Common use of Scientific Evaluation Clause in Contracts

Scientific Evaluation. The quality of the reports is determined by the Technical Committee, or experts commissioned by the latter, in accordance with the ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ et al.1 method by classifying the report into one of the following categories: (1) reliable without restriction, (2) reliable with restrictions, (3) not reliable, (4) not assignable. The allocation to the four categories must be accompanied by appropriate substantiation in accordance with the requirements described in the chapter "Documentation of reliability categories in data sheets (IUCLID)" of the ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ et al. publication. The quality of the robust summaries and IUCLID datasets is determined by the IP Consortium, or experts commissioned by the latter. If the documents (IUCLID data set and/or robust summary) submitted by a party supplying a report are not in conformity with the state of the art or missing, the IP consortium or experts commissioned by the latter, should develop a robust summary and an IUCLID update. Also studies, for which no standard protocol exists, e.g., exposure studies, must be documented by an IUCLID data set and a robust summary, and are also to be evaluated under the ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ et al. method.