Hand-held SNM monitors are an effective and unobtrusive means to search pedestrians or vehicles for concealed SNM when automatic SNM monitors are not available or have sounded an alarm. Facility security plans apply SNM monitors as one means to prevent theft or unauthorized removal of SNM from designated areas. Functional testing of monitors on a daily basis with radioactive sources can assure they are in good working order. The significance of a less frequent, in-plant evaluation of an SNM monitor is to verify that the monitor achieves an expected probability of detection for an SNM or alternative test source. The evaluation verifies acceptable performance or discloses faults in hardware or calibration. The evaluation uses test sources shielded only by normal source encapsulation. However, shielded SNM test sources could be used as well. The evaluation, when applied as a routine operational evaluation, provides evidence for continued compliance with the performance goals of security plans or regulatory guidance. Note 1—It is the responsibility of the users of this guide to coordinate its application with the appropriate regulatory authority so that mutually agreeable choices for evaluation frequency, test sources, detection criteria (whether a single or multiple alarms constitute detection), minimum distance for first detection, number of trials, and reporting procedures are used. Regulatory concurrence should be formally documented.1.1 This guide is one of a series on the application and evaluation of special nuclear material (SNM) monitors. Other guides in the series are listed in Section 2, and the relationship of in-plant performance evaluation to other procedures described in the series is illustrated in Fig. 1. Hand-held SNM monitors are described in of Guide C1112, and performance criteria illustrating their capabilities can be found in Appendix X1. 1.2 The purpose of this guide to in-plant performance evaluation is to provide a comparatively rapid procedure to verify that a hand-held SNM monitor performs as expected for detecting SNM or alternative test sources or to disclose the need for repair. The procedure can be used as a routine operational evaluation or it can be used to verify performance after a monitor is calibrated. 1.3 In-plant performance evaluations are more comprehensive than daily functional tests. They take place less often, at intervals ranging from weekly to once every three months, and derive their result from multiple trials. 1.4 Note that the performance of both the hand-held monitor and its operator are important for effective monitoring. Operator training is discussed in Appendix X2. 1.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. 1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety problems, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. Note—The procedures shown “above” the user provide the user with information before acquiring a monitor, and those “below” assist the user to obtain continuing acceptable performance from the monitor.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

4.1 Establishment of an in-service linings monitoring program permits planning and prioritization of lining maintenance work as needed to maintain lining integrity and performance in nuclear Coating Service Level III systems. Refer to ASTM MNL-8, Manual on Maintenance Coatings for Nuclear Power Plants,7 and Guide D7230, which provides guidance for selecting lining materials for new construction or maintenance of safety-related lining systems.4.2 A linings monitoring program enables early identification and detection of potential problems in lining systems. Some Coating Service Level III lining systems may be known in advance to be suspect, deficient, or degraded. Monitoring lining performance will assist in developing follow-up procedures to resolve any significant deficiency relative to lining work.4.3 Degraded linings may generate debris under normal operation and testing or during upset conditions that could adversely affect the performance of safety-related systems. In most cases, the consequence of the debris generation is flow blockage, essential heat transfer reduction, or both; ultimately leading to degradation of equipment or system performance. A linings monitoring program may be required to fulfill licensing commitments for Coating Service Level III lining work.1.1 This guide covers procedures for establishing a program to monitor the performance of Coating Service Level III lining (and coating) systems in operating nuclear power plants. Monitoring is an ongoing process of evaluating the condition of the in-service lining systems.1.2 Coating Service Level III lining systems subject to this guide are generally those applied to metal substrates comprising raw water, condensate-quality water, or fuel oil wetted (that is, full or intermittent immersion) surfaces in systems that may include:1.2.1 Service water piping upstream of safety-related components,1.2.2 Service water pump internals (draft tube, volutes, and diffusers),1.2.3 Service water heat exchangers including the channels, pass partitions, tubesheets, end bells, and covers1.2.4 Service water strainers,1.2.5 Reactor water storage tanks (RWSTs),1.2.6 Refuel cavity water storage tanks,1.2.7 Reactor makeup water system,1.2.8 Component cooling water system,1.2.9 Lube oil tanks for safety-related equipment, and1.2.10 Emergency diesel fuel oil system.1.3 It is the intent of this guide to provide a recommended basis for establishing a linings monitoring program, not to mandate a singular basis for all programs. Variations or simplifications of the program described in this guide may be appropriate for any given operating nuclear power plant depending on its licensing commitments. Similar guidelines may be applicable for certain Coating Service Level II applications such as fluid immersion systems.1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

