№ files_lp_3_process_7_015342
File format: docx
Character count: 15106
File size: 33 KB
Administrative report outlining regulatory, operational, and financial implications of Ontario’s transition of the Blue Box recycling program from municipal cost-sharing to full producer responsibility between 2023 and 2025.
Jurisdiction:
Ontario
Subject:
Blue Box Transition to Full Producer Responsibility
Type of document:
Committee report
Program:
Blue Box Program
Related Programs:
Tire Program; Electronics and Hazardous Waste Diversion Programs
Issuing Authority:
Provincial Government of Ontario
Addressee:
Committee
Author:
Not specified
Date:
Not specified
Referenced Date:
August 15, 2019
Geographic Scope:
Province of Ontario
Key Stakeholders:
Municipalities; Producers of Printed Paper and Packaging; Stewardship Ontario; Producer Responsibility Organizations (PROs)
Population Threshold Referenced:
Municipalities over 5,000 population
Transition Period:
January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2025
Regulatory Development Period:
2019–2020
Topic:
Waste diversion policy and regulatory transition
Price: 8 / 10 USD
The file will be delivered to the email address provided at checkout within 12 hours.
The file will be delivered to the email address provided at checkout within 12 hours.
Don’t have cryptocurrency yet?
You can still complete your purchase in a few minutes:- Buy Crypto in a trusted app (Coinbase, Kraken, Cash App or any similar service).
- In the app, tap Send.
- Select network, paste our wallet address.
- Send the exact amount shown above.
The final amount may vary slightly depending on the payment method.
The file will be sent to the email address provided at checkout within 24 hours.
The product description is provided for reference. Actual content and formatting may differ slightly.
Note:
Year
Subject:
Organic Certification Process
Document Type:
Organic System Plan
Agency / Institution:
Pro-Cert
Target Audience:
Organic producers and farmers
Validity Period:
Annual
Note:
Year
Topic:
Organic Certification
Document Type:
Annual Update Form
Author:
Pro-Cert
Target Audience:
Organic Producers
Period of Validity:
Annual
Note:
Year
Document Type:
Appendix
Target Audience:
COR Applicants
Year:
2023
Region / city:
Springfield, Illinois
Topic:
Aggregate material certification for transportation contractors
Document type:
Certification letter
Organization / institution:
Central Bureau of Materials (CBM)
Author:
Not specified
Target audience:
Department of Transportation contractors
Effective period:
Until rescinded
Approval date:
Not specified
Modification date:
Not specified
Note:
Year
Year:
2023
Region / City:
Singapore
Subject:
E-waste Management
Document Type:
Guidelines
Organization / Institution:
National Environment Agency, Waste Management Division
Author:
National Environment Agency
Target Audience:
Producers of regulated e-waste products
Effective Period:
1 July 2021 to 30 June 2026
Approval Date:
4 October 2019
Last Updated:
31 January 2023
Year:
2022
Region / City:
Monaco
Topic:
Geospatial Information, Producer Codes
Document Type:
User Manual
Organization:
International Hydrographic Organization
Author:
International Hydrographic Organization
Target Audience:
Data producers, organizations involved in geospatial information, maritime navigation agencies
Period of Validity:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Changes:
Not specified
Year:
2020
Region / City:
Canada
Theme:
Oil country tubular goods, trade regulations
Document Type:
Questionnaire
Organization / Institution:
Canada Border Services Agency
Author:
Canada Border Services Agency
Target Audience:
Exporters and foreign producers of oil country tubular goods
Period of Action:
January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2019
Approval Date:
April 2, 2015
Date of Changes:
N/A
Year:
2023
Region / City:
United States
Subject:
Organic certification
Document Type:
Compliance Plan
Organization / Institution:
Quality Assurance International (QAI)
Author:
QAI
Target Audience:
Organic producers
Period of Validity:
Ongoing
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Changes:
Not specified
Year:
2024
Region / City:
United States
Topic:
Agricultural Grants
Document Type:
Grant Application Guide
Organization:
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)
Author:
USDA
Target Audience:
Agricultural producers seeking grants
Period of Validity:
2024
Approval Date:
January 16, 2024
Amendment Date:
None
Note:
Year
Contextual description:
A request document for obtaining third-party certification for composite wood products under US EPA TSCA and CARB regulations, including details on manufacturing, product specifications, and quality control measures.
