Big Chemical Encyclopedia

Chemical substances, components, reactions, process design ...

Articles Figures Tables About

Employer Prohibitions.Part

For an atom the evaluation of the potentials in Eq. (2) is achieved straightforwardly, using trial wavefunctions, by integrating the charge density radially. Once the potentials are known the wavefunctions are obtained by numerical integration of the radial part of the Schrodinger equation, and the process is continued iteratively to self-consistency. In molecules the loss of spherical symmetry makes the procedure much more difficult, and in particular for molecules containing heavy atoms the number of matrix elements which must be evaluated becomes prohibitive. Calculations on the uranyl ion have employed three different approaches to circumvent this difficulty. [Pg.251]

Because of the scarcity of experimental data, computational methods need to be employed to predict molecular thermochemical data for the species. Important part of the development of such quantum chemical methods is their critical assessment by comparison to accurate experimental data. Nowadays, different theoretical schemes, such as the G2, CBS, or G3 theory, are able to predict enthalpies of formation for small systems at accuracy within a few kcal per mole. Unfortunately, these approaches, which involve the use of high-level ab initio methods, are limited by the size of molecule systems that can be studied and are still prohibitively costly. A recent review on the use of different theoretical methods for computing enthalpies of formation was published by Curtiss et al. [18, 19]. Density Functional Theory... [Pg.2]

The regulations require a driver to submit to an alcohol or drug test when the employer has reasonable suspicion to believe the driver has violated the drug and alcohol prohibitions in Part 382, Subpart B. The employer s suspicion must be based on specific, contemporaneous, articulable observations concerning the appearance, behavior, speech, or body odors of the driver. [Pg.70]

The consequences for drivers found to have violated Subpart B of this Part, including the requirement that the driver be removed immediately from safety-sensitive functions, and the procedures under Part 40, Subpart 0, of this title. (9) Your policy must clearly state what the consequences are to a driver who violates the prohibitions listed in Subpart B of Part 382. For carriers that have a zero-tolerance policy, this is simple — you will provide the driver with a list of substance abuse professionals, and then terminate employment. For carriers that do not terminate, you must detail your SAP program in your written policy. [Pg.246]

Drivers are not off the hook in this proposal. To close a loophole that has been around for a while, the proposal would require drivers to notify (in writing) all current employers of any violations of the prohibitions in Part 382. The notification must be made before the end of the business day following the day the employee received notice of the violation, or prior to performing any safety-sensitive function, whichever comes first. [Pg.251]

Part of is meant to include the possibility that the composition of a material stream may vary, for instance that solids may settle out in a pipeline that has a dead leg under certain operating conditions, with the consequence of blockage and unavailability of that part of the line when it is needed. The recommended actions may include the elimination of the dead leg by employing a recirculation system, redesigning the dead leg to be entirely vertical so that settlement may not occur, or simply prohibiting the operational mode in which the problem can occur. [Pg.126]

You, as an employer, may not test for any other substances under Department of Transportation (DOT) authority. However, Part 40 does not prohibit you from testing for other controlled substances under your own authority. [Pg.591]

The company will prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity as part of its written employment policy statement. [Pg.36]

Equipment operations in which any part of the equipment, load line, or load (including rigging and lifting accessories) is closer than the minimum approach distance under Table A of 1926.1408 to an energized power line is prohibited, except where the employer demonstrates that all of the following requirements are met ... [Pg.1242]

As already mentioned, the relevant statutory provisions are part of the criminal law, and prior to 1974 the only recourse available to an inspector faced with a recalcitrant employer was prosecution. The Health and Safety at Work Act introduced two new sanctions the improvement notice and the prohibition notice, to assist in securing compliance with the safety standards. An improvement notice requires that certain matters be remedied within a specified time. A prohibition notice requires that a particular activity, deemed to involve a risk of serious personal injury, cease until the situation has been resolved. In many cases, notice procedure is more effective in improving standards than is prosecution, but the serving of a notice does not preclude legal proceedings. Failure to comply with a notice is, in itself, an offence. [Pg.216]

Safety and health professionals may require medical examinations of employees only if the medical examination is specifically job related and is consistent with business necessity. Medical examinations are permitted only after the applicant with a disability has been offered the job position. The medical examination may be given before the applicant starts the particular job, and the job offer may be contingent upon the results of the medical examination if all employees are subject to the medical examinations and information obtained from the medical examination is maintained in separate, confidential medical files. Employers are permitted to conduct voluntary medical examinations for current employees as part of an ongoing medical health program, but again, the medical files must be maintained separately and in a confidential manner. The ADA does not prohibit safety and health professionals or their medical staff from making inquiries or requiring medical or fit for duty examinations when there is a need to determine whether or not an employee is still able to... [Pg.111]


See other pages where Employer Prohibitions.Part is mentioned: [Pg.131]    [Pg.524]    [Pg.624]    [Pg.510]    [Pg.101]    [Pg.524]    [Pg.29]    [Pg.201]    [Pg.13]    [Pg.163]    [Pg.381]    [Pg.22]    [Pg.330]    [Pg.431]    [Pg.163]    [Pg.69]    [Pg.85]    [Pg.99]    [Pg.110]    [Pg.24]    [Pg.90]    [Pg.127]    [Pg.910]    [Pg.49]    [Pg.104]    [Pg.480]    [Pg.60]    [Pg.318]    [Pg.1239]    [Pg.1239]    [Pg.1269]    [Pg.1384]    [Pg.112]    [Pg.131]    [Pg.1489]    [Pg.20]    [Pg.851]    [Pg.266]    [Pg.141]   


SEARCH



Prohibit

Prohibited

Prohibition

Prohibitive

© 2024 chempedia.info