1.1 This guide establishes the minimum national standard for training the emergency medical technician (basic) to perform patient management techniques for patients of all ages. 1.2 This guide is one of a series which together describe the minimum training standard for the emergency medical technician (basic). 1.3 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.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

5.1 This guide provides guidance to persons managing or responsible for designing sampling and analytical plans for determining whether sample compositing may assist in more efficiently meeting study objectives. Samples must be composited properly, or useful information on contamination distribution and sample variance may be lost.5.2 The procedures described for mixing samples and obtaining a representative subsample are broadly applicable to waste sampling where it is desired to transport a reduced amount of material to the laboratory. The mixing and subsampling sections provide guidance to persons preparing sampling and analytical plans and field personnel.5.3 While this guide generally focuses on solid materials, the attributes and limitations of composite sampling apply equally to static liquid samples.1.1 Compositing and subsampling are key links in the chain of sampling and analytical events that must be performed in compliance with project objectives and instructions to ensure that the resulting data are representative. This guide discusses the advantages and appropriate use of composite sampling, field procedures and techniques to mix the composite sample, and procedures to collect an unbiased and precise subsample(s) from a larger sample. It discusses the advantages and limitations of using composite samples in designing sampling plans for characterization of wastes (mainly solid) and potentially contaminated media. This guide assumes that an appropriate sampling device is selected to collect an unbiased sample.1.2 The guide does not address: where samples should be collected (depends on the objectives) (see Guide D6044), selection of sampling equipment, bias introduced by selection of inappropriate sampling equipment, sample collection procedures or collection of a representative specimen from a sample, or statistical interpretation of resultant data and devices designed to dynamically sample process waste streams. It also does not provide sufficient information to statistically design an optimized sampling plan, or determine the number of samples to collect or calculate the optimum number of samples to composite to achieve specified data quality objectives (see Practice D5792). Standard procedures for planning waste sampling activities are addressed in Guide D4687.1.3 The sample mixing and subsampling procedures described in this guide are considered inappropriate for samples to be analyzed for volatile organic compounds. Volatile organics are typically lost through volatilization during sample collection, handling, shipping, and laboratory sample preparation unless specialized procedures are used. The enhanced mixing described in this guide is expected to cause significant losses of volatile constituents. Specialized procedures should be used for compositing samples for determination of volatiles such as combining directly into methanol (see Guide D4547).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

7.1 This specification is intended to be used by USS developers, CAAs, and others to assess USS conformance with this UTM specification.1.1 This specification is intended to be a global specification providing components that may be used to satisfy requirements expected to be common to many UTM-related regulations. This specification is not intended to comprehensively address all aspects of any particular UTM-related regulation or concept of operations. Similarly, because varying terminology for the same concept is frequently used across different regulations, readers should not expect an exact terminology consistency with any particular UTM-related regulation.1.2 This version of the specification is focused on strategic aspects of UAS operations, including strategic conflict detection, aggregate conformance of operations to their operational intents, constraint awareness, and situational awareness in the event of nonconforming or contingent operations. The intention is that this specification will evolve to address increasingly complex strategic aspects of UAS operations and potentially certain tactical aspects of UAS operations.1.3 This specification addresses the performance and interoperability requirements, including associated application programming interfaces (APIs), for a set of UTM roles performed by UAS Service Suppliers (USSs) in support of UAS operations.2 Roles are groupings of one or more related UTM services. A competent authority may choose to use the roles defined in this specification in establishing the granularity of authorizations granted to a USS. The roles defined in this specification are:(1) Strategic Coordination, comprising the Strategic Conflict Detection and Aggregate Operational Intent Conformance Monitoring services;(2) Conformance Monitoring for Situational Awareness (CMSA);(3) Constraint Management, comprising the Constraint Management service; and(4) Constraint Processing, comprising the Constraint Processing service.1.4 Section 4, Conceptual Overview, provides a description of each of the services and roles and includes further discussion on their scope.1.5 A regulator may choose to require that a USS support a minimum or prescribed set of roles and services and may adopt terminology other than USS for a software system that provides something other than that minimum or prescribed set of roles and services. However, for purposes of this specification, a USS is a system that provides one or more of the UTM services defined in this specification.1.6 A USS is not required by this specification to perform all roles or implement all defined services, providing business case flexibility for implementers. A typical USS that supports operators in the planning and execution of UAS operations may implement the Strategic Coordination, Constraint Processing, and CMSA roles. (Note that a USS providing CMSA for a UAS operation is