iTeh StandardsiTeh Standards
EURUSD
Your shopping cart is empty.
ASTM

ASTM E2771-11(2019)

(Terminology)

Standard Terminology for Homeland Security Applications

Standard Terminology for Homeland Security Applications

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
3.1 In this terminology, definitions used in other ASTM International standards are indicated by following the definition with the designation of the standard.
SCOPE
1.1 This terminology provides definitions and abbreviations of terms used in ASTM International standards pertaining to homeland security applications.  
1.2 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.

General Information

Status
Published
Publication Date
30-Apr-2019
ICS
13.200 - Accident and disaster control
Technical Committee
E54 - Homeland Security Applications
Drafting Committee
E54.91 - Planning and Coordination
Current Stage
Ref Project

Relations

Refers
ASTM E3005-24 - Standard Terminology for Body Armor and Ballistic Protection
Effective Date
01-Apr-2024
Refers
ASTM D883-24 - Standard Terminology Relating to Plastics
Effective Date
01-Feb-2024
Refers
ASTM D883-23 - Standard Terminology Relating to Plastics
Effective Date
01-Nov-2023
Refers
ASTM E2601-23 - Standard Practice for Radiological and Nuclear Emergency Response
Effective Date
01-Oct-2023
Refers
ASTM E3002-15(2023) - Standard Practice for Assessing the Comparative Efficacy of Products Used for the Decontamination of Chemical Warfare Agents (CWAs) on Skin
Effective Date
01-Sep-2023
Refers
ASTM E3003-20 - Standard Practice for Body Armor Wearer Measurement and Fitting of Armor
Effective Date
01-Aug-2020
Refers
ASTM D1129-13(2020)e2 - Standard Terminology Relating to Water
Effective Date
01-May-2020
Refers
ASTM E3068-20 - Standard Test Method for Contact Measurement of Backface Deformation in Clay Backing During Body Armor Testing
Effective Date
01-Apr-2020
Refers
ASTM E3112/E3112M-20 - Standard Test Method for Ballistic-resistant Products and Shoot Packs
Effective Date
01-Apr-2020
Refers
ASTM E3004-20 - Standard Specification for Preparation and Verification of Clay Blocks Used in Ballistic-Resistance Testing of Torso Body Armor
Effective Date
01-Apr-2020
Refers
ASTM E3086-20 - Standard Practice for Creating Appliques for Use in Testing of Nonplanar Soft Body Armor Designed for Females
Effective Date
01-Apr-2020
Refers
ASTM E3062/E3062M-20 - Standard Specification for Indoor Ballistic Test Ranges for Small Arms and Fragmentation Testing of Ballistic-resistant Items
Effective Date
01-Apr-2020
Refers
ASTM E3005-20 - Standard Terminology for Body Armor
Effective Date
01-Feb-2020
Refers
ASTM E2677-20 - Standard Test Method for Estimating Limits of Detection in Trace Detectors for Explosives and Drugs of Interest
Effective Date
01-Feb-2020
Refers
ASTM D883-20 - Standard Terminology Relating to Plastics
Effective Date
01-Jan-2020

Buy Standard

ASTM E2771-11(2019) - Standard Terminology for Homeland Security ApplicationsASTM E2771-11(2019) - Standard Terminology for Homeland Security Applications
PreviousNext
Standard
ASTM E2771-11(2019) - Standard Terminology for Homeland Security Applications
English language
30 pages
sale 15% off
Preview
sale 15% off
Preview

Standards Content (Sample)