4.1 This practice was developed to help manufacturers, designers, maintenance personnel, trainers, owners, employees, and customers of secure destruction services to provide a reasonable level of safety for everyone exposed to hazards of equipment used to provide those services.4.2 Sections 1 – 3 provide general information and definitions and apply to all plant-based and mobile secure destruction operations and equipment covered by this practice.4.3 Sections 5 – 8 provide requirements for design, manufacture, reconstruction, modification, operation, and maintenance of plant-based and mobile equipment used for secure destruction.1.1 This practice sets forth criteria for the design, manufacture, assembly, modification, operation, maintenance, service, or repair of plant-based and mobile secure destruction equipment.1.2 This practice is applicable both to plant-based (fixed facility) and mobile (truck-based) secure destruction operations engaged in collecting, receiving, storing, processing, transporting, or combinations thereof, media and related items to provide for secure destruction by physical or electronic alteration.1.3 In this practice, minimum safety requirements are established with respect to secure destruction operations and equipment.1.4 This practice applies to both new and existing mobile and plant-based secure destruction equipment.1.5 Units—The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车

SNM monitors are an effective and unobtrusive means to search pedestrians for concealed SNM. Facility security plans use SNM monitors as one means to prevent theft or unauthorized removal of designated quantities of SNM from access areas. Daily testing of the monitors with radioactive sources guarantees only the continuity of alarm circuits. The in-plant evaluation is a way to estimate whether an acceptable level of performance for detecting chosen quantities of SNM is obtained from a monitor in routine service or after repair or calibration. The evaluation verifies acceptable performance or discloses faults in hardware or calibration. The evaluation uses test sources shielded only by normal source filters and encapsulation and, perhaps, by intervening portions of the transporting individual's body. The transporting individual also provides another form of shielding when the body intercepts environmental radiation that would otherwise reach the monitor's detectors. Hence, transporting individuals play an important role in the evaluation by reproducing an important condition of routine operation. The evaluation, when applied as a routine-operational evaluation, provides evidence for continued compliance with the performance goals of security plans or regulatory guidance. It is the responsibility of the users of this evaluation to coordinate its application with the appropriate regulatory authority so that mutually agreeable evaluation frequency, test sources, way of transporting the test source, number of test-source passages, and nuisance-alarm-rate goals are used. Agreed written procedures should be used to document the coordination.1.1 This guide is affiliated with Guide C1112 on applying special nuclear material (SNM) monitors, Guide C1169 on laboratory performance evaluation, Guide C1189 on calibrating pedestrian SNM monitors, and Guides C1236 and C1237 on in-plant evaluation. This guide to in-plant performance evaluation is a comparatively rapid way to verify whether a pedestrian SNM monitor performs as expected for detecting SNM or SNM-like test sources. 1.1.1 In-plant performance evaluation should not be confused with the simple daily functional test recommended in Guide C1112. In-plant performance evaluation takes place less often than daily tests, usually at intervals ranging from weekly to once every three months. In-plant evaluations are also more extensive than daily tests and may examine both a monitor's nuisance alarm record and its detection sensitivity for a particular SNM or alternative test source. 1.1.2 In-plant performance evaluation also should not be confused with laboratory performance evaluation. In-plant evaluation is comparatively rapid, takes place in the monitor's routine operating environment, and its results are limited to verifying that a monitor is operating as expected, or to disclosing that it is not and needs repair or recalibration. 1.2 In-plant evaluation is one part of a program to keep SNM monitors in proper operating condition. Every monitor in a facility is evaluated. There are two applications of the in-plant evaluation: one used during routine operation and another used after calibration. 1.2.1 Routine Operational Evaluation—In this form of the evaluation, nuisance alarm records for each monitor are examined, and each monitor's detection sensitivity is estimated during routine operation. The routine operational evaluation is intended to reassure the plant operator, and his regulatory agency, that the monitor is performing as expected during routine operation. This evaluation takes place without pre-testing, recalibration, or other activity that might change the monitor's operation, and the evaluation simulates the normal use of the monitor. 1.2.2 Post-Calibration Evaluation—This form of the evaluation is part of a maintenance procedure; it should always follow scheduled monitor recalibration, or recalibration connected with repair or relocation of the monitor, to verify that an expected detection sensitivity is achieved. Nuisance alarm data do not apply in this case because the monitor has just been recalibrated. Also, having just been calibrated, the monitor is likely to be operating at its best, which may be somewhat better than its routine operation. 1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. 1.4 This standard does not purport to address the safety problems, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