required to also provide Strategic Coordination for the operation.) However, other implementations more limited in scope are possible. For example, a USS may implement only the Constraint Management role and be intended for use only by authorized constraint providers; or, a USS may implement only the Constraint Processing role to provide general airspace awareness to users independent of planning UAS flights. USSs may also provide additional, value-added capabilities and still be compliant with this specification as long as the value-added capabilities do not conflict with the services defined in this specification, and the implementation of services defined in this specification conforms to the applicable requirements.1.7 A USS may also support other UTM roles such as Remote ID and airspace access (for example, the FAA’s LAANC), specified in other documents.1.8 This specification addresses aspects common to all roles and services, such as Discovery and Synchronization Services (DSS), security, auditing, and handling of off-nominal cases (for example, USS or DSS failures).1.9 Additional services or enhancements to the current services will be added to subsequent versions of this specification. Appendix X2, Future Work Items, identifies a set of these items.1.10 The safety case for this version of the specification, summarized in Appendix X4, is limited to strategic deconfliction, which is accomplished using the services provided by the Strategic Coordination role. This analysis does not constitute a full safety case for any particular operator or set of operations, which will have their own unique factors and variables. It does help operators understand, however, the contribution of using strategic deconfliction to their safety case and what the key variables are in increasing or decreasing the contribution. Using assumptions similar to those documented in Appendix X4, strategic deconfliction reduces the probability of midair collisions by approximately two to three orders of magnitude, with the rate of off-nominal events and participation being the key variables.1.11 Of particular note, this version of this specification does not establish requirements for fairness or equitable airspace access among UAS operations, but instead includes requirements for the logging of information that will inform future requirements in this area.1.12 Usage: 1.12.1 In a region where participating UAS operators voluntarily agree to or are required by the competent authority to comply with this specification, it enables strategically deconflicted UAS operations as well as situational awareness for operations that may not be required to be strategically deconflicted. This specification is not dependent upon the use of segregated or nonsegregated airspace.1.12.2 For regions where this specification is required by a competent authority, this specification assumes regulations established by the competent authority (or its delegate) identify any prioritization of operations and whether or not strategic conflicts are allowed between operations of the same priority. For example, it may be legal in some jurisdictions for recreational operations to share airspace and have overlapping operational intents, relying on UAS personnel to coordinate and maintain visual separation; whereas in other jurisdictions, this may not be allowed. The specification takes no position on allowed or disallowed strategic conflicts. Instead it addresses requirements for when conflicts are allowed by regulations (for example, notifications to involved USSs and UAS personnel) and for when conflicts are not allowed (for example, replanning, inability to activate an operation with nonallowed conflicts).1.12.3 This specification is not intended to address the complete safety case for air collision risk. It provides a mechanism to address one portion of a safety case, specifically the strategic separation of participating UAS from other participating UAS. Other technologies or procedures, outside the scope of this specification, may be required to mitigate air risk with nonparticipating aircraft and to address other aspects of a complete safety case for air collision risk.1.12.4 Through the use of constraints, this specification also provides awareness of geographically and time-limited airspace information to USS, UAS personnel, or the operator’s automation, or combinations thereof. In circumstances where a constraint is used to represent the volume within which a manned operation is planned, it provides a mechanism to address the strategic separation of participating UAS from the manned flight. However, USS responsibility is limited to providing awareness of constraints, and it is the responsibility of the UAS personnel to comply with any regulatory aspect of constraints.1.13 Applicability: 1.13.1 This specification applies to operations conducted in a connected environment, meaning the UAS personnel have access to the USS (typically by means of the internet) and connectivity to the Unmanned Aircraft (UA). This specification anticipates and accommodates limited gaps in connectivity, but does not purport to address operations in locations where persistent connectivity is unavailable.1.13.2 This specification does not purport to address tactical conflicts between UAS. Notifications and data sharing requirements in this specification associated with Strategic Conflict Detection and Conformance Monitoring for Situational Awareness may be useful in aiding some tactical conflict detection and dynamic rerouting capabilities. However, those capabilities are beyond the scope of this specification, and an implementation cannot assert compliance for tactical conflict detection or dynamic rerouting using this specification.1.13.3 This specification does not purport to address conflicts between UAS and manned aircraft outside of instances where a manned operation is encapsulated in a constraint.1.13.4 This specification does not purport to address authorization for UAS to operate in controlled or uncontrolled airspace.1.13.5 This specification does not purport to address UAS that are not participating in UTM.1.14 Relationship to Other International UTM Standards and Specifications: 1.14.1 It is an objective of this specification to be compatible with