Monitoring, Reporting and Evaluation. Each University will be responsible for collecting data and monitoring its environmental performance using the Environmental Performance Indicators (EPI’s) selected for this XL project, which will be reviewed by EPA and each University’s individual stakeholder groups. Each University will also take appropriate steps to evaluate compliance and address any nonconformance within its Laboratory EMP within 12 months of the effective date of the FPA. Thereafter, environmental performance data will be generated and evaluated in accordance with Section III. G. of this FPA. The University laboratories which will be affected by this project are used for research and teaching purposes. The breakdown of the individual Universities’ laboratories and the hazardous waste accumulation areas (managed in accordance with 40 CFR 262.34) for each University are shown in Table 2 below: Table 2. XL Project Participation and Scope of Project Implementation Institution Departments Participating Location of Current Hazardous Waste Accumulation Area1 Boston College Chestnut Hill, MA Chemistry, Biology, Geology, Physics and Psychology Xxxxxxx Chemistry Building 0000 Xxxxxx Xx., Xxxxxx MA Xxxxxxx Building 000 Xxxxxxxxxxxx Xxx. Chestnut Hill , MA University of Massachusetts Boston Boston, MA Chemistry, Biology, Psychology, Anthropology, Geology and Earth Sciences, and Environmental, Coastal and Ocean Sciences Science Building (Bldg. #080); XxXxxxxxx Building (Bldg. # 020); and Xxxxxxxx Building (Bldg. # 010) 000 Xxxxxxxxx Xxxx., Boston MA University of Vermont Burlington, VT Colleges of: Agriculture and Life Sciences; Arts and Sciences; Medicine; and Engineering and Mathematics; and Schools of: Nursing; Allied Heath Sciences; and Natural Resources. Given Bunker 00 Xxxxxxxx Xxx., Xxxxxxxxxx XX 1 Note: These accumulation areas will still be fully covered by the current Federal and State RCRA regulations. This XL project, for example, will not allow any increased air emissions that would otherwise have been controlled under the current RCRA regulations such as the Subpart CC hazardous waste organic air emission standards that apply to large quantity generators who accumulate hazardous waste on-site.
Monitoring, Reporting and Evaluation. MSD will make some enforceable commitments, voluntary commitments, and articulate additional project aspirations during FPA negotiations in the project’s final phase. EPA expects these commitments and aspirations to be further defined and added to upon the completion of the data collection and analysis phase of the FPA development. MSD’s project is based upon extensive data collection and analysis. MSD SEP strategy will incorporate measures of environmental outcomes and results along with specific project milestones. The performance measures will be based on pollutant loadings, programmatic activities, environmental projects, and assessment checks. MSD commits to submitting semi-annual reports describing the progress of the project, presenting papers regarding the project at conferences, and posting results on the Internet.
Monitoring, Reporting and Evaluation. EPA's monitoring, reporting and evaluation criteria within this Agreement articulate EPA's expectation that Project XL sponsors will make Project information, including performance data, available to Stakeholders in a form that is easy to understand. Information about this Project can be found on the Project XL web site, xxx.xxx.xxx/xxxxxxxxx; and on the NS Mayport web sites xxx.xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx or xxx.xxxxxxxxx.xxxx.
Monitoring, Reporting and Evaluation. The Environmental Division at Puget Sound Naval Shipyard is responsible for oversight of the project and will submit periodic progress reports to DOD, EPA, WDOE, working groups, and stakeholder groups. Changes proposed in Phase II of the project as a result of the information gained in Phase I will be proposed in a manner meant to ensure that environmental risks will not be disproportionately distributed. Interested stakeholders will be included in the creation and monitoring of the program in order to ensure changes proposed in Phase II achieve this goal.
Monitoring, Reporting and Evaluation. The measurement of specific water quality parameters will be established as baseline reference for comparison of water quality after the implementation of pollution prevention BMPs. The transmission of real-time watershed conditions to websites and EESAT Building on the UNT campus provides direct access by stakeholders to information. The success of efforts to implement pollution prevention measures will be evaluated as the degree of improvement of water quality after implementation. Implementation of the pilot project will commence upon approval by EPA and TNRCC and the project will receive continuous evaluation during the five (5) – year pilot project.