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.
Designation: E2771 − 11 (Reapproved 2019)
Standard Terminology for
Homeland Security Applications
This standard is issued under the fixed designation E2771; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year of
original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision.Anumber in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval.A
superscript epsilon (´) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.
1. Scope (AHP) to Multiattribute DecisionAnalysis of Investments
Related to Projects, Products, and Processes
1.1 This terminology provides definitions and abbreviations
E2411Specification for Chemical Warfare Vapor Detector
of terms used in ASTM International standards pertaining to
(CWVD) (Withdrawn 2014)
homeland security applications.
E2413 Guide for Hospital Preparedness and Response
1.2 This international standard was developed in accor-
(Withdrawn 2018)
dance with internationally recognized principles on standard-
E2458Practices for Bulk Sample Collection and Swab
ization established in the Decision on Principles for the
SampleCollectionofVisiblePowdersSuspectedofBeing
Development of International Standards, Guides and Recom-
Biological Agents and Toxins from Nonporous Surfaces
mendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical
E2520Practice for Measuring and Scoring Performance of
Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.
Trace Explosive Chemical Detectors
E2521Terminology for Evaluating Response Robot Capa-
2. Referenced Documents
bilities
2.1 ASTM Standards:
E2541Guide for Stakeholder-Focused, Consensus-Based
D638Test Method for Tensile Properties of Plastics
Disaster Restoration Process for Contaminated Assets
D747Test Method for Apparent Bending Modulus of Plas-
(Withdrawn 2019)
tics by Means of a Cantilever Beam (Withdrawn 2019)
E2542Specification for Portable Water Heaters Used at
D790Test Methods for Flexural Properties of Unreinforced
Personnel Decontamination Stations
and Reinforced Plastics and Electrical Insulating Materi-
E2543Specification for Portable Air Heaters Used at Per-
als
sonnel Decontamination Stations and Shelters
D882Test Method for Tensile Properties of Thin Plastic
E2601Practice for Radiological Emergency Response
Sheeting
E2639Test Method for Blast Resistance of Trash Recep-
D883Terminology Relating to Plastics
tacles
D1129Terminology Relating to Water
E2640GuideforResourceManagementinEmergencyMan-
D1424Test Method for Tearing Strength of Fabrics by
agement and Homeland Security (Withdrawn 2019)
Falling-Pendulum (Elmendorf-Type) Apparatus
E2668Guide for Emergency Operations Center (EOC) De-
D3384Method of Test for Powder Resistance of Floor
velopment (Withdrawn 2019)
Polish Films
E2677Test Method for Estimating Limits of Detection in
D5219Terminology Relating to Body Dimensions for Ap-
Trace Detectors for Explosives and Drugs of Interest
parel Sizing
E2731Specification for Materials to Mitigate the Spread of
E1301Guide for Proficiency Testing by Interlaboratory
Radioactive Contamination after a Radiological Disper-
Comparisons (Withdrawn 2012)
sion Event (Withdrawn 2018)
E1765Practice for Applying Analytical Hierarchy Process
E2732 Practice for Responder Family Support Service
(Withdrawn 2020)
E2739Specification for Personnel Decontamination System
This terminology is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee E54 on
to be Used During a Chemical Event (Withdrawn 2019)
Homeland Security Applications and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee
E54.91 on Planning and Coordination.
E2740Specification for Trash Receptacles Subjected to
Current edition approved May 1, 2019. Published June 2019. Originally
Blast Resistance Testing
ɛ3
approved in 2011. Last previous edition approved in 2011 as E2771–11 . DOI:
E2770GuideforOperationalGuidelinesforInitialResponse
10.1520/E2771-11R19.
to Suspected Biological Agents and Toxins
For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, or
contact ASTM Customer Service at service@astm.org. For Annual Book of ASTM
E2800Practice for Characterization of Bacillus Spore Sus-
Standards volume information, refer to the standard’s Document Summary page on
pensions for Reference Materials
the ASTM website.
E2831/E2831MGuide for Deployment of Blast Resistant
The last approved version of this historical standard is referenced on
www.astm.org. Trash Receptacles in Crowded Places
Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. United States
E2771 − 11 (2019)
E2842Guide for Credentialing for Access to an Incident or E3113SpecificationforBallistic-resistantVehicleDoorPan-
Event Site els Used by Public Safety Agencies
E3131Specification for Nucleic Acid-Based Systems for
E2851/E2851MSpecification for Ruggedness Requirements
for HAZMAT Instrumentation Bacterial Pathogen Screening of Suspicious Visible Pow-
ders
E2852Guide for Acquisition, Maintenance, Storage, and
E3141/E3141MTest Method for Ballistic Resistant Shields
Use of Hazardous Material Detection Instrumentation
for Law Enforcement
E2866 Test Method for Determination of Diisopropyl
F1494Terminology Relating to Protective Clothing
Methylphosphonate, Ethyl Methylphosphonic Acid, Iso-
F1731Practice for Body Measurements and Sizing of Fire
propyl Methylphosphonic Acid, Methylphosphonic Acid,
andRescueServicesUniformsandOtherThermalHazard
and Pinacolyl MethylphosphonicAcid in Soil by Pressur-
Protective Clothing
ized Fluid Extraction and Analyzed by Liquid
F2878Test Method for Protective Clothing Material Resis-
Chromatography/Tandem M
tance to Hypodermic Needle Puncture
E2885Specification for Handheld Point Chemical Vapor
F2992/F2992MTest Method for Measuring Cut Resistance
Detectors (HPCVD) for Homeland Security Applications
of Materials Used in Protective Clothing withTomodyna-
E2915GuideforEmergencyOperationsCenter(EOC)Man-
mometer (TDM-100) Test Equipment
agement
2.2 Government Standards:
E2933Specification for Stationary Point Chemical Vapor
18 U.S.C. 175Prohibitions with Respect to Biological
Detectors (SPCVD) for Homeland Security Applications
Weapons
E2951Guide for Community Emergency Preparedness for
18 U.S.C. 178Definitions
Persons with Disabilities
CPL 02-02-071 Technical Enforcement and Assistance
E2952SpecificationforAir-PurifyingRespiratoryProtective
Guidelines for Hazardous Waste Site and RCRA Correc-
Smoke Escape Devices (RPED)
tive Action Clean-up Operations
E3002Practice for Assessing the Comparative Efficacy of
DOD4145.26MDepartmentofDefense:DODContractors’
Products Used for the Decontamination of Chemical
Safety Manual for Ammunition and Explosives
Warfare Agents (CWAs) on Skin
FEMA US&R-2-FGUrban Search and Rescue Response
E3003Practice for Body Armor Wearer Measurement and
System Field Operations Guide
Fitting of Armor
FIPS 201Personal Identity Verification (PIV) of Federal
E3004Specification for Preparation andVerification of Clay
Employees and Contractors
BlocksUsedinBallistic-ResistanceTestingofTorsoBody
NIMS 2008National Incident Management System
Armor
NIMS Guide 0002National Credentialing Definition and
E3005Terminology for Body Armor
Criteria
E3062/E3062M Specification for Indoor Ballistic Test
2.3 IAEA Standards:
Ranges for Small Arms and Fragmentation Testing of
IAEA 2006International Atomic Energy Agency Annual
