5.1 There is a wide variety of nitration compounds that may be produced and accumulate when oils react with gaseous nitrates formed during the engine combustion process. These nitration products may increase the viscosity, acidity and insolubles in the oil, which may lead to ring sticking and filter plugging. Monitoring of nitration products is therefore an important parameter in determining overall machinery health and should be considered in conjunction with data from other tests such as atomic emission (AE) and atomic absorption (AA) spectroscopy for wear metal analysis (Test Method D5185), physical property tests (Test Methods D445 and D2896), and other FT-IR oil analysis methods for oxidation (Test Method D7414), sulfate by-products (Test Method D7415), and additive depletion (Test Method D7412), which also assess elements of the oil’s condition (1-6).1.1 This test method covers monitoring nitration in gasoline and natural gas engine oils as well as in other types of lubricants where nitration by-products may form due to the combustion process or other routes of formation of nitration compounds.1.2 This test method uses FT-IR spectroscopy for monitoring build-up of nitration by-products in in-service petroleum and hydrocarbon-based lubricants as a result of normal machinery operation. Nitration levels in gasoline and natural gas engine oils rise as combustion by-products react with the oil as a result of exhaust gas recirculation or a blow-by. This test method is designed as a fast, simple spectroscopic check for monitoring of nitration in in-service petroleum and hydrocarbon-based lubricants with the objective of helping diagnose the operational condition of the machine based on measuring the level of nitration in the oil.1.3 Acquisition of FT-IR spectral data for measuring nitration in in-service oil and lubricant samples is described in Practice D7418. In this test method, measurement and data interpretation parameters for nitration using both direct trend analysis and differential (spectral subtraction) trend analysis are presented.1.4 This test method is based on trending of spectral changes associated with nitration in in-service petroleum and hydrocarbon-based lubricants. For direct trend analysis, values are recorded directly from absorption spectra and reported in units of 100*absorbance per 0.1 mm pathlength (or equivalently absorbance units per centimetre). For differential trend analysis, values are recorded from the differential spectra (spectrum obtained by subtraction of the spectrum of the reference oil from that of the in-service oil) and reported in units of 100*absorbance per 0.1 mm pathlength (or equivalently absorbance units per centimetre). Warnings or alarm limits can be set on the basis of a fixed maximum value for a single measurement or, alternatively, can be based on a rate of change of the response measured (1).2 In either case, such maintenance action limits should be determined through statistical analysis, history of the same or similar equipment, round robin tests or other methods in conjunction with the correlation of nitration changes to equipment performance.NOTE 1: It is not the intent of this test method to establish or recommend normal, cautionary, warning or alert limits for any machinery. Such limits should be established in conjunction with advice and guidance from the machinery manufacturer and maintenance group.1.5 This test method is for petroleum and hydrocarbon-based lubricants and is not applicable for ester-based oils, including polyol esters or phosphate esters.1.6 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.1.6.1 Exception—The unit for wave numbers is cm-1.1.7 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

1.1 This practice is intended to cover the extraction, analysis, and information management pertaining to visible wear debris collected from oil system filters or debris retention screens. Further, it is intended that this practice be a practical reference for those involved in FDA.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： 843元 / 折扣价： 717 元 加购物车

This specification establishes the performance requirements and associated test methods for qualifying designs of suspension and nonsuspension production forks employed on bicycles that are intended for use in Condition 3 topography. This kind of condition pertains to rough trails, rough unpaved roads, and rough technical areas and unimproved trails, wherein contact with the irregular terrain and momentary loss of tire contact with the ground may occur during usage. The forks shall go through compression load, bending load, impact resistance, and fatigue tests. Models that fail to meet the specified test requirements shall be rejected.1.1 This specification establishes testing requirements for qualifying designs using production forks intended for use in Condition 3 per Classification F2043.

定价： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

This specification establishes the testing requirements for the structural performance of Condition 3 bicycle frames. The bicycle frames shall undergo horizontal and vertical loading fatigue tests, and impact strength test in accordance to a referenced ASTM test method. Frames that fail to meet the performance requirements shall be rejected.1.1 This specification establishes testing requirements for the structural performance properties of Condition 3 bicycle frames.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 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

5.1 The impulse-response method is used to evaluate the condition of concrete slabs, pavements, bridge decks, walls, or other concrete plate structures. The method is also applicable to plate structures with overlays, such as concrete bridge decks with asphalt or portland cement concrete overlays. The impulse-response method is intended for rapid screening of structures to identify potential locations of anomalous conditions that require more detailed investigation.5.2 This practice is not intended for integrity testing of piles. For such applications refer to Test Method D5882.5.3 This practice can be used to locate delaminated or poorly consolidated concrete. It can also be used to locate regions of poor support or voids beneath slabs bearing on ground.5.4 Results are used on a comparative basis for comparing concrete quality or support conditions at one point in the tested structural element with conditions at other points in the same element, or for comparing a structural element with another element of the same geometry. Invasive probing (drilling holes or chipping away concrete) or drilling of cores is used to confirm interpretations of impulse-response results.5.5 Because concrete properties can vary from point to point in the structure due to differences in concrete age, batch-to-batch variability, or placement and consolidation practices, the measured mobility and dynamic stiffness can vary from point to point in a plate element of constant thickness.NOTE 1: The flexural stiffness of a plate is directly proportional to the elastic modulus of the material and directly proportional to the thickness raised to the third power (5). As a result, variations in thickness will have a greater effect on variations in mobility than variations in elastic modulus.5.6 The effective radius of influence of the hammer blow limits the maximum concrete element thickness that can be tested. The apparatus defined in this practice is intended for thicknesses less than 1 m.5.7 For highway