定价： 646元 加购物车

4.1 This classification identifies and hierarchically arranges the work elements, activities, and tasks required for environmental projects. This classification increases the level of communication and allows for more effective exchange of cost and performance data between environmental projects.4.2 This classification defines environmental work elements as major components of environmental projects. It is the common thread linking activities and participants in an environmental project from initial planning through operations and maintenance, D&D, and SLTM.4.3 The users of ECES include program and project managers, cost estimators, and cost analysts in both the public and private sector.4.4 This classification uses an increased level of standardization, uniformity, and consistency that provides a common basis for comparing, analyzing, and calibrating cost data. This classification can also be used as a checklist of project activities to be completed.4.5 Use this classification when:4.5.1 Developing a company-specific Code of Accounts (COAs) for capturing and reporting cost early in the project development for more effective project controls and management. COA is a logical breakdown of a project into controllable elements for the purpose of cost collection, control, and reporting. COA is organized at lower detailed levels that summarize to higher levels and is company or site, or both, and project-specific.4.5.2 Developing a work breakdown structure (WBS) early in the project development for proper management of the project. The WBS provides a framework for managing the cost, schedule, and performance objectives of a project. This framework allows the project to be separated into logical components and makes the relationship of the components clear. The WBS defines the project in terms of hierarchically related action and product-oriented elements. Each element provides logical summary points for assessing technical accomplishments and for measuring cost and schedule performance.4.5.3 Supporting programs and project functions. Use ECES for bid solicitation, collection, and evaluation; communicating project data between installations or agencies and industry; cost and schedule estimating; historical cost and schedule data collection; historical project data collection for technology deployments and project conditions; validating and calibrating cost estimates and software tools; and establishing and disseminating best practices and lessons learned.4.6 The hierarchical nature of the classification allows for collecting data using more detailed lower level elements or for summarizing data at higher levels.4.7 ECES, as described in this classification, is being included in the Remedial Action Cost Estimating Requirement (RACER)6 system and the Environmental Cost Analysis System (ECAS).7 RACER is used for estimating cost and ECAS is used to collect, maintain, and analyze the cost of completed projects. Federal agencies performing environmental work intend to incorporate the ECES.1.1 This standard establishes a classification of the comprehensive hierarchical list of elements for life-cycle environmental work. The classification is based on the Interagency Environmental Cost Element Structure (ECES).2 Elements, as defined here, are major components common to environmental projects.3 The elements represent the life-cycle activities for environmental projects regardless of the project design specification, construction method, technology type, or materials used. The classification serves as a consistent reference for cost estimating, analysis, and monitoring during the various phases of the project life cycle. Using ECES ensures consistency, over time and from project to project, in the cost management and performance measurement of environmental projects. It also enhances reporting at all phases of a project, from assessment and studies through design, construction, operations and maintenance (O&M), and surveillance and long-term monitoring (SLTM).1.2 This classification applies to all environmental work, including environmental restoration, waste management, decontamination and decommissioning (D&D), surveillance and long-term monitoring, and technology development.1.3 The use of this classification increases the level of standardization, uniformity, and consistency of collected environmental project costs. Such uniformity and standardization allows for ease of understanding project costs, provides a common “cost language” for sharing and comparing cost information, and allows for easier analysis and calibration of cost data. This standard classification can be used as a checklist of activities to be completed in environmental projects.1.4 Guide E2637 is intended to facilitate the application of the ECES to any environmental remediation project, without regard to project size.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 加购物车

定价： 712元 加购物车

定价： 712元 加购物车

定价： 712元 加购物车

4.1 Use—This guide is intended for use on a voluntary basis for evaluating data for long term storage as they relate to environmental matters. The user may elect to apply this guide for any or all of these purposes:4.1.1 Determining an entity’s document retention policies;4.1.2 Designing and implementing a system for cataloging the documents stored under this guide;4.1.3 Documenting whether a property is subject to regulatory action;4.1.4 Supporting evaluation of whether similar environmental risks (for example, permits, plant, or process expansion) are being recognized at similar points in their lifecycle per Guide E3123;4.1.5 Supporting evaluation of whether similar environmental risks and liabilities are being managed to similar outcomes per Guide E3123;4.1.6 Supporting the determination of liability values per Guide E2137;4.1.7 Supporting due diligence analysis for proposed mergers, acquisitions, or spinoffs;4.1.8 Documenting key decisions on environmental liability provisions, reserves, budgets, and cash flow forecasts, including recognition benchmarks and obligating events (see Guide E3123);4.1.9 Providing documentation to support the identification and analysis of liabilities associated with:4.1.9.1 Certain remedial alternatives;4.1.9.2 Future land uses, property transfer, and redevelopment decisions;4.1.9.3 Land use alternatives for former landfills and chemically impacted sites; and4.1.9.4 Meeting regulatory requirements;4.1.10 Designing and implementing project and program controls;4.1.11 Defending against third-party lawsuits;4.1.12 Calculating insurance premiums;4.1.13 Making and settling insurance claims;4.1.14 Making purchase accounting adjustments;4.1.15 Preparing an audit defense; and4.1.16 Completing financial and investment analysis.4.2 Needs Regarding Document Formats—Preserve data across time, eliminate duplicate file collection, and maintain data and files in contemporary formats to avoid stranded/obsolete data.4.2.1 General Practice—Maintain documents in original format; every ten years, migrate files to a current version of the most popular application in the following categories:4.2.1.1 Spreadsheets;4.2.1.2 Databases;4.2.1.3 Text documents (such as pdf and word-processing files);4.2.1.4 Still images (such as JPEG and GIF);4.2.1.5 Video images;4.2.1.6 GIS files;4.2.1.7 E-mail; and4.2.1.8 In the case of paper and facsimile documents, photographs, photographic negatives, and motion picture film, digitization should be completed on the best available copy within ten years of creation (or as soon as possible).1.1 This guide describes good commercial and customary practice in documenting environmental risks, project, and program knowledge.1.2 Considering that management of environmental liabilities can span very long timeframes, users of this guide understand that preserving key findings, decisions, obligations, commitments, and guarantees for coming generations of project teams is essential to efficient management of associated assets and liabilities.1.3 Units—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 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 加购物车

定价： 1011元 加购物车