Year:
2024
Region / City:
California
Theme:
Environmental Policy, Producer Responsibility, Packaging
Document Type:
Application Form
Organization:
CalRecycle
Author:
California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery
Target Audience:
Organizations seeking to apply as Producer Responsibility Organizations
Effective Period:
January 01, 2024 – Ongoing
Approval Date:
N/A
Date of Changes:
N/A
Year:
2022
Country:
United States
Issuing agency:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, Office of Policy Support
OMB control number:
0584-0524
Expiration date:
12/31/2022
Legal framework:
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; Privacy Act of 1974
Document type:
Training evaluation survey form
Program:
Farm to School Producer Training
Subject:
Assessment of knowledge, perceptions, and intended implementation of farm to school sales strategies
Target audience:
Agricultural producers participating in farm to school training
Estimated completion time:
5 minutes per response
Data collection nature:
Voluntary information collection without personally identifiable information
Contact address:
1320 Braddock Place, Alexandria, VA 22306
Year:
2000
Region / City:
United States
Topic:
Insurance, Producer Licensing
Document Type:
Resolution
Organization:
National Conference of Insurance Legislators (NCOIL)
Author:
NCOIL State-Federal Relations Committee
Target Audience:
State legislators, insurance commissioners
Effective Period:
Not specified
Approval Date:
July 7, 2000
Amendment Date:
Not specified
Context:
The document is a resolution adopted by NCOIL in support of uniformity and reciprocity provisions for producer licensing under the NAIC Producer Licensing Model Act.
) and join the S1NET. For guides with in depth examinations of performance measure definitions, go to:
https://www.milsuite.mil/book/docs/DOC-129783
Table of Contents (Hyperlinks to Sections):
Developing ‘Significant Duties and Responsibilities’ OER Narratives: Notes, Rules, and Instructions OER Narrative Prohibited Techniques, Inconsistencies, No-Go’s: Negative Comment Rules Referred OERs Narrative Comment Examples Block a. APFT and HT/WT Block b. Overall Performance Block c. Character (to include SHARP comments) Block d. Presence Block e. Intellect Block f. Leads Block g. Develops Block h. Achieves Senior Rater Potential Senior Rater Narrative Examples Senior Rater Narrative Comment Examples (for potential, promotion, school, etc.) Successive Assignments Other SR Comments (explanations of anything unusual about OER) Effective Words for Evaluations JUNIOR OFFICER PLATE (DA FORM 67-10-1) NOTE: 2LTs who have NOT completed BOLC, will not receive an OER until they complete BOLC (AC and ARNG; USAR officers can receive an OER before completing BOLC). The FROM date will be their commissioning date. All time until their BOLC graduation will be NONRATED on their first OER. OER PROFILING: OERs: Rater and Senior Rater Profiles are CONSTRAINED, meaning Officers are only allowed to grant 49% of each rank they rate with either an “EXCELS” (as Rater) or “MOST QUALIFIED” (as Senior Rater). HOWEVER, if you have an immature profile, and have only just begun rating/senior rating Officers of a certain rank, you are allowed a ONE TIME option of giving one of the first two evaluations you make at a particular grade, an “EXCELS” (as Rater) or “MOST QUALIFIED” (as Senior Rater). OER (OER SUPPORT FORM) PART III: Developing ‘Significant Duties and Responsibilities’ (blocks a., b., and c.): Refer to DA PAM 611-21 (https://www.milsuite.mil/book/groups/smartbookdapam611-21
) and DA PAM 600-3 (Commissioned Officer Professional Development and Career Management), to assist in the development of PART III, block d. As a minimum, the duty description will include pr:
- Number of personnel supervised, - Amount of resources under the rated officer’s control, - Scope of responsibilities. 3) Descriptions must be clear and concise with emphasis on specific functions required. 4) Note conditions unique to the assignment; e.g. RA officers assigned to FT support duties with RC units or USAR officers assigned to RA units OER NARRATIVES: Notes, Rules, and Instructions Rater and Senior Rater Narratives: - Requires candor and courage; frank and accurate assessment. - Quantify officer’s value relative to peers and do so in concert with rater/senior rater box check. - Are short; tell a simple story about the quality of officer being evaluated. - Are interesting and compelling. - Are looked at by selection board members when they are looking for in-depth information about a rated officer’s performance and potential. - Numbers; 1-10, write them out (e.g. one, two, ten). 11 or higher, write the number; e.g. 11, 15, 105. Exception, when a 1-10 is WITH an 11 or higher; e.g. “5 tool kits with 20 tools each.” - Fashion the narrative to the officer; double check use of “he/his” vs. “she/hers.” - Awards: Awards and/or special recognition received during the rating period may be cited in evaluation comments (for example, “received the Humanitarian Service Medal” or “named the Instructor of the Year”). - Raters and SR CAN use the officer’s name in the narrative; e.g. “1LT Joe was ….” Rater and Rater Narratives: - Focus on PERFORMANCE; explaining what the rated officer did and how well he/she did it. - Focus on specifics to quantify and qualify performance. - Raters should advocate the rated officer to the SR. - When there is no SR (due to lack of qualifications), rater’s narrative provides the input on both performance and potential. Senior Rater (SR) and SR Narrative (see SR Rater Narrative section for examples): - Focus on POTENTIAL, 3-5 years out (promotions, command, school, & assignments). - Can amplify box checks by using the narrative to clearly send the appropriate message to selection boards. - CANNOT mention Box Check. - Additional information for when SR is also Rater can be found in DA PAM 623-3, pg. 26, “DA Form 67–10–1, part VI: block c—Senior Rater Narrative.” OER Narrative Prohibited Techniques, Inconsistencies, No-Go’s: - School/Course Comments: Bullets about how a Soldier did in a school or course are ONLY allowed if that school did not produce an AER/DA Form 1059. - Narratives are not a laundry list of superlatives – more is not necessarily better. - Brief, unqualified superlatives or phrases, particularly if they may be considered trite. - Excessive use of technical acronyms, or phrases not commonly recognized. - Techniques aimed at making specific words, phrases, or sentences stand out from the rest of the narrative; e.g. excessive use of capital letters; unnecessary quotation marks; repeated use of exclamation points; wide spacing between selected words, phrases, or sentences to include double spacing within a paragraph or between paragraphs. - Inappropriate references to box checks; e.g “Would be TOP BLOCK if profile allowed” or “absolutely far exceeded the standard”. - Trying to quantify (e.g. “top 2% of my captains”) with a small population. - Stay in your lane/level; avoid comments like “Best 1LT in the Army” unless you’re the Army CoS. - Stating “the best ever”; having 10 in the population, 50 in the profile. - Using overused phrases and clichés that are counterproductive or overused; e.g. stellar, historic, “delivered a dazzling performance,” “hit the ground running,” consummate professional, and unlimited potential. - Using specific selection board-type language. Examples of this include, “definitely a 6+ Soldier”. - Don’t exaggerate; “If I could prove it, CPT X is an LTC disguised as a CPT.” - Be mindful of what IS NOT said; it can have the same impact as what is said; e.g. NOT having numbers, or quantifiable points. - Don’t say the sa
Note:
en
Topic:
Officer Evaluation, Narrative Guidelines
Document Type:
Guide
Target Audience:
Raters, Senior Raters
Year:
Not specified
Region / City:
Not specified
Topic:
Clinical Study Documentation
Document Type:
Instructional Template
Institution / Organization:
Not specified
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
Study Teams, Clinical Researchers
Period of Validity:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Amendment Date:
Not specified
Note:
Year
Year:
2017
Region / City:
Maine
Topic:
Politics, Healthcare, Social Security, Abortion
Document Type:
Political Ad/Press Release
Author:
Unknown
Target Audience:
Voters, Political Constituents, General Public
Period of Validity:
N/A
Approval Date:
N/A
Date of Changes:
N/A