applications, results may be influenced by traffic noise or low frequency structural vibrations set up by normal movement of traffic across a structure. The intermittent nature of these noises, however, may allow testing during traffic flow on adjacent portions of the structure. Engineering judgment is required to determine whether the response has been influenced by traffic-induced vibrations.5.8 Heavy loads on suspended slabs may affect test results by altering the frequencies and shapes of different modes of vibration. Debris on the test surface may interfere with obtaining a sharp impact and with measuring the response.5.9 The practice is not applicable in the presence of vibrations created by mechanical equipment (jack hammers, sounding with a hammer, mechanical sweepers, and the like) impacting the structure.5.10 Tests conducted next to or directly over structural elements that stiffen the plate will result in reduced mobility and not be representative of the internal conditions of the plate.5.11 The practice is not applicable in the presence of electrical noise, such as that produced by a generator or other electrical sources, that is captured by the data-acquisition system.1.1 This practice provides the procedure for using the impulse-response method to evaluate rapidly the condition of concrete slabs, pavements, bridge decks, walls, or other plate-like structures.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 and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.4 The text of this standard references notes and footnotes that provide explanatory material. These notes and footnotes (excluding those in tables and figures) shall not be considered as requirements of the standard.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

5.1 This guide is intended to provide machinery maintenance and monitoring personnel with a guideline for performing trend analysis to aid in the interpretation of machinery condition data.1.1 This guide covers practical techniques for condition data trend analysis.1.2 The techniques may be utilized for all instrumentation that provides numerical test results. This guide is written specifically for data obtained from lubricant samples. Other data obtained and associated with the machine may also be used in determining the machine condition.1.3 This guide provides a methodology for assessing changes in lubricant during service. For limits on a specific lubricant parameter used in different system types, users should refer to Practice D4378, Practice D6224, or other established industry criteria, such as from the OEM. Guide D7720 may be used to determine limits if unavailable through the other references given.1.4 This guide does not address upper or lower control limits. These limits are provided by product manufacturers, defined in ASTM specifications, or both. The range between upper and lower control limits should be greater than the range within each test method’s repeatability coefficient. See Practices D3244, D6299, and D6792 for more information about ensuring that process control limits do not violate statistical fundamentals.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： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

4.1 Uses—This guide is intended for use on a voluntary basis by parties who wish to conduct a BEPIE. The process defined in this guide involves: (1) the collection of building and equipment information, including whole building energy consumption, much of which is typically collected as part of an E2018 PCA; (2) weather-normalizing the whole building energy consumption to obtain an EUI; (3) benchmarking the EUI to compare against the EUI of peer buildings; and (4) determining if the building’s EUI is under-performing compared to the EUI of peer buildings. If the building’s EUI is under-performing, the guide (1) evaluates the extent to which the building is under-performing; (2) provides guidance on what energy efficiency improvements might be made to bring the building to the performance level of its peers; and (3) provides guidance to obtain a probable cost for these energy efficiency improvements. The guide is intended principally as an approach to conducting a standardized building energy performance inquiry in connection with commercial real estate involved in a commercial real estate transaction with the intent to identify a condition of EUI under-performance compared to peer buildings. The guide provides for two approaches: a Screening Assessment (SA) that may be conducted, for example, as an adjunct to an E2018 PCA during due diligence prior to an acquisition, and a More Comprehensive Assessment (MCA) that would include more rigorous investigation as may, for example, be conducted by a building owner seeking to make an investment in EEMs. This guide is intended to reflect a commercially practical and reasonable inquiry.4.2 Clarifications on Use: 4.2.1 Use in Conjunction with an E2018 PCA—This guide, when added as a supplemental scope of work to an E2018 PCA, is designed to assist the user and Consultant in developing information about energy consumption and energy efficiency improvements that may be undertaken to reduce energy consumption in a building involved in a commercial real estate transaction. The guide also has utility to a wide range of situations, including those that may not involve a commercial real estate transaction. The guide is not intended to replace an E2018 PCA, but rather to supplement it.4.2.2 Independent Use—This guide may also be used independently of any other building or property condition assessment.4.2.3 Site-Specific—This guide is site and property-specific in that it relates to an existing building’s or property’s energy performance.4.3 Who May Conduct—A BEPIE should be performed by a qualified Consultant or individual (hereafter referred to as the “Consultant”) with the education, training and experience necessary to perform the requirements of this guide (refer to 8.6). No practical approach can be designed to eliminate the role of professional judgment and the value and need for experience in the individual performing the inquiry. The professional experience of the Consultant is, consequently, important to the performance of a BEPIE.4.4 Additional Services—Additional services not included within the scope of this guide may be contracted for between the user and the Consultant (refer to 13.1 – 13.2). For example, the user or Consultant may also wish to apply for LEED® or ENERGY STAR® certification.4.5 Principles—The following principles are an integral part of this guide and are intended to be referred to in resolving any ambiguity or exercising such discretion as is accorded the user or Consultant in performing a BEPIE.4.5.1 Uncertainty is not eliminated—No BEPIE standard can wholly eliminate uncertainty in determining the myriad of variables that can impact the energy consumption of a building on a property and the energy savings that might be realized by making energy efficiency improvements. The BEPIE is intended to reduce, but not eliminate, uncertainty regarding the impact of such variables.4.5.2 Assessment is not exhaustive—This guide is not meant to be an exhaustive assessment. There is a point at which the cost of the information obtained or the time required to gather it outweighs the usefulness of the information and, in fact, may be a material detriment to the orderly completion of a commercial real estate transaction. One of the purposes of this guide is to identify a balance between