№ lp_1_30780
File format: docx
Character count: 7433
File size: 52 KB
This document is a template to help two organizations set up a Memorandum of Cooperation for developing and implementing a National Greenhouse Gas Inventory.
Year:
2021
Region / city:
USA
Topic:
Greenhouse Gas Inventory
Document type:
Template
Agency / organization:
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Author:
EPA
Target audience:
National inventory teams, environmental policy makers
Validity period:
Not specified
Approval date:
Not specified
Date of changes:
Not specified
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.
Project title:
Assistance to the Republic of Kazakhstan in fulfilling international obligations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by reducing the carbon footprint of electricity suppliers for the leading technology company Bitfury
Project ID number:
Not specified
Country:
Kazakhstan
Implementing partner:
Ministry of Ecology, Geology and Natural Resources of the Republic of Kazakhstan
Responsible partner:
United Nations Development Programme
Partner organization:
Bitfury Holding B.V.
Start date:
December 12, 2019
End date:
December 31, 2021
Project approval bodies:
UNDP; Ministry of Ecology, Geology and Natural Resources of the Republic of Kazakhstan
Thematic area:
Climate change mitigation; greenhouse gas emissions; forestry and carbon sequestration
International framework:
Paris Agreement; Kyoto Protocol
Total budget:
USD 2,068,222
Funding sources:
Bitfury Phase I and II; Government of Kazakhstan (in-kind); UNDP (in-kind)
Gender marker:
GEN1
Related SDG:
UN Sustainable Development Goal on forest restoration and climate action
Type of source:
International development project documentation
Year:
2021
Date:
20 August 2021
Version:
1.0
Document type:
User guide
Industry:
Aerospace industry
Topic:
Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions
GHG scope:
Scope 3
Emission categories:
Purchased Goods & Services; Capital Goods
Methodological basis:
GHG Protocol Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting and Reporting Standard
Organization:
International Aerospace Environmental Group (IAEG)
Working group:
IAEG Work Group 3
Purpose:
Voluntary accounting and reporting of greenhouse gas emissions
Geographical scope:
Aerospace industry value chain
Copyright holder:
International Aerospace Environmental Group (IAEG)
Status:
Informational document, not a standard
Approval date:
20 August 2021
Intended users:
Aerospace and defense companies and value chain partners
Period covered:
Not specified
Year:
2024
Region / City:
USA
Topic:
Environmental Impact Assessment, Supply Chain
Document Type:
Report
Organization / Institution:
Wesley Ingwersen
Author:
Wesley Ingwersen
Target Audience:
Researchers, Environmental Scientists, Policymakers, Industry Professionals
Period of Validity:
2022
Approval Date:
July 5, 2024
Revision Date:
July 5, 2024
Year:
2007
Region / City:
Australia
Topic:
Environmental regulations, corporate responsibility
Document type:
Guidance document
Author:
Australian Government
Target Audience:
Corporations and their legal or environmental compliance teams
Effective Period:
Ongoing
Approval Date:
Not specified
Amendment Date:
Not specified
Year:
2024
Region / City:
Australia
Subject:
Greenhouse and energy auditing
Document type:
Report
Organization:
Clean Energy Regulator
Author:
Not specified
Target audience:
Registered greenhouse and energy auditors
Period of validity:
12 months from registration anniversary
Approval date:
07/03/2024
Date of changes:
Not specified
Year:
20XX
Agency:
[Agency Name]
Program:
[Program Name]
Authorizing legislation:
Item XXXX-XXX-XXXX of the Budget Act of 20XX, as amended by [X] (Chapter X, Statutes of 20XX)
Total expenditure:
$[X] million
Administrative costs:
$[XX] million or [XX]%
Project Types:
Low carbon transportation, Affordable housing, Energy efficiency, Climate adaptation
Eligible recipients:
Local governments, Non-profit organizations, Private sector, Consumers
Year:
2020
Region / city:
United Kingdom
Subject:
Greenhouse Gas Removal, Carbon Capture
Document Type:
Programme Guidance
Organization:
BEIS (Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy)
Author:
BEIS
Target Audience:
Businesses, Innovators, Researchers
Period of Action:
2020-2030s
Approval Date:
2020
Modification Date:
N/A
Note:
Year
Subject:
Greenhouse Gas Reporting, Carbon Neutral Government Program
Document Type:
Guide, Framework
Organization:
Public Sector Organizations
Target Audience:
