Benchmark issues

These types of benchmarking issues can be used to identify other issues that may require further analysis due to the potential for severe consequences or higher perceived likelihood for an accident. The issues identified through a qualitative analysis can be directly used as inputs in a semi-quantitative analysis with a focus on developing a better understanding of these issues and their influence on the level of risk, and need for additional risk mitigation measures. 

The most actively traded government securities for various maturities are called benchmark issues. Yields on these issues serve as reference interest rates which are used extensively for pricing other securities. Exhibit 1.2 is a Bloomberg screen of the benchmark bonds issued by the government of the Netherlands. European government bonds will be discussed in Chapter 5. As an illustration of a corporate bond. Exhibit 1.3 shows a Bloomberg Security Description screen for 4.875% coupon bond issued by Pirelli SPA that matures on 21 October 2008. 

Swap spreads are quoted off specific government benchmarks. When a benchmark issue is replaced, it can have a technical effect on swap spreads. Swap spreads can either narrow or widen, depending on the new benchmark issue used and the shape of the yield curve. The change is only technical, however, and absolute swap rate levels remain unchanged. 

A P2 audit differs from most other types of audits because it makes use of a dual benchmarking approach namely, it uses both technical (environmental performance) and financial performance as its basis for making corrective actions. The status quo most often serves as the benchmark, though other standards certainly can be devised. A P2 audit can also affect non-environmental issues. The types of corrective actions can affect other types of wastes, energy, occupational safety, product quality, and worker productivity. 

Other difficulties arise from the incorrect treatment of aromaticity, e.g. the tautomeric form C can be also represented as an aromatic compound. However, ALOGPS, for example, does not consider this ring as an aromatic one. Inconsistently defined aromaticity lowers the prediction performance (Fig. 15.ID). The use of SDF files, which do not explicitly define aromaticity solves this problem. All these factors are not limiting when the data are prepared with the same coding scheme and consistency. However, these issues are very important for method application and benchmarking. 

Based on a benchmarked scope/specification provided by Orica and with process engineering carried out on behalf of Orica by Noram Engineers and Constructors of Canada. This package was free-issued to each supplier for detailed engineering and costing. 

The elucidation of actinide chemistry in solution is important for understanding actinide separation and for predicting actinide transport in the environment, particularly with respect to the safety of nuclear waste disposal.72,73 The uranyl CO + ion, for example, has received considerable interest because of its importance for environmental issues and its role as a computational benchmark system for higher actinides. Direct structural information on the coordination of uranyl in aqueous solution has been obtained mainly by extended X-ray absorption fine structure (EXAFS) measurements,74-76 whereas X-ray scattering studies of uranium and actinide solutions are more rare.77 Various ab initio studies of uranyl and related molecules, with a polarizable continuum model to mimic the solvent environment and/or a number of explicit water molecules, have been performed.78-82 We have performed a structural investigation of the carbonate system of dioxouranyl (VI) and (V), [U02(C03)3]4- and [U02(C03)3]5- in water.83 This study showed that only minor geometrical rearrangements occur upon the one-electron reduction of [U02(C03)3]4- to [U02(C03)3]5-, which supports the reversibility of this reduction. 

For continuous data, there are still a number of outstanding issues regarding the benchmark including (Crump 2002) (1) definition of an adverse effect (2) whether to calculate the BMD from a continuous health outcome, or first convert the continuous response to a binary (yes/no) response (3) quantitative definition of the BMD, in particular in such a manner that BMD from continuous and binary data are commensurate (4) selection of a mathematical dose-response model for calculating a BMD (5) selection of the level of risk to which the BMD corresponds and (6) selection of a statistical methodology for implementing the calculation. 

Crump, K.S. 1984. A new method for determining aUowable daily intakes. Fundam. Appl. Toxicol. 4 854-871. Crump, K. 2002. Critical issues in benchmark calculations from continuous data. Crit. Rev. Toxicol. 32 133-153. 

The reader will find timely reviews of a number of important research areas as well as very recent research findings. This volume represents a benchmark for the fields of food science and agriculture focused at the molecular level and designed to address quality issues. If agricultural sciences follow the lead demonstrated in this volume, the quality demands of the consumer can be met. 

Consider benchmarking If possible, arrange with other organizations that have successfully made the transition to meet with them, review their system, and discuss transition issues and how they were solved. 

The way to estimate strategic value in the financial sense, in other words the premium paid beyond the enterprise value, is probably the valuation issue which is least amenable to any form of method or systematic analysis. Although previous transactions from external benchmarking or from the company s own experience may give some kind of lead, even if there is true comparability between the benchmark and the valuation subject, differences in market conditions from one day to the next will often have major influences on the price of an asset. The acquisition of Hexal by Novartis Sandoz generic division in 2006 was widely criticized at the time as being too costly, yet immediately thereafter Teva bought Ivax to re-establish their market position... 

This section discusses communication issues raised by group V-VII biomarkers (Chapter 3), in which some indicator of concentrations at which health effects do or do not appear could be used as a benchmark for the observed biomarker concentrations. 

In classifying waste, deterministic responses generally should be of concern only for hazardous chemicals (see Section 3.2.2.1). Therefore, the only important issue for risk assessment is the most appropriate approach to estimating thresholds for induction of responses in humans. The primary concern here is that consistent approaches should be used for all substances that induce deterministic effects. NCRP s recommendation that nominal thresholds in humans should be estimated using the benchmark dose method and a safety factor of 10 or 100, depending on whether the data were obtained in a study in humans or animals (see Section 6.1.2.1), is intended to provide consistency in estimating thresholds for all substances that cause deterministic effects. 

The last marketing-mix variable is productivity and quality. One issue here is creating efficiency in pharmacy service activities. This means that monitoring and feedback of service encounters should be performed. Then pharmacists can be trained to be efficient in the time spent with patients when providing services. Time benchmarks can be established for various service offerings. Nonpharmacist personnel should be used where appropriate, such as in scheduling appointments and billing payers. 

The reality of the situation has become evident Without analytical tools that could keep pace with new benchmarks for sample generation, the advantages would not be fully realized. Thus, the relationship between sample generation and analysis is a major issue in the pharmaceutical industry. Clearly, traditional approaches for analysis are not capable of meeting specialized needs created by dramatic improvements in sample generation. 

---