the competing goals of limiting the costs and time demands inherent in performing a BEPIE and the reduction of uncertainty about unknown conditions resulting from collecting additional information.4.5.3 Level of inquiry is variable—Not every building will warrant the same level of assessment. The appropriate level of assessment should be guided by the type and complexity of the property being evaluated, the needs of the user, and the information already available or developed in the course of the inquiry.4.6 Rules of Engagement—The contractual and legal obligations between a Consultant and a user (and other parties, if any) are outside the scope of this guide. No specific legal relationship between the Consultant and user was considered during the preparation of this guide.1.1 Purpose—The purpose of this guide is to define a commercially useful standard in the United States of America for incorporating building energy performance into an assessment of existing property condition, and specifically into a property condition assessment (PCA) on a building involved in a commercial real estate transaction. The guide is intended to provide a methodology for the user to identify building energy under-performance compared to peer buildings. If the building is under-performing compared to its peers, a methodology is provided to identify potential energy performance improvements and provide a probable cost for such improvements. The guide may be used independently or as a voluntary supplement to ASTM Guide E2018 PCA. Utilization of this guide and incorporating it into a PCA is voluntary. If the property owner is unwilling or unable to provide building energy consumption information and it is not possible to develop a reasonable estimate of building energy consumption, the methodology defined by this guide cannot be performed.1.2 Building Energy Performance and Improvement Evaluation (BEPIE)—the process as described in this guide by which a person collects, analyzes and reports on a building’s energy consumption, compares it to peer buildings and determines if the building is under-performing. If the building is under-performing, potential major improvements (energy efficiency measures, EEMs) that may reduce building energy consumption to achieve parity with peer buildings are identified and a probable cost is provided. Building energy performance as defined by this guide involves the collection of annual whole building energy consumption for heating, cooling, ventilation, lighting, and other related energy-consuming end-uses. Building energy consumption, for example, includes total electricity used at the building; purchased or delivered steam, hot water, or chilled water to the building; natural gas, fuel oil, propane, biomass, or any other matter consumed as fuel at the building. Annual whole building energy consumption in kBTU/yr is weather-normalized and converted to energy use intensity (EUI, kBTU/SF-yr), and then benchmarked against weather-normalized energy consumption in peer buildings. If the building consumes more energy than peer buildings, it is assumed to be under-performing. For under-performing buildings, the methodology provided in this guide identifies potential energy improvements and associated costs that may be able to bring the building to parity with peers. If electricity is generated on site from renewable/alternative energy systems (for example, solar photovoltaic systems, wind energy generator technology, fuel cells, or microturbines), the electricity produced is considered energy savings and is netted against building energy requirements with the purpose of reducing building EUI. The assessment conducted for the BEPIE may be a Screening Assessment (SA) that might be conducted in due diligence prior to building acquisition, or a More Comprehensive Assessment (MCA) that might be conducted by the owner of a building who may have had an SA conducted prior to acquiring the building. A BEPIE as performed according to this guide is building- and site-specific. For multifamily type property, the BEPIE is property-specific where a property may include multiple buildings. For such cases, data from the multiple buildings are aggregated prior to analysis.1.3 Objectives—Objectives in the development of this guide are to: (1) define a commercially useful guide for incorporating building energy performance into the assessment of existing property condition as part of due diligence associated with real estate transactions conducted pre-acquisition, post-acquisition or independent of an acquisition; (2) identify buildings that consume more energy than their peers, that is, are under-performing relative to peers; (3) identify how under-performing buildings might be improved and provide a probable cost to bring under-performing buildings to parity with peers; (4) define a commercially useful and reliable guide for conducting a building energy performance and improvement evaluation; (5) facilitate consistency in conducting and reporting of building energy performance and the evaluation of measures that may improve energy performance; (6) provide a process for conducting a BEPIE that is technically sound, consistent, transparent, practical and reasonable; and (7) provide criterion for identifying what constitutes a building being considered an energy under-performer compared to its peers.1.4 Documentation—The scope of this guide includes data collection, compilation, analysis and reporting. All sources, records and resources relied upon in the BEPIE assessment should to be documented.1.5 Considerations Outside the —The use of this guide is limited to the conduct of a BEPIE as defined by this guide. While this information may be used in assessing building valuation or for other reasons, any such use is solely between the user and the Consultant and beyond the scope of this guide.1.6 Organization of the Guide—BEPIE has 14 sections and 12 appendices. The appendices are included for informational purposes only and are provided for guidance in implementing this guide.Section 1 Describes the scope of the guide.Section 2 Identifies referenced documents.Section 3 Provides terminology pertinent to the guide.Section 4 Discusses the significance and use of the guide.Section 5 Discusses the relationship between this guide and ASTM E2018, ASTM E2797 and ASHRAE 211.Section 6 Describes the user’s responsibilities under this guide.Section 7 Describes the data collection needs for this guide.Section 8 Describes the building energy performance and improvement evaluation process.Section 9 Describes the benchmarking process.Section 10 Describes the process for conducting a screening assessment.Section 11 Describes the more comprehensive assessment process.Section 12 Describes reporting of findings and conclusions.Section 13 Identifies non-scope considerations.Section 14 Identifies keywords associated with the guide.Appendix X1 Driving Forces for Considering Building Energy Performance in PCAs.Appendix X2 Common Commercial Building Types.Appendix X3 EPA Portfolio Manager.Appendix X4 Commercial (CBECS) and Residential (RECS) Building Energy Consumption Surveys.Appendix X5 U.S. Climate Zones.Appendix X6 Building Performance Database.Appendix X7 EULs of Common Energy-consuming Equipment.Appendix X8 EEM Replacement Schedule Considerations.Appendix X9 Energy Savings for Common EEMs.Appendix X10 Common Energy and Water Savings Measures.Appendix X11 Building Energy Performance and Sustainability Certifications.Appendix X12 Sample BEPIE Screening Assessment Report Format1.7 This guide cannot replace education or experience and should be used in conjunction with professional judgment. Not all aspects of this guide may be applicable in all circumstances. This ASTM guide is not intended to represent or replace the standard of care by which the adequacy of a given professional service must be judged, nor should this guide be applied without consideration of a building’s many unique aspects. The word “standard” in the title means only that the guide has been approved through the ASTM consensus process.1.8 Nothing in this guide is intended to create or imply the existence of a legal obligation for reporting building energy performance or other building-related information. Any consideration of whether such an obligation exists under any federal, state, local, or common law is beyond the scope of this guide.1.9 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.1.10 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