3.1 Spoilage of paint in the container is often related to the use of contaminated raw materials, water (particularly recycled washwater), vessels, piping, and equipment in the manufacturing plant. There is a need for a simple method to determine the presence or absence of microorganisms in plants that manufacture paints and coatings. Such a determination enables the manufacturer to establish the point of contamination (that is, raw materials or problem housekeeping areas in the plant) to help in solving the spoilage problem.NOTE 1: Some contamination in plant areas is to be expected, since microorganisms are ubiquitous and cannot generally be eliminated practically (it is what an in-can preservative is supposed to control). Excessive levels of contamination or contaminated raw materials can exceed the capability of the preservative. If you have excessive contamination in the plant, there are methods for decontamination including steam, preservatives, bleach, etc. These should be discussed with your biocide supplier and used with care. Recovery of spoiled or contaminated products is often not feasible, so an adequate level of the appropriate biocide in conjunction with good plant housekeeping practices are essential. Your biocide supplier can also help here.3.2 This test method may be used by persons without basic microbiological training, but some training on aseptic techniques would be recommended.NOTE 2: The reliability of the results obtained from this test method is extremely dependent on the techniques employed. Improper techniques can result in a sterile sample appearing to be contaminated, and even worse, a contaminated sample appearing to be sterile (see also 5.1). It is recommended that you consult with your biocide supplier, raw material supplier, or an independent testing laboratory to confirm questionable results.1.1 This test method covers a procedure for the determination of the microbial condition (contamination or sterility) of raw materials used in the manufacture of paint, and the microbial condition of paint and paint manufacturing areas.1.2 The values in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

定价： 3504元 / 折扣价： 2979 元

5.1 Performing this procedure from this practice should result in a properly adjusted walk-through metal detector operating at or near the optimum sensitivity setting for the environment in which it is installed.5.2 This practice determines the lowest sensitivity setting required to detect a specified test object and establishes a sensitivity setting suitable for most operational needs.5.3 This practice may be used to establish an initial sensitivity setting for follow-on procedures that determine credible values for probability of detection and confidence level, as required by regulatory authorities.1.1 This practice covers a procedure for adjusting the operational sensitivity of in-plant walk-through metal detectors. Performance of this procedure should result with in-plant walk-through metal detectors being adjusted to an initial operational sensitivity setting suitable for performance testing.1.2 This practice does not set test object specifications or specify specific test objects. These should be specified by the regulatory authority.1.3 This practice uses information developed by Practice C1270, or an equivalent procedure, which identifies the critical test object (from a specified set of test objects), its critical orientation, and the critical test path through the detection zone. In the case of Practice C1270, the information is found on the detection sensitivity map(s) for each in-plant walk-through metal detector.1.4 This practice is one of several developed to assist operators of nuclear facilities with meeting the metal detection performance requirements of the regulatory authorities (see Appendix X1 and Appendix X2).1.5 This standard practice is neither intended to set performance levels nor limit or constrain technologies.1.6 This practice does not address safety or operational issues associated with the use of walk-through metal detectors.1.7 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standards. The values given in parentheses are for information only.1.8 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

