pppp
F.
R-
S.
RECOVER
FEB 1 3
ENGINEERING
1974
MEDC
TECHNICAL
FIELD
INFORMATION
TECHNICAL REPORTS
NOTES
DATA
RETRIEVAL
CURRENT
TEXTS
AWARENESS
SYSTEM
Notes
Field
Volume
Analysis
6
Number
Principles
for
Serve
Washington
-
I
January
Use
as
in
1974
Planning
Fops
Division
of
Engineering
News
U S
FOREST
SERVICE
U.S.
DEPARTMENT
OF AGRICULTURE
ENGINEERING FIELD NOTES
This publication
technical
a
is
monthly newsletter
or administrative
the personal
procedures mandatory
This publication
is
the publication
all
This publication
Headquarters.
is
If
distributed
for this purpose.
Service
be exclusively.
to
by FSM.
from the Washington
recommended
as
represents
or
approved
However
of the type of material
because
in
should read each issue.
directly to
Office
like
all
one
Coordinator to increase the number of copies
Regional Station and Area
ask
your Office
sent to
Manager or the
your office. Use Form 7100-60
of back issues are also available from the Washington
Copies
and ideas of a
references.
for engineers.
technicians
not now receiving a copy and would
are
The
personnel.
information
text in the publication
and must not be construed
and engineering
engineers
Information
Regional
Forest
exchange engineering
policy except
or
instructions
not intended
you
among
nature
of the respective author
opinions
to
published
Office
and can be ordered on
Form 7100-60.
submitted
Material
Office
to see that
the
several typewritten
grammar
edit for
Washington
FSM
Service-wide
engineers
all
to.
the information
pages.
However
Editor
This
of
Service
interpretation
whom
field
should
personnel
Kjell
R-8
Ernest Quinn
R-3
Dan Roper
Fleet
Stanton
is
its
of
an
concerning
published
this
Service
or corporation
by other than
names
evaluation
product or service to the exclusion
USDA
The Department
information
official
format
for distribution
retirees only.
to
will
typed double-spaced
and
submit both questions
and
Ron Pokrandt
R-10
Bill
is
Vischer
Al Colley
editing
publishing
Washington
to
Bakke
R-9
WO
Jim McCoy
Forest
be
Office
are
R-6
Engineering
or use
to
The Washington
photos.
Groven
direct questions
and
not constitute
Coordinator
should
Office
and white
Allen
The use of tradefirm
does
submitted to the Washington
Bob Hinshaw
monthly newsletter
- Forest
submitted may vary from several sentences
news items. are preferred.
or glossy black
by the respective Regional
accurate informative and of interest to
R-2
R-5
should
of material
articles or
be reviewed
should
R-l
R4
Division
short
The Coordinators
for publication.
for publication
current timely technically
be original drawings
Each Region has an Information
Coordinators
Office
The length
7113.
only. All material
illustrationsshould
material
is
employees
D.
of the
U. S. Department
Agriculture
own employees.
and convenience
conclusion recommendation
be suitable.
to
Fran Owsley
of Agriculture
assumes no responsibility for the
its
may
dates etc.
20250.
of
for the information
of others which
C.
endorsement
of the reader. Such
or approval
of
use
any
FIELD NOTES
ANALYSIS PRINCIPLES FOR USE
By
Project Leader
Forest
IN
PLANNING
M. DeKalb
Victor
Service Transportation
System Planning
Project
INTRODUCTION
During the
phases
with
last
half century the Forest
meeting the
in
the people
assigned to
responsibilities
of the United States
through various
Service has passed
in
it
by Congress. Today
a
recognizing
new
operational
Forest
challenge
officers
join
an adequate
to provide
environment with limited resources.
The problems
from limited resources
arising
many of us to rethink
caused
resources
in
the National
Forests.
system plans must be developed
in
Forest
most Forest
and
in
the last four years.
officers
the realm
two processes
change
resource
officers
is
Engineering
However
right.
for planning
This
from the
is
there
is
in
and
meetings
Field Notes has
overt opposition.
had
several
In fact
habits are stronger than
way
a long
functional
logic
to go before
a part of the bigger problem
traditional
of
development and transportation
has not received
notion
that the concept
implemented.