Ballistic-resistant Items
Report 2006
E3068Test Method for Contact Measurement of Backface
2.4 NCRP Standards:
DeformationinClayBackingDuringBodyArmorTesting
NCRP Report 165Responding to a Radiological or Nuclear
E3078/E3078MPractice for Conditioning of Hard Armor
Terrorism Incident: A Guide for Decision Makers
Test Items
2.5 NFPA Standards:
E3086Practice for CreatingAppliques for Use in Testing of
NFPA472Standard for Competence of Responders to Haz-
Nonplanar Soft Body Armor Designed for Females
ardous Materials/Weapons of Mass Destruction Incidents
E3095GuideforSurrogateMaterialsforFieldEvaluationof
NFPA1561Standard on Emergency Services Incident Man-
NucleicAcid-Based On-Site BiologicalAssessmentTech-
agement System and Command Safety
nologies
E3107/E3107MTest Method for Resistance to Penetration
Available from U.S. Government Printing Office, Superintendent of
and Backface Deformation for Ballistic-resistant Torso
Documents, 732 N. Capitol St., NW, Washington, DC 20401-0001, http://
Body Armor and Shoot Packs
www.access.gpo.gov.
E3108Practice for Conformity Assessment of Protective
Available from Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), 200
Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20210, http://www.osha.gov.
Gloves Worn by Law Enforcement and Corrections Offi-
Available from the Defense Technical Information Center, 8725 John J.
cers
Kingman Road, Suite 0944, Ft. Belvoir, VA 23060-6128.
E3109Specification for Protective Gloves Worn by Law 8
Available from Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), 500 C St.,
Enforcement and Corrections Officers SW, Washington, DC 20472, http://www.fema.gov.
Available from National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), 100
E3110/E3110MTest Method for Collection of Ballistic
Bureau Dr., Stop 1070, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-1070, http://www.nist.gov.
Limit Data for Ballistic-resistant Torso Body Armor and
Available from International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna International
Shoot Packs
Centre, PO Box 100, 1400 Vienna, Austria, https://www.iaea.org.
Available from National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements,
E3111/E3111MTest Methods for Ballistic Resistant Head
7910 Woodmont Ave., Suite 400, Bethesda, MD 20814-3095, http://
Protection
www.ncrponline.org.
E3112/E3112MTest Method for Ballistic-resistant Products
Available from National Fire ProtectionAssociation (NFPA), 1 Batterymarch
and Shoot Packs Park, Quincy, MA 02169-7471, http://www.nfpa.org.
E2771 − 11 (2019)
NFPA 1600Standard on Disaster/Emergency Management competence to carry out specific conformity assessment
and Business Continuity Programs tasks. E3108–18 from ISO/IEC 17000
2.6 NIJ Standards:
accuracy, n—closeness of agreement between a test result and
NIJ 0101.06Ballistic Resistance of Body Armor
the accepted reference values. E3131–17
2.7 ISO/IEC Standards:
E3095–17 from E1301
ISO/IEC 17000Conformity assessment–Vocabulary and
advertised protective area, n—anareaofaglovestatedbythe
general principles
ISO/IEC 17025General Requirements for the Competence supplier as having specific protection. E3109–18
of Testing and Calibration Laboratories
AEGL-1, n—airborne concentration (expressed as ppm or
ISO Guide 34General Requirements for the Competence of
mg/m ) of a substance above which it is predicted that the
Reference Material Producers
general population, including susceptible individuals, could
2.8 AOAC Standards:
experience transient health effects.
SMPR 2010.003Standard Method Performance Require-
E2885–13
ments for Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) Methods for
E2933–13
Detection of Bacillus anthracis in Aerosol Collection
Filters and/or Liquids
AEGL-2, n—airborne concentration (expressed as ppm or
mg/m ) of a substance above which it is predicted that the
3. Significance and Use
general population, including susceptible individuals, could
experienceirreversibleorotherserious,long-lastingadverse
3.1 In this terminology, definitions used in other ASTM
health effects or an impaired ability to escape.
International standards are indicated by following the defini-
E2885–13
tion with the designation of the standard.
E2933–13
4. Terminology
AEGL-3, n—airborne concentration (expressed as ppm or
4.1 Definitions:
mg/m ) of a substance above which it is predicted that the
30-minute Acute Exposure Guideline Levels for Selected
general population, including susceptible individuals, could
Airborne Chemicals, (30-min AEGL value), n—represent
experience life-threatening health effects or death.
exposure limits for the general public and are applicable to
E2885–13
emergency exposure periods for 30 minutes. E2885–13
E2933–13
E2933–13
affected stakeholder, n—any individual, group, company,
abrasion, n—the wearing away of any part of a material by
organization, government, tribe, or other entity which may
rubbing against another surface. E3109–18 from D3384
bedirectlyaffectedbytheoutcomeofthespecificrestoration
planning process. E2541–10
abstain, v—robot manufacturer or designated operator declar-
ing not to perform a particular test or not to have the test
affiliation, adj—the association of a non-credentialed indi-
result disseminated. E2521–16
vidual or group of individuals under the supervision of an
accessory, n—a body armor component that is detachable or
AHJ-compliant credentialed responder for the purpose of
removable from the body armor and is intended to provide
gaining access to accomplish a specific incident or event
extendedareaofcoverageprotectionagainstthreatsthatmay
mission. E2842–14
include ballistic threats, stabbing, fragmentation, blunt
agreements, n—advance written (preferred) and/or oral ar-
impact, or a combination of threats. E3005–18
rangements between and among entities that provide a
DISCUSSION—Accessories are typically attachments to tactical body
armorprovidingprotectiontoareasnotcoveredbythevest,suchasthe
mechanism to share resources and obtain assistance.
shoulders, upper arms, neck, sides, pelvis, and groin. See tactical body
E2640–10 from NFPA 1600/NIMS 2008
armor. See vest.
air-purifying respiratory protective smoke escape device,
accessory, n—item that may be provided with an RPED that
RPED, n—air-purifying respirator used to protect a person
does not affect its ability to meet the requirements of this
whileescapingfromafirebyremovingcertaincontaminants
specification. E2952–17
of fire-generated products of combustion from the inhaled
air. E2952–17
accreditation, n—third-party attestation related to a confor-
mityassessmentbodyconveyingformaldemonstrationofits
ALARA (as low as reasonably achievable), n—a principle of
radiation protection philosophy that requires that exposures
12 to ionizing radiation should be kept as low as reasonably
Available from National Institute of Justice (NIJ), 810 7th St., NW,
achievable, economic and social factors being taken into
Washington, DC 20531, http://nij.gov.
Available from International Organization for Standardization (ISO), ISO
account; the ALARA principle is satisfied when the expen-
Central Secretariat, BIBC II, Chemin de Blandonnet 8, CP 401, 1214 Vernier,
diture of further resources would be unwarranted by the
Geneva, Switzerland, http://www.iso.org.
reduction in exposure tha
...

