№ files_lp_3_process_7_013857
File format: docx
Character count: 16528
File size: 30 KB
Year:
2019
Agency:
Department of the Air Force, DoD
System Name:
Air Force Safety Automated System (AFSAS)
System Number:
F091 AFSEC C
Purpose:
Support mishap and occupational illness prevention and preserve combat capability
Authority:
10 U.S.C. 8013, 10 U.S.C. 3013, 10 U.S.C. 5013, E.O. 12196, 29 CFR 1960, DoD Directive 5134.01, DoD Instruction 6055.07, Air Force Policy Directive 91-2, Air Force Instructions 91-204 and 91-207
Privacy Impact:
Records secured on DoD infrastructure with encryption and controlled access
Routine Uses:
Disclosure to law enforcement, DOJ, courts, NARA, Congressional members, and other federal agencies under specified conditions
OMB Collection Required:
Yes
OMB Control Number:
60 Day Notice Published 3/21/19
IT System:
Air Force Safety Automated System (AFSAS), DITPR #170
Contractor Involvement:
Yes
Document Type:
Federal Register Notice
Audience:
Air Force personnel, safety professionals, senior leaders
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.
Year:
1974
Jurisdiction:
United States
Subject matter:
Employee benefits; group health plans; ERISA compliance
Document type:
Sample summary plan description wrap document
Governing law:
Employee Retirement Income and Security Act of 1974 (ERISA)
Issuing organization:
SelectHealth, Inc.
Intended issuer of final document:
Employer / Plan Administrator
Intended audience:
Employers sponsoring group health plans; plan administrators
Plan type:
Group health plan (welfare benefit plan)
Legal status:
Sample document; not legally binding as provided
Related documents:
Certificate of Coverage; Member Payment Summary; Provider & Facility Directory
Administrative responsibility:
Employer / Plan Administrator
Geographic scope:
United States
Effective date:
To be specified by employer
Source type:
Administrative and legal compliance guidance document
Year:
2015
Region / City:
United States
Theme:
Privacy, Data Systems, Homeland Security
Document Type:
Federal Register Notice
Agency / Institution:
Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Customs and Border Protection
Author:
Privacy Office, Department of Homeland Security
Target Audience:
General Public, Trade Community, Stakeholders in Homeland Security and Customs
Effective Date:
September 16, 2015
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Changes:
Not specified
Year:
2015
Region / city:
United States
Topic:
Privacy Act, Homeland Security, Customs and Border Protection
Document Type:
Federal Register Notice
Agency:
Department of Homeland Security, Privacy Office
Author:
Department of Homeland Security
Target Audience:
Public, stakeholders in the trade and customs sectors
Effective Date:
September 16, 2015
Approval Date:
August 17, 2015
Amendment Date:
Not specified
Year:
2026
Region / City:
Alexandria, VA
Subject:
Sexual Assault Prevention and Response
Document Type:
Policy
Organization:
Department of Defense
Author:
Ms. Bette Inch
Target Audience:
Department of Defense Personnel, Military Staff, Contractors
Effective Period:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Amendment Date:
Not specified
Year:
2026
Region / City:
India
Subject:
Environmental Compliance
Document Type:
Regulatory Checklist
Organization:
Haryana State Pollution Control Board
Author:
Haryana State Pollution Control Board
Target Audience:
Industrial Units and Project Developers
Effective Period:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Amendment Date:
Not specified
Year:
1974
Region / City:
London
Subject:
Environmental regulation
Document Type:
Application form
Organ / Institution:
Westminster City Council
Author:
Westminster City Council
Target Audience:
Contractors, environmental professionals
Period of Action:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Amendment Date:
Not specified
Year:
1974
Region / City:
London
Theme:
Pollution control, construction regulation
Document type:
Application form
Organization:
Westminster City Council
Author:
Westminster City Council
Target audience:
Contractors, project managers
Effective period:
Not specified
Approval date:
Not specified
Amendment date:
Not specified
Year:
1974
Country:
United States
Legal framework:
Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974
Statutory references:
42 U.S.C. 201, 300f et seq., 21 U.S.C. 349
Regulation:
40 CFR Part 149
Topic:
Protection of drinking water sources
Document type:
Environmental review worksheet section
Responsible agencies:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
Subject:
Sole source aquifers
Scope:
HUD-funded projects affecting sole source aquifers
Compliance criteria:
Risk of aquifer contamination and public health hazard
Required coordination:
EPA regional office
Supporting documentation:
Maps, memoranda of understanding, consultation records
Mitigation requirements:
EPA-approved measures when significant risk is identified
Decision outcome:
Compliance determination or denial of federal financial assistance
Year:
1974
Region / City:
United Kingdom
Subject:
Employment, Data Protection, Criminal Records
Document Type:
Form
Organization / Institution:
St Joseph’s Catholic Primary School
Author:
St Joseph’s Catholic Primary School
Target Audience:
Job Applicants
Validity Period:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Changes:
2020
Year:
2024
Region / City:
Australia
Topic:
Health Insurance
Document Type:
Act
Author:
Government of Australia
Target Audience:
General public, healthcare professionals, policymakers
Effective Period:
From 14 October 2024
Approval Date:
14 October 2024
Amendment Date:
14 October 2024
Title:
Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 (Exceptions) Order 1986 Form as Amended 2013
Legislation Referenced:
Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974; Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 (Exceptions) Order 1986 (Amended 2013); Data Protection Act 1998
Document Type:
Employment disclosure and declaration form
Issuing Body:
The Council
Applicable Sector:
Public sector employment
Purpose:
Disclosure of criminal convictions and related information for exempt posts
Target Audience:
Job applicants for exempt positions
Data Protection Statement:
Personnel Information Protection Statement (Appendix A)
Information Collected:
Criminal convictions, cautions, pending prosecutions, personal data
Declaration Requirement:
Applicant signature and date
Related Department:
Human Resources
Legal Status:
Mandatory disclosure for posts exempt under Section 4(2) of the Act
Year:
1974
Country:
United States
Court:
Supreme Court of the United States
Chief Justice:
Warren E. Burger
Case Citation:
418 U.S. 683
Related Lower Court:
United States District Court for the District of Columbia
Subject Matter:
Executive privilege and separation of powers
Legal Context:
Subpoena duces tecum under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 17(c)
Parties:
United States v. Richard Nixon
Decision Date:
July 8, 1974
Procedural Posture:
Certiorari before judgment
Opinion Type:
Majority opinion of the Court
Historical Context:
Watergate investigation
Year:
1974
Region / City:
United Kingdom
Topic:
Criminal Record Disclosure
Document Type:
Legal Form
Organization / Institution:
[Insert relevant organization or school]
Target Audience:
Applicants for positions working with vulnerable groups
Period of Validity:
Ongoing
Date of Approval:
[Insert date if available]
Date of Amendments:
2013, 2020
Context:
A legal document used to disclose any criminal convictions for those applying for roles involving work with vulnerable groups, ensuring compliance with the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974.
Year:
1974
Region / City:
United Kingdom
Subject:
Criminal Record Disclosure
Document Type:
Disclosure Form
Organization / Institution:
St Thomas Aquinas Catholic Multi Academy Trust
Author:
St Thomas Aquinas Catholic Multi Academy Trust
Target Audience:
Job applicants for positions involving vulnerable groups
Effective Period:
N/A
Approval Date:
N/A
Amendment Date:
2013, 2020
Year:
[fiscal year]
Region / City:
[jurisdiction], Louisiana, US
Type of Document:
Plan / Resolution
Subject:
Residential Antidisplacement and Relocation
Issuing Authority:
[jurisdiction]
Legal Basis:
Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended
Responsible Contact:
[contact person], [telephone and email]
Scope:
Low/moderate-income dwelling units affected by demolition or conversion
Replacement Housing Deadline:
Within three years of demolition or conversion start
Funding Source:
Louisiana Community Development Block Grant Program
Adoption Date:
[date of month], 20__
Effective Period:
Duration of replacement housing obligation and 10-year affordability for replacement units
Document Type:
Public administrative resolution
Official Signatories:
Mayor, Clerk
Year:
2024
Region / City:
Seattle
Topic:
Service dogs, ableism, disability justice
Document Type:
Research Article
Organization / Institution:
Seattle Pacific University, Department of Physics
Author:
Amy D. Robertson
Target Audience:
Researchers, disability advocates, public policy experts
Period of Action:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Changes:
Not specified
) 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:
2023
Region / City:
Global
Topic:
Investment Reporting and Project Progress
Document Type:
Report
Organization:
Gates Foundation
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
Grantees, Program Officers
Effective Period:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Amendments:
Not specified
Note:
Contextual Description
Year:
2026
Region / City:
United States
Theme:
Transitional Housing, Domestic Violence Support
Document Type:
Application Guide
Organization:
Office on Violence Against Women (OVW)
Author:
OVW
Target Audience:
Applicants for OVW Transitional Housing Assistance Grant Program
Period of Effect:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Amendment Date:
Not specified
Year:
MM/DD/YYYY
Region / City:
Not specified
Subject:
Environmental Impact Assessment
Document Type:
Environmental Review Checklist
Agency / Organization:
Not specified
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
Project Managers, Environmental Consultants
Period of Validity:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Changes:
Not specified