The Compliance Factor

The serious conflicts of interest in the process of the NAP preparation, as well as the multitude of practical restrictions (data availability, pressure of time), led to a simple procedure for the basic model of allocation for the existing installations it proved to be the smallest common denominator. Regarding the allocation of allowances on the basis of historical emissions for the period 2000-2002 without further sectoral differentiation, a very simple base model was created. Here, allocation arose out of the historical emissions for this period multiplied by a so-called compliance factor. This simple model was expanded, however, by a multitude of special rules which had significant consequences for the compliance factor and considerably eroded the uniformity and transparency of the allocation model. 

In the allocation procedure, a special allocation for the electricity production from CHP plants was catered for in order to compensate incentives to reduce the electricity production from CHP. The construction of this regulation comprises a special allocation for the historical production of electricity by CHP, which is subjected to an expost adjustment. If electricity production from CHP is reduced in the course of the period, the return of the special allocation for CHP is requested in the ratio of five times the special allocation for a reduction of 1 million kWh electricity production from CHP. After the special allocation for the electricity production from CHP had borne 35 EUA per million kilowatt-hours in the first draft of the NAP, this special allocation was reduced to 27 EUA as a result of political negotiations, and also in order not to make the compliance factor too ambitious. Annually, 2.02 million EUA were additionally allocated to the CHP plants. 

The German NAP therefore uses the so-called proportionate allocation cuts procedure. If the total sum of the allowances allocated to individual installations (except cases of hardship) is higher than 495 (499 million EUA minus new entrants reserve minus allowances for hardship clauses), the allocations for all the plants are correspondingly reduced, if the allocation does not have the compliance factor one. 

The compliance factor in the original BMU proposal from January 2004 amounted to 0.927. The difference from the uniform compliance factor of 0.971 is mainly a result of an inflation of the cap, the reduction of the new entrants set-aside and the special allocation to CHP. 

If < value of the acceptable risk, then the compliance factor for risk is 0. 

A study by Shull et al. [35]. on the adhesion of soft and relatively thin elastomeric lenses to glass substrates shows that the compliance (C = S/P) predicted by the JKR theory is larger than the actual value by a constant factor. 

Compliance with the principles of GMP is one of the major factors considered by the Licensing Authority when examining an applicahon for a licence to manufacture under the Medicines Act (1968). Similar codes exist in the USA and other countries. 

We have thus far focused on the biological factors that affect drug responses but recovery from illness often takes place in the context of interactions among individuals. In these interactions, both patient and clinician bring their own knowledge, predispositions, values, priorities, modes of thinking, and belief systems into play. Within this transaction, issues such as patient compliance, expectation effect ... 

The temperature dependence of the compliance and the stress relaxation modulus of crystalline polymers well above Tf is greater than that of cross-linked polymers, but in the glass-to-rubber transition region the temperature dependence is less than for an amorphous polymer. A factor in this large temperature dependence at T >> TK is the decrease in the degree of Crystallinity with temperature. Other factors arc the reciystallization of strained crystallites ipto unstrained ones and the rotation of crystallites to relieve the applied stress (38). All of these effects occur more rapidly as the temperature is raised. 

Fig. 4.9 Temperature dependence of the characteristic time of the a-relaxation in PIB as measured by dielectric spectroscopy (defined as (2nf ) ) (empty diamond) and of the shift factor obtained from the NSE spectra at Qmax=l-0 (filled square). The different lines show the temperature laws proposed by Tormala [135] from spectroscopic data (dashed-dotted), by Ferry [34] from compliance data (solid) and by Dejean de la Batie et al. from NMR data (dotted) [136]. (Reprinted with permission from [125]. Copyright 1998 American Chemical Society)...

Another approach developed on the basis of an empirical compliance calibration, which was designed originally for isotropic brittle materials (Berry 1963), appears to avoid certain problems associated with correction factors. The compliance is given in the form of empirical equation... 

Cost More expensive dosage forms may be an important factor for non-compliance. So, the cost factor should be considered while selecting a drug. The less expensive drug treatment may be preferred. 

The creep parameters J and y are obtained through transverse creep experiments. The initial compliance is the elastic response of the material (Equation 8.41). In general, the creep parameters J and y, and the shift factor aT may all be dependent on the cure state of the material. For the current process model the shift factor is assumed to be separable and, as such, is only temperature dependent. As a first approximation the creep parameters are represented as linear functions of the degree of cure. ... 

The left-hand side is a compliance parameter or bulk strain normalized for the centrifugal, gravitational, and inertial stresses exerted on the material during spheronization. The volume shape factor of pellets became closer to that of a sphere as the compliance of the extrudate increased, when measured in a creep test (56). 

The factors in (6.27) take care of the fact that two terms such as sxy + eyx are only counted once in the abbreviated notation. In this notation the compliance matrix sij is the inverse of the stiffness matrix Cj/. 

This situation provided the opportunity for the decision maker to consider many other factors when the control decision was made. The predominant factors driving the control decision were judgmental and unquantifiable. They included the essentiality of the disinfection process in the control of waterborne disease (which is a large risk), the desire to optimize drinking water quality so as to avoid unnecessary risks, and the consideration of the unique compliance problems of small underfinanced and marginally operated water systems. Ultimately, the decision was driven by the feasibility and costs of treatment process improvements. 

The polydispersity factor p is evaluated with the aid of any of the well-known viscosity-molecular weight relationships. From eq. (3.60) a proportionality of the intrinsic viscosity to the half power of the molecular weight is expected, as this theory holds for 0-solvents. However, based on the conclusion of Section 3.5, viz. that the reduced steady-state compliance of a monodisperse polymer is insensitive to the excluded... 

From eq. (3.78) it becomes evident that the polydispersity factor depends on the solvent power. According to eq. (3.75a) the same holds for the reduced steady-state compliance p of the polydisperse system, in contrast to that of a monodisperse system (cf. the conclusion of Section 3.5). The reason for this paradoxical fact is that, actually, superpositions along the /S-axis are prescribed by eq. (3.74a), /3 being a function of intrinsic viscosity which is a function of solvent power. 

The mechanical properties of Shell Kraton 102 were determined in tensile creep and stress relaxation. Below 15°C the temperature dependence is described by a WLF equation. Here the polystyrene domains act as inert filler. Above 15°C the temperature dependence reflects added contributions from the polystyrene domains. The shift factors, after the WLF contribution, obeyed Arrhenius equations (AHa = 35 and 39 kcal/mole). From plots of the creep data shifted according to the WLF equation, the added compliance could be obtained and its temperature dependence determined independently. It obeyed an Arrhenius equation ( AHa = 37 kcal/mole). Plots of the compliances derived from the relaxation measurements after conversion to creep data gave the same activation energy. Thus, the compliances are additive in determining the mechanical behavior. 

Below a characteristic temperature, T0, of about 15° to 16°C, the shift factors appear to follow the WLF equation, Equation 2, with C = 7.1, C2 = 135.9°C, and Tr — 0°C. The coefficients were determined in the usual way (6). The temperature dependence of both the relaxation moduli and the creep compliances could be described with the same WLF equation within the experimental scatter. It appears that below T0 the triblock copolymer behaves essentially as a filled rubber, the polystyrene domains acting only as inert filler. However, the WLF equation which describes the temperature dependence of the mechanical properties in this region is not identical with that of pure 1,4-polybutadiene, for which Maekawa, Mancke, and Ferry (20) find cx — 4.20, c = 161.5°C,... 

---