Conclusions and Recommendations Clause Samples

Conclusions and Recommendations. Based on our country-by-country analysis, 197 of the AEWA populations are already well-monitored both for population size and trend. Our prioritisation method allowed focusing on the AEWA conservation and management priorities (Priorities 1-2) and to consider cost effectiveness and feasibility (Priorities 3-6). Theoretically, the two- third target of the AEWA Strategic Plan can be just attained by focusing on the development of monitoring activities for Priority 1-5 populations (i.e. leaving out the 168 more widespread Priority 6 populations that would require more species-specific monitoring methods. Most of the Priority 1-5 populations would require improvement of the IWC though regional schemes focusing on the West Asian / East African flyway with possibly three subregional components in the Central Asia, Arabia and Eastern and Southern Africa. In the latter region, improvements in Tanzania and Mozambique are particularly important. In the Black Sea - Mediterranean - Sahelian flyway the focus should be primarily on the Sahel countries and especially on increasing the consistency of annual counts. The quality of monitoring is already better in the Black Sea and Mediterranean regions. In the East Atlantic, the ongoing capacity-building activities should continue and the consistency and representativity of site coverage should be further strengthened in most countries. Angola would require a major capacity improvement but primarily for the intra-African migrants on inland wetlands. It is also clear that the targets of the AEWA Strategic Plan cannot be achieved without complementing the IWC with periodic aerial surveys both in Western Africa as well as in Eastern and Southern Africa, by setting up a periodic offshore waterbird monitoring scheme in the Caspian Sea and by focusing in each country on a relatively small number of breeding bird species strategically selected in this report.

Conclusions and Recommendations. In this article we have statistically tested the VS30-slope (or more specifically the NEHRP class-slope) correlations published by Wald and ▇▇▇▇▇ (2007) for Europe and parts of the Middle East. In total 706 sites with VS30 measurements were used. It is found that the technique leads to a site classification that is better than chance for all NEHRP site classes in active areas. For stable areas, there are still limited data to enable firm conclusions but our results suggest that the proposed correlations perform poorly in these zones. Based on our findings we reiterate the recommendations of ▇▇▇▇ and ▇▇▇▇▇ (2007) that site classifications based on VS30-slope correlations should only be used for regional or national (and not local or site- specific) first-order studies. In addition, they are only to be used in the absence of other more detailed information (e.g. microzonation studies) and not for sites inside small, relative to the DEM resolution, basins or those with special geological conditions that may affect results (e.g. flat-lying volcanic plateaux, carbonate rocks, glaciated continental terrain or coastal pixels if the slope is not calculated using bathymetric data). Again many of these limitations were stated by ▇▇▇▇ and ▇▇▇▇▇ (2007). Site classifications based on VS30-slope correlations are not sufficiently accurate to replace actual field measurements and they should not be used for site-specific studies. Consequences of erroneous estimation could be serious, so the user of such correlations should be aware that they only provide a first approximation and the true site class for a given site could be incorrect by one or, even, two classes (in either direction). At a local scale, further investigations should be carried out based on geology and measurements. In addition, the slope limits used for estimating VS30 are dependent on the slope-calculation algorithm and, as previously shown by ▇▇▇▇▇ and ▇▇▇▇ (2009) and ▇▇▇▇▇▇ et al. (2010), on the DEM resolution. We prefer predicting a site class rather than VS30 even when this is associated with a (large) standard deviation because we believe it gives a better indication that the site class is only an estimate and is not based on a measured VS30 value. We fear that the reporting of a numerical estimate for VS30 with a measure of its uncertainty would lead to the temptation to use the value and forget about the scatter.