Questions, Comments and Discussion

Ask us and Technical Secretary will try to provide an answer. You can facilitate discussion about the standard in here.

This May Also Interest You

ASTM
ASTM E2601-23(Practice)
Standard Practice for Radiological and Nuclear Emergency Response

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 It is essential for response agency personnel to plan, develop, implement, and train on standardized guidelines that encompass policy, strategy, operations, and tactical decisions prior to responding to a radiological or nuclear incident. Use of this practice is recommended for all levels of the response structure.  
5.2 Documents developed from this practice should be reviewed and revised as necessary on a two-year cycle or according to each jurisdiction’s normal practices. The review should consider new and updated requirements and guidance, technologies, and other information or equipment that might have a significant impact on the management and outcome of radiological incidents.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice provides decision-making considerations for response to both accidental and intentional incidents that involve radioactive material. It provides information and guidance for what to include in response planning and what activities to conduct during a response. It also encompasses the practices to respond to any situation complicated by radiation in conjunction with the associated guidance for the specific type of incident.  
1.1.1 The intended audience for the standard includes planners as well as emergency responders, incident commanders, and other emergency workers who should be protected from radiation.  
1.1.2 The scope of this practice applies to all types of radiological emergencies. While it does not fully consider response to an NPP accident,3 an explosive RDD, or nuclear detonation, detailed guidance to respond to such incidents is provided in other documents, such as those cited in the introduction. With respect to the guidance documents, this practice provides the general principles that apply to the broad range of incidents and associated planning goals but relies on the AHJ to apply and tailor their response planning based on those documents as well as the limitation of the personnel and equipment resources in the jurisdiction. In addition, the AHJ should use those documents to identify improvements to planning and resources to be better prepared for the more complex emergencies.  
1.1.3 This practice does not expressly address emergency response to contamination of food or water supplies.  
1.1.4 The Emergency Response Guide (ERG) published by the Department of Transportation provides valuable information for response to traffic accidents involving radioactive materials. For other radiological or nuclear incidents, however, the ERG may not provide adequate information on appropriate protective measures and should not be the sole resource used.  
1.2 This practice applies to those emergency response agencies that have a role in the response to an accidental or intentional radiological or nuclear incident. It should be used by emergency response organizations such as law enforcement, fire service, emergency medical services, and emergency management.  
1.3 This practice assumes that implementation begins with the recognition of a radiological or nuclear incident and ends when emergency response actions cease or the response is supported by specialized regional, state, or federal response assets.  
1.4 AHJs using this practice should identify hazards, develop a plan, acquire and track equipment, and provide training consistent with the descriptions provided in Section 6.  
1.5 While response to radiological hazards is the focus of this practice, responders must consider all hazards during a response; it is possible that non-radiological hazards may present a greater danger at an incident, particularly in incidents with wide area dispersion.  
1.5.1 This practice does not fully address assessing the risks from airborne radioactivity. Equipment to determine this potential hazard is not widely available in emergency responder communities. Like other responses to unknown hazards, respiratory protection commonly used by responders is required until a complete hazard i...

