-M.":/ r,hfiet? it n?c<-*'-Rry)
SUBMIT TO: Commissioner
Internal Revenue Service
Washington, D. C. 20224
Use ink or tvpfv.-rilcr. Sec rever.-i- side for iiislruriions and additional JMforr.ation required.
1. NAME OF CLAIMANT (Pleasa punt lull ,,«nie) 2. AGE 3. MARTIAL STATUS
Earl TorReson
923 Elm Street, Dallas, Texas
5. NAME AND ADDRESS OK SPOUSE. IF ANY
6. PLACE OF ACCIDENT (Give city or town and State; if outside city limits, indicate mi/ea^e or
distance to nczrent city or town)
Dallas, Texas
7. DATE AND DAY OF ACCIDENT TIME (A.M. or P.M.)
April 4, 1966 fi • 45 a m
8.
AMOUNT OF CLAIM
PROPERTY
DAMAGE
PERSONAL
INJURY
TOTAL
!
245.00"
I
125,00
J 370,00
9. DESCRIPTION OF ACCIDENT—STATE BELOW. IN DETAIL. ALL KNOWN FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES ATTENDING THE DAMAGE OR INJURY. INDENTIFYING PERSONS
AND PROPERTY INVOLVED AND THE CAUSE THF.REOF
I was driving west on Westside Drive and stopped for a stop sign at the
intersection of Westside and Lemon Streets. I then proceeded through the
intersection. When my car was about halfway through it was struck on the
left rear by a Government car operated by Thomas Landvoight, A&TT Investigator,
Internal Revenue Service, The rear of my car was damaged to the extent of $245
and I had doctors' bills, including X-Ray, of $125 due to an injury to my neck.
PROPERTY DAMAGE
NAME OF OWNER. IF OTHER THAN CLAIMANT
ADPRFSS OF OWNER. IF OTHFR THAN CLAIMANT
BRIEFLY DESCRIBE KIND AND LOCATION OF PROPERTY AND NATURE AND EXTEM OF PAMAGE. SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON REVERSE SIDE FOR METHOD OF SUBSTANTIATING CLAIM
Left rear door, left rear wheel, and left rear fender, and trunk lid. Itemized
receipted bill for the repair work attached.
11. PERSONAL INJURY
STATE MATURE AND EXTENT OF INJURY WHICH FORMS THE BASIS OF THIS CLAIM
Due to impact of cars head was snapped to the side wi;h resulting injury to
neck. Statement by Dr. J. H. Burns concerning injury attached, as well as
receipted bills for services by Dr. Burns and Memphis X-Ray laboratories.
12.
WITNESSES
Mildred Collins
4115 Westside Drive, Dallas, Texas
CRIMINAL PENALTY FOR PRESENTING FRAUDU-
LENT CLAIM OR MAKING FALSE STATEMENTS
Fine of not more than 510,000 or imprisonment for not more
than 5 years or both. (Ste 62 Slat. CSS, 71,0; 18 U.S.C. 287, 1001.)
CIVIL PENALTY FOR PRESENTING
FRAUDULENT CLAIM
The claimant shall forfeit, and pay to the United States the
sum of $2,000. plus double the amount of damages sustained
by the United'States. (Sec U.S. §.^»0, 61,38; St'U-K.C SSI.)
I DECLARE UNDER THE PENALTIES OF PERJURY THAT THE
AMOUNT OF THIS CLAIM COVERS ONLY DAMAGES AND INJURIES
CAUSED BY THE ACCIDENT ABOVE DESCRIBED I AGREE TO ACCEPT
SAID AMOUNT IN FJLL SATISFACTION AND FINAL SETTLEMENT OF
THIS CLAIM.
DATE OF CLAIM
April 15, 1966
NOTE: Signututn us^/ nbnve should be usorf in ell future corrftsponc/enco.