Conclusions and Recommendations. The literature review (see Appendix C) indicates a range of buffer width recommendations for protecting the shade function. Based on the ▇▇▇▇▇ curve reported in this section of the report, approximately 1 SPTH (estimated at 61 meters or 200 ft) will provide nearly 100 percent effectiveness of the buffer to protect the intertidal from desiccation, elevated temperatures, and other shade-related functions. Of course, in nonforested community types (e.g., prairie and grasslands) the shade function from overstory trees may be unattainable. To maximize the buffer’s effectiveness to provide the shade function, the following actions are recommended: • Avoid disturbance to native vegetation in riparian areas, especially nearer the water’s edge. • Retain, restore, and enhance mature trees and a multi-layered canopy and understory of native vegetation at sites that support these types of plant communities. • Ensure that riparian areas can be maintained in mature, native vegetation through time. • Prevent modifications to banks and bluffs (e.g., armoring) that could disrupt natural processes (such as soil creep, development of backshore and overhanging vegetation, recruitment of wood and other organic matter to riparian area including beaches and banks.) • Prohibit cutting and topping of trees and avoid “limbing” (selective branch cutting to enhance views) of trees for view corridors and other purposes within buffers.

Conclusions and Recommendations. The final section of the report will present our conclusions as to the findings of the study, as well as recommendations for future considerations. The cost estimate for this task is $41,092, with much of this effort dedicated to the public health evaluation in Section 4 (approximately $18,000). Details on the cost breakdown are provided in Table 8.

Conclusions and Recommendations. All conclusions and recommendations adopted during the session must be included in this section. The recommendations must reflect commitments made by States and the IAEA during the session. The recommendations shall include the following: a) adoption of the report and its transmission to the BAR session; b) recommendations on changes to the project activity plan and to the related budget; c) recommendations on matters within the purview of the BAR session; d) recommendations on the venue, date and provisional agenda of the next ATCB session; e) recommendations for consideration by the IAEA; f) adoption of recommendations on projects proposed for inclusion in the programme for a given biennium; g) adoption of recommendations on the suspension or termination of projects, as appropriate.

Conclusions and Recommendations. The goal of the signatories is to achieve an efficient, fully functional OA market based on competition among publishers large and small, in terms of quality, service and price. The business models and technologies required for a rapid transition to 100% OA already exist, the APC model being just one of them.

Conclusions and Recommendations. This chapter summarises some key conclusions that can be drawn from the agreements, and offers some policy recommendations on basis of them. The agreements analysed were heavily redacted and these conclusions should be read with that in mind. In general, the lack of transparency around the APAs is problematic on many fronts.

Conclusions and Recommendations. For the reasons stated herein, Merrimack Energy concludes that the shortlisting decisions by PG&E in the 2007 RPS RFO were reasonable and based on the requirements and evaluation criteria set forth in the Solicitation Protocol. The selection of the shortlist was very inclusive and erred on the side of including more offers in what was a very ample shortlist relative to the procurement target. In the Shortlist Report, Merrimack Energy recommended a number of changes to the RPS procurement process, several of which were adopted by PG&E in the 2008 RPS RFO. Despite recommending certain changes, our assessment is that the PG&E evaluation methodology was appropriate and that it was administered fairly and reasonably.

Conclusions and Recommendations. All conclusions and recommendations adopted during the discussion must be included in this section. The recommendations must include, inter alia, the following: a) adoption of the national coordinators’ report; b) approval of all measures to be taken to ensure sustainability; c) approval of a small number of activities required to ensure that ongoing difficulties are resolved upon completion of the project. ANNEXES a) List of participants. b) Country reports. c) Meeting schedule. d) Evaluation tables (if not included in the body of the report). e) Others. 1. Annual ARCAL COUNTRY report 2. Instructions on the table of financial indicators for assessing countries’ contributions to the ARCAL programme 3. Report by ARCAL project coordinators 4. Instructions on the table of financial indicators for assessing countries’ contributions to Project ARCAL RLA/ / The annual report by national coordinators must reflect progress achieved and setbacks encountered in programme implementation during the year. This report is the responsibility of the ARCAL national coordinator and must be sent before 15 March of each year to the IAEA. In order to provide necessary and useful information for project reporting, monitoring and development, a report format, as set out below, must be followed. ANNEXES Annex 4.1 – Format of the annual report on ARCAL country activities. Annex 4.2 – Table of financial indicators for assessing States’ contributions. 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2. PARTICIPATION OF THE NATIONAL COORDINATOR IN ARCAL ACTIVITIES 3. RESULTS, DIFFICULTIES AND PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED IN IMPLEMENTING PROJECTS AND THE AGREEMENT