certain UTM specifications that address common subject matter and are developed under other standards development organizations (SDOs).1.14.2 The existence of multiple specifications on the same subject matter can occur when the regulatory environment in a region requires that a necessary specification be developed by a particular SDO. In these cases, ASTM International seeks to establish a cooperation arrangement with the applicable SDO to ensure consistency between the related specifications.1.14.3 This specification also seeks to support an international audience where differing regulatory requirements can exist. Where practical, this specification accommodates the differing requirements through a superset approach using a variety of techniques such as optional features and features that are configured to support a particular regulatory ruleset.1.14.4 A summary of related specifications and the techniques used to achieve compatibility is provided in Appendix X3.1.15 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard.1.15.1 Units of measurement included in this specification:cm centimeterskm kilometersm metersdeg, ° degrees of latitude and longitude, compass directions secondsHz Hertz (frequency)time unless otherwise specified, formatted in accordance with IETF RFC 33391.16 Table of Contents: Title Section 1Referenced Documents 2Terminology 3Conceptual Overview 4Performance Requirements 5Test Methods:     6   7  Hazards 8  Test Units 9  Procedure 10  Product Marking 11  Packaging and Package Marking 12  Precision and Bias 13Keywords 14Table of Values Annex A1Interoperability Requirements and DSS Testing Annex A2USS-DSS and USS-USS OpenAPI YAML Description Annex A3Reference Architectures for Interoperability Security Controls Appendix X1Future Work Items Appendix X2Compatibility with Related Standards Appendix X3Safety Case for Strategic Deconfliction Appendix X4Failure Modes and Effects Analysis Appendix X5UTM Ecosystem Testing Strategy Appendix X6List of Working Group Participants and Contributors Appendix X7Related Material  1.17 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.1.18 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： 918元 / 折扣价： 781 元 加购物车

5.1 Coordination of response and recovery support cannot be performed well if the EOC team lacks an appropriate operating environment. An operating environment that increases stress in staff or hinders the ability to perform basic tasks will ultimately degrade the effectiveness of the EOC team. EOC management must be accomplished in parallel with incident management support and should be transparent to the EOC team. EOC management must also be consistent with and support the incident management system used by the EOC team (for example, the Incident Command System mandated for use in the United States under the National Incident Management System). Effective EOC management can be attributed to good preplanning and related training. This guide provides the emergency management community with practical concepts and approaches for effective EOC management.1.1 This guide provides general guidelines for the management of an emergency operations center (EOC) prior to, during, and after activation for emergency or disaster support.1.2 An EOC is where the coordination of response and recovery support is performed, but the EOC is also a physical location that generates its own demands. For the EOC team to perform effectively, the physical and organizational demands of the EOC as a facility must be met. EOC management is distinct from the operational management of the incident.1.3 This guide may also serve as a foundation for management of a smaller facility such as a department operations center (DOC), larger facilities such as a regional operations center (ROC), or state operations center (SOC) with a broader area of responsibility and more extensive need to communicate and coordinate with others.1.4 This guide applies to fixed facilities and does not specifically address portable or field-deployable EOCs at temporary locations, virtual EOCs using communications technology to link geographically separated participants, or EOC relocation under a Continuity of Operations Plan (COOP). However, elements within this document will apply to these situations.1.5 This guide is the second in a series regarding the EOC. For the Standard Guide for EOC Development, see Guide E2668.1.6 This document includes some references and terminology specific to the United States of America but may be adapted for use elsewhere.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.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： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

4.1 The intended use of this guide is to provide practical assistance in the development of an optimized sampling design. This standard describes or discusses:4.1.1 Sampling design selection criteria,4.1.2 Factors impacting the choice of a sampling design,4.1.3 Selection of a sampling design,4.1.4 Techniques for optimizing candidate designs, and4.1.5 The criteria for evaluating an optimized sampling design.4.2 Within a formal USEPA data generation activity, the planning process or data quality objectives (DQOs) development is the first step. The second and third are the implementation of the sampling and analysis design and the data quality assessment. Within the DQO planning process, the selection and optimization of the sampling design is the last step, and therefore, the culmination of the DQO process. The preceding steps in the DQO planning process address:4.2.1 The problem that needs to be addressed,4.2.2 The possible decisions,4.2.3 The data input and associated activities,4.2.4 The boundaries of the study,4.2.5 The development of decision rules, and4.2.6 The specified the limits on decision error.4.3 This guide is not intended to address the aspects of the planning process for development of the project objectives. However, the project objectives must be outlined and communicated to the design team, prior to the selection and optimization of the sample design.4.4 This guide references statistical aspects of the planning and implementation process and includes an appendix for the statistical calculation of the optimum number of samples for a given sampling design.4.5 This guide is intended for those who are responsible for making decisions about environmental waste management activities.1.1 This document provides practical guidance on the selection and optimization of sample designs in waste management sampling activities, within the context of the requirements established by the data quality objectives or other planning process.1.2 This document (1) provides guidance for selection of sampling designs; (2) outlines techniques to optimize candidate designs; and (3) describes the variables that need to be balanced in choosing the final optimized design.1.3 The contents of this guide are arranged by section as follows:1.   