Standards consensus

There is no "standard consensus concentration of magnesium bicarbonate solution for deacidification of paper. Some conservators prefer a high concentration to assure an adequate alkaline reserve. Others object to the "chalky feel of papers so treated. A concentration of 0.05M was used in this study unless otherwise indicated. 

REGULATORY STANDARDS, CONSENSUS STANDARDS, AND VOLUNTARY PROGRAMS... 

Reference or standard consensus methods methods developed by organisations that use interlaboratory studies to validate them (ISO, CEN, AOAC, DIN, BSI, AFNOR etc.). Their development leads to a known and stated precision or accuracy. 

In relation to lead in drinking water these combinations seem appropriate but there is, as yet, no consensus on how to define potentially harmful nor how to convert likelihood, when expressed as a frequency of occurrence, to zonal compliance with regulatory standards. Consensus will only come from case studies and peer review. 

Standards also give definitions for the characteristics of a material or product, or they provide the means and methods to implement quality tests for them. The difference lies in their method of preparation, therefore, in their legal status. A standard is the result of a consensus between all parties concerned. These parties represent the manufacturers of the product or material, the consumers who are the industries or user services or, ultimately, consumer associations, as well as, finally, governments. 

Standards are generally not made into law and therefore are not enforced but depend on voluntary compliance. Their only strength lies in the consensus obtained during their preparation. There are, nevertheless, a few exceptions it can happen that a decree or directive gives a standard an obligatory nature. 

Moreover, it is useful to distinguish between the standards prepared by the official standards organizations and the professional standards. The former s mission is to ensure that the conditions of the consensus of the widest assemblage of interested parties are followed. The professional standards are prepared by recognized professional organizations but limit the consensus to only the participating organizations. 

In the same way that standards either can be limited to a consensus between professionals or they can be official, the standards organizations can be either professional or official. 

The accreditation of a standard is an official act (signed by the Ministry of Industry in France). To prepare standards, governments have mandated private organizations which are responsible for continuously following the rules to reach a mciximum consensus. There is only one such organization per country. They are, moreover, grouped at the European and international levels. 

All these organizations have developed numerous working procedures, with very little difference between each other. These procedures seem at first heavy and cumbersome, but following them allows a consensus to be reached. Thus, for example, free access for all to the standardization commissions work is guaranteed, and the existence of lobbies is avoided. 

Product characterization aims at defining their end-use properties by means of conventional standard measurements related as well as possible — and in any case, being the object of a large consensus— to end-use properties. We cite for example that octane numbers are supposed to represent the resistance of gasoline to knocking in ignition engines. 

In 1973 the Semiconductor Equipment and Materials Institute (SEMI) held its first standards meeting. SEMI standards are voluntary consensus specifications developed by the producers, users, and general interest groups in the semiconductor (qv) industry. Examples of electronic chemicals are glacial acetic acid [64-19-7] acetone [67-64-17, ammonium fluoride [12125-01 -8] and ammonium hydroxide [1336-21 -6] (see Ammonium compounds), dichloromethane [75-09-2] (see Cm.OROCARBONSANDcm.OROHYDROCARBONs), hydrofluoric acid [7664-39-3] (see Eluorine compounds, inorganic), 30% hydrogen peroxide (qv) [7722-84-1] methanol (qv) [67-56-1] nitric acid (qv) [7697-37-2] 2-propanoI [67-63-0] (see Propyl alcohols), sulfuric acid [7664-93-9] tetrachloroethane [127-18-4] toluene (qv) [108-88-3] and xylenes (qv) (see also Electronic materials). 

Consensus standards are the key to the voluntary standards system because acceptance and use of such standards foUow direcdy from the need for them and from the involvement in their development of all those who share that need. Consensus standards must be produced by a body selected, organized, and conducted in accordance with due process procedures. AH parties or stakeholders are iavolved in the development of the standard and substantial agreement is reached according to the judgment of a properly constituted review board. Other aspects of due process involve proper issuance of notices, record keeping, baHoting, and attention to minority opinion. 

Portland cements are manufactured to comply with specifications estabUshed in each country (70). In the United States, several different specifications are used, including those of the American Society for Testing and Materials and American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). The ASTM aimuaHy pubhshes test methods and standards (24), which are estabhshed on a consensus basis by its members which include consumers and producers. 

There are obvious benefits to be derived from consensus standards which define the chemistry and properties of specific materials. Such standards allow designers and users of materi s to work with confidence that the materials supplied will have the expected minimum properties. Designers and users can also be confident that comparable materials can be purchased from several suppliers. Producers are confident that materials produced to an accepted standard will find a ready market and therefore can be produced efficiently in large factories. 

