<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.1" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>CSTI News</title>
	<link>http://www.cstiacoustics.com/news</link>
	<description>Current News and Projects</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 01 Nov 2010 21:09:13 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.1</generator>
	<language>en</language>
			<item>
		<title>Engineering a Quieter America</title>
		<link>http://www.cstiacoustics.com/news/?p=12</link>
		<comments>http://www.cstiacoustics.com/news/?p=12#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Nov 2010 21:09:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bob Bruce</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Regulations]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cstiacoustics.com/news/?p=12</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[For several years Bob Bruce of CSTI acoustics has worked with the National Academy of Engineering on an analysis of the state of noise in America; the report, Technology for a Quieter America, is available.
Read the announcement here.
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For several years Bob Bruce of CSTI acoustics has worked with the National Academy of Engineering on an analysis of the state of noise in America; the report, <em>Technology for a Quieter America</em>, is available.</p>
<p><a href="/downloads/NAE.pdf">Read the announcement here.</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cstiacoustics.com/news/?feed=rss2&amp;p=12</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>OSHA Interpretation of &#8220;Feasible&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.cstiacoustics.com/news/?p=10</link>
		<comments>http://www.cstiacoustics.com/news/?p=10#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Nov 2010 16:49:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bob Bruce</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Regulations]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cstiacoustics.com/news/?p=10</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As reported in the Federal Register for 19 October 2010 on page 64216.
This document constitutes OSHA’s official interpretation of the term feasible administrative or engineering controls as used in the applicable sections of OSHA’s General Industry and Construction Occupational Noise Exposure standards. Under the standard, employers must use administrative or engineering controls rather than personal [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As reported in the Federal Register for 19 October 2010 on page 64216.</p>
<p>This document constitutes OSHA’s official interpretation of the term feasible administrative or engineering controls as used in the applicable sections of OSHA’s General Industry and Construction Occupational Noise Exposure standards. Under the standard, employers must use administrative or engineering controls rather than personal protective equipment (PPE) to reduce noise exposures that are above acceptable levels when such controls are feasible. OSHA proposes to clarify that feasible as used in the standard has its ordinary meaning of capable of being done. The Agency intends to revise its current enforcement policy to reflect this interpretation. The Agency solicits comments from interested parties on this interpretation.</p>
<p><a href='news/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/fr-notice-noise-eng-controls-10-19-10.pdf' title='OSHA Interpretation of Feasible'>Read the full announcement here.</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cstiacoustics.com/news/?feed=rss2&amp;p=10</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Update on EPA Labeling Regulations</title>
		<link>http://www.cstiacoustics.com/news/?p=9</link>
		<comments>http://www.cstiacoustics.com/news/?p=9#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Jan 2007 21:07:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bob Bruce</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Regulations]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cstiacoustics.com/news/?p=9</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 23-24 January 2007, EPA held an informal two day meeting in Washington to discuss revisions to the current hearing protector labeling regulation (40 CFR Part 211, Subpart B). As you may know hearing protectors are rated with a NRR number which is often in the range of 20-30, giving many the impression that the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 23-24 January 2007, EPA held an informal two day meeting in Washington to discuss revisions to the current hearing protector labeling regulation (40 CFR Part 211, Subpart B). As you may know hearing protectors are rated with a NRR number which is often in the range of 20-30, giving many the impression that the hearing protector is providing 20-30 dB of noise reduction. Long term usage of hearing protection is probably only good for 10-12 dB of noise reduction.</p>
<p>Observers expect EPA to issue a new rule before the end of the calendar year.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cstiacoustics.com/news/?feed=rss2&amp;p=9</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>National Academy of Engineering</title>
		<link>http://www.cstiacoustics.com/news/?p=7</link>
		<comments>http://www.cstiacoustics.com/news/?p=7#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Jan 2007 23:31:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bob Bruce</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Regulations]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cstiacoustics.com/news/?p=7</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The National Academy of Engineering&#8217;s Magazine &#8220;Bridge&#8221; has published an article on &#8220;Engineering Controls&#8221; by Bob Bruce.  You can see it at [nae.edu].
