General Methodology. Analyzing the potential oil and gas development impacts for LEPCs requires three basic components:
1) A defined plan area.
2) An estimate of the rate and extent of habitat loss related to the development and management activities.
3) An estimate of population density to define the effects of those direct impacts on LEPCs. The plan area for the RWP is defined by EOR+10 which encompasses 62,733 mi2 or 40,149,404 acres across parts of Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas. The buffer around the range accounts for shifts in the estimated occupied range over time due to changes in habitat, movements of birds, and detectability of birds in areas of low population density. The EOR+10 is broken into four ecoregions. These ecoregions broadly reflect the different ecotypes across the LEPC range. Existing infrastructure or developments were identified based on publicly available GIS data for Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma and Texas. The sources and dates for these data sources are described in detail on ages 131–134 of the RWP. These datasets represent the best available data on developments within the region, but in many cases, the spatial and attribute error rates of these datasets are undefined. It is expected that the mitigation framework under the RWP and this CCAA will incentivize industry to provide better data on existing developments and will improve the assessment of impacts over time. In addition to the infrastructure data sources, this analysis uses data from the 2013 CHAT, which includes the focal areas (CHAT 1), connectivity zones (CHAT 2) and the remainder of the EOR+10. The density estimate utilized in this analysis is based on a reconstruction of LEPC populations across the range by Xxxxxx (2012). This reconstruction used LEPC ground survey data and aerial survey data collected across all four ecoregions. Depending on the ecoregion, this collective long-term average population estimate represents a period of 13-22 years from 1990 to 2012. During this period, populations ranged from roughly 37,000 to 84,000 birds, and that population estimate is representative of past and future conditions, including the population goals within the RWP. The density estimate uses the Xxxxxx average population estimate divided by the area of suitable habitat as predicted by a Maximum Entropy lek habitat model developed by USGS (Xxxxxxxxx et al. unpublished data) (Table 3). It conservatively represents all potential take resulting from development or ...
General Methodology. 5.1 Proposal submissions should outline the resources to be committed to this work by the Proponent.
5.2 Proponents are to provide a description of the services proposed, including the details of the services.
5.3 In the submission, the Proponent should provide a description of the methods to be employed to perform and co-ordinate the work.
General Methodology. 1.1 General methodology (internal network- ing) The document describing general norms and methodologies for networking and best practices of work into the BPN is D 1.1 where also methodologies for quality assurance and monitoring are found. This section instead will include some specifications of those methodologies, for the internal work of WP to WP communication and WG internally specific methodologies (see WG sections).
General Methodology. 3
1.1 General methodology (internal networking) 3
1.2 Minute writing 3
1.3 Calendar and reminders 3
1.4 Repository 4
1.4.1 Versioning of files and documents 4
1.5 Web site 4
1.5.1 Help desk 4 1.6 Problem solving on contents 5
General Methodology. A Base Year is established (usually the most recent fiscal year). These base patient revenues will be adjusted for price variance from approved rates, for volume variances, changes in differential due to changes in payer mix and any other approved One-Time adjustments. This base year revenue is then adjusted for any special transitional revenue provision to facilitate conversion of the hospital from an 85% variable cost system to a 100% fixed cost system (as is applicable under the TPR constraint system).1 This provision is described in subsection C. In year three of this agreement, the hospital is also eligible for a population adjustment to its overall TPR constraint. The hospital then must provide appropriate and necessary hospital services to its patient population and operate within the TPR constraint afforded it by the HSCRC for all years this agreement remains in effect.
General Methodology. A five-step Delphi forum process was used to develop understanding of foresight from experts active in the field of nanotechnology. This process was intended to permit an independent synthesis of information derived from leading experts. The steps were:
1) Core group formulation of initial questions A Core Group of experts from US, Canada and Europe (government, academia, industry) were recruited by the project team. The Core Group was provided with a scope statement for the desired outcome of the Delphi forum and an initial set of possible questions. Through web conferencing and document revisions, the Core Group advised on the development of the questions used in the first round of the Delphi forum.