Service
that resource
or management
the
of obtaining
thinking
to
a
total
thinking.
The above
meetings
fully
This
and decisions
of action
are
Forest
in
agree
notion
to the use
one unit has been extensively discussed
for Forest Engineers
Service publications
articles during
The
as
of mobility
and a land ethic have
groups
interest
special
the relationship
objectives and problems have
and they serve
as
a
been repeatedly
discussed in recent
foundation for the following
discussion
on
Forest
analysis
Service
principles
for use in planning.
As
a result
amount of
theory
of the need for better integrated planning
time
is
to wildland
planning
being spent by Forest
use design problems.
which should
provide
officers
This
in
in
the Forest
developing
presentation
help in the practical
analysis
will
Service
methods
discuss
a
considerable
to apply
some
of a resource
planning
aspects of
development
problem.
1
Presented
at the Region
4 Forest
Engineers
Meeting
1972
1
Salt Lake
City Utah January
26
THE LEVEL OF INTENSITY OF PLANNING
Forest
management
Service
planning
tools are used
every
a continuing adaptive
is
of operation
level
process. Planning
from developing
In each situation
-
and values involved
and
data collection
that is they
must be
as
analysis
intense
efforts
as
is
of the transportation
must be
necessary
and
management
a land
a procedure for yearly maintenance and operation
plan to developing
system.
planning
at
in
with the
tune
risks
to minimize irrevocable
decisions.
Peter Drucker
follows Long-range
of present
Today
the relation between
has expressed
does
planning
land use decisions
use planning
in
set
the stage for
there
is
will
the planning
process be varied
which
and
gives
area.
over a selected
a broad but shallow
Intensity of planning
2
At any one time
upon
should
2
will
of the plan
be considered
it
is
Range
money
resources
in
Since
only one
that several
planning
area.
the
levels
Such
on the principle that irrevocable
The
step
first
coverage
planning
is
long-range
so that an analyst can
more penetrating
the following
then
analysis
select
intensity of planning
the need
studies.
two principles can be stated
be enough to minimize irrevocable
should
and planning
when
will
vary
within
decisions.
a planning
and the portion
area depending
or aspect
of the area being studied.
under long-range
until
planning
suggest that the primary system
and the secondary collector system should
planning
a shorter time horizon
Planning
of
on other resources and
effects
is
in effect.
This procedure does
principles.
Long
to
of lack of
timber.
follows
the same
within
occur
regional supplements on transportation
be considered
above
land use planning
as result
the particular problem being considered
function
more
area and be based
Based on the above brief discussion
1
balance
This concept requires that the intensity of the planning
be minimized.
should
They must
objectives of today with the capacity
social
triggering
analysis
arises the area or areas requiring
Many
tomorrows decisions.
depends on the intensity of planned use and the
lands within
activities
as
deals with the futurity
Service usually begins seriously because
be manipulated intensively
intensity in data collection
variation
It
a need to do something about one or
At present the resource usually
resource
decisions.
and needs.
the Forest
when
and manpower
not
not deal with future
and must meet the
flexibility
react to further circumstances
area.
and future events
planning
decisions.2
economy and
Land
present
Management
Science April 1959 p 239
2
not
fit
the
PHASES OF DIFFICULTPLANNING
During the
few years many planning
last
units and other experts.
hand
considerable
importance
They
all
In applying
analysis.
processes have been developed
work and under
by Forest
The
state
where
phases
Service
of the art require
process the same
any planning
by the analyst.
are often overlooked
the present
areas of
sensitive
occur
difficulties
are
discussed below.
One
area
cases
in
we
fail
to recognize
the Forest
individual
parts
established
Service
their
weakness
and
A
is
The
A
20000
maker
the decision
A more intensive
Figure
2.
The
shown
in
and should
breakdown
last
box could
and
is
Figure
1.