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The National Academy of Engineering&#8217;s Magazine &#8220;Bridge&#8221; has published an article on &#8220;Engineering Controls&#8221; by Bob Bruce.  You can see it at <a href="http://www.nae.edu/nae/bridgecom.nsf/weblinks/MKEZ-77WQUV?OpenDocument">[nae.edu]</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cstiacoustics.com/news/?feed=rss2&amp;p=7</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Structure-borne Noise</title>
		<link>http://www.cstiacoustics.com/news/?p=6</link>
		<comments>http://www.cstiacoustics.com/news/?p=6#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jan 2007 21:05:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bob Bruce</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Services]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cstiacoustics.com/news/?p=6</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Noise can be the result of structure-borne vibrations from sources some distance from the receiver.  CSTI Acoustics models the structure-borne noise using a statistical energy analysis technique.
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Noise can be the result of structure-borne vibrations from sources some distance from the receiver.  CSTI Acoustics models the structure-borne noise using a statistical energy analysis technique.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cstiacoustics.com/news/?feed=rss2&amp;p=6</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Low-frequency Vibration</title>
		<link>http://www.cstiacoustics.com/news/?p=5</link>
		<comments>http://www.cstiacoustics.com/news/?p=5#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jan 2007 21:05:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bob Bruce</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Services]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cstiacoustics.com/news/?p=5</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Low-frequency vibration can interfere with workers&#8217; ability to perform tasks.  CSTI models the vibration from machinery and calculates the expected vibration on decks and bulkheads due to the vibration.  The vibration is predicted in terms of the acceleration in m/s².  These values can be compared with vibration criteria such as the NORSOK [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Low-frequency vibration can interfere with workers&#8217; ability to perform tasks.  CSTI models the vibration from machinery and calculates the expected vibration on decks and bulkheads due to the vibration.  The vibration is predicted in terms of the acceleration in m/s².  These values can be compared with vibration criteria such as the NORSOK vibration standards.  If the acceleration is in excess of the allowable levels, then treatments are developed to solve the problem.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cstiacoustics.com/news/?feed=rss2&amp;p=5</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Acoustic Induced Vibration</title>
		<link>http://www.cstiacoustics.com/news/?p=4</link>
		<comments>http://www.cstiacoustics.com/news/?p=4#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jan 2007 21:05:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bob Bruce</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Services]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cstiacoustics.com/news/?p=4</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[CSTI Acoustics offers analysis of Acoustic Induced Vibration (AIV) for flare systems.  AIV can occur downstream of pressure relief valves under certain pressure and flow conditions.  The generated sound power is so intense that the piping can vibrate in a circumferential mode.  Small connections subjected to the intense sound and vibration can [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>CSTI Acoustics offers analysis of Acoustic Induced Vibration (AIV) for flare systems.  AIV can occur downstream of pressure relief valves under certain pressure and flow conditions.  The generated sound power is so intense that the piping can vibrate in a circumferential mode.  Small connections subjected to the intense sound and vibration can fail.  CSTI analyzes the situations and develops solutions to the problem.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cstiacoustics.com/news/?feed=rss2&amp;p=4</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>EPA Hearing Protection</title>
		<link>http://www.cstiacoustics.com/news/?p=3</link>
		<comments>http://www.cstiacoustics.com/news/?p=3#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Jan 2007 17:53:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bob Bruce</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Regulations]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cstiacoustics.com/news/?p=3</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 23 January 2007, EPA will start an informal two day meeting in Washington to discuss revisions to the current hearing protector labeling regulation (40 CFR Part 211, Subpart B).  As you may know hearing protectors are rated with a NRR number which is often in the range of 20-30, giving many the impression [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 23 January 2007, EPA will start an informal two day meeting in Washington to discuss revisions to the current hearing protector labeling regulation (40 CFR Part 211, Subpart B).  As you may know hearing protectors are rated with a NRR number which is often in the range of 20-30, giving many the impression that the hearing protector is providing 20-30 dB of noise reduction.  Long term usage of hearing protection is probably only good for 10-12 dB of noise reduction.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cstiacoustics.com/news/?feed=rss2&amp;p=3</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