5.1 Moisture in concrete floor slabs affects the performance of flooring systems such as resilient, wood, and textile floor coverings and coatings. Manufacturers of such systems generally require moisture testing be performed before installation of coverings on floor slabs and screeds. The measurement of sub-surface comparative moisture condition in the upper 1.0 in. (25.4 mm) stratum of a concrete slab with a non-destructive moisture meter is one such method.5.2 Excessive moisture in floor slabs after installation can cause floor covering system failures such as delamination, bonding failure, deterioration of finish flooring and coatings, and microbial growth.5.3 5.3 Comparative moisture content tests indicate the moisture in the slab, which is usually referenced to the percentage of dry weight. That is:Results indicate conditions at the time of the test.5.4 Methods of meter calibration and factors affecting equilibration are described in Section 8.1.1 This guide focuses on obtaining the comparative moisture condition within the upper 1.0 in. (25.4 mm) stratum in concrete, gypsum, anhydrite floor slabs and screeds for field tests. Due to the wide variation of material mixtures and additives used in floor slabs and screeds, this methodology may not be appropriate for all applications. See 1.2 through 1.8 and Section 11. Where appropriate or when specified, use further testing as outlined in Test Methods F1869 or F2170 before installing a resilient floor covering.1.2 This guide is intended for use to determine if there are moisture-related conditions existing on, or in, the floor slabs that could adversely impact the successful application and performance of resilient flooring products.1.3 This guide may be used to aid in the diagnosis of failures of installed resilient flooring.1.4 This guide is intended to be used in conjunction with meter manufacturer’s operation instructions and interpretive data where available.1.5 Where possible or when results need to be quantified, use this guide to determine where additional testing such as Test Methods F1869 or F2170 as specified to characterize the floor slab and the test area environment for moisture, humidity and temperature conditions.1.6 This guide may not be suitable for areas that have surface applied moisture migration systems, curing compounds or coatings that cannot be removed or cleaned off sufficiently to allow the moisture to move upwards through the slab. For a floor slab of 6 in. (150 mm) plus thickness, low porosity slabs, slabs with no vapor retarder installed, and slabs where the above surface environmental conditions can have a greater than normal influence on the moisture reduction gradient of the floor slab or screed, consider Test Method F2170 (below surface in situ rh method) as a more suitable test method under these circumstances.1.7 This guide is not intended to provide quantitative results as a basis for acceptance of a floor for installation of moisture sensitive flooring finishes systems. Test Methods F1869 or F2170 provide quantitative information for determining if moisture levels are within specific limits. Results from this guide do not provide vital information when evaluating thick slabs, slabs without effective vapor retarders directly under the slab, lightweight aggregate concrete floors, and slabs with curing compound or sealers on the surface.1.8 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.1.9 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 warnings are given in Section 7.1.10 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 overall objective of this practice is to provide recommendations for the systematic acquisition of image data that indicate the health condition of the wear-sensitive SPW in PBF-LB/M machines. These data may allow a user to determine calibration and maintenance cycles based on the actual health condition of the SPW.4.2 The recommendations are intended for original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) of PBF-LB/M machines to provide guidance for the implementation of sensor systems to acquire spatially resolved data about the health condition of the SPW.4.3 The recommendations are intended for users of PBF-LB/M machines to provide guidance for the assessment of the actual health condition of the SPW to:4.3.1 Flag when a calibration or maintenance of the optical system is needed and alert the user or OEM to perform the calibration or maintenance and4.3.2 Generate statistical estimates for the useful life, or critical health state, of the SPW based on data recorded over the long term. The statistics may be used to derive maintenance cycles that allow a better utilization of the useful life of the SPW than current predetermined maintenance cycles.1.1 This practice provides:1.1.1 Recommendations for the design and integration of an area scan camera system (referred to as “camera system”) into a laser powder bed fusion (PBF-LB/M) machine to assess the health condition of the scanner protective window (SPW),1.1.2 Recommendations for data acquisition with the aforementioned system,1.1.3 Description of a methodology for processing the aforementioned data, and1.1.4 Recommendation on ex-situ measurements of laser beam parameters and part properties suitable for labeling of the processed condition data.1.2 Many of the operational descriptions included in this practice are intended as general overviews. They may not present the detailed information required.1.3 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.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： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车