  • Standard
    48 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
  • Standard
    48 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM E2521-23(Terminology)
Standard Terminology for Evaluating Response Robot Capabilities

SCOPE
1.1 This terminology identifies and precisely defines terms as used in the standard test methods, practices, and guides for evaluating response robots intended for hazardous environments. Further discussions of the terms can be found within the standards in which the terms appear.  
1.2 The term definitions address response robots, including ground, aquatic, and aerial systems. Some key features of such systems are remotely operated from safe standoff distances, deployable at operational tempos, capable of operating in complex environments, sufficiently hardened against harsh environments, reliable and field serviceable, durable or cost effectively disposable, and equipped with operational safeguards.  
1.3 Units—Values stated in either the International System of Units (metric) or U.S. Customary units (inch-pound) are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents. Both units are referenced to facilitate acquisition of materials internationally and minimize fabrication costs. Tests conducted using either system maintain repeatability and reproducibility of the test method and results are comparable.  
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.

  • Standard
    4 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
  • Standard
    4 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM E2542-08(2022)(Specification)
Standard Specification for Portable Water Heaters Used at Personnel Decontamination Stations

ABSTRACT
This specification is used to standardize the portable water heaters used on personnel decontamination lines to insure the heaters provide sufficient heated water for as long as they are needed during the emergency. The heater materials of construction shall be easily cleaned of surface mud and grime with no degradation of the unit's ability to perform its function. The performance requirements for portable water heaters are presented in details. The rotometer test method, and ASTM test method shall be performed to meet the requirements prescribed. The water heater unit's water flow shall be measured, and recorded. The water heater unit's cold water inlet and warm water output temperature shall be measured and recorded. The water heater unit's water supply and outlet pressures shall be measured and recorded.
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
12.1 The use of these acceptance tests will insure that organizations buying portable heaters will be assured the heaters meet certain performance requirements.
SCOPE
1.1 This specification is used to standardize the portable water heaters used on personnel decontamination lines to insure the heaters provide sufficient heated water for as long as they are needed during the emergency.
Note 1: These heaters are not intended to be used for the decontamination for any other surface or material. Also, these heaters are intended to be portable and easy to use by first responders during a chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and explosive (CBRNE) event.  
1.2 This specification contains a specification section and a test methods section so users need to refer to the section applicable to their needs when using this standard specification.  
1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.
Note 2: The U.S. first responder personnel using the equipment manufactured under this standard are not likely to be familiar with SI units so English units need to be included as part of the system documentation and shown on control panels for any equipment sold to U.S. organizations.  
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.

  • Technical specification
    4 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM E2543-08(2022)(Specification)
Standard Specification for Portable Air Heaters Used at Personnel Decontamination Stations and Shelters

ABSTRACT
This specification is used to standardize the portable air heaters used on personnel decontamination lines to insure the heaters provide sufficient heated air for personnel comfort before, during, and after the decontamination for as long as they are needed during the emergency. The heater materials of construction shall be easily cleaned of surface mud and grime with no degradation of the unit’s ability to perform its function. The preferred fuels for the heater section of the portable air heater are diesel fuel, gasoline, or bottled propane gas. Measurement of the air heater unit’s air flow and input and output temperatures shall be performed.
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
11.1 The use of these acceptance tests will insure that organizations buying portable heaters will be assured the heaters meet certain performance requirements.
SCOPE
1.1 This specification is used to standardize the portable air heaters used on personnel decontamination lines to insure the heaters provide sufficient heated air for personnel comfort before, during, and after the decontamination for as long as they are needed during the emergency.
Note 1: These heaters are not intended to be used for the decontamination for any other surface or material. Also, these heaters are intended to be portable and easy to use by first responders during a chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and explosive (CBRNE) event.  
1.2 This specification contains a specification section and a test methods section so users need to refer to the section applicable to their needs when using this standard specification.  
1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.
Note 2: The U.S. first responder personnel using the equipment manufactured under this standard are not likely to be familiar with SI units so English units need to be included as part of the system documentation and shown on control panels for any equipment sold to U.S. organizations.  
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.

  • Technical specification
    3 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM E2853/E2853M-22(Test Method)
Standard Test Method for Evaluating Ground Response Robot Capabilities: Search Tasks