4.1 Significance—This guide provides additional guidance to preparers of environmental disclosures; these materials are needed to address changing audience needs, the increased regulatory and accounting complexity around environmental matters, and the emergence of a variety of long-term trends and factors, including but not limited to:4.1.1 Number and scope of domestic, and foreign environmental laws and their implementing regulations;4.1.2 Number and scope of treaties, as well as the implementing laws and regulations; parties in these treaties include multilateral organizations and indigenous peoples;4.1.3 Judicial decisions clarifying the impact of laws, regulations, and treaties;4.1.4 Costs of compliance with environmental regulations;4.1.5 Number of known chemical compounds (see Chemical Abstracts Service REGISTRYSM, which contains over 193 million unique organic and inorganic substances);4.1.6 Cost and accuracy of soil, sediment, air, soil vapor, surface water and groundwater testing equipment and procedures;4.1.7 Knowledge about benefits and effects of chemical compounds on human health, ecological receptors, and the environment;4.1.8 Number and efficacy of remedial technologies;4.1.9 Experience with assessing and remediating environmental conditions;4.1.10 Assumptions regarding impacts of environmental conditions, through modeling and other forecasting tools;4.1.11 Number of environmental, social and governance (ESG) metrics and their pace of adoption;4.1.12 Frequency and financial impact of counterparty failure; and4.1.13 Development of comparable accounting standards by other authorities; and4.1.14 Investor interest in the impact of these trends and factors on their investments.4.2 Uses—This guide is intended for use on a voluntary basis by a reporting entity that provides financial and qualitative disclosure regarding environmental liabilities. Disclosure is integrated with preceding elements of financial statements, namely recognition, measurement, and presentation of environmental liabilities, as noted in Fig. 1. (Full explanation of this framework can be found in FASB Concepts Statement 8, September 2010.) With the long-term trends and factors in 4.1, the issuers of environmental disclosures have found it useful to regularly report material environmental topics to the public through filings to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Form 10-K or 20-F.NOTE 1: Many of these trends and factors, as well as the changes to GAAP, have occurred gradually. For example, users of this guide will likely be aware that chemicals that were not regulated or considered contamination yesterday may be deemed so tomorrow.4.2.1 Typical environmental disclosures to the public include, but are not limited to:FIG. 1 FASB Conceptual Framework4.2.1.1 Book value of current environmental liabilities, such as asset retirement obligations, pollution remediation obligations, and natural resource damage claims;4.2.1.2 Book value of product liability costs (for example, recalls) and other litigation related to human health and the environment;4.2.1.3 Counts of projects or legal matters, especially over time, which provide a metric to track if the rate of liability settlements align with or vary from the rate of incoming liabilities;4.2.1.4 Indirect costs such as project and legal services to oversee liabilities, and guarantees on the long-term performance of counterparties;4.2.1.5 Costs and income associated with contracts and commitments, such as purchase and sale agreements, insurance contracts, and merger transactions;4.2.1.6 Voluntary costs to comply with environmental laws, regulations and treaties;4.2.1.7 Contingencies and non-financial metrics related to the above items; and4.2.1.8 Note to financial statements confirming that a booked environmental liability conforms to the accounting definition of a liability, namely that a loss has been incurred which will result in future spending that is both probable and reasonably estimable. See E3123 for further detail.4.2.2 The degree and type of disclosure depends on the scope and objective of the financial statements. Such statements may not always be audited or prepared for the public domain.4.2.3 For example, users of this guide may need to make non-public disclosures for the benefit of investors, prospective asset purchasers, lenders, regulators, insurers, tax authorities, key customers, and joint venture partners.4.2.4 Users of this guide should be aware that shareholder concerns, contractual obligations, financial assurance requirements, court decisions, and regulatory directives may affect their flexibility in the use of this guide.4.2.5 Some larger entities may publish their environmental, social and governance (ESG) metrics to communicate company policies, progress in meeting emission goals, sustainability of individual products and services, and the impact of subsidies and taxes. The user should note that ESG metrics are not a part of generally-accepted accounting principles. ESG metrics may lack comparability (see Fig. 1 above) from industry to industry, and sometimes company to company. While these ESG metrics constitute a form of environmental disclosure, they are excluded from this Guide. These metrics are published by several organizations, including the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board. See Guide E2718 for further information.4.3 Principles: The following principles are an integral part of this Guide and are intended to be referred to in resolving ambiguities or disputes regarding the interpretation of disclosures regarding environmental liabilities.4.3.1 Faithful representation—to be useful to the decisions of those receiving environmental disclosures, the information provided must be reliable and trusted. Users of this Guide should note the “Enhancing Qualitative Characteristics” in Fig. 1:(a) disclosures should be comparable with similar disclosures from competing or peer entities; the use of non-standard measurements or terminology should be avoided(b) disclosures should be verifiable through cost accounting and auditing specialists(c) disclosures should consist of timely information, reflecting an entity’s quarterly financial reporting to its officers(d) disclosures should be understandable through using the common reporting terminology in GAAP; for example, an entity should not describe asset retirement obligations (ASC 410-20 and GASB 83) with entity-specific project labels.4.3.2 Continuous Improvement—just as environmental liabilities generally accrue across time and with strategic transactions, any entity should disclose gradual improvements in addressing environmental matters as the scope and scale of issues evolve. A newly-formed entity may find no reason to disclose hypothetical losses or describe risks which have not occurred; however, an entity with 100 years of operations may find it essential to disclose an historical review of brands, facilities and waste disposal practices.4.3.3 Transparency—entities will find it useful to supplement financial disclosures with performance metrics, including but not limited to:4.3.3.1 Number of properties awaiting reuse and/or sale because of environmental contamination concerns, including those with AULs (see Guide E2091)4.3.3.2 Number of sites successfully completing regulator-directed remediation; portion of the liability portfolio in either early or final stages of regulator-directed remediation4.3.3.3 Relevance of emerging contaminants to current and historical production4.3.3.4 Relevance of climate adaptation expenses to future operations4.3.3.5 Relevance of pending court cases4.3.3.6 Limitations to reliably calculating current liabilities4.3.3.7 Comprehensive impact of long-term trends of booked liabilities – generally available by combining a decade or more of historical disclosures – to avoid the impression of “remediation theater” where environmental reserves are booked and expended roughly equally without any sense of progress or achievement in addressing contamination.4.3.4 Uncertainty Not Eliminated—Although a reporting entity, as of the time when its financial statements are prepared, may hold a certain position with