2. Referenced Documents   3. Terminology   4.   5. Summary of Guide   6. Factors Affecting Sampling Design Selection    6.1 Sampling Design Performance Characteristics    6.2 Regulatory Considerations    6.3 Project Objectives    6.4 Knowledge of the Site    6.5 Physical Sample Issues    6.6 Communication with the Laboratory    6.7 Analytical Turn Around Time    6.8 Analytical Method Constraints    6.9 Health and Safety    6.10 Budget/Cost Considerations    6.11 Representativeness   7. Initial Design Selection  8. Optimization Criteria  9. Optimization Process    9.2 Practical Evaluation of Design Alternatives    9.3 Statistical and Cost Evaluation   10. Final Selection     Annex A1 Types of Sampling Designs    A1.1 Commonly Used Sampling Designs    A1.2 Sampling Design Tools    A1.3 Combination Sample Designs   Appendix X1. Additional References   Appendix X2. Choosing Analytical Method Based on Variance and Cost   Appendix X3. Calculating the Number of Samples: A Statistical Treatment  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： 843元 / 折扣价： 717 元 加购物车

4.1 The scope of the Committee F24 is the development of standard methods of testing, performance specifications, definitions, standard methods of maintenance and operations, and best practices for amusement rides and devices. The work of this Committee F24 will be coordinated with other ASTM Committees and other societies and organizations having mutual interest.4.2 The intent of this standard guide is to serve as an overview for F24 standards and to outline processes and procedures to manage the lifecycle of an amusement ride or device. Persons looking for more details on an individual type of amusement ride or device should reference the specific standards available. See Appendix X1.1.1 This guide provides an overview of the appropriate F24 standard(s) to be applied during development and operation and use phases of an amusement ride or device.1.2 This guide sets forth procedures for owners, operators, designers, engineers, manufacturers, vendors, and suppliers to apply throughout the lifecycle of an amusement ride or device.1.3 This guide sets forth procedures for assessing and managing the end of operational life for an amusement ride or device, sub-system or component.1.4 This guide includes an appendix, which provides additional information to improve the understanding and application of the criteria presented in this standard guide.1.5 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.1.6 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： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车

5.1 Environmental data are often required for making regulatory and programmatic decisions. Decision makers must determine whether the levels of assurance associated with the data are sufficient in quality for their intended use.5.2 Data generation efforts involve three parts: development of DQOs and subsequent project plan(s) to meet the DQOs, implementation and oversight of the project plan(s), and assessment of the data quality to determine whether the DQOs were met.5.3 To determine the level of assurance necessary to support the decision, an iterative process must be used by decision makers, data collectors, and users. This practice emphasizes the iterative nature of the process of DQO development. Objectives may need to be reevaluated and modified as information related to the level of data quality is gained. This means that DQOs are the product of the DQO process and are subject to change as data are gathered and assessed.5.4 This practice defines the process of developing DQOs. Each step of the planning process is described.5.5 This practice emphasizes the importance of communication among those involved in developing DQOs, those planning and implementing the sampling and analysis aspects of environmental data generation activities, and those assessing data quality.5.6 The impacts of a successful DQO process on the project are as follows: (1) a consensus on the nature of the problem and the desired decision shared by all the decision makers, (2) data quality consistent with its intended use, (3) a more resource-efficient sampling and analysis design, (4) a planned approach to data collection and evaluation, (5) quantitative criteria for knowing when to stop sampling, and (6) known measure of risk for making an incorrect decision.1.1 This practice covers the process of development of data quality objectives (DQOs) for the acquisition of environmental data. Optimization of sampling and analysis design is a part of the DQO process. This practice describes the DQO process in detail. The various strategies for design optimization are too numerous to include in this practice. Many other documents outline alternatives for optimizing sampling and analysis design. Therefore, only an overview of design optimization is included. Some design aspects are included in the practice's examples for illustration purposes.1.2 DQO development is the first of three parts of data generation activities. The other two aspects are (1) implementation of the sampling and analysis strategies, see Guide D6311; and (2) data quality assessment, see Guide D6233.1.3 This guide should be used in concert with Practices D5283, D6250, and Guide D6044. Practice D5283 outlines the quality assurance (QA) processes specified during planning and used during implementation. Guide D6044 outlines a process by which a representative sample may be obtained from a population, identifies sources that can affect representativeness, and describes the attributes of a representative sample. Practice D6250 