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This test method is part of an overall suite of related test methods that provide repeatable measures of human-system interaction capability including robotic system mobility, dexterity, inspection, remote operator proficiency, and situational awareness. In particular, the operator control unit (OCU) design and interface features may impact the operator’s ability to perform movement and inspection tasks with the robot.  
5.2 The test apparatuses are low cost and easy to fabricate so they can be widely replicated. The procedure is also simple to conduct. This eases comparisons across various testing locations, dates, and times to determine best-in-class systems and operators.  
5.3 Evaluation—This test method can be used in a controlled environment to measure baseline capabilities. It can also be embedded into operational training scenarios to measure degradation due to uncontrolled variables in lighting, weather, radio communications, GPS accuracy, etc.  
5.4 Procurement—This test method can be used to identify inherent capability trade-offs in systems, make informed purchasing decisions, and verify performance during acceptance testing. This aligns requirement specifications and user expectations with existing capability limits.  
5.5 Training—This test method can be used to focus operator training, as a repeatable practice task or as an embedded task within training scenarios. The resulting measures of remote operator proficiency enable tracking of perishable skills over time, along with comparisons of performance across squads, regions, or national averages.  
5.6 Innovation—This test method can be used to inspire technical innovation, demonstrate break-through capabilities, and measure the reliability of systems performing specific tasks within an overall mission sequence. Combining or sequencing multiple test methods can guide manufacturers toward implementing the combinations of capabilities necessary to perform essential mission tasks.
SCOPE
1.1 This test method is intended for remotely operated ground robots operating in complex, unstructured, and often hazardous environments. It specifies the apparatuses, procedures, and performance metrics necessary to measure the capability of a robot to maneuver and search throughout an environment to inspect objects of interest while negotiating complex terrain. This test method is one of several related human-system interaction tests that can be used to evaluate overall system capabilities.  
1.2 The robotic system typically includes a remote operator in control of all functionality, so an onboard camera and remote operator display are typically required. Assistive features or autonomous behaviors may improve the effectiveness or efficiency of the overall system.  
1.3 Different user communities can set their own thresholds of acceptable performance within this test method for various mission requirements.  
1.4 Performing Location—This test method may be performed anywhere the specified apparatuses and environmental conditions can be implemented.  
1.5 Units—The International System of Units (a.k.a. SI Units) and U.S. Customary Units (a.k.a. Imperial Units) are used throughout this test method. They are not mathematical conversions. Rather, they are approximate equivalents in each system of units to enable use of readily available materials in different countries. The differences between the stated dimensions in each system of units are insignificant for the purposes of comparing test method results, so each system of units is separately considered standard within this test method.  
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 i...

  • Standard
    26 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
  • Standard
    26 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM E2802/E2802M-21e1(Test Method)
Standard Test Method for Evaluating Response Robot Mobility Using Variable Hurdle Obstacles

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This test method is part of an overall suite of related test methods that provide repeatable measures of robotic system mobility and remote operator proficiency. The variable hurdle obstacle as described challenges robotic system locomotion, suspension systems to maintain traction, rollover tendencies, self-righting (if necessary), chassis shape variability (if available), and remote situational awareness by the operator. As such, the variable hurdle obstacle can be used to represent obstacles in the environment, such as railroad tracks, curbs, and debris.  
5.2 The scale of the apparatus can vary to provide different constraints representative of typical obstacle spacing in the intended deployment environment. For example, the three configurations can be representative of repeatable complexity for unobstructed obstacles (open configuration), relatively open parking lots with spaces between cars (rectangular confinement configuration), or within bus, train, or plane aisles, or dwellings with hallways and doorways (square confinement configuration).  
5.3 The test apparatuses are low cost and easy to fabricate so they can be widely replicated. The procedure is also simple to conduct. This eases comparisons across various testing locations and dates to determine best-in-class systems and operators.  
5.4 Evaluation—This test method can be used in a controlled environment to measure baseline capabilities. The variable hurdle obstacle can also be embedded into operational training scenarios to measure degradation due to uncontrolled variables in lighting, weather, radio communications, GPS accuracy, etc.  
5.5 Procurement—This test method can be used to identify inherent capability trade-offs in systems, make informed purchasing decisions, and verify performance during acceptance testing. This aligns requirement specifications and user expectations with existing capability limits.  
5.6 Training—This test method can be used to focus operator training as a repea...
SCOPE
1.1 This test method is intended for remotely operated ground robots operating in complex, unstructured, and often hazardous environments. It specifies the apparatuses, procedures, and performance metrics necessary to measure the capability of a robot to negotiate an obstacle in the form of hurdles. This test method is one of several related mobility tests that can be used to evaluate overall system capabilities.  
1.2 The robotic system includes a remote operator in control of most functionality, so an onboard camera and remote operator display are typically required. This test method can be used to evaluate assistive or autonomous behaviors intended to improve the effectiveness or efficiency of remotely operated systems.  
1.3 Different user communities can set their own thresholds of acceptable performance within this test method for various mission requirements.  
1.4 Performing Location—This test method may be performed anywhere the specified apparatuses and environmental conditions can be implemented.  
1.5 Units—The International System of Units (a.k.a. SI Units) and U.S. Customary Units (a.k.a. Imperial Units) are used throughout this document. They are not mathematical conversions. Rather, they are approximate equivalents in each system of units to enable use of readily available materials in different countries. The differences between the stated dimensions in each system of units are insignificant for the purposes of comparing test method results, so each system of units is separately considered standard within this test method.  
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 internation...