regard to the existence and extent of its environmental liabilities, there remains uncertainty with regard to the final resolution of factual, technological, regulatory, legislative, and judicial matters, which could affect its valuation of environmental liabilities. Under the constraints of preparation cost and materiality (noted in Fig. 1), users needing reliable information may experience additional limitations, such as unaudited cost projections, draft scientific findings, or the bounds of attorney-client privilege. Users may encounter decisions identified as uncertainties and observe liabilities priced solely through the costs to implement potential remedial strategies; information on cognitive biases in valuing environmental costs and liabilities may be found in Guide E2137.4.3.5 Disclosure Dependent on Circumstances—Not every environmental liability warrants the same level of detail in its disclosure. Disclosure will be guided by the scope and objective of the financial statement, and accordingly, by the materiality of the environmental liability and the level of information available.4.3.6 Comparison with Subsequent Disclosures—Subsequent disclosures that convey different information regarding the extent or magnitude of the reporting entity's exposures should not be construed as indicating the initial disclosures were inappropriate or incorrect. Disclosures shall be evaluated on the reasonableness of judgments and inquiries made at the time and under the circumstances in which they were made. Subsequent disclosures should not be considered valid standards to judge the appropriateness of any prior disclosure based on hindsight, new information, use of developing analytical techniques, or other factors. However, information on trends may be of value to a user of financial statements.4.3.7 Not Exhaustive—Appropriate disclosure does not necessarily mean an exhaustive disclosure; discretion and professional judgment are used by estimators, auditors, and the reporting entity's management in setting limits on the preparation cost, materiality, and volume of information worth disclosing as environmental liabilities.NOTE 2: For each entity, there is a tradeoff between displaying detailed information and identifying reliable and accurate insights that are useful to user decisions.4.3.8 Assessment of Risk—As the reporting entity becomes aware of an environmental liability, the condition or issue should be evaluated to assess the actual or potential risk to human health and environment and resources. The degree of risk is evaluated in context of the current regulatory environment, an understanding of the specifics of the condition or issue, potential future uses, and asset retirement obligations.4.3.9 Improved Capital Stewardship—Disclosure, along with the preceding steps of recognition, measurement, and presentation, provides context for environmental liabilities and may improve the defensible allocation of capital to resolving those liabilities as efficiently as possible. Over time, an entity may find it valuable or even essential to demonstrate leadership in cost efficiency for understanding, controlling, preventing, and reducing environmental liabilities. The need for intermittent internal presentations may transform into the need for regular public disclosures as an entity acquires environmentally impaired assets or other environmental liabilities. An entity may prefer to make the ongoing investment in competent and continuous data collection and interpretation to draw internal managerial attention toward measuring and ensuring progress in discharging the liabilities as efficiently as possible.1.1 Purpose—The purpose of this guide is to provide a series of options or instructions consistent with good commercial and customary practice in the United States for environmental liability disclosures accompanying audited and unaudited financial statements. This guide is consistent with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP)2 issued by Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB), as well as related statements, rules, regulations, and/or procedures issued by Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB), Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB), Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board (FASAB). This guide is intended to be consistent with national and multinational issuers of accounting standards and practices, including International Accounting Standards Board (IASB).1.2 Objectives—The objectives of this guide are to:1.2.1 Identify the common terminology used in environmental disclosures,1.2.2 Explain the need for environmental disclosures,1.2.3 Define the conditions warranting disclosure, and1.2.4 Illustrate the report formats and content typically used in environmental disclosures.1.3 History of development of this guide—In 1993-1994, a group of insurance companies approached ASTM to request a best practice environmental cost estimation and disclosure standard, as they were experiencing high environmental remediation and asbestos claims from policyholders that were reporting no material liabilities in their annual reports. At the same time, asbestos and environmental liabilities were triggering bankruptcy more frequently, again with little prior disclosure by companies other than boilerplate legal language that costs were too uncertain or not estimable, or that such costs would not be material. Research by the ASTM standard working committee at the time found such shortcomings as (a) rarely attempting to identify a full portfolio of potential liabilities, (b) dividing liabilities into separate sites or claims to avoid aggregated material outcomes that would require disclosure, and (c) relying on “known minimum costs” or “no estimate” to forecast liabilities. This disclosure standard (E2173), initially developed over a seven-year period with its first approval in 2001, was created to cure these shortcomings by providing guidance for best practice disclosure, including aggregation of liabilities before conducting a materiality test, as well as disclosure of the major assumptions and evaluations underlying the disclosure. The companion referenced cost estimation standard (E2137, which was split into a separate standard due to its broader applicability beyond disclosure purposes) provided guidance on a hierarchy of cost estimation methodologies that explicitly address uncertainty and recommend alternative methodologies. Both E2137 and E2173 have been revised over time to reference and incorporate applicable elements of new accounting standards and regulations, consider applicable case law, and incorporate new best-practice examples and years of additional experience with cost estimation and disclosure.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： 646元 加购物车

1.1 This specification covers international standards for the environmental system aspects of airworthiness and design for “small” aircraft.1.2 The applicant for a design approval must seek the individual guidance of their respective CAA body concerning the use of this specification as part of a certification plan. For information on which CAA regulatory bodies have accepted this specification (in whole or in part) as a means of compliance to their Small Aircraft Airworthiness regulations (hereinafter referred to as “the Rules”), refer to the ASTM F44 webpage (www.ASTM.org/COMMITTEE/F44.htm), which includes CAA website links. Annex A1 maps the Means of Compliance described in this specification to EASA CS-23, amendment 5, or later, and FAA 14 CFR Part 23, amendment 64, or later.1.3 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system are not necessarily exact equivalents; therefore, to ensure conformance with the standard, each system shall be used independently of the other, and values from the two systems shall not be combined.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 加购物车

定价： 646元 加购物车

定价： 712元 加购物车