describes how a decision point can be calculated.1.4 Environmental data related to waste management activities include, but are not limited to, the results from the sampling and analyses of air, soil, water, biota, process or general waste samples, or any combinations thereof.1.5 The DQO process is a planning process and should be completed prior to sampling and analysis activities.1.6 This practice presents extensive requirements of management, designed to ensure high-quality environmental data. The words “must” and “shall” (requirements), “should” (recommendation), and “may” (optional), have been selected carefully to reflect the importance placed on many of the statements in this practice. The extent to which all requirements will be met remains a matter of technical judgment.1.7 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.1.7.1 Exception—The values given in parentheses are for information only.1.8 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.1.9 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

Validation is an important and mandatory activity for laboratories that fall under regulatory agency review. Such laboratories produce data upon which the government depends to enforce laws and make decisions in the public interest. Examples include data to support approval of new drugs, prove marketed drugs meet specifications, enforce environmental laws, and develop forensic evidence for trial. This also extends to LIMS used in environmental laboratories. In some cases these systems may need to be interoperable with CLIMS and computer-based patient records (CPR) for reporting environmental exposures and clinical laboratory testing for biologic measure of stressor exposure. The enormous financial, legal, and social impact of these decisions requires government and public confidence in laboratory data. To ensure this confidence, government agencies regularly review laboratories operating under their rules to confirm that they are producing valid data. Computer system validation is a part of this review. This guide is designed to aid users validating LIMS and incorporating the validation process into their LIMS life cycle.Validation must provide evidence of testing, training, audit and review, management responsibility, design control, and document control, both during the development of the system and its operation life (2).1.1 This guide describes an approach to the validation process for a Laboratory Information Management System (LIMS).1.2 This guide is for validation of a commercial LIMS purchased from a vendor. The procedures may apply to other types of systems, but this guide makes no claim to address all issues for other types of systems. Further, in-house developed LIMS, that is, those developed by internal or external programmers specifically for an organization, can utilize this guide. It should be noted that there are a number of related software development issues that this guide does not address. Users who embark on developing a LIMS either internally or with external programmers also should consult the appropriate ASTM, ISO, and IEEE software development standards.1.3 This guide is intended to educate individuals on LIMS validation, to provide standard terminology useful in discussions with independent validation consultants, and to provide guidance for development of validation plans, test plans, required standard operating procedures, and the final validation report.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

4.1 Purpose—This practice provides a framework for an authority to assess, plan, and execute: (1) the construction of new systems of tangible and intangible infrastructure; and (2) operate, maintain, monitor, and repair existing systems of infrastructure assets so as to maximize their use value by providing desired services for the benefit of infrastructure asset service recipients of the authority’s unit of government or private sector organization.4.2 How to Use Information—The information generated by this practice is used to assess the quality and frequency of delivered infrastructure asset services, which then provides the basis for changing the amounts or proportions of funding for one, many, or all types of infrastructure assets in the subsequent cycle of assessment, planning, and execution. The user shall identify an acceptable score for each infrastructure asset system being assessed with the practice (using resources listed in Table 4) and is encouraged to set targets for higher scores for each subsequent cycle of assessment (so that continuous improvement may be achieved) that shall not exceed four years.4.3 Who Should Use Information—The authority should use the generated information from the use of this practice to: (1) life safety-prioritize capital expenditures (extraordinary outlays) and spending on operations, maintenance, monitoring, and repair (ordinary outlays) of each infrastructure asset system that is assessed; (2) ensure costs are based on a life cycle basis, and, (3) triage those expenditures when insufficient funds limit the number of prioritized infrastructure asset services that can be improved or upgraded. The infrastructure asset service recipient should use generated information from the use of this practice to: (1) advocate for improved services; (2) coordinate communication among other infrastructure asset service recipients to voice concerns about service quality, frequency, and equity; and (3) identify new sources of revenue if present revenues are not sufficient for projects prioritized by the authority or by infrastructure asset service recipients.4.4 Regulatory Context—This practice does not supersede or replace federal, State, or local regulations, or reporting guidelines of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board or the Financial Accounting Standards Board. The user is responsible for determining the regulatory context, and associated constraints and obligations associated with the information generated in the performance of this practice.4.5 Use of Practice—An authority may incorporate this practice, in whole or in part, into general regulatory or guidance documents.4.6 Professional Judgment—This practice allows for transparency and accountability for an authority. The