Personnel involved in GHG reporting in PSOs
Year:
2009
Region / City:
Australia
Topic:
National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting
Document Type:
Audit Template
Organization / Institution:
Clean Energy Regulator (CER)
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
Registered greenhouse and energy auditors
Period of validity:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of amendments:
Not specified
Year:
2025
Region / City:
Australia
Topic:
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Estimation
Document Type:
Guideline
Agency / Organization:
Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water
Author:
Environmental Accounting Services
Target Audience:
Government, environmental agencies, industry stakeholders
Period of Validity:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Amendment Date:
Not specified
Year:
2025
Region / city:
Canberra
Topic:
Greenhouse gas emissions estimation, agriculture, fisheries, and forestry
Document Type:
Guidelines
Institution:
Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water
Author:
DCCEEW (Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water)
Target Audience:
Agricultural, fisheries, and forestry professionals, environmental researchers
Period of Effect:
Ongoing
Approval Date:
February 2025
Date of Revisions:
Not indicated
Intellectual Property Rights:
Commonwealth of Australia owns copyright and other intellectual property rights
Acknowledgments:
Environmental Accounting Services for drafting, Voluntary Greenhouse Gas Estimation and Reporting Standards Reference Group for contributions
Creative Commons License:
CC BY 4.0
Contact Information:
Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water, GPO Box 3090, Canberra ACT 2601, Telephone 1800 920 528
Disclaimer:
Liability for any damages or loss related to the document is disclaimed
Note:
Contextual Description
Year:
2025
Region / City:
Canberra, Australia
Topic:
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Estimation
Document Type:
Draft Guidelines
Agency / Institution:
Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water
Author:
Environmental Accounting Services, Voluntary Greenhouse Gas Estimation and Reporting Standards Reference Group
Target Audience:
Agriculture, Fisheries, and Forestry industries, producers, advisors, decision-makers
Period of Application:
Ongoing
Approval Date:
February 2025
Date of Changes:
N/A
Year:
2023
Region / City:
Alberta
Topic:
Greenhouse Gas Quantification
Document Type:
Report
Organization:
ERA
Author:
ERA GHG Team
Target Audience:
Applicants for ERA funding
Validity Period:
Ongoing
Approval Date:
2023
Date of Changes:
N/A
Form number:
CER-NGER-015
Version:
1.0
Date of issue:
7 January 2025
Jurisdiction:
Australia
Regulatory framework:
National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Regulations 2008
Scheme:
National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Scheme
Related mechanism:
Safeguard Mechanism
Type of document:
Regulatory nomination form
Issuing authority:
Clean Energy Regulator
Subject matter:
Nomination of multi-site cement production facilities
Eligible activities:
Cement production attributable to Portland cement clinker
Reporting period applicability:
Activities conducted on or after 1 July 2023
Approval deadline:
30 June of the relevant financial year
Submission methods:
Post and email
Target entities:
Operators of multi-site cement production businesses
Administrative purpose:
Facility nomination and variation of existing nominations
Note:
Year
Region / City:
Mumbai, India
Topic:
Education, Alumni Services
Document Type:
Application Form
Organization:
Tata Institute of Social Sciences
Author:
TISS-SSE
Target Audience:
Alumni
Period of Validity:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Amendments:
Not specified
Year:
2026
Region / city:
Not specified
Topic:
Academic paper template
Document Type:
Template
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
Researchers, academics, authors submitting manuscripts
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:
2024
Region / city:
Kyoto
Theme:
Admissions
Document type:
Evaluation form
Organization / institution:
Kyoto iUP Admissions Office
Author:
Kyoto iUP Admissions Office
Target audience:
Secondary/high school applicants and evaluators
Period of validity:
Until applicants’ screening results are announced
Approval date:
N/A
Modification date:
N/A
Note:
Date
Declaration:
All the above facts stated are true and correct to best of my / our knowledge and belief.