4.1 Uses—This practice is intended for use on a voluntary basis by parties who wish to assess the environmental condition of forestland or rural property taking into account commonly known and reasonably ascertainable information. While use of this practice is intended to constitute all appropriate inquiries for purposes of the LLPs, it is not intended that its use be limited to that purpose. This practice is intended primarily as an approach to conducting an inquiry designed to identify recognized environmental conditions in connection with a subject property. No implication is intended that a person shall use this practice in order to be deemed to have conducted inquiry in a commercially prudent or reasonable manner in any particular transaction. Nevertheless, this practice is intended to reflect good commercial and customary practice. (See 1.5.)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 subject property and as such, has utility for a wide range of persons, including those who may have no actual or potential CERCLA liability and/or may not be seeking the LLPs.4.2.2 Residential Occupants/Lessees/Purchasers and Others—No implication is intended that it is currently customary practice for residential occupants/lessees of multifamily residential buildings, occupants/lessees of single-family homes or other residential real estate, or purchasers of dwellings for one's own residential use, to conduct an environmental site assessment in connection with these transactions. Thus, these transactions are not included in the term forestland or rural property transactions, and it is not intended to imply that such persons are obligated to conduct an environmental site assessment in connection with these transactions for purposes of all appropriate inquiries or for any other purpose.4.2.3 Site-specific—This practice is site-specific in that it relates to the assessment of environmental conditions for a subject property comprising forestland or rural 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 Standard Practice—This practice sets forth one procedure for an environmental site assessment known as a “Phase I Environmental Site Assessment for Forestland or Rural Property,” “Phase I Environmental Site Assessment,” a “Phase I ESA,” or simply a “Phase I.” This practice is separate from and is applicable to different types of property than Practice E1527 as further described in 4.3.1. These practices are each intended to meet the standard of all appropriate inquiries necessary to qualify for the LLPs. It is essential to consider that these practices, taken together, provide for two alternative practices of all appropriate inquiries for forestland or rural property.4.3.1 Election to Commence with This Practice—The user may commence inquiry to identify recognized environmental conditions in connection with a subject property by performing this practice when conditions identified in 1.1 are met. A primary consideration in applying this practice instead of E1527 is the nature and extent of the subject property being assessed, as the typical environmental concerns, sources for interviews and records, and the methodology used to perform the site reconnaissance may differ significantly. The subject property need not be contiguous and may contain isolated areas of non-forestland and non-rural property. This practice is intended to provide a more practical approach to assess rural property and forestland properties that are generally uniform in use.4.3.2 Who May Conduct—Whenever a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment is conducted, it must be conducted by an environmental professional, as defined in Appendix X2 (and 40 C.F.R. 312.10(b)), to the extent specified in 7.5.1. Further, at the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment level, no practical standard can be designed to eliminate the role of judgment and the value and need for experience in the party performing the inquiry. The professional judgment of an environmental professional is, consequently, vital to conducting all appropriate inquiries at the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment level.4.4 Additional Services—As set forth in 12.10, additional services may be contracted for between the user and the environmental professional. Such additional services may include BER issues not included within the scope of this practice, examples of which are identified in Section 13 under Non- Considerations.4.5 Principles—The following principles are an integral part of this practice and are intended to be referred to in resolving any ambiguity or exercising such discretion as is accorded the user or environmental professional in conducting an environmental site assessment or in judging whether a user or environmental professional has conducted all appropriate inquiry or has otherwise conducted an adequate environmental site assessment.4.5.1 Uncertainty Not Eliminated—No environmental site assessment can wholly eliminate uncertainty regarding the potential for recognized environmental conditions in connection with a subject property. Performance of this practice is intended to reduce, but not eliminate, uncertainty regarding the potential for recognized environmental conditions in connection with a subject property, and this practice recognizes reasonable limits of time and cost.4.5.2 Not Exhaustive—All appropriate inquiries does not mean an exhaustive assessment of a property. There is a point at which the cost of 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 transactions. One of the purposes of this practice is to identify a balance between the competing goals of limiting the costs and time demands inherent in conducting an environmental site assessment and the reduction of uncertainty about unknown conditions resulting from additional information.4.5.3 Level of Inquiry Is Variable—Not every property will warrant the same level of assessment. Consistent with good commercial or customary standards and practices as defined at 42 U.S.C. § 9601(35)(B), the appropriate level of environmental site assessment will be guided by the type of property subject to assessment, the expertise and risk tolerance of the user, future intended uses of the subject property disclosed to the environmental professional, and the information developed in the course of the inquiry. This practice is no less stringent than Practice E1527; however, the means by which this practice intends to satisfy that level of all appropriate inquiries within reasonable time and cost constraints are different than under Practice E1527. Site reconnaissance of isolated areas of the property that include activities outside the definition of forestland or rural property should be addressed using methodologies such as those provided in E1527. See also section 1.1.1.4.5.4 Comparison with Subsequent Inquiry—It should not be concluded or assumed that an inquiry was not all appropriate inquiries merely because the inquiry did not identify recognized environmental conditions in connection with a subject property. Environmental site assessments must be evaluated based on the reasonableness of judgments made at the time and under the circumstances in which they were made. Subsequent environmental site assessments should not be considered valid standards to judge the appropriateness of any prior assessment based on hindsight, new information, use of developing technology or analytical techniques, or other factors.4.5.5 Point in Time—The environmental site assessment is based upon conditions at the time of completion of the individual environmental site assessment elements (see 7.2).4.6 Continued Viability of Environmental Site Assessment: 4.6.1 Presumed Viability—Subject to 4.8 and the user’s responsibilities set forth in Section 6, an environmental site assessment meeting or exceeding this practice is presumed to be viable when it is completed less than 180 days prior to the date of acquisition of the subject property (or, for transactions not involving an acquisition, the date of the intended transaction). The completion dates of the components presented in 4.6.2(i), (iii), (iv), and (v) for interviews, review of government records, visual inspections, and declaration by environmental professional, shall be identified in the report. Completion of searches for recorded