Infrastructure Management Process (Fig. 2) includes two community engagement steps, whereby the authority seeks concurrence with her/his infrastructure asset service recipients on goals and priorities for such services. Importantly, the authority is obliged to make final decisions that result in provided infrastructure asset services. Should this practice become part of the user’s system of governance, those results will be revisited continuously.FIG. 2 Infrastructure Management Process4.7 The user should review the standards in Table 4 before each iteration of this practice’s use.4.8 Elimination of Uncertainty—Professional judgment, interpretation, and some uncertainty are inherent in the processes described herein even when decisions are based upon objective scientific principles and accepted industry practices. In addition, new methods are continually being developed for this evolving field.4.9 Process Overview—At initiation, the user reviews: Section 3 Terminology; and then proceeds to Section 4 ; Section 5 Planning and Scoping; Section 6 Integrated Infrastructure System Management Process; and Section 7 Infrastructure System Reporting and Documentation, and becomes familiar with Fig. 2, an overview of the Infrastructure Management Process.1.1 This asset management practice establishes requirements of transparency and accountability for an assemblage of tangible and intangible infrastructure asset systems for a public or private organization.1.2 This practice promotes the life safety-prioritized and cost efficacious delivery of 15 types of infrastructure assets to infrastructure asset service recipients. These services include direct uses (for example, water supply or police protection) and indirect uses (for example, preventing adverse impacts on the environment while minimizing nature’s adverse impacts on infrastructure assets).1.3 This practice may be used as the basis for training guides for infrastructure asset system employees and operators.1.4 This practice provides an acceptability framework for 15 systems of infrastructure assets, including (1) potable water supply, (2) food systems, (3) sewage and storm water systems, (4) buildings, (5) healthcare, (6) security, (7) power, (8) communication, (9) transit and travel, (10) waste disposal, (11) education, (12) cultural heritage, (13) recreation and entertainment, (14) nature, and (15) financial systems.1.5 This practice is composed of the following sections: referenced documents; terminology; significance and use; planning and scoping; integrated infrastructure system management process; and infrastructure system reporting and documentation.1.6 The values stated in inch-pound 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.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： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车

Coordination and provision of emergency resources to jurisdictions and people impacted by all types of incidents is a fundamental aspect of emergency management. The ability to identify resource needs, articulate those needs effectively to resource providers, and mobilize the necessary resources from the source to the point of distribution is the essence of disaster assistance. Standardization of terminology and processes will benefit all individuals and entities engaged in emergency-related resource management.This guide provides emergency management and homeland security practitioners with a common, structured approach to resource management.1.1 This guide provides a standard frame of reference for managing resources in conjunction with an incident.1.2 This guide addresses fundamental terms, references, definitions, and a process model for implementation of resource management plans, policies, and procedures in an incident.1.3 This guide complements the concepts and principles of NIMS developed by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS).1.4 This guide is intended to complement and support the resource sharing goals and objectives of the Emergency Management Assistance Compact (EMAC).1.5 This guide may be used in conjunction with the NFPA 1600 Standard on Disaster/Emergency Management and Business Continuity Programs and NFPA 1561 Standard on Emergency Services Incident Management System.1.6 This guide may be used by any and all entities having a role in the preparation for, response to, recovery from, and mitigation and prevention of an incident.1.7 This guide is not intended to address all facets of resource management in the private sector, nor is it intended to provide comprehensive guidance for categorization and typing of all resources that might be used during an incident.1.8 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 and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

4.1 This practice covers procedures for establishing and maintaining a quality system for nondestructive testing agencies.4.2 Controlling the quality of service rendered is a continuing process. This practice provides guidelines for establishing a quality management system that provides for: calibration, standardization, reference samples, examination plans, and procedures.4.3 The basic requirements for a quality management system encompass the following areas, all of which shall be documented.4.3.1 Quality policy statement, planning, and administration,4.3.2 Organization,4.3.3 Human resources,4.3.4 Physical resources, and4.3.5 Quality management.1.1 This practice covers general requirements for the establishment and maintenance of a quality management system for agencies engaged in nondestructive testing (NDT).1.2 This practice utilizes criteria contained in Practice E543.1.3 This practice utilizes criteria contained in American National Standard ANSI/ISO/ASQ Q9001–2008, Quality management systems—Requirements.1.4 This practice recognizes the importance of establishing minimum safety criteria.1.5 The use of SI or inch-pound units, or combinations thereof, will be the responsibility of the technical committee whose standards are referred to in this standard.1.6 This practice 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 practice to establish appropriate safety and health 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： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