5.1 This test method provides a simple field-based technique for condition monitoring of soot in in-service lubricants associated with combustion engines, machinery, and equipment used in industry and by the military. Critical applications should use laboratory-based test methods, such as Thermal Gravimetric Analysis (TGA) described in Test Method D5967, Annex A4. Infrared spectroscopy is a well-established laboratory method for evaluating soot levels in lubricants. This test method can be used to monitor soot build-up in lubricants and can indicate whether soot has accumulated to an extent that could significantly degrade the performance of the oil. High soot content can compromise lubricant performance and cause filter and oil passage blockage. Soot concentration should be considered in conjunction with data from other condition monitoring tests as described in Practice E2412 to determine whether the oil should be replaced to minimize machinery wear or failure, or both.1.1 This test method pertains to field-based monitoring of soot in diesel crankcase engine oils as well as in other types of engine oils where soot may contaminate the lubricant as a result of a blow-by due to incomplete combustion of fuels. It is applicable to oils having soot levels of up to 12 % by mass.1.2 This test method uses filter-based infrared technology for monitoring of soot build-up in in-service petroleum and hydrocarbon-based lubricants as a result of normal machinery operation. Soot levels in engine oils rise as soot particles contaminate the oil as a result of exhaust gas recirculation from blow-by. This test method is designed as a fast, simple, and field-capable spectroscopic check for soot in in-service hydrocarbon-based lubricants with the objective of helping diagnose the operational condition of the machine based on measuring the level of soot in the oil.1.3 This test method is intended as a field test only, and should be treated as such. Critical applications should use laboratory based methods, such as Thermal Gravimetric Analysis (TGA) described in Test Method D5967, Annex A4.1.4 Acquisition of spectral data for measuring soot in in-service oil and lubricant samples with the use of a fixed-filter IR instrument is described in this test method. Calibration against prepared soot standards is also described.NOTE 1: It is not the intent of this test method to establish or recommend normal, cautionary, warning, or alert limits for any machinery. Such limits should be established in conjunction with advice and guidance from the machinery manufacturer and maintenance group.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： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

5.1 This test method produces a measure of retroreflective efficiency (coefficient of retroreflected luminance, RL-2) for a pavement marking system under conditions of continuous wetting. The test result depends on factors such as the pavement marking binder and optic materials, their application, wear from traffic and plowing, wetting rate, and road grade and cross slope.5.2 The measured retroreflective efficiency under conditions of continuous wetting may be used to characterize the properties of a pavement marking on the road as water is continuously falling on it. The retroreflective efficiency of the marking under conditions of continuous wetting is almost always different than under dry conditions.5.3 The wetting rate of 2 in./h represents the upper limit of what is meteorologically classified as heavy rainfall. Rainfall rates above 2 in./h are classified as extreme or violent, and are sometimes associated with weather such as tropical storms.5.4 The retroreflectivity of pavement markings degrades with traffic wear and requires periodic measurement to ensure that the coefficient of retroreflected luminance under continuous wetting meets requirements and provides adequate visibility for nighttime drivers.5.5 The continuous wetting rate as well as the roadway grade and cross slope impact the results of this test method. The user shall measure and report the rate used for testing.5.6 The roadway grade and cross slope adjacent to the measurement area impact the results of this test method. A digital level (inclinometer) can be used to quickly measure grade and cross slope.5.7 Results obtained using this test method should not be the sole basis for specifying and assessing the wet retroreflective effectiveness of pavement marking systems. Users should complement the results of this test method with other evaluation results, such as nighttime visual inspections.1.1 This test method covers a measurement of the wet retroreflective (RL-2) properties of horizontal pavement marking materials, such as traffic stripes and road surface symbols. A standardized method utilizing a standardized continuous wetting device and a portable retroreflectometer is described to obtain measurements of the wet retroreflective properties of horizontal pavement markings.1.2 Retroreflective performance obtained with this test in a standardized condition of continuous wetting does not necessarily relate to how markings perform in all conditions of natural rain.NOTE 1: Test Method E2177 may be used to describe the retroreflective properties of pavement markings in conditions of wetness, such as after a period of rain.1.3 This test method is suitable for measurements made in the laboratory and in the field when the necessary controls and precautions are followed.1.4 This test method specifies the use of external beam retroreflectometers conforming to Test Method E1710.2 The entrance and observation angles required of the retroreflectometer in this test method are commonly referred to as “30 meter geometry.”21.5 The test method excludes the effects of rain between the vehicle and the marking.1.6 Results obtained using this test method should not be the sole basis for specifying and assessing the wet retroreflective effectiveness of pavement marking systems. Users should complement the results of this test method with other evaluation results, such as nighttime visual inspections.1.7 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. 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

This specification establishes testing requirements for the structural performance properties of Condition 0 bicycle frames. Condition 0 is a vehicle usage classification defined in Classification F2043 indicating the type of riding and surface condition intended by design. Included are specifications for establishing loads and other criteria to be used with the matching test method. The bicycle frame shall be tested in accordance with Test Methods F2711, the Horizontal Loading Fatigue test, Vertical Loading Fatigue test, and the Impact Strength test.1.1 This specification establishes testing requirements for the structural performance properties of Condition 0 bicycle frames.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 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

5.1 An increase in soot material can lead to increased wear, filter plugging and viscosity. Monitoring of soot is therefore an important parameter in determining overall machinery health and should be considered in conjunction with data from other tests such as atomic emission (AE) and atomic absorption (AA) spectroscopy for wear metal analysis (Test Method D5185), physical property tests (Test Methods D445 and D2896), and other FT-IR oil analysis methods for oxidation (Test Method D7414), sulfate by-products (Test Method D7415), nitration (Test Method D7624), and additive depletion (Test Method D7412), which also assess elements of the oil’s condition (1-6).1.1 This test method pertains to field-based monitoring soot in diesel crankcase engine oils as well as in other types of engine oils where soot may contaminate the lubricant as a result of a blow-by due to incomplete combustion of in-service fuels.1.2 This test method uses FT-IR spectroscopy for monitoring of soot build-up in in-service lubricants as a result of normal machinery operation. Soot levels in engine oils rise as soot particles contaminate the oil as a result of exhaust gas recirculation or a blow-by. This test method is designed as a fast, simple spectroscopic check for monitoring of soot in in-service lubricants with the objective of helping diagnose the operational condition of the machine based on measuring the level of soot in the oil.1.3 