5.1 A complex set of variables affect metal detection and detection sensitivity. Some physical characteristics of metal objects that influence detection are material composition, shape, surface area, surface and internal electrical and magnetic properties, and finish. The orientation of a test object can greatly influence detection as can the direction and speed or changes in speed while passing through the detection zone. Nearby large metal objects and metal moving in near proximity to a metal detector also affect operation, as do temperature and humidity, and can be a cause for nuisance alarms. Additionally, most currently manufactured walk-through metal detectors have some means for programming the operation of the detector for special conditions or requirements; these variables and the effect they have on the operation of in-plant detectors must be considered if a test program is to be effective. This practice is intended to minimize the impact of these variables on the operation of in-plant detectors by systematically testing the installed detectors in the operating environment with the test object(s) specified by the regulatory authority requirements.5.2 This practice may be used to determine the critical test object from a group of test objects, its critical orientation, and the critical test path through the detection zone. This information may allow the use of a single test object for setting the operational sensitivity of the detector and performing periodic performance evaluations necessary to ensure a high probability that all test objects in the group are detectible within the capabilities of the detector.5.3 The detection sensitivity map(s) generated by this practice provides baseline metal detection data for the specified test objects and can serve as a foundation for in-plant walk-through metal detector set-up and performance evaluation testing. The detection sensitivity map(s) may be incorporated into a detector performance test log in support of performance evaluation practices.5.4 This practice may provide insight into certain metal detection characteristics of walk-through metal detectors, particularly the effect of different metals and test object orientations on detection capability, that are useful for optimizing detector sensitivity settings for detection of specified weapons or shielding material, or both.5.5 Periodic performance of this practice and analysis of the results may provide a means to monitor the state of health of in-plant detectors and to gain further insight into detector application and operation.1.1 This practice covers a procedure for determining the weakest detection path through the portal aperture and the worst-case orthogonal orientation of metallic test objects. It results in detection sensitivity maps, which model the detection zone in terms related to detection sensitivity and identify the weakest detection paths. Detection sensitivity maps support sensitivity adjustment and performance evaluation procedures (see Practices C1269 and C1309).NOTE 1: Unsymmetrical metal objects possessing a primary longitudinal component, such as handguns and knives, usually have one particular orientation that produces the weakest detection signal. The orientation and the path through the detector aperture where the weakest response is produced may not be the same for all test objects, even those with very similar appearance.NOTE 2: In the case of multiple specified test objects or for test objects that are orientation sensitive, it may be necessary to map each object several times to determine the worst-case test object or orientation, or both.1.2 This practice is one of several developed to assist operators of walk-through metal detectors with meeting the metal detection performance requirements of the responsible regulatory authority. (See Appendix X2)1.3 This practice is neither intended to set performance levels, nor limit or constrain operational technologies.1.4 This practice does not address safety or operational issues associated with the use of walk-through metal detectors.1.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.1.6 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

5.1 This test method is useful for distinguishing between oils that are adaptable to various types of spraying application, with a higher unsulfonated oil being required for leaf spraying as compared to dormant vegetation application.1.1 This test method covers the determination of unsulfonated residue in plant spray oils of petroleum origin and applies only to the petroleum oil content. It provides a measure of the degree of refinement of plant spray oils by determining the extent to which the oil is attacked by 98.61 % sulfuric acid under closely standardized conditions. Since the relationship between unsulfonated residue and the actual composition of the oil is not known, this test method should be applied only for measuring the degree of refinement and not for the determination of aromatics or olefins, or both.1.2 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