environmental cleanup liens (4.6.2(ii)) is a user responsibility; however, if the user has engaged the environmental professional to conduct these searches, then that date shall also be identified in the report.4.6.2 Updating of Certain Components—Subject to 4.8 and the user’s responsibilities set forth in Section 6, an environmental site assessment meeting or exceeding this practice, and for which the information was collected within one year prior to the date of acquisition of the subject property, may be used provided that the following components of the inquiries were updated within 180 days of the date of purchase or the date of the intended transaction; the 180-day period shall commence from the completion of any of these components, whichever is first:(i) interviews with owners, operators, and occupants;(ii) searches for recorded environmental cleanup liens (a user responsibility, see Section 6);(iii) searches of federal, tribal, state, and local government records;(iv) visual inspections of the subject property and of adjoining properties; and(v) the declaration by the environmental professional responsible for the assessment or update.4.6.3 Compliance with All Appropriate Inquiries—To qualify for one of the threshold criteria for satisfying the LLPs to CERCLA liability, the all appropriate inquiries components listed in 4.6.2 must be conducted or updated within 180 days of and prior to the date of acquisition of the subject property, and all other components of all appropriate inquiries must be conducted within one year prior to the date of acquisition of the subject property. The date of the report generally does not represent the date the individual components of all appropriate inquiries were completed and should not be used when evaluating compliance with the 180-day or 1-year all appropriate inquiries requirements.4.6.4 User’s Responsibilities—If, within the period described above, the environmental site assessment will be used by a user different than the user for whom the environmental site assessment was originally prepared, the subsequent user must also satisfy the user’s responsibilities in Section 6.4.7 Prior Assessment Usage—This practice recognizes that environmental site assessments conducted in accordance with this practice will include information that subsequent users may want to use to avoid undertaking duplicative assessment procedures. Therefore, this practice describes procedures to be followed to assist users in determining the appropriateness of using information in environmental site assessments performed more than one year prior to the date of acquisition of the subject property (or for transactions not involving an acquisition such as a lease or refinance, the date of the intended transaction). The system of prior assessment usage is based on the following principles that should be adhered to in addition to the specific procedures set forth elsewhere in this practice:4.7.1 Use of Prior Information—Subject to the requirements set forth in 4.6, users and environmental professionals may use information in prior environmental site assessments provided such information was generated as a result of procedures that meet or exceed the requirements of this practice. However, such information shall not be used without current investigation of conditions likely to affect recognized environmental conditions in connection with the subject property. Additional tasks may be necessary to document conditions that may have changed materially since the prior environmental site assessment was conducted. Nothing in this practice is intended to convey a right to use or rely upon resources, information, findings, or opinions provided in prior assessments.4.7.2 Contractual Issues Regarding Prior Assessment Usage—The contractual and legal obligations between prior and subsequent users of environmental site assessments or between environmental professionals who conducted prior environmental site assessments and those who would like to use such prior environmental site assessments are beyond the scope of this practice.4.8 Actual Knowledge Exception—If the user or environmental professional conducting an environmental site assessment has actual knowledge that the information being used from a prior environmental site assessment is not accurate or if it is obvious , based on other information obtained by means of the environmental site assessment or known to the person conducting the environmental site assessment, that the information being used is not accurate, such information from a prior environmental site assessment may not be used.4.9 Rules of Engagement—The contractual and legal obligations between an environmental professional and a user (and other parties, if any) are outside the scope of this practice. No specific legal relationship between the environmental professional and the user is necessary for the user to meet the requirements of this practice.4.10 Organization of This Practice—This practice has thirteen sections and six appendices. Section 1 is the . Section 2 is Referenced Documents. Section 3, Terminology, has definitions of terms not unique to this practice, descriptions of terms unique to this practice, and acronyms. Section 4 is of this practice. Section 5 provides discussion regarding activity and use limitations. Section 6 describes User’s Responsibilities. Sections 7 – 12 are the main body of the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, including evaluation and report preparation. Section 13 provides additional information regarding non-scope considerations (see 1.4). The appendices are included for information and are not part of the procedures prescribed in this practice. Appendix X1 explains the liability and defense provisions of CERCLA that will assist the user in understanding the user’s responsibilities under CERCLA; it also contains other important information regarding CERCLA, the Brownfields Amendments, and this practice. Appendix X2 provides the definition of the environmental professional responsible for the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, as required in the “All Appropriate Inquiries” Final Rule (40 C.F.R. Part 312). Appendix X3 provides an optional User Questionnaire to assist the user and the environmental professional in gathering information from the user that may be material to identifying recognized environmental conditions. Appendix X4 offers an additional examination of the recognized environmental condition definition. Appendix X5 provides a suggested table of contents and report format for a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment. Appendix X6 summarizes non-scope considerations that persons may want to assess.1.1 Purpose—The purpose of this practice is to provide an alternative method to ASTM E1527 for good commercial and customary practices in the United States of America for conducting a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment2 of forestland or rural property with respect to the range of contaminants within the scope of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) and petroleum products. As such, this practice is intended to permit a user to satisfy one of the requirements to qualify for the innocent landowner, contiguous property owner, or bona fide prospective purchaser limitations on CERCLA liability (hereinafter, the “landowner liability protections,” or “LLPs”): that is, the practice that constitutes “all appropriate inquiries” into the previous ownership and uses of a property consistent with good commercial and customary standards and practices as defined at 42 U.S.C. §9601(35)(B). (See Appendix X1 for an outline of CERCLA's liability and defense provisions.) Controlled substances are not included within the scope of this standard. Persons conducting an environmental site assessment as part of an EPA Brownfields Assessment and Characterization Grant awarded under CERCLA 42 U.S.C. §9604(k)(2)(B) must include controlled substances as defined in the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. §802) within the scope of the assessment investigations to the extent directed in the