5.1 Environmental data are often required for making regulatory and programmatic decisions. These data must be of known quality commensurate with their intended use.5.2 Data generation efforts involve the following: establishment of the DQOs; design of the project plan to meet the DQOs; implementation of the project plan; and assessment of the data to determine whether the DQOs have been met.5.3 Certain minimal criteria must be met by the field and laboratory organizations generating environmental data. Additional activities may be required, based on the DQOs of the data collection effort.5.4 This practice defines the criteria for field and laboratory organizations generating environmental data and identifies some other activities that may be required based on the DQOs.5.5 This practice emphasizes the importance of communication among those involved in establishing DQOs, planning and implementing the sampling and analysis aspects of environmental data generation activities, and assessing data quality.5.6 Environmental field operations are discussed in Section 7, and environmental laboratory operations are discussed in Section 8.1.1 Environmental data generation efforts are composed of four parts: (1) establishment of data quality objectives (DQOs); (2) design of field measurement and sampling strategies and specification of laboratory analyses and data acceptance criteria; (3) implementation of sampling and analysis strategies; and (4) data quality assessment. This practice addresses the planning and implementation of the sampling and analysis aspects of environmental data generation activities (Parts (1) and (2) above).1.2 This practice defines the criteria that must be considered to ensure the quality of the field and analytical aspects of environmental data generation activities. Environmental data include, but are not limited to, the results from analyses of samples of air, soil, water, biota, waste, or any combinations thereof.1.3 Adoption of a quality assurance project plan (QAPP) containing the goals, policies, procedures, organizational responsibilities, evaluation and reporting requirements, and other attributes of a quality management system including statement of DQOs should be adopted prior to application of this practice. Data generated in accordance with this practice are subject to a final assessment to determine whether the DQOs were met through application of quality control (QC) procedures that produce data that are scientifically valid for the purposes to which the data are intended. For example, many screening activities do not require all of the mandatory quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC) steps found in this practice to generate data adequate to meet the project DQOs. The extent to which all of the requirements must be met remains a matter of technical judgement as it relates to the established DQOs.1.4 This practice presents extensive management requirements designed to ensure high-quality environmental data. The words “must,” “shall,” “may,” and “should” have been selected carefully to reflect the importance placed on many of the statements made in this practice.1.5 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.1.6 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： 777元 / 折扣价： 661 元 加购物车

4.1 This practice establishes expected outcomes associated with an asset management system.4.2 Understand the difference between performance standards and design standards—these are primarily performance statements versus design statements. What is being measured is achievement, not process.4.3 This practice encourages an inclusive understanding and communication of the outcomes associated with an asset management system. As additional standards are added, comparisons on this basis to other asset management systems can be further enabled.4.4 This practice, in combination with Practice E2279, should provide an enhanced basis for making decisions surrounding both assets and asset management systems.4.5 This practice is intended to foster and enable additional standard practices related to or based on the terms and concepts in the outcomes and outcome components. In particular, this practice may suggest a standard for personal and management skills useful in efforts to achieve these outcomes.4.6 This practice is to evaluate how robust the asset management system is, and guide future corrections and improvements.1.1 This practice describes expected outcomes associated with an asset management system. It is a measure of achievement rather than process and is performance oriented rather than design oriented.1.2 Outcomes are defined as information, events, objects, or states of being produced as a result or consequence of an objective, plan, process, accident, effort, or other similar action or occurrence and can be expressed in a quantitative or qualitative manner.1.3 An output measure is the tabulation, calculation, or recording of activity or effort and can be expressed in a quantitative or qualitative manner. For example, an output is driving 100 mph; an outcome is arriving safely.1.4 An outcome measure is an assessment of the results of a program activity compared to its intended purpose. This practice assumes that inputs are correlated to known or declared outputs of the system or system component being assessed.1.5 Consistent with Practice E2452 (EMPM), these outcomes are grouped into process management outcomes and operational outcomes.1.5.1 Although they may be directly related, strategies and tactics should not be confused with outcomes. Strategies are long-term plans of action designed to achieve a particular goal. Tactics are maneuvers or actions calculated to achieve some end. For example, increasing exercise is a strategy to attain the goal or outcome of fitness. Running is a supporting tactic to achieve the goal or outcome of fitness. Other tactics or groups of tactics may achieve the same outcome. On the other hand, as the definition of outcome indicates, tactics are not required for attaining outcomes. For example, fitness may be an unplanned result of a job requiring physical exertion.1.6 This practice describes the outcomes at a high level, with limited discussion of each outcome or components of each outcome. The intent is to provide a