2) Delphi forum Round 1 With advice from the Core Group and using the expert contact lists from multiple sources involved in commerce, regulation, or study of nanotechnology uses, the project team assembled an invitation list of approximately 2500 experts worldwide. Efforts were made (through contacting trade associations and considering commodity manufacturers as well as product manufacturers) to ensure that the invitation list would reach the full range of the value chain for MNM use in products. The questions developed with the Core Group were coded into a web-survey instrument (xxx.xxxxxxxxx.xxx) and sent to the expert invitation list. Round 1 was open for response for approximately 2 months in late 2015 (details discussed below). During this period the project team developed web and newsletter announcements. The project team also enlisted leading experts to stimulate participation as ambassadors using direct emails to their contact lists.
3) Expert review panel A panel of experts was convened to evaluate the collected information including the first Delphi round results and to help define the aims of the second Delphi round in light of the foresight objectives. Advice was sought using specific questions regarding content and meaning of the first round. The evaluation occurred in an expert roundtable and a nanomaterial specialty section meeting of the 2015 Society for Risk Analysis (SRA) Annual Meeting in Washington DC (details below).
4) Core group-advised development of Delphi Round 2 questions Round 2 questions were developed with guidance from the Core Group in consideration of their review of the Round 1 data, the expert panel reviews at the 2015 SRA meeting, and advice from ProSafe Partners. The resulting questions were intended to clarify issues ra...
General Methodology. All procedures were approved by the Emory University Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee. Midsagittally-hemisected spinal cords were isolated from Xxxxxxx–Xxxxxx rats aged from postnatal days 6-12 and were prepared for in vitro experiments as described previously (Xxxxxxxx and Xxxxxxx, 0000;Xxxx et al., 2005) or from mice of the same age from the either the FVB or balb/c background. Recordings were made in oxygenated artificial cerebrospinal fluid (aCSF) containing (in mM): NaCl 128; KCl 1.9; D-glucose 10; MgSO41.3; CaCl2
General Methodology. Different set of stakeholders involved in the project can play an important role in the achievement of the projects objectives. This is the basic idea for establishing a network of common interest that will support the development of the project. Community building and stakeholders consultation activities are the organizational tools and methods that will be used for creating it. All of the project partners will identify key stakeholders in their own countries relevant for the CIVIC EPISTEMOLOGIES project as it is important to raise awareness of the project’s activities and the opportunities for using the Roadmap and Registry of Services. The steps towards establishing and nurturing the network are as follows: Identify the stakeholders to contact and the projects to liaise with at national and international level, to establish a reliable framework that can be used as a starting point for the consultation activities. Define the object of the consultation, depending on the needs of the different users and stakeholders and on the expected outcomes. Find out how and where this consultation can take place, e.g. conferences and workshops, ad hoc meetings, online consultation, developing of advocacy papers, etc. This network will be the base for a sustainable network of common interest existing beyond the EU funded period and aims to encourage future use and development of CIVIC EPISTEMOLOGIES Roadmap and Registry of Services. A plan for the sustainability of the project will be developed, by investigating approaches and models from other similar initiatives in order to obtain concrete solutions that can be applied to CIVIC EPISTEMOLOGIES activities.
General Methodology. For purposes of calculating the components of Working Capital the following hierarchy is to be used for all balances:
(a) The accounting principles, policies, procedures, categorizations, definitions, methods, practices and techniques specifically listed in Section 2 below.
(b) To the extent not addressed in (a), GAAP as of the Closing Date applied consistently with the accounting principles, policies, procedures, categorizations, assets recognition bases, definitions, methods, practices and techniques (including in respect of the exercise of management judgment) adopted in the Financial Statements .
General Methodology. In any given Contract Year, where the Commonwealth is required to pay an Exit Fee, such Exit Fee shall be the lesser of (a) the Exit Fee set forth in Attachment 10.1.10 (Exit Fees) as calculated in accordance with this Schedule 10.1 or (b) the “Calculated Exit Fees”, which is to be calculated as described below. Depending upon the reason for the termination, the Commonwealth may pay the Exit Fee for the applicable Contract Year. There shall be no Exit Fee for any termination on or after the expiration of the initial ten (10) year Term, unless the Commonwealth has exercised Section 14.1.2 (Term Renewal) of this Agreement, in which instance the Exit Fees shall be applicable to that renewal Term, but not for any termination on or after the expiration of such renewal term. Amounts may be invoiced by Vendor as costs are incurred by Vendor or assumed as obligations of the Commonwealth as indicated in the respective Fee component in Attachment 10.1.10 (Exit Fees).