Acquisition of FT-IR spectral data for measuring soot in in-service oil and lubricant samples is described in Standard Practice D7418. In this test method, measurement and data interpretation parameters for soot using both direct trend analysis and differential (spectral subtraction) trend analysis are presented.1.4 This test method is based on trending of spectral changes associated with soot in in-service lubricants. For direct trend analysis, values are recorded directly from absorbance spectra and reported in units of 100*absorbance per 0.1 mm pathlength. For differential trend analysis, values are recorded from the differential spectra (spectrum obtained by subtraction of the spectrum of the reference oil from that of the in-service oil) and reported in units of 100*absorbance per 0.1 mm pathlength (or equivalently absorbance units per centimeter). Warnings or alarm limits can be set on the basis of a fixed maximum value for a single measurement or, alternatively, can be based on a rate of change of the response measured (1).2 In either case, such maintenance action limits should be determined through statistical analysis, history of the same or similar equipment, round robin tests or other methods in conjunction with the correlation of soot levels to equipment performance.1.4.1 Interpretation of soot values reported as a percentage is more widely understood within the industry. As an alternate reporting option, an equation to convert the soot absorbance value generated from Procedure A (direct trend) analysis to percent is provided. This equation is based on the Beer-Lambert law which states that concentration is directly proportional to absorbance.NOTE 1: It is not the intent of this test method to establish or recommend normal, cautionary, warning, or alert limits for any machinery. Such limits should be established in conjunction with advice and guidance from the machinery manufacturer and maintenance group.1.5 This test method is primarily for petroleum/hydrocarbon based lubricants but is also applicable for ester based oils, including polyol esters or phosphate esters.1.6 This method is intended as a field test only, and should be treated as such. Critical applications should use laboratory based methods, such as Thermal Gravimetric (TGA) analysis described in Standard Method D5967, Annex A4.1.7 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 PCI is a numerical indicator that rates the surface condition of the pavement. The PCI provides a measure of the present condition of the pavement based on the distress observed on the surface of the pavement, which also indicates the structural integrity and surface operational condition (localized roughness and safety). The PCI does not measure structural capacity nor does it provide direct measurement of skid resistance or roughness. It provides an objective and rational basis for determining maintenance and repair needs and priorities. Regular monitoring of the PCI is used to establish the rate of pavement deterioration, which permits early identification of major rehabilitation needs. The PCI can also provide feedback on pavement performance for validation or improvement of current pavement design and maintenance procedures.4.2 The PCI procedure for interlocking concrete pavements was developed by surveying many sample units. Additional verification of the accuracy and repeatability of the PCI procedure for interlocking concrete pavements remains to be performed.1.1 This practice is used to assess the condition of roads and parking lots surfaced with interlocking concrete pavement through visual surveys using the Pavement Condition Index (PCI) method of quantifying pavement condition.1.2 The PCI for roads and parking lots was developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (1, 2).2 It is further verified and adopted by DOD and APWA. This standard is an adaptation of the PCI method for interlocking concrete pavements.1.3 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered 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： 843元 / 折扣价： 717 元 加购物车

4.1 Uses—This practice is intended for use by federal agencies, and environmental professionals in order to facilitate ECP efforts. It is also intended for use by preparers and reviewers of environmental condition of property maps and ECP reports used to support CERFA uncontaminated property identifications and property suitable for transfer by lease or by deed. GSA regulations addressing the disposal of federal property (41 CFR §105-72), require the landholding agency to assert either that (a) there is no evidence of hazardous substance activity, or (b) there is evidence of hazardous substance activity that occurred on the property. If there is evidence that hazardous substance activity occurred on the property, the landholding agency has a “due diligence” obligation to provide detailed, accurate information on all “reportable quantities” of hazardous substances stored, released, or disposed of on property that it reports to GSA for disposal. The specific substances that must be reported under CERCLA and their reporting limits are described in 40 CFR §302.4 and 40 CFR §373. If the landholding agency discloses that hazardous substance activity took place on the property, then the landholding agency must assert whether or not all required remedial action necessary to protect human health and the environment has been taken with respect to those hazardous substances.4.1.1 The ECP reports prepared in accordance with this practice may be used to achieve compliance with the federal Management Regulations, Real Property Disposal rules codified in 41 CFR §102-75.4.2 Clarifications on Use: 4.2.1 Use Not Limited to CERCLA—This practice is designed to assist the user in developing information about the environmental condition of a property and as such has utility for a wide range of persons, including those who may have no actual or potential CERCLA liability (see 40 CFR §373, 41 CFR §102-75 and Section 208 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, Public Law 94-579).4.2.2 Residential Tenants/Purchasers and Others—No implication is intended that it is currently customary practice for residential tenants of multifamily residential buildings, tenants of single-family homes or other residential real estate, or purchasers of dwellings for one's own residential use, to conduct an ECP in connection with these transactions. Thus, these transactions are not included in the term commercial real estate transactions. Thus, although such property may be included within the scope of an ECP, their occupants shall not be treated as key site personnel with regard to the housing occupied for the purpose of conducting an ECP.4.2.3 Site-Specific—This practice is site-specific in that it relates to assessment of environmental conditions of federal real property. Consequently, this practice does not address many additional issues raised in transactions such as purchases of business entities; or interests therein, or of their assets, that may well involve environmental liabilities pertaining to properties previously owned or operated or other off-site environmental liabilities.4.3 Related Practices—See Practices E1527 and E2247.4.4 Principles—The following principles are an integral part of this practice and all related practices and are intended to be referred to in resolving any ambiguity or exercising such discretion as is accorded the user or environmental professional in performing an ECP or in judging