Monitoring, Reporting and Evaluation. 60. Monthly monitoring and evaluation will be carried out by the PO through all its committees and subject to the agency involved for validation in order to facilitate the reporting of progress and ensure 100% satisfaction. However, the PO BISFFA monitoring team will be conducting individual inspections to every accomplished intervention to support advances (cash or in kind) for a smooth financial management system.
Monitoring, Reporting and Evaluation. EPA’s monitoring, reporting, and evaluation criterion articulates EPA’s expectation that Project XL sponsors will make project information, including performance data, available to Stakeholders in a form that is easy to understand. Information about this project can be found on the Project XL website, http:/xxx.xxx.xxx/xxxxxxxxx and on the MSD website, http:/xxx.xxxxxxxx.xxx. This Agreement provides for monitoring, reporting to Agencies and Stakeholders, and periodic performance evaluation. The means of reporting and an annual meeting near the project site (with advance notice) and the availability of backup data on request should make information regarding the project accessible. Regulated activities not addressed by this Agreement should adhere to the appropriate reporting requirements. MSD will submit a mid-year Progress Report describing the progress of its XL project, including MSD’s activities and accomplishments, as well those of participating agencies, industries, and public initiatives, as relevant. Additionally, MSD will submit an annual Performance Assessment Report. The Progress Report and the Performance Assessment Report will include the items listed in Section IX. Additionally, MSD will take advantage of other avenues to share information about this project and provide stakeholders with opportunities to assess progress and ensure that MSD is meeting its commitments. For example, MSD staff expect to present papers at key conferences about their XL project during the course of the project, post interim and milestone results on the internet, maintain data in MSD’s files, summarize results in newsletters, and speak about the project at local events, including government meetings, local school events, and public tours of MSD facilities.
Monitoring, Reporting and Evaluation. The project proponents should identify how to make information about the project, including performance data, available to stakeholders in a form that is easily understandable. Environmental data will be placed on the Internet each month, for general public access (xxx.xxxxxxx.xxx/xxxxxxxxx). Imation will also provide a copy of its monthly report to the local public library to ensure information access for all community members. Data will include total facility emissions, total emissions of each compound, comparisons to pollutant-specific caps, as well as information about any emissions-related facility modifications or analyses conducted by Imation for this project (see a more detailed description of requirements for the monthly report in section II.A.3.c below). Imation's XL Project will also be evaluated annually, and then more comprehensively every 5 years, upon renewal. This review will be conducted by Imation and the Agencies, with assistance from the Project XL Stakeholders group.
Monitoring, Reporting and Evaluation. The project has conceived outputs 1.4 and 1.5 for managing, monitoring and evaluation. This will include the proper set-up of project steering committee and arrange the technical and logistical organization of workshops, seminars, subcontracts for consultants, etc. Project progress monitoring will be conducted jointly with the organization of technical seminar/ expert meeting, so it has been foreseen two UNIDO missions along the project and the preparation of a final project report as required. In addition, six-monthly progress reports will be prepared and submitted to the donors. A final evaluation should be performed at the end of the project implementation. This will assess the expected results, lessons learned, impact and sustainability of the priority sectors targeted. Several publications and visibility actions are also planned along the implementation to ensure smooth communication of project progress to all stakeholders.
Monitoring, Reporting and Evaluation. The Agreement contains key result measurements and identifies when and how these should be reported for purposes of project evaluation. By requiring each utility that participates to identify its UCCFs, RCRA inspections can be conducted at these facilities by DEC's regional offices as a special component of the normal RCRA inspection program. Among the most significant results will be events that do not take place. Due to elimination of the need to secure or provide EPA identification numbers for remote locations and elimination of the need to prepare or process Hazardous Waste Reports for a remote location whenever more than l,000 kilograms of hazardous waste are collected per month, certain current reporting requirements are eliminated.
