Review documents

The project review process involves multiple steps that should be definea in management gmdelines (CCPS, 1993, pp. 57-61). The steps include (1) review pohcy, (2) review scheduling, (3) reviewtech-nique, (4) review team representation, (5) review documentation, (6) review follow-up, (7) review follow-up verification, and (8) review procedures change management. These steps define how a review, whether it be a safety review, environmental review, pre-start-up review, or whatever, is conducted and how closure of review aclion items is achieved. 

Review Documentation The project review team leader has the ultimate responsibility for documenting the results of the project review. This responsibility may be delegated to a team scribe or secretary to record trie review minutes and issue a summary report with listed action items. The action items could address exceptions to company or industiy standards and government regulations, review team recommendations based on experience and knowledge, and further issues for study that could not be resolved during the review session. 

Step 1.6 Review Documentation. Collate and review all existing documentation and information regarding the process. Regional or plant surveys may have been undertaken, environmental audits may have been conducted, safety audit findings may be available these could yield useful information indicating the areas for concern, and will show gaps where no data are available. 

The safety status of the process should be periodically reviewed against the guiding principles for the original design. Monitoring of add-ons can detect potentially dangerous modifications. Process hazards analysis or process safety audits are useful tools for this review. Documentation of inherently safer principles is critical to ensure that future changes don t nullify the positive features of the initial installation. 

Hansch and Leo [13] described the impact of Hpophihdty on pharmacodynamic events in detailed chapters on QSAR studies of proteins and enzymes, of antitumor drugs, of central nervous system agents as well as microbial and pesticide QSAR studies. Furthermore, many reviews document the prime importance of log P as descriptors of absorption, distribution, metabolism, excretion and toxicity (ADMET) properties [5-18]. Increased lipophilicity was shown to correlate with poorer aqueous solubility, increased plasma protein binding, increased storage in tissues, and more rapid metabolism and elimination. Lipophilicity is also a highly important descriptor of blood-brain barrier (BBB) permeability [19, 20]. Last, but not least, lipophilicity plays a dominant role in toxicity prediction [21]. 

OPCW (2003) Review document, www.opcw.org/html/global/wgrc/2k3/rclrevdoc.html. OPCW, The Hague. 

Review Documentation The project review team leader has the ultimate responsibility for documenting the results of the project... 

Note Every effort has been made to ensure this list Is accurate, reliable, and Includes the most recent test methods available. Advances in analytical technologies and revisions to current test methods are an ongoing process. Therefore, due to the ever evolving test methods, the listed methods above may not be inclusive of all methods currently available. Also, it is possible the listed test methods are subject to revision (s) and may be replaced/superceded by a new test method(s). Thus, the reader should consult peer-reviewed documents before relying on the information provided. 

OECD has prepared a Detailed Review Document on classification systems for sensitizing substances in OECD Member countries as a step toward consensus on a harmonized classification system concerning criteria and classification systems for sensitizing substances in OECD countries (OECD 1999a). 

OECD. 1999a. Detailed review document on classification systems for sensitising substances in OECD member countries. OECD Series on Testing and Assessment No. 13. Environment Directorate, Joint Meeting of the Chemicals Committee and the Working Party on Chemicals. ENV/JM/MONO(99)3. Paris OECD. 

OECD. 2006d. Draft Hershberger background review document. Paris OECD, http //www.oecd.org/ dataoecd/18/57/37880949.pdf... 

At the same time. Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM) evaluated FETAX methodology based on the inter-laboratory studies and published a review document in 2000 (5). The expert panel concluded that FETAX was not sufficiently validated for regulatory use due to the intra- and inter-laboratory variability (6). Nonetheless, the assay was developed in our laboratory for use as a predictive screening assay. 

Wellner, D., and A. Meister, A survey of inborn errors of metabolism and transport in man. Ann. Rev. Biochem. 50 911, 1981. This review documents the importance of the pathways that break down amino acids. in. humans... 

Salaices, Maria Waterhouse, Bert Waddams, A. L. Kamatari, O. Chelating Agents A CEH Product Review Document. Promotional literature, Preston Jarvis/American Industrial Chemical Corporation, USA. 

Requirements review documentation System design specifications Software design methods Software review(s)... 

Implementation Unit Test Documentation Report Code and Code Review Documentation In-process Vendor/System Developer Audit Report Integration Test Procedures ... 

---