whether a user or environmental professional has conducted appropriate inquiry or has otherwise conducted an adequate ECP.4.4.1 Uncertainty Not Eliminated—No ECP can wholly eliminate uncertainty regarding the potential for recognized environmental conditions in connection with a property. Performance of this practice is intended to reduce uncertainty regarding the potential for recognized environmental conditions in connection with a property to the minimum practicable level, but not eliminate such uncertainty altogether, as well as to recognize reasonable limits of time and cost for property information.4.4.2 Level of Inquiry is Variable—Not every federal property will warrant the same level of ECP effort. Consistent with good practice, the appropriate level of ECP will be guided by the type of property subject to ECP and the information developed in its conduct.4.4.3 Comparison with Subsequent Inquiry—It should not be concluded or assumed that an inquiry was not an appropriate inquiry merely because the inquiry did not identify recognized environmental conditions in connection with a property. The ECPs must be evaluated based on the reasonableness of judgments made at the time and under the circumstances in which they were made. Subsequent ECPs should not be considered valid standards to judge the appropriateness of any prior ECP based on hindsight, new information, use of developing technology or analytical techniques, or other factors.4.5 Continued Viability of Environmental Baseline Survey—An ECP meeting or exceeding this practice and completed less than 180 days prior to the date of a subsequent use is presumed to be valid for that use. An ECP not meeting or exceeding this practice or completed more than 180 days previously may be used to the extent allowed by 4.6 – 4.6.5.4.6 Prior ECP Usage—This practice recognizes that ECPs performed in accordance with this practice or otherwise containing information which was reasonably accurate at the time prepared will include information that subsequent users may want to use to avoid undertaking duplicative ECP procedures. Therefore, this practice describes procedures to be followed to assist users in determining the appropriateness of using information in ECPs performed previously. The system of prior ECP usage is based on the following principles that should be adhered to in addition to the specific procedures set forth elsewhere in this practice:4.6.1 Use of Prior Information—Subject to 4.6.4, users and environmental professionals may use information in prior ECPs provided such information was generated as a result of procedures that meet or exceed the requirements of this practice or accurately state the limitations of the information presented. When using information from an ECP which, as a whole, fails to meet or exceed the requirements of this practice, the use shall be limited to those portions of the ECP which, based upon the limitations and methodology of the ECP report, the environmental professional finds to be reasonably accurate.NOTE 3: Earlier versions of this practice required the review and analysis of a significantly smaller set of records.4.6.2 Prior ECP Meets or Exceeds—Subject to 4.6.4, a prior ECP may be used in its entirety, without regard to the specific procedures set forth in these practices if, in the reasonable judgment of the user, the prior ECP meets or exceeds the requirements of this practice and the conditions at the property likely to affect environmental condition of property area types in connection with the property are not likely to have changed materially since the prior ECP was conducted. In making this judgment, the user should consider the type of property subject to the ECP and the conditions in the area surrounding the property.4.6.3 Current Investigation—Except as specifically provided in 4.6.2, prior ECPs should not be used without current investigation of conditions likely to affect the environmental condition of property in connection with the property that may have changed materially since the prior ECP was conducted. For an ECP to be consistent with this practice, a new visual inspection, interviews, an update of the records review, and other appropriate activities may have to be performed.4.6.4 Actual Knowledge Exception—If the user or environmental professional(s) conducting an ECP has actual knowledge that the information being used from a prior ECP is not accurate or if it is obvious, based on other information obtained by means of the ECP or known to the person conducting the ECP, that the information being used is not accurate, such information from a prior ECP may not be used.4.6.5 Contractual Issues Regarding Prior ECP Usage—The contractual and legal obligations between prior and subsequent users of ECPs or between environmental professionals who conducted prior ECPs and those who would like to use such prior ECPs are beyond the scope of this practice.1.1 Purpose—The purpose of this practice is to define good commercial and customary practice in the United States for assessing the environmental condition of property (ECP) of federal real property. This practice applies to property under consideration for lease, excess and surplus property at closing and realigning military installations, claims reverting to federal ownership such as abandoned mines, and other federally-owned property. The steps in this practice are conducted to fulfill certain requirements of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) section 120(h), as amended by the Community Environmental Response Facilitation Act of 1992 (CERFA) and the federal real property disposal regulations codified in 41 CFR Subpart C (41 CFR 102-75). As such, this practice is intended to help a user to gather and analyze data and information in order to classify property into the applicable environmental condition of property area types (in accordance with the ASTM D5746, Standard Classification of Environmental Condition of Property Area Types, (see Appendix X1). Once documented, the ECP report is used to support Findings of Suitability to Transfer (FOSTs), Findings of Suitability to Lease (FOSLs), or uncontaminated property determinations, or a combination thereof, pursuant to the requirements of CERFA and CERCLA § 120(h). Users of this practice should note that it does not address (except where explicitly noted) requirements for appropriate and timely regulatory consultation or concurrence, or both, during the conduct of the ECP or during the identification and use of the standard environmental condition of property area types.1.1.1 Environmental Condition of Property—In accordance with the federal landholding agency policies and General Services Administration’s (GSA) federal real property management regulations, an ECP will be prepared or evaluated for its usefulness (and updated if necessary) for any federally-owned property to be transferred by deed or leased. The ECP will be based on existing environmental information related to storage, release, treatment, or disposal of hazardous substances, munitions, or petroleum products on the property to determine or discover the obviousness of the presence or likely presence of a release or threatened release of any hazardous substance or petroleum product. In certain cases, additional data, including sampling, if appropriate under the circumstances, may be needed in the ECP to support the FOST or FOSL. A previously conducted ECP may be updated as necessary and used for making a FOST or FOSL. An ECP also may