This
recognized
overall
the existing
3
be rewritten
as
men
the
been
This situation
valid.
than
in
many
of Goals
at
during
least
man-months
3 months
full
to plan.
participation
of
the operation.
and Objectives
Making
Decision
situation in establishing
with the
to 5 days
have had periodic review
of the Definition
many
but
objectives have
take several
process can
takes four
have taken
In
leads to one of the areas of planning
This
exists.
acre area using overlays
of objectives should
establishment
and
are no longer
characteristics
time spent on analyzing
project.
process
their
no system
objectives for the planning
to complete.
already
system.
existing
exists
of the system much more difficult
or analysis
that of insufficient
typical planning
an
of reviewing
interrelationship and their individual
use situations where
-
the importance
a prior time period
in
makes objective planning
non-land
is
a system of operation
box
for Definition
is
shown
in
and
of Goals
Objectives.
This
leads to principle 3
3
-
Decisions
about goals and objectives
decisions.
They must be established
must allow
sufficient
Most planning
obtained
an impression
continuous
by redrawing
in
that feedback
and
universal.
through
a
the feedback
to the decision
Perhaps
Figure.1 to look like
a
like
is
goals.
Such
that
shown
in
Figure
essential.
and between
3.
3
in
view of
1.
Feedback
lines
These flowcharts
boxes phases
better picture of the planning
Figure
goals and objectives
to change
operation.
considered
maker
process and this process
planning
and subjected
the full planning
processes indicate a flowchart
usually limited to points where
no different than other management
time to assure reasonable
must then be periodically reviewed
information
are
process can
is
are
create
not
be developed
Definition
and
Goals
of
Objectives
Determination
Information
and
Selection
the
of
Techniques
Analytical
Definition
of
ternative
Plans
Manipulation
Collection
nd
of
Required
Preliminary
of
Analysis
Data
Analysis
of
Alternatives
Evaluation
of
Alternatives
Decision
Making
NOTE
all
boxes have
loops
Figure
1.
-A
Planning
4
Process
to
all
feed-back
other boxes
Definition
and
Goals
of
Objectives
Determination
Information
and
of
Selection
Analytical
of
Techniques
Definition
Alternative
Collection
and
the
Required
of
Plans
Manipulation
Preliminary Analysis
of
Data
Analysis
of
Alternatives
Evaluation
of
Alternatives
Making
Decision
NOTE
all
boxes have
locps
Figure
2.
-A
Process
For Defining
5
Goals
to
all
feed-back
other boxes
and Objectives
Definition
of
Alternative
Plans
Collection
Manipulation
Determination
of
Needed
Information
Analysis
Decision
Definition
Goals
and
Data
Making
Analysis of
Alternatives
of
and Objectives
Evaluation
of
Figure
of
3.
Alternatives
- Interaction Needed
6
Between
Steps
4
Principle
4
-
The
must be working
strategy for the planning
Figures
4 through
planner
and other interested
A
planning
brief
Strategy
The
primarily
a planning
process are
planning
a
analyst
continuously.
is
and/or
recognize
a
planning
would probably occur
This
strategy
of the planning
phases
to define
is
with
established
procedure
a
and to what depth various
parties
will
the
during
in
participate
in
advance
planning
and decisions.3
evaluation
when
process
Planning
how when
phases
all
all
interaction
one phase
in
considered.
project being
definition of objectives.
that determines
of
of the planning
the early stages
between
iteration
portions
in
continuous
in
he may be working
Although
necessary.
One of
and
Interchange
analyst.
be involved
maker should
decision
8 indicate
at
is
Forest
a
different abstract approaches
several
We
parties.
have adapted
them
to
between
to interaction
indicate
parties
a
with
dealt
level.
of each strategy follows
description
- Figure
of Information
4
supervisor controls and conducts
planner/forest
the study
and only contacts
others
to
present findings and gather information.
-
Information with Feedback
The
plans
Alternatives
decisions.
may
or
may
and then
The Coordinator
tests
3
planning
Bruce Bishop
Freeway
No.
Planning
A
alternatives
and feedback
and makes
Proposed
obtained.
inputs.
unit.
He
or
another
officer
goes to interested parties
and guides the planner
between
the
secures information
in analysis.
7
and receives feedback.