terms and conditions of the specific grant or cooperative agreement. Additionally, an evaluation of business environmental risk (BER) associated with a parcel of commercial real estate may necessitate investigation beyond that identified in this practice (see 1.4 and Section 13).1.1.1 Standard Practice Selection—The methodology included in this practice is an effective and practical process for achieving the objectives of a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment of forestland or rural property when some of the methodologies of ASTM E1527 are deemed to be impractical or unnecessary due to the size or nature of the property. This practice is intended to provide a more practical approach to assess rural and forestland properties that are generally uniform in use. A primary consideration in applying this practice instead of E1527 is the nature and extent of the property being assessed, as the typical environmental concerns, sources for interviews and records, and the methodology used to perform the site reconnaissance may differ significantly. The property to be assessed using this standard practice need not be contiguous and may contain isolated areas of non-forestland and non-rural property. Site reconnaissance of isolated areas of the property that include activities outside the definition of forestland or rural property should be addressed using methodologies such as those provided in E1527, which may be conducted and reported in conjunction with this practice, as discussed in 4.5.3.1.1.2 Recognized Environmental Conditions—The goal of the processes established by this practice is to identify recognized environmental conditions. The term recognized environmental condition means (1) the presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at the subject property due to any release to the environment; (2) the likely presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at the subject property due to a release or likely release to the environment; or (3) the presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at the subject property under conditions that pose a material threat of a future release to the environment. A de minimis condition is not a recognized environmental condition.1.1.3 Related Standard Practices—This practice is closely related to Standard Practice E1527. Standard Practice E1527 is an environmental site assessment for commercial real estate (see 4.3).1.1.4 Petroleum Products—Petroleum products are included within the scope of this practice because they are of concern with respect to many parcels of forestland or rural property and current custom and usage is to include an inquiry into the presence of petroleum products when conducting an environmental site assessment of forestland or rural property. Inclusion of petroleum products within the scope of this practice is not based upon the applicability, if any, of CERCLA to petroleum products.1.1.5 CERCLA Requirements Other Than Appropriate Inquiries—This practice does not address whether requirements in addition to all appropriate inquiries have been met in order to qualify for the LLPs (for example, the duties specified in 42 U.S.C. §§9607(b)(3)(a) and (b) and cited in Appendix X1 including the continuing obligation not to impede the integrity and effectiveness of activity and use limitations (AULs), or the duty to take reasonable steps to prevent releases, or the duty to comply with legally required release reporting obligations).1.1.6 Other Federal, State, and Local Environmental Laws—This practice does not address requirements of any state or local laws or of any federal laws other than the All Appropriate Inquiries provisions of the LLPs. Users are cautioned that federal, state, and local laws may impose 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 in, on, or at the subject property that are not addressed in this practice and that may pose risks of civil and/or criminal sanctions for non-compliance.31.1.7 Documentation—The scope of this practice includes research and reporting requirements that support the user's ability to qualify for the LLPs. As such, sufficient documentation of all sources, records, and resources utilized in conducting the inquiry required by this practice must be provided in the written report (refer to 8.1.9 and 12.2).1.2 Objectives—Objectives guiding the development of this practice are (1) to synthesize and put in writing good commercial and customary practices for environmental site assessments for forestland or rural property; (2) to facilitate high quality, standardized environmental site assessments; (3) to provide a practical and reasonable standard practice for all appropriate inquiries; and (4) to clarify an industry standard for all appropriate inquiries in an effort to guide legal interpretation of the LLPs.1.3 Units—The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.1.4 Considerations Beyond —The use of this practice is strictly limited to the scope set forth in this section. Section 13 of this practice identifies, for informational purposes, certain environmental conditions (for example, threatened and endangered species and non-point source considerations) that may exist on a forestland or rural property that are beyond the scope of this practice, but may warrant discussion between the environmental professional and the user about a forestland or rural property transaction. The need to include an investigation of any such conditions in the environmental professional's scope of services should be evaluated based upon, among other factors, the nature of the subject property and the reasons for performing the assessment (for example, a more comprehensive evaluation of business environmental risk), and should be agreed upon between the user and environmental professional as additional services beyond the scope of this practice prior to initiation of the environmental site assessment process.1.5 This practice offers a set of instructions for performing one or more specific operations and should be supplemented by education, experience, and professional judgment. Not all aspects of this practice may be applicable in all circumstances. This ASTM standard practice does not necessarily represent the standard of care by which the adequacy of a given professional service must be judged, nor should this document be applied without consideration of a project's unique aspects. The word “standard” in the title means only that the document has been approved through the ASTM consensus process.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： 918元 加购物车

3.1 Definitions—Terms and related definitions given in Section 4 are intended for use uniformly and consistently in all building and environmental acoustic test standards in which they appear.3.2 Definitions of Terms Specific to Each Standard: 3.2.1 As indicated in Section 4, terms and their definitions are intended to provide a precise understanding and interpretation of the building and environmental acoustic test standards in which they appear.3.2.2 A specific definition of a given term is applicable to the standard or standards in which the term is described and used.3.2.3 Different definitions of the same term are acceptable provided each one is consistent with and is not in conflict with the standard definition for the same term, that is, the general concept the term describes.3.2.4 If a standard under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee E33 specially defines a term, i.e. provides a definition different in any way from what is given in Section 4 of Terminology C634, that standard shall list the term and its description under the subheading, Definitions of Terms Specific to This Standard.3.2.4.1 Discussion—The mandatory language of section 3.2.4 is consistent with the mandatory language from §E2 of Form and Style for ASTM Standards (April 2020) and with the ASTM Committee E33 bylaws in place when this standard was published; it reflects a situation that exists, it does not prescribe anything.3.3 Definitions for some terms associated with building and environmental acoustic issues and not included in Terminology C634 are found in ISO/TR 25417 or IEEE P260.4. When discrepancies exist, the definition in Terminology C634 shall prevail.1.1 This terminology covers terms, related definitions, and descriptions of terms used or likely to be used in building and environmental acoustics standards. Definitions of terms are special-purpose definitions that are consistent with the standard definitions but are written to ensure that a specific building and environmental acoustics standard is properly understood and precisely interpreted. The primary focus of this document is upon terms, definitions and descriptions found within standards under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee E33; however, terms, definitions and descriptions that are of general interest to the field of acoustics are also included.1.2 This building and environmental acoustics standard cannot be used to provide quantitative measures.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 加购物车