There is a broad international consensus on the general strategy for detecting EDs, although there are at present no internationally agreed standardized test methods. The overall approach can be summed up as follows ... 

Consensus standards Existing standards that are voluntarily being followed by industry, typically containing the minimum requirements for materials, procedures, and applications. 

This analysis forms the basis of a widely used industry consensus standard, American Petroleum Institute, Recommended Practice 14C, Analysis, Design, Installation, and Testing of Basic Surface Systems for Ofi- i orc Production Platforms (RP14C), which contains a procedure tor dcicnniniiig required process safety devices and shutdowns. The procedures ilescribed here can be used to develop checklists for devices not covered by RP14C or to modify the consensus checklists presented in RP14C in areas of the world where RPI4C is not mandated. 

While RP14C provides guidance on the need for process safety devices, it is desirable to perform a complete hazards analysis of tlie facility to identify hazards that are not necessarily detected or contained by process sLifety devices and that could lead to loss of containment of hydrocarbons or otherwise lead to fire, explosion, pollution, or injury to personnel. The industry consensus standard, American Petroleum Institute Recommended Practice 14J, Design and Hazards Analysis for Offshore Facilities (RP14J), provides guidance as to the use of various hazards analysis techniques. 

The modified FMEA approach has been used by the API to develop RP14C. In this document ten different process components have been analyzed and a Safety Analysis Table (SAT) has been developed for each component. A sample SAT for a pressure vessel is shown in Table 14-4. The fact that Tables 14-3 and 14-4 are not identical is due to both the subjective natures of a Hazard Analysis and FMEA, and to the fact that RP14C is a consensus standard. However, although the rationale differs somewhat, the devices required are identical. (The gas make-up system in Table 14-4 is not really required by RP14C, as we shall see.)... 

Most or the incidents described were the result or not rollowing good engineering practice. Some violated the law, and many more would if they occurred today. In the United States, they would violate OSHA 1910.147 (1990) on The Control of Hazardous Energy (Lock Out/Tag Out) and the Process Safety Management (PSM) Law (OSHA 1910.119, in force since 1992). which applies to listed chemicals above a threshold quantity. The PSM Law requires companies to follow good engineering practice, codes, industry consensus standards, and even the company s owm standards. OSHA could view failure to follow any of these as violations. 

Cascading effects Check valve Clogged (of filter) Consensus standard Conservation vent Dike, berm Discharge valve Division (in electrical area classification) Downspout Expansion joint Explosion proof Faucet... 

In the early part of the 1990s deliberations on appliance efficiency standards appeared to be heading toward greater consensus. Manufacturers, efficiency advocates, and states joined together to discuss a negotiated joint proposal for the second DOE revision under NAECA of refrigerator standards, which was to be issued in 1995. All major parties submitted a joint proposal to DOE in late 1994. 

Expl Power is always measured in relative terms, ie, relative to a standard expl and expressed as a percentage. For military explosives the consensus standard is TNT, and for commercial expls the standard is usually Blasting Gelatin (see Vol 2, B211-R). Three measurement methods are in common use ... 

The ASME Consensus was first published in 1979 and has been a standard reference ever since for boiler water treatment practice in the United States and its sphere of influence. The ASME Consensus 1994 update reflected the need to cover technical advances in boiler design and water conditioning, and also new and different types of steam generator, steam purity issues, and similar matters. 

The BSI perspective is quite different from that of ASME. It includes considerable information on water treatment chemicals and tackles its standard with a strong chemistry emphasis, whereas the ASME Consensus maintains an engineering stance. 

The BS 2486 1978 water chemistry table for FT plants categorized boilers by FW hardness (unlike the 1997 revision, which charted by heat flux, and the ASME Consensus, which uses pressure to define boiler groups). This 1978 edition has been withdrawn by BSI. However, for the purposes of providing guidelines for those many thousands of smaller FT boiler plant owners around the world (especially those in newly industrializing countries) operating lower heat-flux units and without benefit of first-class pretreatment, it remains a valid standard. 

Other notaries are the Consensus on Operating Practices for the Control of Feedwater and Boiler Water Chemistry in Modem Industrial Boilers (1994 edition), published by the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, and BS 2486 1997 Recommendations for Treatment of Water for Steam Boilers and Water Heaters from the British Standards Institution. The 1994 Consensus (with its engineering background) and the 1997 version of BS 2486 (with its strength in operational chemistry) complement each other well. I consider that the tables and propositions contained in these two booklets jointly represent a true standard for boiler water treatment operational control. Consequently, I am pleased to be able to reproduce in this book all the tables from both publications, having received permission from the respective organizations to do so. 

---