Clarkson
develops
to others
on these
supervisor or his assistant
directs
- Figure
presented
based
unit places itself in contact
alternatives
He
6
Figure
and the planning
interested parties
The
-
places the forest
and feedback
are
not be adjusted
Arbitrative Planning
Strategy
5
supervisor controls the studies.
planner/forest
planning
Figure
H.
with interested parties
Interaction
Oglesby and Gene
E.
among
Willeke
assesses
parties
is
7
objectives
not encouraged.
Community
Study of California Planning Procedures Highway
305 p 46
their
Attitudes
Towards
Research Record
Ranger
GOALS
Forest
PLANNER
Staff
and
Information
and/or
Alternatives
SUPERVISOR
Community
DIAGNOSIS
Regional
Figure
4.
- Strategy
of Information
Office
Ranger
Supervisor
and
Staff
GOALS
PLANNER
Alternate
Proposals and
Information
110
DIAGNOSIS
Community
Figure
5.
- Information
with
Feedback
Plans
Community
or
Modify
Approve
Forest
Staff
SUPERVISOR
and/or
Proposed
RANGER
Local
Plans
Interest
Alternate
Plans
Other
Interests
Figure
6.
- Arbitrative
Planning
PLANNER
CHIEF
Regional
Forester
needs
goal s
Local
Government
needs
Other Agencies
PLANNER
needs
goals
Plans
Supervisors
Staff
needs
goals
Local
Interest
Land
Figure
7.
-
Is
Alternative
SUPERVISOR
Ranger
goa
Resources
The
Coordinator
CHIEF
Regional Forester
needs
Local
go81s
Government
needs
Other Agencies
N
PLANNER
SUPERVISOR
needs
goals
Ranger
Alternative
Plans
Supervisors
Staff
needs
goals
Local
Interest
Land
Figure
8.
-
Resources
The Coordinator Analyst
goals
The Coordinator Analyst
The
with each other. The planning
synthesizes
objectives.
It
works out
5
planning
a
strategy
compromises
Usually planning
or the planning
approach
unit should
wishes
it
to
planning
In any event
group.
The management
in
use
its
recognize
considerable
established
during
or just
after
of the
analysis
for the data
6
A
and
so
unit should
amount
the
analysis.
role
teams
This
always
of effort
Care should
should
not
collects
the planning
analyze
be taken
for
not
planning
the process and he
first
project or two
be studied
considered
seriously
data
was the
and a direction
has
it
75 to 95
during
This results
in
poor
6.
principle
needed
each
of two
to spend too
problem
major jobs
much
advance and
in
-
data collection
time on data collection.
management and the planning unit set objectives collected data and analyzed
and well. The last and biggest problem of all is to present the alternatives
and
expertly
consequences the assessment to the decision
structured
to
to
present
alternatives
to
creative
does
fit
his
imagination
one present
Or
scenic views
presented
the
to a decision
amount of
scarring
fire
Principle
7
to
and consequences
7
the planning
teams
in a
form he can observe
guidance
is
given
in
for nonquantifiable
particularly
or hazard
to
on
this
presentation.
Their charts
limited
in
their
and
how
on
is
open
How
Or the value of
incurred Analysts
experience
step
consequences.
have
the supervisor and staff and they
their
easily
the literature
a road will have on the landscape
protection
around and discussed the matter based
reference
little
maker including the public therefore
and innovation
the increased
alternatives
maker
frame of reference. Very
said
then
We
turned
the area without any
were much too
difficult
to read.
-
Present
alternatives
frame of reference
and consequences
in a
as that of the decision
13
is
accordingly.
in
the remainder of the effort.
during
unit
to operate.
in their
If
team
planning
begins what
of the planner
how
and
that
state
and operate
operation
analysis.
collected and causes
planning
define
And
and analyzes
effort
or
would
5
planning
definition of objectives.
often been the case that the planner
percent
usually best whether the planning
time learning
and
data collection
interact
skills
is
before
dilemma encountered by many of the planning
problem of balancing
and technical
areas of conflict.
principle
decide
and
confront
Parties
in
done with no definition of the
is
unit wastes
studies.
unit supplies methodological
suggest that the coordinator-analyst
one person or
A
8
Figure
unit promotes participation
planning
directly
We
-
form which
maker.
is
simple
and
in
the same
CONCLUSION
The
of the principles
application
and
making
decision
will
listed
herein
more in
cost no
to any planning
terms
of
process will enhance
informed
expended.