定价： 481元 / 折扣价： 409 元 加购物车

4.1 Use—this guide is intended for use on a voluntary basis for evaluating environmental liabilities, often with Guide E2137 for estimation and Guide E2173 for disclosure. The user may elect to apply this guide for any or all of these purposes:4.1.1 Determining if an environmental risk or liability exists,4.1.2 Determining if similar environmental risks (for example, permits, plant or process expansion) are being recognized at similar points in their lifecycle,4.1.3 Determining if several similar environmental risks and liabilities are being managed to similar outcomes,4.1.4 Determining liability values,4.1.5 Due diligence analysis for proposed mergers, acquisitions, or spinoffs,4.1.6 Documenting key decisions on environmental liability provisions, reserves, budgets and cash flow forecasts.4.1.7 Identifying and analyzing liabilities associated with the following:4.1.7.1 certain remedial alternatives,4.1.7.2 future land uses, property transfer and redevelopment decisions,4.1.7.3 land use alternatives for former landfills and chemically impacted sites,4.1.7.4 Meeting regulatory requirements,4.1.8 Designing and implementing project and program controls,4.1.9 Defending against third-party lawsuits,4.1.10 Calculating insurance premiums,4.1.11 Making and settling insurance claims,4.1.12 Making purchase accounting adjustments,4.1.13 Preparing an audit defense, and4.1.14 Completing financial and investment analysis.4.2 Principles—the following principles are an integral part of this guide and should be used to resolve ambiguity or dispute regarding the recognition and derecognition of environmental liabilities. These principles are drawn from several sources, including historical and current accounting principles, court decisions, academic studies, as well as good commercial and customary practice.4.2.1 Current awareness of an entity’s accounting framework and applicable generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) is expected of everyone. Developing related environmental liability recognition policies and procedures commonly requires inputs from internal and external sources, including (but not limited to) accounting, finance, legal, environmental health and safety, capital projects and real estate.4.2.2 The reporting entity has a duty to identify a risk in order to determine if it meets the criteria for recognition and derecognition. A default assertion of immateriality without data or structured judgement is inconsistent with GAAP and with good commercial and customary practice.4.2.3 Accrued liabilities must represent losses in future periods. Consequently, certain costs are treated differently for accounting and tax purposes:4.2.3.1 Costs for response activities resulting from an event in the current reporting period that will be fully completed within the current period (with no on-going future obligations) do not require accrual but are expensed as incurred in the current period.4.2.3.2 Costs for environmental cleanup activities that are related to active ongoing operations (not a past event), including ongoing discharge treatment and monitoring, groundwater or air monitoring, etc. are not appropriate for inclusion in environmental liability accruals.4.2.3.3 Costs for capital expenditures (investments) in new property, plant and equipment are also not appropriate for accrual. Rarely, certain capital expenditures will effectively settle a liability, but accounting and tax rules for accruals and investments are specialized and distinct. An entity’s accounting framework will already address these differences.4.2.4 Over time, some risks become recognized liabilities and vice versa.4.2.5 Comprehensive data sources regarding environmental risks and liability quantification are readily available and have improving levels of accuracy (or precision).4.2.6 Imperfect or incomplete information is a common obstacle to environmental liability recognition: the lack of comprehensive and current data on an environmental risk does not prevent comparison of a past environmental liability with a prospective one. Even with complete knowledge of property and regulatory issues, a reliable calculation of all costs is still challenging but possible.4.2.7 While uncertain timing of spending is a common factor to determining a present value of a risk or liability, an expected value can generally be calculated from comparable sites, open source estimates, and vendor quotes.4.2.8 Application of the materiality constraint (FASB Concepts Statement 8; Appendix X2) should enable users of this guide to determine which environmental risks should be recognized and potentially disclosed (Guide E2173). Users of this guide should consider whether an aggregation of many related immaterial risks constitute a recognizable liability.4.2.9 Application of the cost constraint (FASB Concepts Statement 8) should enable users of this guide to filter or screen which risks should be evaluated in more detail (see 6.3 on the Watch list, also Guide E2137). Users should consider the opportunity costs of not developing a more rigorous estimate, as well as whether data exists to justify an improved estimate.4.2.10 Recognition may be for a specific phase of activity or other incremental component of a liability. Particularly, GASB 49 specifies the recognition of components of a liability based on the occurrence of certain (commonly sequential) obligating events and recognition benchmarks. The unit of account applied to measurement and recording environmental liabilities must be consistent with the entity’s accounting framework. See 9.9 for further detail on unit of account.4.2.11 Where terminology such as “probable” and “reasonably estimable” is used to identify risks for recognition, users should clearly state and consistently apply any numerical definitions and ensure these definitions are consistent with their relevant accounting framework(s).4.2.12 No part of GAAP (or IFRS) specifies a minimum or maximum time horizon for measurement, recognition or derecognition of environmental liabilities. Users should be aware of applicable regulations or policies in determining an appropriate/reasonable timespan. For example, a financial assurance valuation may cover 30 years of forecasted costs, while a contract may presume perpetual spending to manage a liability. [Guide E2173 contains recommendations about displaying key assumptions in X4.4 “Portfolio Assumption Tracking Table”].4.2.13 US GAAP and IFRS express the preference for calculating liabilities at their prices (ideally “fair value measurement”). There are complexities with calculating some costs (remedy failure, counterparty risk) to determine fair value. Users of this guide should use caution in stating that a single remedy – once implemented – contains all of the possible costs and will successfully extinguish all risks and liabilities anticipated at a site. As noted in Guide E2137, price and cost approaches yield estimates which can differ significantly.4.2.14 Litigation is both a method of enforcement and type of liability in its own right. The risk of litigation is continuous and generally unavoidable. Awareness of litigation conditions are