  • Standard
    12 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM E2915-13(2020)(Guide)
Standard Guide for Emergency Operations Center (EOC) Management

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Coordination of response and recovery support cannot be performed well if the EOC team lacks an appropriate operating environment. An operating environment that increases stress in staff or hinders the ability to perform basic tasks will ultimately degrade the effectiveness of the EOC team. EOC management must be accomplished in parallel with incident management support and should be transparent to the EOC team. EOC management must also be consistent with and support the incident management system used by the EOC team (for example, the Incident Command System mandated for use in the United States under the National Incident Management System). Effective EOC management can be attributed to good preplanning and related training. This guide provides the emergency management community with practical concepts and approaches for effective EOC management.
SCOPE
1.1 This guide provides general guidelines for the management of an emergency operations center (EOC) prior to, during, and after activation for emergency or disaster support.  
1.2 An EOC is where the coordination of response and recovery support is performed, but the EOC is also a physical location that generates its own demands. For the EOC team to perform effectively, the physical and organizational demands of the EOC as a facility must be met. EOC management is distinct from the operational management of the incident.  
1.3 This guide may also serve as a foundation for management of a smaller facility such as a department operations center (DOC), larger facilities such as a regional operations center (ROC), or state operations center (SOC) with a broader area of responsibility and more extensive need to communicate and coordinate with others.  
1.4 This guide applies to fixed facilities and does not specifically address portable or field-deployable EOCs at temporary locations, virtual EOCs using communications technology to link geographically separated participants, or EOC relocation under a Continuity of Operations Plan (COOP). However, elements within this document will apply to these situations.  
1.5 This guide is the second in a series regarding the EOC. For the Standard Guide for EOC Development, see Guide E2668.  
1.6 This document includes some references and terminology specific to the United States of America but may be adapted for use elsewhere.  
1.7 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.8 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

  • Guide
    7 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM E2827/E2827M-20(Test Method)
Standard Test Method for Evaluating Response Robot Mobility Using Crossing Pitch/Roll Ramp Terrains

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This test method is part of an overall suite of related test methods that provide repeatable measures of robotic system mobility and remote operator proficiency. This crossing (discontinuous) pitch/roll ramp terrain specifically challenges robotic system locomotion, suspension systems to maintain traction, rollover tendencies, self-righting in complex terrain (if necessary), chassis shape variability (if available), and remote situational awareness by the operator. As such, it can be used to represent modest outdoor terrain complexity or indoor debris within confined areas.  
5.2 The overall size of the terrain apparatus can vary to provide different constraints depending on the typical obstacle spacing of the intended deployment environment. For example, the terrain with containment walls can be sized to represent repeatable complexity within bus, train, or plane aisles; dwellings with hallways and doorways; relatively open parking lots with spaces between cars; or unobstructed terrains.  
5.3 The test apparatuses are low cost and easy to fabricate so they can be widely replicated. The procedure is also simple to conduct. This eases comparisons across various testing locations and dates to determine best-in-class systems and operators.  
5.4 Evaluation—This test method can be used in a controlled environment to measure baseline capabilities. It can also be embedded into operational training scenarios to measure degradation due to uncontrolled variables in lighting, weather, radio communications, GPS accuracy, etc.  
5.5 Procurement—This test method can be used to identify inherent capability trade-offs in systems, make informed purchasing decisions, and verify performance during acceptance testing. This aligns requirement specifications and user expectations with existing capability limits.  
5.6 Training—This test method can be used to focus operator training as a repeatable practice task or as an embedded task within training scenarios. The resulting mea...
SCOPE
1.1 This test method is intended for remotely operated ground robots operating in complex, unstructured, and often hazardous environments. It specifies the apparatuses, procedures, and performance metrics necessary to measure the capability of a robot to traverse complex terrains in the form of crossing (discontinuous) pitch/roll ramps. This test method is one of several related mobility tests that can be used to evaluate overall system capabilities.  
1.2 The robotic system includes a remote operator in control of all functionality, so an onboard camera and remote operator display are typically required. Assistive features or autonomous behaviors that improve the effectiveness or efficiency of the overall system are encouraged.  
1.3 Different user communities can set their own thresholds of acceptable performance within this test method for various mission requirements.  
1.4 Performing Location—This test method may be performed anywhere the specified apparatuses and environmental conditions can be implemented.  
1.5 Units—The International System of Units (SI Units) and U.S. Customary Units (Imperial Units) are used throughout this document. They are not mathematical conversions. Rather, they are approximate equivalents in each system of units to enable use of readily available materials in different countries. This avoids excessive purchasing and fabrication costs. The differences between the stated dimensions in each system of units are insignificant for the purposes of comparing test method results, so each system of units is separately considered standard within this test method.  
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 stand...