effort
00000900
HOW ROPS CAN SERVE AS FOPS
By Leonard
Della-Moretta
San Dimas Equipment
This
article
structure
ROPS
used
tractors
Engineers
for
ROPS
in
can
timbered areas
size
of trees
and from
protective
falling
Center
which a tractors
structure
commonly equipped with
roll-over
FOPS.
the same
protective
Track-type
structure
to protect
objects.
of Automotive
J395 Performance
recognizes
underlying
are
roll-over
2.9 of the Society
SAE
of the
serve as a falling object
from tractor
the operator
Paragraph
an estimate
contains
Development
Criteria
the limit design concepts
the roll-over
safety problem by
reminding the reader that the true safety
factor
of a
absorption
ROPS
is
related
characteristics
more to
design details
to
than
force resistance.
to static
energy
and weldment
insure structural ductility
Roll-Over
14
Protective Structure
considerations
Similar energy-absorption
introduced
for
3 and 5 of
SAE
from
falling
Both
sets
objects
drop
the
and procedures
apparatus
ý--ý
FOPS by
are
test
outlined
in
J231 requirements
sections
for safety
objects.
of requirements
and deflected
that falling
include
structural elements
to be kept out of a critical zone
the operator. This zone
is
are
surrounding
outlined
SAE
in
397a.
The
L
Falling Objects
load
on an overturned
and the load from
Structure
Protective
are
both overhead
on
objects
falling
loads
applied
in
place and from the same direction
frame fixed
tractors
weight
ROPS
and FOPS
structures for timbered areas to compare
different
For a
of a
size
large
ROPS
tree
is
the
to
to withstand
falling
Service tests of tractor canopy
that can
sizes
blows from
a
relate
be considered
equally safe for
tractors.
inelastic
deflection
that must support
S
which we can assume to be constant
W
the weight
of the overturned
E
where CS
ability
then be scaled from older Forest
FOPS
its
the same
absorbed from both loads we can
the energy
equating
to its combined
This relation can
objects.
By
the tractor.
in
ROPS
tractors
some
constant
The
energy
of a falling
For
similar
trees
tree
or tree
top
the weight
falls
is
is
is
the product
proportional
proportional
tractor can be written
1
CSSW
of the design.
related to the overstrength
object
the distortion energy
of
its
weight
and the distance
to the cube of the diameter.
to the height
of the tree
it
The
and therefore
falls.
distance
also to
the
its
diameter.
If
we
provide
constants
Cd
and Ce for impact-efficiency
diameter
Cf
for density
the energy
for the proportion
delivered to the
of the trees height
FOPS by
a falling
tree
that
it
fell
of d inches
is
E
Cd C f Ce
15
d4
2
Equating the energies from
inelastic
deflection
S
we
1
and
find
2
solving for d and lumping
Agricultural Engineers
Howard.
In substance the paper
tractor canopy
of that period
26-inch
diameter
value at
C1/4
trees.
FE
Paper No.
C
of Tractor
Howard found
gave adequate
This data
protection
Canopy
Tests
the
to
a
26000-pound
of
- Charles
W.
conventional
that a well-designed
rounding off inappropriate
after
including
3
value by using American Society
1368 Results
by Mr.
constants
CW1/4
d
This formula can be scaled to find a proper
all
tractor from
decimals
fixes
the
2.
Therefore
4
2WV4
d
where
W
d
of tractor pounds
weight
tree
diameter inches
maximum tree
yields
the
ROPS
provisions on a conventional
We
can
crawler
study
the implications
tractors
as in
for which
diameter
of
can
infer
safe
FOPS
protection
from the
tractor.
4 by
the following
tabulating
it
over the range
of familiar modern
table
Weight
Tractor
we
pounds
Safe
Tree Diameter
inches
John Deere
6000
18
D2
11600
21
D4
16600
23
D5
22300
24
D6
27400
26
D7
40000
28
D8
63000
32
D9
87300
34
Cat.