MT 1(16)00-18 (10-17-66) IR Manual
1(16)10-10 OFFICIAL USE ONLY
-------
SAKKTY PUOGUAM
ts:^™%T' V'^ Ts"* f'l - **-•* /< s K'fi*
1:
-------
SAI'KTY 1JHO€I!AM
Treasury Doportmr-nt
Form No. 3079 (8 65)
CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE CLAIM FOR LOSS OR DAMAGE TO PERSONAL PROPtRTY (P.L. 83-55:0
Use ink or rypewiHcr and subp.it in duplicate. See reverse *ide for instructions ond additional information
1- Name, Grade, and Title of Claimant (rit:ase print full name)
James J. Harris
GS-9, Administrative Assistant
2. Addtess of Claimant (Street, City, State, Zip Code)
202 Washington Street
New York, New York 61111
3. Current Post of Duty
Room 1224
614 Indiana Avenue
New York, New York
4. 'PosJ of Duty at Time of L,oss or Damage
Same as 3. above
5. Amount of Claim
$30.00
6. Place where loss or damage
occurred
Federal Building
New York, New York
7, Date of Loss or damage
April 1, 1966
8, Description of Property
Itemized Listing
Raincoat, wash and
wear with removable
lining
Date Acquired
March 10, 1966
(Attached supplemental sheet, if necessary)
9. Biief statement of circumstances:
Purchase Price or Value
$30.00
Value when Lost or
Damaged
$30.00
Estimated Repair Cost
$12.00
Upon entering the Federal Building to report for work on April 1, 1966, I caught the
right pocket of my raincoat on a protruding bolt on the entrance door and tore the
pocket causing a rip about 12" long. The bolt was left 'when a handle had been removed
and not replaced. I can have the tear stitched by a tailor, but the repair would be
most unsightly.
CRIMINAL PENALTY FOR PRE! ANTING A FRAUDULENT CLAIM OR MAKING FALSE STATEMENTS:
Fineor not more than $10,000 or riprisonment fornot more than 5 years or both (See 62 Slat. 698, 749; 18 U.S.C. 287,
1001)
CIVIL PENALTY FOR PRESENTING A FRAUDULENT CLAIM: The claimant shall forfeit and pay to the United States
the sum of $2,000, plus double the amount of damages sustained by the United States. (See R.S. Sec. 3490, 5438; 31
U.S.C. 231)
10. I make this claim with full knowledge of the penalties for wilfully making a false claim, and certify that I am entitled to any
payment
11. I hereby assign to the United States, to the extent of any payment on this claim accepted by me, all my right, title, and interest
•in and to any claim I may have against any carrier, insurer or other party, arising out of the above-described incident
Date of Claim
April 6, 1966
If claimant is not owner, state relationship
MT 1(16)00-12 (10-17-66) IR Mani-o!
1(16)10-11 crF/c//a usp o.'viy
-------
SAFETY PROGRAM
EXHIBIT 1(16)10-11—Con*. \
INSTRUCTIONS
(a) In support of claims for damage to property which has been or can be economically repaired, the
claimant should submit at least two itemized signe'd statements or estimates by reliable, disinterested
concerns, (only one statement or estimate need be submitted if the amount claimed is $100 or less) or, if
payment has been made, the itemized signed receipts evidencing payment.
(b) In support of claims for damage to property which is not economically reparable, or if the property
is lost or destroyed, the claimant should submit statements as to the original cost of the property, the
date of purchase, and the value of the property, both before and after the accident. Such statements should
be by disinterested competent persons, preferably reputable dealers or officials familiar with the type of prop-
erty damaged, or by two or more competitive bidders, and should be certified as being just and correct.
(c) See section 6 of Treasury Military Personnel and Civilian Employees' Claims Act Regulations for
the additional evidence required for claims for property loss in quarters or other authorized places; claims
for property loss by theft; claims for transportation losses; claims for property losses due to marine or air-
craft disaster; claims for property losses due to enemy action, public disaster/etc.; claims for property
losses when the property was used for benefit of the government; claims for loss of money deposited for
safekeeping, transmittal, or other authorized dispositions; and claims for motor vehicles damaged while
being shipped.
(d) See section 7 of Treasury Military Personnel and Civilian Employees' Claims Act Regulations for
additional procedures that must be followed in claims involving a carrier or insurer.
(e) The maximum amount allowable on any claim is $6,500.
* U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1972 O - 455- 452
MT 1(16)00-18 (10-17-66) IR
OFFICIAL USE ONLY 1(16)10-11
-------