4.1 This guide provides information to assist engineers with the design requirements and construction guidelines for paving an open-graded friction course (OGFC) surface layer. An OGFC is primarily used to improve the skid resistance and wear resistance of an asphalt pavement by providing an escape route for surface water beneath a moving wheel load. The asphalt mixture is typically produced with a low amount of fine aggregate particles and high air void content to provide a passageway of interconnected voids for moisture to drain away from the travelway. The film thickness of the asphalt and overall asphalt content are important for better stripping resistance and durability and aging properties.NOTE 1: OGFCs may also be placed to reduce the tire-pavement interface noise and may also be placed to reduce the occurrence and severity of reflective cracking.1.1 This guide covers the construction of open-graded friction course (OGFC) plant asphalt mixtures. End-use specifications should be adopted to conform to job and user requirements. Where applicable, Specification D3666 should be applied as a minimum for agencies testing and inspecting road and paving materials.1.2 Asphalt OGFCs are placed as the final wearing course for highways and airfields.1.3 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two systems may result in nonconformance with the standard.1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

7.1 Walk-through metal detectors are an effective and unobtrusive means for searching for concealed metallic weapons and SNM (special nuclear material) shielding material. The detectors are generally applied to prevent the unauthorized entry of weapons into facilities, and theft or unauthorized removal of SNM. Daily functional testing of metal detectors shows that they are operating and will produce the correct alarm signal; the significant use of less frequent in-plant evaluations provides data from which to determine if detectors are operating at expected performance levels.7.2 This practice provides a system of procedures for evaluating the detection performance of walk-through metal detectors.7.3 The procedures specify data to be recorded and used for establishing, tracking, and auditing metal detector performance and operation.7.4 This practice suggests documentation for maintaining performance records. Appendix X4 provides examples of forms for recording and tracking detector operation and performance testing.1.1 This practice is one of several (see Appendix X1) developed to assist operators of nuclear facilities with meeting the metal detection performance requirements set by regulatory authorities.1.2 This practice consists of four procedures useful for evaluating the in-plant performance of walk-through metal detectors (see Fig. 1).FIG. 1 Walk-through Metal Detector Evaluation Testing ProgramNOTE 1: The number of detection sensitivity verification tests in a series, the number of passes per test, the acceptance criteria, and the frequency may be established by regulatory authority or set by the security organization based on threat scenarios or vulnerability assessments; the numbers should be sufficient to provide a degree of assurance commensurate with the detector application.NOTE 2: If the detector fails to meet the acceptance criteria, the verification series is terminated. The detector then must be tested to reestablish the probability of detection. If the probability of detection requirement cannot be met (repairs may be necessary), the detector must be mapped and the operational sensitivity setting reestablished. Performance testing can then be resumed starting with a new detection sensitivity test.NOTE 3: If the detector fails the functional test, the detector must be immediately removed from service (see Appendix X1).1.2.1 Two of the procedures provide data for evaluating probability of detection. These procedures use binomial data (alarm/not alarm).1.2.1.1 The detection sensitivity test (DST; see Note 1) is the initial procedure in the detection probability evaluation series. It is used to establish the probability of detection immediately after the detector has been adjusted to its operational sensitivity setting.NOTE 1: The DST is one of two procedures used to evaluate detection rate. The Detection Sensitivity Verification Test (DSVT) is the other. In the evaluation test strategy, the DST is used to initially determine and document the detection rate and then the DSVT is used to periodically check that the detection rate continues to meet the requirements.1.2.1.2 The detection sensitivity verification test (DSVT; see Note 1) procedure periodically provides data for evaluation of continuing detection performance.1.2.2 The third procedure is a “functional test.” It is used routinely to verify that a metal detector is operating and responds with the correct audio and visual signals when subjected to a condition that should cause an alarm.1.2.3 The fourth procedure is used to verify that alarms generated during detection sensitivity testing were likely the result of the detection of metal and not caused by outside interferences or the perturbation of the detection field by the tester's body mass.1.2.3.1 This procedure also can be used to establish a probability of occurrence for false alarms, for example, 20 test passes by a clean-tester resulting in no alarms indicates a false alarm probability of less than 0.15 at 95 % confidence. This procedure is optional unless required by the regulatory authority.1.3 This practice does not set test object specifications. The specifications should be issued by the regulatory authority.1.4 This practice is intended neither to set performance levels nor to limit or constrain technologies.1.5 This practice does not address safety or operational issues associated with the use of walk-through metal detectors.1.6 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