help to satisfy other environmental requirements (for example, to satisfy the requirements of CERFA or to facilitate the preparation of environmental condition reports). In addition, the ECP provides a useful reference document and assists in compliance with hazard abatement policies related to asbestos and lead-based paint. The ECP process consists of discrete steps. This practice principally addresses ECP-related information gathering and analysis.1.1.1.1 Discussion—Prior versions of this practice referred to environmental baseline surveys (EBS). The 2018 Department of Defense 4165.66M Base Redevelopment and Realignment Manual changed the focus to ECP. Appendix 3 of DODM 4165.66M provides direction on the preparation of FOST and FOSL documentation. Section C2.4.2.3 of DODM 4165.66M provides direction for Department of Defense property proposed for disposal and redevelopment.1.1.2 CERCLA Section 120(h) Requirements—This practice is intended to assist with the identification of federal real property and DoD installation areas subject to the notification and covenant requirements of CERCLA § 120(h) relating to the deed transfer of contaminated federal real property (42 USC 9601 et seq.), (see Appendix X2). Examples of other federal landholding agencies that must comply with CERCLA §120(h) requirements include the Bureau of Land Management, the Federal Aviation Administration, and U.S. Forest Service.1.1.3 CERFA Requirements—This practice provides information to partially fulfill the identification requirements of CERFA [Pub. L. 102-426, 106 Stat. 2174], which amended CERCLA. Property classified as area Type 1, in accordance with Classification D5746 is eligible for reporting as “uncontaminated” under the provisions of CERFA and the Federal Management Regulations, Real Property Disposal rules codified in 41 CFR 102-75. Additionally, certain property classified as area Type 2, where evidence indicates that storage occurred for less than one year, may also be identified as uncontaminated. At installations and federal property listed on the National Priorities List, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) concurrence must be obtained for the property to be considered “uncontaminated” and therefore transferable under CERCLA § 120(h)(4). The EPA has stated that there may be instances in which it would be appropriate to concur with the federal landholding agency that certain property can be identified as uncontaminated under CERCLA § 120(h)(4) although some limited quantity of hazardous substances or petroleum products have been stored, released, or disposed of on the property (see EPA Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, May 2019). If the information available indicates that the storage, release, or disposal was associated with activities that would not be expected to pose a threat to human health or the environment (for example, housing areas, petroleum-stained pavement areas, and areas having undergone routine application of pesticides), such property should be eligible for expeditious reuse.NOTE 1: Confirmed releases of emerging chemicals of environmental concern may require additional consideration (see Office of the Undersecretary of Defense. Policy Memorandum for Clarifications and Upcoming Changes to Department of Defense Instruction 4715.18 in Response to Department of Defense Office of Inspector General Findings, April 2022).1.1.4 Petroleum Products—Petroleum products and their derivatives are included within the scope of this practice. Areas on which petroleum products or their derivatives were stored for one year or more, known to have been released or disposed of [CERCLA§ 120(h)(4)] are not eligible to be reported as “uncontaminated property” under CERFA.1.1.5 Other Federal, State, and Local Environmental Laws—This practice does not address requirements of any federal, state, or local laws other than the applicable provisions of CERCLA identified in 1.1.2 and 1.1.3. These applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements (ARARs) may have a bearing upon the ultimate disposition of the federal property. Users are cautioned that federal, state, and local laws may impose additional ECP or other environmental assessment obligations that are beyond the scope of this practice. Users should also be aware that there are likely to be other legal obligations with regard to hazardous substances or petroleum products discovered on property that are not addressed in this practice and that may pose risks of civil or criminal sanctions, or both, for noncompliance.1.1.6 Other Federal, State, and Local Real Property and Natural and Cultural Resources Laws—This practice does not address requirements of any federal, state or local real property or natural and cultural resources laws. Users are cautioned that numerous federal, state, and local laws may impose additional environmental and other legal requirements that must be satisfied prior to deed transfer of property that are beyond the scope of this practice.NOTE 2: The General Services Administration’s Excess Real Property Due Diligence Checklist for Federal Landholding Agency Customers, November 2017, provides additional detail on federal ARARs.1.1.7 Non-Federal Property—This standard may also be used by state and local agencies to assess the environmental condition of non-federal property.1.2 Objectives—Objectives guiding the development of this practice are (1) to synthesize and put in writing a standard practice for conducting a high quality ECP, (2) to facilitate the development of high quality, standardized environmental condition of property maps to be included in an ECP that can be used to support FOSTs, FOSLs, and other applicable environmental condition reports, (3) to facilitate the use of the standard classification of environmental condition of property area types (see Classification D5746), (4) to facilitate the development of a standard guide for preparing and updating ECP reports, and (5) comply with the Federal Real Property Disposal regulations codified in 41 CFR 102-75.1.3 Limitations—Users of this practice should note that, while many of the elements of an ECP are performed in a manner consistent with other “due diligence” functions, an ECP is not prepared to satisfy a purchaser of real property’s duty to conduct “all appropriate inquiries”, as defined in 40 CFR 312, to establish an “innocent landowner defense” to CERCLA § 107 liability. Any such use of any ECP by any party is outside the control of the federal agencies and beyond the scope of any ECP. No warranties or representations are made by any federal agency, its employees, or contractors that any ECP report satisfies any such requirement for any party.1.4 Organization of This Practice—This practice has 15 sections. Section 1 is the scope. Section 2 identifies referenced documents. Section 3, Terminology, includes definitions of terms not unique to this practice, descriptions of terms unique to this practice, and acronyms and abbreviations. Section 4 is the significance and use of this practice. Section 5 describes user's responsibilities. Sections 6 – 13 are the main body of the data gathering analysis steps of the ECP process. Section 14 briefly describes the ECP Step 3 classification of environmental condition of property area types. Section 15 contains a list of keywords. The seven appendices are non-binding and non-mandatory; they provide background, guidance, and examples.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： 918元 / 折扣价： 781 元 加购物车