Assessment report

Scientific and Technical Assessment Report on Manganese, PB-242-291, Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., 1975, pp. 6—7. 

Science AppHcations, Inc., Status Report on the EPRI Fuel Cycle Accident Risk Assessment, Report EPRI-NP-1128, Electric Research Power Institute, Palo Alto, Calif., July 1979. 

V. D. McGinniss, "Radiation Curing State-of-the-Art Assessment," Report prepared for the Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, Calif.,... 

Summarize the fmdings and recommendations in a brief pre-assessment report, and present and review this with management. This will reaffirm management s commitment to the next phase. Include in the pre-assessment report a list of actions or steps that the team intends to follow in the next phase. If some of these steps involve field measurements, then highlight these and their possible effects on production schedules and personnel assignments. Use the steps in Phase II as a guide to developing the recommended actions. 

From these answers, a listing of reeommendations is developed speeify-ing the need for additional aetion or study. The reeommendations, along with the list of questions and answers, beeome the key elements of the hazard assessment report. 

To consolidate multiple reports efficiently, you may want to develop an enlarged chart based on the assessment report form (questionnaire, protocol, other), which can be filled in as assessments are completed. This may help to illustrate common strengths and weaknesses, as well as highlighting pacesetter programs and gaps. 

The applicant must submit complete copies of dossier to the EMEA, and directly to each of the rapporteurs. The EMEA are allowed 14 days to validate the application to ensure that it is complete and in accordance with the regulations, after which the rapporteurs can commence the scientific evaluation. The review process involves considerable feedback between the rapporteurs, the CHMP and the applicant, central to which can be achieving agreement on the final text of the SPC, labels and leaflet. The rapporteurs are required to deliver preliminary assessment reports to the CHMP within 80 days of the start of the review process. The applicant is also copied on the report. Over the next 40 days issues raised in... 

The decentralised procedure can be used in cases where the product has never been authorised in any of the Member States, and the applicant wishes to obtain a license in a number of states simultaneously. The applicant must submit applications with the complete dossier to the Competent Authorities of each of the Member States where authorisation is desired. A single Member State should be chosen as the reference state to undertake the scientific assessment ofthe complete dossier, while the other states are designated as concerned states. The review process has many parallels vhth the centralised procedure, in that similar time lines exist, the reference State plays the role ofthe rapporteur, and the concerned States replace the CHMP. Once all States have validated that the dossiers are complete, the reference State is allowed 70 days to review the dossier and prepare a preliminary assessment report, which is circulated to the concerned Member States and the applicant. Comments from the concerned Member States and applicant responses are collected so that by day 120 the reference State may issue a draft assessment report together vhth draft SPC, label and leaflet texts. The clock may be stopped until requested responses from the applicant are received. The application then enters the second step in the assessment process, during which all the concerned Member States consider the... 

I Scientific Review (Rapporteurs) Preliminary Assessment Reports (Rapporteurs) ---------------- ... 

Draft assessment report, SPC, Labels, leaflet (Reference CA)... 

Certificate of exclusion from environmental assessment or assessment report as applicable Labelling of devices... 

I wish to acknowledge the assistance of Dr. T.G. Brydges in preparation of this manuscript. He provided advice and made available the comprehensive subject material of the Canadian Assessment Reports (Reference 14). The assistance of Ruth Tung in typing the manuscript is also recognized. 

This chapter summarizes climate projections presented by the recent Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) of the IPCC, both for the global scale and for the so-called European and Mediterranean region. Besides the IPCC projections, other results regarding the Mediterranean area will be reviewed as well. The emphasis will be mostly placed on temperature and precipitation projections, while other variables, such as wind, solar radiation, or sea level, will not be commented in depth. Some attention will be paid to methodologies used to develop projections, and the corresponding uncertainties will be commented. In general, projections will be given for the end of the current century. 

Acknowledgments This contribution derives from a previous work [20], Additional parts have been developed in the frame of an assessment report requested by the Catalan Water Agency (ACA) some colleagues contributed to that report Jordi Cunillera (Servei Meteorologic de Catalunya), Carme Llasat (Universitat de Barcelona), Josep Enric Llebot (Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona) and Javier Martm-Vide (Universitat de Barcelona). Rosana Rel also contributed to the bibliographic search. 

IPCC (2007) Climate change 2007 impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Working Group II. Fourth Assessment Report, UNEP... 

EEA- European Environmental Agency (2000) Nutrients in European ecosystems. Environmental Assessment report No 4. Available at http //www.eea.europa.eu/publications/ ENVIASSRP04 (June 2009)... 

CES (2002b) Comments on near final risk assessment report. Letter from Centre Europeen des Silicones, Brussels, 9 July. 

GC (1993) Non-pesticidal organotin compounds. Priority substances list assessment report. Ottawa, Ontarie,... 

U.S. Environmoital Protection Agency, Subsurface Flow Constructed Wetlands for Wastewater Treatment A Technology Assessment, Report EPA/ 832-R/93/001. Washington, D.C, 1994. 

---