5.1 Terrestrial phytotoxicity tests are useful in assessing the effects of environmental samples or specific chemicals as a part of an ecological risk assessment (3-6, 12, 13).5.2 Though inferences regarding higher-order ecological effects (population, community, or landscape) may be made from the results, these tests evaluate responses of individuals of one or more plant species to the test substance.5.3 This guide is applicable for: (a) establishing phytotoxicity of organic and inorganic substances; (b) determining the phytotoxicity of environmental samples; (c) determining the phytotoxicity of sludges and hazardous wastes, (d) assessing the impact of discharge of toxicants to land, and (e) assessing the effectiveness of remediation efforts.1.1 This guide covers practices for conducting plant toxicity tests using terrestrial plant species to determine effects of test substances on plant growth and development. Specific test procedures are presented in accompanying annexes.1.2 Terrestrial plants are vital components of ecological landscapes. The populations and communities of plants influence the distribution and abundance of wildlife. Obviously, plants are the central focus of agriculture, forestry, and rangelands. Toxicity tests conducted under the guidelines and annexes presented herein can provide critical information regarding the effects of chemicals on the establishment and maintenance of terrestrial plant communities.1.3 Toxic substances that prevent or reduce seed germination can have immediate and large impacts to crops. In natural systems, many desired species may be sensitive, while other species are tolerant. Such selective pressure can result in changes in species diversity, population dynamics, and community structure that may be considered undesirable. Similarly, toxic substances may impair the growth and development of seedlings resulting in decreased plant populations, decreased competitive abilities, reduced reproductive capacity, and lowered crop yield. For the purposes of this guide, test substances include pesticides, industrial chemicals, sludges, metals or metalloids, and hazardous wastes that could be added to soil. It also includes environmental samples that may have had any of these test substances incorporated into soil.1.4 Terrestrial plants range from annuals, capable of completing a life-cycle in as little as a few weeks, to long-lived perennials that grow and reproduce for several hundreds of years. Procedures to evaluate chemical effects on plants range from short-term measures of physiological responses (for example, chlorophyll fluorescence) to field studies of trees over several years. Research and development of standardized plant tests have emphasized three categories of tests: (1) short-term, physiological endpoints (that is, biomarkers); (2) short-term tests conducted during the early stages of plant growth with several endpoints related to survival, growth, and development; and (3) life-cycle toxicity tests that emphasize reproductive success.1.5 This guide is arranged by sections as follows:Section Title1 2 Referenced Documents3 Terminology4 Summary of Phytotoxicity Tests5 6 Apparatus7 Test Material8 Hazards9 Test Organisms10 Sample Handling and Storage11 Calibration and Standardization12 Test Conditions13 Interference and Limitations14 Quality Assurance and Quality Control15 Calculations and Interpretation of Results16 Precision and Bias1.6 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.1.7 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. Specific precautionary statements are given in Section 8.1.8 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 843元 / 折扣价： 717 元 加购物车

This standard is applicable to the overhaul and routine operation maintenance of I&C system for units already in production in thermal power plant.

定价： 2664元 / 折扣价： 2265 元 加购物车

1.0.2 The code is applicable to the design of loads of individual process disciplines and the civil discipline from the ground or basement floor to the roof of the main building in new, renovated or expanded fossil-fired power plants with a single unit capacity of 125 MW–1000 MW.

定价： 749元 / 折扣价： 637 元 加购物车

1.0.2 This standard is applicable to super-large, large and medium-sized aggregate processing plants for the hydroelectric and water conservancy projects.

定价： 281元 / 折扣价： 239 元 加购物车