16
Two
inferences
1
2
can
be drawn
Very small
Even very
tree
tops.
tractors
large
from
this
overhead
furnish
tractors
Reconnaissance
supplement the machines
tabulation
are
not
protection
structurally
safe
from rather large-diameter
trees.
for falls of very large
and
or other safety measures
appear
structural provisions for safety.
000000000
17
advisable
trees
to
WASHINGTON OFFICE
OF ENGINEERING
DIVISION
NEWS
TECHNOLOGICAL IMPROVEMENTS
Heyward
T. Taylor
Assistant Director
Initial
Range
Pole Surveying
locating property
between
lines
We
Tests.
have completed the
National
property
Colorado
Forests
designed and the surveyors
much
with
and
less effort
instruments
1
between
direct
line
These
initial tests
this
equipment
prepared
The
that
double
Surveys
will
be
Space Flight Center
we
that detects
between
lines
air at
range
near
Denver
worked
as
more accurately
of two
consists
main
one property
corner
and
and thus projects
the laser signal
cadastral
available
at
survey output
Operation
Forest
is
and
units scheduled
Service by
and
is
successful
NASA
will give
training
a
2
true
manuals
scientists
and
built
culmination
believe
in
survey
us more
are
for delivery next
NASA
and were designed
Maryland
We
costs.
breakthrough
a significant
maintenance
new
The development
Service surveyors
it
and spring operations
for winter
for the three
Greenbelt
quality and reduce
can improve survey
scheduled
Radio Corporation of America.
venture
the
in
Forests
Florida the instruments
locating property
are
were developed for the Forest
instruments
in
The equipment
costs.
corner
property
on National
surveys
that beams vertically
production procedures.
and
they
The
two adjacent
the corners.
indicate
will
instrumentation.
accurate
reduced
at
line
Tennessee and
report that
a laser signal
a receiver at an adjacent
in
pole tests for
range
a line of sight between
In property
corners.
and on National
initial laser
lands and adjoining property.
Forest
pole and accessory sensing equipment provide
nonintervisible
of Engineering
being
fiscal year.
of Goddard
under contract
by
of a 5-year joint
scientists.
OPERATIONS
Harold
L.
Strickland
Assistant Director
Geometronics.
Notes.
The new
multilayer
map system was
Concurrent with the development of
of the organizational
alternatives
this
for producing
18
discussed in the July
mapping
the maps.
system
The
another
massive
1973
issue
study
of Field
was made
cost of equipment
out
pointed
maintain
The
in-house
a cost-effective
organization
National
of centralization
that a greater degree
signed
in
a letter
1200
1
when
T.
C. Nelson
of the Center
depends on
area will depend
The
establishment
following
The
on the Departments
laboratory
series
will
support
mapping
there in Fiscal
location
Plans are to begin
Year 1975 the
for the Center
is
Chief
Foresters
of phasing
rate
not definite selection of the
approval.
of the Center will not
items of work
base
work
by phasing
financing.
available
Deputy
Organization to the Regional
announcing the plans for implementing a Geometronics Service Center.
operation
Service to
the future.
on November
was culminated
study
System
Forest
capability
would be needed for the Forest
eliminate the Regional
Offices
units however
the
be transferred to the Center
for aerial photography
ref FSM 7140
orthophotography
major project type work
As
the Center becomes
Regional
call
Offices
for continued
consultation
units.
fully
support
to users
of the ultimate
and to handle
direct
orders
will
user/center
be processed
work
to coordinate
work may be
load
is
programs
Regional
geometronics
can be developed
19
in
present
units.
It
the future
plans
provide
for ordering work.
anticipated in procedures
channels
shifted from the
for the Center
rush jobs.
through the Regional
communication
by users
other items of
each Region
For the time being no major change
work
requested
operational
Regardless
in
as
is
as
hoped
All
that
appropriate.
TELEPHONE NUMBERS FOR WO DIVISION OF
ENGINEERING ARLINGTON VIRGINIA 22209
Area Code
Name
is
703
-
dial
prefix
Ext.
Room
23
extension
plus five-digit
Name
No.
Ext.
Aiken
Phyllis A.
58042
1109F
Kolzow
Albee
William
58184
1207E
Larse Robert W.
58018
1203
Leicht Linda A.
58184
1207D
Litten
K.