often part of the determination of recognition and derecognition.NOTE 1: When estimating litigation exposure and potential costs, the user should consider if the litigation includes the potential for fines that are imposed on a daily basis for each violation.4.2.15 Spending correlates positively with (but is not identical to) liability reduction.4.2.16 Spending may fail to reduce liabilities.4.2.17 Spending to address a liability indicates that a liability exists.4.2.18 It is not unusual for a liability to require immediate recognition under the accounting standards although spending on the liability may not occur in the foreseeable future.4.2.19 Environmental risks should be regularly reviewed, documented and analyzed to record events, decisions, obligations and responsibilities (see Section 6 and 9.8).4.2.20 The tools, procedures and vendor experience needed to promptly provide a cost or timing forecast, or both, already exists and is continuously improving; lack of resources or a brief turnaround time are not reasonable justifications for continuously misstating a risk or liability.4.2.21 Strategic transactions can bring changes to the accounting framework used by an entity, which can trigger recognition and derecognition of liabilities.4.2.22 Periodic reiterations of recognition steps are useful to stakeholders. If an entity finds that similar liabilities are being recognized and settled in varying ways, a reiteration of policies and procedures can express an entity’s current tolerance for risk and for recognition of environmental liabilities.4.2.23 As an entity successfully grows while simultaneously extinguishing environmental liabilities, the aggregate liability will eventually become immaterial. See 9.7 for further detail.4.2.24 The same physical location may have multiple environmental risks and liabilities. The definition and application of the term “unit of account” should be evaluated as an entity grows and settles key risks and liabilities; see 9.7 and 9.9 for further detail.4.2.25 Completion of some activity (see Section 7) usually precedes derecognition.4.3 Liability management practices—the following practices are an integral part of this guide and users should employ them to reliably recognize and derecognize environmental liabilities4.3.1 Independent of an organization’s standard record retention policies, indefinitely maintaining searchable listings of the following should be given consideration:4.3.1.1 Extensive spending history, provision or reserve change decisions, project phase decisions, and key site activities, including remediation, capital expenditures, permitted discharges, asset retirement.4.3.1.2 Correspondence with regulators, especially documents which identify specific obligations (such as notices of violation, consent decrees, administrative orders). Environmental data collected in support of this correspondence.4.3.1.3 Active, inactive and closed business units and corporations.4.3.1.4 Properties used (whether owned, leased, divested, or a common ecological resource) in a way that causes environmental liabilities, especially those with activity and use limitations.4.3.1.5 Activity and use limitations needed, requested and issued, even for divested properties.4.3.1.6 Zoning change requests, applications to create or remove activity and use limitations.4.3.1.7 Environmental permits (such as RCRA, NPDES, etc.)4.3.1.8 Vendor, property, general liability insurance policies, along with listings of any claims submitted and their respective disposition.4.3.1.9 Waste disposal and treatment sites used, along with transporters, corresponding insurance, waste manifesting.NOTE 2: These may include Publicly-Owned Wastewater Treatment Plants that receive and process liquid wastes transported by pipe way, sewer or in bulk (tanker truck).4.3.1.10 Purchased, processed, marketed, recycled and waste chemical compounds; end users, recyclers, and transporters.4.3.1.11 Environmental counterparties, such as successor property owners, adjacent property owners, nearby contributors to common ecological resources (wetlands, aquifers, river sediments), other PRPs on multiparty cleanup projects (Superfund sites), unrelated entities which promised to settle some ARO or remedial obligation.4.3.2 Periodically, an organization may find it necessary to study, evaluate or maintain databases of the following:4.3.2.1 Bankruptcy filings of environmental counterparties4.3.2.2 Regulator websites covering environmental compliance, enforcement, permitting, spills, to confirm those records are accurate4.3.2.3 Regulator websites covering similar (unrelated) liabilities to determine if data provides predictive insights.4.3.2.4  Public interest and news websites that track environmental compliance issues.4.4 General Process for Recognition and Derecognition: 4.4.1 Overall Process—described in Fig. 1 Environmental Liability Lifecycle – the process is iterative, continuous, and controlled through periodic settlement of liabilities. The four steps are:FIG. 1 Environmental Liability Lifecycle4.4.1.1 Watch list (pre- and postrecognition)—consists of a screened listing of risks, identified by type, location and other attributes. A detailed explanation is in 6.3 and Section 7 of this guide.4.4.1.2 Recognition (liability accrual and footnoting)—each type of environmental liabilities has a recognition process for converting a risk to an accrual (or footnote) listed in Section 5 of this guide.4.4.1.3 Settlement (work, spending, negotiations)—consists of routine activities to study, remediate, restore, monitor, redevelop and manage a property to satisfy one of the five types of liabilities. This also includes payments to others for their performance or guarantee or cashout of these activities.4.4.1.4 Extinguishment and Derecognition—confirmation that your entity settled the obligation, commitment, contingency or guarantee and that the liability no longer exists. The accrual is removed from the financial statements.4.4.2 Classification by location—any risk or liability must be associated with a specific location. In the case of product warranty risks, this may be an entire nation or customs union. In the case of soil or groundwater contamination, this may be a street address or waste disposal facility. See 9.9 for more detail on applying the concept of a “unit of account”.4.4.3 Classification by type—there are five common types of environmental liabilities, which may exist simultaneously at the same location: asset retirement obligation, other environmental obligations, commitments, contingencies, and guarantees.4.4.4 This guide uses the five liability types in the numerical order stated in the 2009 Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) developed by the Financial Accounting Standards Board. Users of this guide should consult the references noted in the following Fig. 2 as well as Appendix X1, and – at least annually – develop an understanding of any recent changes:FIG. 2 Five Liability Types4.4.5 In Section 5 of this guide, users may find it useful to follow a more comprehensive process to recognize certain liability types and consider past activity at that location. See Appendix X5 for a process flow example.1.1 Purpose—The purpose of this guide is to provide a series of options or instructions consistent with good commercial and customary practice for recognition and derecognition of environmental liabilities. This guide is consistent with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). Recognition of environmental liabilities is essential to determining the current book value of an entity. An entity may have future spending to extinguish risk and liabilities triggered in the past. Serious consequences, ranging from failed audits and poor capital stewardship to financial fraud and bankruptcy, exist for entities omitting material information from financial statements.1.2 Objective—This guide enables users to reliably determine if a given type of environmental liability exists and subsequently has been settled, consistent with the accounting definitions in place.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： 843元 加购物车