framework for current and potential additional standards. A cross reference relating current standards to the outcomes is provided in Section 5.1.7 The outcomes further described in Section 5 are listed in the following:1.7.1 Process Management Outcomes: 1.7.1.1 Outcome 1—Mission Support1.7.1.2 Outcome 2—Accounting and Accountability1.7.1.3 Outcome 3—Information Management1.7.1.4 Outcome 4—Planning1.7.1.5 Outcome 5—Relationships1.7.2 Operational Outcomes: 1.7.2.1 Outcome 6—Asset Functionality for Intended Purpose1.7.2.2 Outcome 7—Resource Optimization1.7.2.3 Outcome 8—Asset Visibility1.7.2.4 Outcome 9—Safety and Security1.7.2.5 Outcome 10—Installation, Movement, and Storage1.8 In Section 5, a rating scale is provided to quantify in a uniform manner achievement of outcomes and outcome components.1.9 This practice, in combination with Practice E2279, clarifies and enables effective and efficient control and tracking of assets and may provide an enhanced basis for making decisions surrounding both property and property management systems.1.10 This practice is intended to be applicable and appropriate for all asset-holding entities.1.11 This practice covers tangible assets and tangible property as defined in Terminology E2135. Consistent with the nomenclature used, individual portions of the practice may be applicable to more limited subsets of tangible assets, for example, to equipment and not to material.1.12 This practice assumes competence and subject matter expertise of those performing the assessment and those being assessed. (For example, as specified in the GAO Yellow Book.) The use of professional judgment by asset management professionals is required to achieve desired outcomes.1.13 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.1.14 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

4.1 This guide discusses options for taking a subsample from a sample submitted to a laboratory. If followed, it will minimize the bias and variance of the characteristic of interest of the laboratory sample prior to analysis.4.2 The guide will describe appropriate instructions to be submitted to the laboratory with the field sample.4.3 This guide is intended for use in the laboratory to take a representative subsample or specimen of the whole field sample for direct analysis or sample preparation for analysis. It is intended for field personnel, data users, laboratory sample reception personnel, analysts, and managers.4.4 To obtain a representative subsample, layer analysis, grinding, mixing, and changing the physical state such as digesting, drying, melting, or freezing may be required. This guide considers cone and quartering, riffle splitting, and particle size reduction.1.1 This guide covers common techniques for obtaining representative subsamples from a sample received at a laboratory for analysis. These samples may include solids, sludges, liquids, or multilayered liquids (with or without solids).1.2 The procedures and techniques discussed in this guide depend upon the sample matrix, the type of sample preparation and analysis performed, the characteristic(s) of interest, and the project-specific instructions or data quality objectives.1.3 This guide includes several sample homogenization techniques, including mixing and grinding, as well as information on how to obtain a specimen or split laboratory samples.1.4 This guide does not apply to air or gas sampling.1.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this 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

This guide will evaluate sample data that contain a high level of uncertainty for decision-making purposes and, where it is feasible, design a statistical study to estimate and reduce the sources of uncertainty. Oftentimes, historical data may be available and adequate for this purpose and no new study is needed.3.1.1 This approach will help the stakeholders better understand where the greatest sources of uncertainty are in the sampling and analysis process. Resources can be directed to where they can most reduce the overall uncertainty.3.1.2 Sampling and analysis design under this approach can often be cost-efficient because (a) the reduction in uncertainty can be done by statistical means alone and (b) the reduction can be translated into a lower number of analyses.This guide is limited to the situation where a decision is based on the mean of a population. It will only include discussions of a balanced design for the collection and analysis of sample data in order to estimate the sources of uncertainty. References to unbalanced designs are provided where appropriate.1.1 Waste management decisions generally involve uncertainty because of the fact that decisions are based on the use of sample data. When uncertainty can be reduced or controlled, a better decision can be achieved. One way to reduce or control uncertainty is through the estimation and control of the components contributing to the overall uncertainty (or variance). Control of the sizes of these variance components is an optimization process. The optimizations results can be used to either improve an existing sampling and analysis plan (if it should be found to be inadequate for decision-making purposes) or to optimize a new plan by directing resources to where the overall variance can be reduced the most.1.2 Estimation of the variance components from the total variance starts with the sampling and measurement process. The process involves two different kinds of uncertainties: random and systematic. The former is associated with imprecision of the data, while the latter is associated with bias of the data. This guide will discuss only sources of uncertainty of a random nature.1.3 There may be many sources of uncertainty in waste management decisions. However, this guide does not intend to address the issue of how these sources are identified. It is the responsibility of the stakeholders and their technical staff to analyze the sampling and measurement processes in order to identify the potentially significant sources of uncertainty. After identifying these sources, this guide will provide guidance on how to collect and analyze data to obtain an estimate of the total uncertainty and its components.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元