58077
1207K
Lupien Theodore
Robert G.
58129
1111
MacNamara
58104
1109D
Mahan Richard
58638
57LL
Mahoney
58638
57LL
Marshall
58085
1113E
Matson
58638
22LL
McLaughlin
58155
12071
58184
1201F
McRae
McVay
58087
1107
59843
1101A
S.
58635
1109B
Nale
M.
58024
1203
Neumann
58077
1207K2
Nielsen
Theral
58084
1113F
Owsley
Frances
58071
1111
Padgett
Myrtle
59843
1101C
Patterson
58077
1207K1
Pelzner Adrian
58635
26LL
Peyton
58638
24LL
Rhoads Ronald W.
58071
11 11
Richardson
58129
1111
C.
Alexander Denise
Allison
Raymond
Angyal
Margaret
Atchison
Bean
Bell
O.
Stanley
P.
Jr.
James M.
W.
Ernest
Boisvert
Brenda M.
Bolen
Bradley Thurl
Broadway
T.
Ollie A.
Norma
Brookens
Brown Wanda
Bruesch
Frances
Colley
Amon
Coorsh
D.
L.
Harry
Josephine
Martha
Decker
Deleissegues
A.
Richard
Edward R.
Dillon
Dixon James
F.
Robert
Driskell
Ellis
M.
Grace
Bybee
Davis
J.
Lawrence
Burchett
Jr.
Ronald
P.
R.
William
C.
Benjamin
D.
A.
Audrey
B.
0.
Robert H.
Edward
F.
E.
Larry
given below
Kay
Room
58010
1113C
59843
1103
58155
12071
58018
1204
58018
1204
58120
1207H
58184
1201E
58184
1207F
58071
1111
58114
1203A
58635
1109F
Iris
58635
1109A
Aileene
58042
1109F
Morris Frank V.
58184
1205F
Murphy
58073
1101C
R.
Daisy
Roger A.
Edmund
C.
R.
G.
Thomas
Frederick
F.
E.
58635
1109E
58073
1101C
59846
1102
58198
1207J
58084
1101C
58059
1104
58031
1201C
58638
20LL
58073
1101C
58114
1201A
Rivera Joseph V.
58638
59LL
1201D
Boone
Y.
58638
57LL
Rotty
Dirck
L.
58184
Alfred
E.
58638
26LL
Ruth Ralph
E.
58184
1207M
Fortune Ralph
F.
58638
22LL
Sam
58099
1208
Farnley George R.
Forstall
Barbara
J.
58042
1109C
Sigele
Anne
Gethers Carolyn D.
58635
1109F
Sirois
Donald L.
Gibson
Frost Dale
0.
D.
58114
1203
Smith Henry
Glover Lewis G.
58071
1111
Strickland
Greenlee
58006
1207G
Stroman
58042
1109C
58638
22LL
M.
58071
1111
Thompson
Jose
rry
58084
1113B
Thompson
Joellen
Harold R.
Hammond
Frank
J.
Harrison Carol
Hartman
Hazel
Hendrickson
i_
58638
22LL
1109B
22LL
Swinnerton John R.
58184
1201F1
Taylor Heyward
T.
58087
1108A
M.
58006
1207G
Romaine E.
58018
1204
58638
57LL
1111
Tullis
58059
1104
Watkins
Howlett
58035
1108
Webb
Myles R.
1202
58638
58071
B.
1101C
58115
58046
Hostrop Bernard
Herfurth Marjorie
L.
Harold L.
58059
Walter
Robert C.
58120
1207H
C.
58638
22LL
Wilbert
William
58084
1113F
Weller Charles R.
58098
1106
Jaeger Ivonne A.
58035
1108B
Wenzel
58184
1207L
Jones David L.
58030
1201B
Wenzlaff Gloria
58006
1207G
Weston Monroe
58638
22LL
Wilcox Sterling
58098
1107
Willis Johnie
58085
1113E
Hyde
Jerry M.
Kaneko Donald
Kelly Frank
K.
J.
Kenestrick
Ruth
Kinworthy
William
G.
R.
20
No.
Edward
T.
58635
1109E
T.
58071
1111
J.
59843
1101B
58638
22LL