  • Standard
    10 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
  • Standard
    10 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM E2826/E2826M-20(Test Method)
Standard Test Method for Evaluating Response Robot Mobility Using Continuous Pitch/Roll Ramp Terrains

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This test method is part of an overall suite of related test methods that provide repeatable measures of robotic system mobility and remote operator proficiency. This continuous pitch/roll ramp terrain specifically challenges robotic system locomotion, suspension systems to maintain traction, rollover tendencies, self-righting in complex terrain (if necessary), chassis shape variability (if available), and remote situational awareness by the operator. As such, it can be used to represent modest outdoor terrain complexity or indoor debris within confined areas.  
5.2 The overall size of the terrain apparatus can vary to provide different constraints depending on the typical obstacle spacing of the intended deployment environment. For example, the terrain with containment walls can be sized to represent repeatable complexity within bus, train, or plane aisles; dwellings with hallways and doorways; relatively open parking lots with spaces between cars; or unobstructed terrains.  
5.3 The test apparatuses are low cost and easy to fabricate so they can be widely replicated. The procedure is also simple to conduct. This eases comparisons across various testing locations and dates to determine best-in-class systems and operators.  
5.4 Evaluation—This test method can be used in a controlled environment to measure baseline capabilities. It can also be embedded into operational training scenarios to measure degradation due to uncontrolled variables in lighting, weather, radio communications, GPS accuracy, etc.  
5.5 Procurement—This test method can be used to identify inherent capability trade-offs in systems, make informed purchasing decisions, and verify performance during acceptance testing. This aligns requirement specifications and user expectations with existing capability limits.  
5.6 Training—This test method can be used to focus operator training as a repeatable practice task or as an embedded task within training scenarios. The resulting measures of remot...
SCOPE
1.1 This test method is intended for remotely operated ground robots operating in complex, unstructured, and often hazardous environments. It specifies the apparatuses, procedures, and performance metrics necessary to measure the capability of a robot to traverse complex terrains in the form of continuous pitch/roll ramps. This test method is one of several related mobility tests that can be used to evaluate overall system capabilities.  
1.2 The robotic system includes a remote operator in control of all functionality, so an onboard camera and remote operator display are typically required. Assistive features or autonomous behaviors that improve the effectiveness or efficiency of the overall system are encouraged.  
1.3 Different user communities can set their own thresholds of acceptable performance within this test method for various mission requirements.  
1.4 Performing Location—This test method may be performed anywhere the specified apparatuses and environmental conditions can be implemented.  
1.5 Units—The International System of Units (SI Units) and U.S. Customary Units (Imperial Units) are used throughout this document. They are not mathematical conversions. Rather, they are approximate equivalents in each system of units to enable use of readily available materials in different countries. This avoids excessive purchasing and fabrication costs. The differences between the stated dimensions in each system of units are insignificant for the purposes of comparing test method results, so each system of units is separately considered standard within this test method.  
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 develo...

  • Standard
    10 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
  • Standard
    10 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM E2828/E2828M-20(Test Method)
Standard Test Method for Evaluating Response Robot Mobility Using Symmetric Stepfields Terrains

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This test method is part of an overall suite of related test methods that provide repeatable measures of robotic system mobility and remote operator proficiency. This symmetric stepfield terrain specifically challenges robotic system locomotion, suspension systems to maintain traction, rollover tendencies, self-righting in complex terrain (if necessary), chassis shape variability (if available), and remote situational awareness by the operator. As such, it can be used to represent modest outdoor terrain complexity or indoor debris within confined areas.  
5.2 The overall size of the terrain apparatus can vary to provide different constraints depending on the typical obstacle spacing of the intended deployment environment. For example, the terrain with containment walls can be sized to represent repeatable complexity within bus, train, or plane aisles; dwellings with hallways and doorways; relatively open parking lots with spaces between cars; or unobstructed terrains.  
5.3 The test apparatuses are low cost and easy to fabricate so they can be widely replicated. The procedure is also simple to conduct. This eases comparisons across various testing locations and dates to determine best-in-class systems and operators.  
5.4 Evaluation—This test method can be used in a controlled environment to measure baseline capabilities. It can also be embedded into operational training scenarios to measure degradation due to uncontrolled variables in lighting, weather, radio communications, GPS accuracy, etc.  
5.5 Procurement—This test method can be used to identify inherent capability trade-offs in systems, make informed purchasing decisions, and verify performance during acceptance testing. This aligns requirement specifications and user expectations with existing capability limits.  
5.6 Training—This test method can be used to focus operator training as a repeatable practice task or as an embedded task within training scenarios. The resulting measures of remote opera...
SCOPE
1.1 This test method is intended for remotely operated ground robots operating in complex, unstructured, and often hazardous environments. It specifies the apparatuses, procedures, and performance metrics necessary to measure the capability of a robot to traverse complex terrains in the form of symmetric stepfields. This test method is one of several related mobility tests that can be used to evaluate overall system capabilities.  
1.2 The robotic system includes a remote operator in control of all functionality, so an onboard camera and remote operator display are typically required. Assistive features or autonomous behaviors that improve the effectiveness or efficiency of the overall system are encouraged.  
1.3 Different user communities can set their own thresholds of acceptable performance within this test method for various mission requirements.  
1.4 Performing Location—This test method may be performed anywhere the specified apparatuses and environmental conditions can be implemented.  
1.5 Units—The International System of Units (SI Units) and U.S. Customary Units (Imperial Units) are used throughout this document. They are not mathematical conversions. Rather, they are approximate equivalents in each system of units to enable use of readily available materials in different countries. This avoids excessive purchasing and fabrication costs. The differences between the stated dimensions in each system of units are insignificant for the purposes of comparing test method results, so each system of units is separately considered standard within this test method.  
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 ...

  • Standard
    11 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
  • Standard
    11 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off