On the basis of that information, the list should be updated.
Relevant information was also communicated by third countries and international organisations. In accordance with Article 4(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2111/2005, certain Member States and the European Aviation Safety Agency (‘EASA’) communicated to the Commission information that is relevant in the context of updating that list. Having regard to Regulation (EC) No 2111/2005 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 December 2005 on the establishment of a Community list of air carriers subject to an operating ban within the Community and on informing air passengers of the identity of the operating carrier, and repealing Article 9 of Directive 2004/36/EC ( 1), and in particular Article 4(2) thereof,Ĭommission Regulation (EC) No 474/2006 ( 2) established the list of air carriers which are subject to an operating ban within the Union, referred to in Chapter II of Regulation (EC) No 2111/2005. Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, If you have any questions about selecting the best mechanical equipment and industrial vacuum for your application, Ruwac is always here to help (413)532-4030.COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2017/2215Īmending Regulation (EC) No 474/2006 as regards the list of air carriers which are banned from operating or are subject to operational restrictions within the Union You’ll want a vacuum that’s powerful and efficient enough to pull off any point of source extraction, but also one that can be used for General Housekeeping to tidy up at the end of the job.
When using a mechanical method, it is important to ensure a properly sized HEPA filtered vacuum is being used in conjunction with the point of source mechanical equipment.
#VAC BAN REMOVER 2017 MARCH FREE#
The difference comes into play with a 1-2 step mechanical process that significantly reduces labor and increases production per hour.Īside from just a labor savings and an increase in production the substrate will be left free of all contamination and have a proper surface profile to accept the new flooring. When weighing the consumable cost between mastic removers and mechanical equipment, the cost per square foot is very similar, approximately. New mechanical technology in the way of scraping, grinding and shot-blasting have quickly surpassed solvent based mastic removal as the leader in productive and safe glue removal. It is becoming more common for job sites to ban solvent based mastic removal and for the glue, floor covering, and overlay manufacturers to not warranty products installed over a floor that has used this method of removal. If not neutralized and cleaned effectively solvent based removers and the residue they leave can have an adverse reaction leading to potential future flooring issues. These steps include applying the mastic remover, dwell time, surface agitation, additional applications and most importantly the need to neutralize and clean the surface. Mastic removers typically require multiple steps in order to maximize the effectiveness of the removal.
Although functional, solvent based mastic removal can be material and labor intensive, not to mention potentially odorous, hazardous, and flammable depending on the mastic remover being used.
Mastic removers are a functional method for removal and are available in many forms such as citrus or soy based and low odor. However, new and improved technology and mechanical processes along with HEPA filtered vacuum systems have brought glue removal into the 21st century. Solvent based mastic removers have long been the industry standard for removal of asbestos containing glues.
0 kommentar(er)
