BEE-spoke-data/govdocs1-by-extension huggingface dataset:
# Presentation: 667528

## XDAQ Benchmark at FNAL

**Configuration:**
**1 RU, 1 BU, 2 kB block size**
**Event throughput (MB/s, ****XDAQ/EVBSIM****):**
**R\NumGather       1            4           16          64**
** ****1                        10/****10****     26/27     44/47     53/58**
** ****4                        23/35     49/63     58/66     61/66**
**                      ****25/57     49/63     58/66**
**                      ****25/57**
**R =  MaxRequests/NumGather**

## Myrinet:
Latency 5+25 us, BW 80 MB/s 
Used for BCN and BDN
EVBSIM: BCN for all traffic
1x1 test case
0.0 ms L2
Trigger rates:
Observed in XDAQ
Increased in EVBSIM until
eventId table starts filling up
1 BCN control msg is 8 bytes
1 BCN packet holds 1/4/16/64 msgs
1 BDN packet of 2 kB per 1 event

**Latency 5+25 us, BW 80 MB/s **
**Used for BCN and BDN**
**EVBSIM: BCN for all traffic**
**1x1 test case**
**0.0 ms L2**
**Trigger rates:**
**Observed in XDAQ**
**Increased in EVBSIM until**
**eventId table starts filling up**
**1 BCN control msg is 8 bytes**
**1 BCN packet holds 1/4/16/64 msgs**
**1 BDN packet of 2 kB per 1 event**

**1x1 Test Stand Setup**
# Presentation: 771799

## Installation of ATLAS Software on LaptopJoe Virzi March 11, 2005

- The installation URL used as reference is: _[http://agenda.cern.ch/askArchive.php?base=agenda&categ=a044275&id=a044275s0t1%2Ftransparencies%2Fdistkit-tutorial-20041102.pdf](http://agenda.cern.ch/askArchive.php?base=agenda&categ=a044275&id=a044275s0t1%2Ftransparencies%2Fdistkit-tutorial-20041102.pdf)_
-  mkdir -p -m 777 /Atlas/AtlasReleases
- cd /Atlas/AtlasReleases
- export ATLAS= _[http://atlas.web.cern.ch/Atlas/GROUPS/SOFTWARE/OO/pacman/cache](http://atlas.web.cern.ch/Atlas/GROUPS/SOFTWARE/OO/pacman/cache)_
- export release=9.0.4
- pacman -allow tar-overwrite -trust-all-caches -get ${ATLAS}:${release}/AtlasRelease-rh73-opt
- mkdir -p ~*/Atlas/work/*${release}
- cd ~*/Atlas/work/*${release}
- echo y | pacman -get /Atlas/AtlasReleases:${release}/AtlasRelease-rh73-opt
- source setup.sh
- source */Atlas/AtlasReleases/dist/*${release}*/Control/AthenaRunTime/**/cmt/setup.sh
# Presentation: 306749

## FLUXNET-2000

## Climate Contribution*

- by continent

***  ** IPCC Data Set:  GLOBAL 30-YEAR MEAN MONTHLY CLIMATOLOGY, 1930-1960, V. 2.1 (CRAMER AND LEEMANS)
**http://www-eosdis.ornl.gov/daacpages/climate_collections.html**

## FLUXNET Activities-2000

**Hired new postdoc: Lianhong Gu**
**Convened FLUXNET 2000 Workshop,**
** ****Leading Synthesis Activity and Article Production**
**Presentations**
**AGU, WUE workshop, AgForestMet, AsiaNET, Boulder UFO**
**Data sets**
**CD-ROM with +30 site-years of hourly data**
**data on-line via Fluxnet web page**
**69 site-years of annual sums published**
**Articles in progress**
**BAMS overview, EOS, spectral analysis, WUE, GRL-AmeriFlux**
**Sites**
**>100 registered world-wide**

## FLUXNET 2000 Activities, cont

**Inter-network Calibration**
**Studies in Australia, Italy**
**Growth**
**AsiaNET **
**New sites in Japan, Siberia, China, Korea, SE Asia**
**CARBOEUROPE**
**LBA, Brazil**
**Africa, Botswana**
**On-going Analyses**
**Footprints and Fluxes, LUE, NPP, Real-time Modeling**
**Workshop Travel Support**
**Boulder UFO Workshop**
**AsiaNet**
**Hosted Visiting Scientists**
**Eva Falge, Frank Kelliher**

## Potential Terrestrial Vegetation*   weighed by area and

**Potential Terrestrial Vegetation*   **weighed by area and
**FLUXNET Contribution**

***  ** Major vegetation type for undisturbed natural (or potential) conditions: Melillo et al. (1993) Nature 363:234-240.
**http://eos-webster.sr.unh.edu, **Global Model Reference Data 0.5

## Contribution to Potential Vegetation

**Contribution to Potential Vegetation**

**http://eos-webster.sr.unh.edu , **Global Model Reference Data 0.5

## Harvard Forest 1995

## Impact of Wind Direction on NEE

| site | Wt by equal  | Wt by 
 |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| HF | -3.22 | -3.28 | -1.8% |
| WB | -0.835 | -0.774 | 7.8% |
| BV | -1.482 | -1.539 | -3.3% |
| SH | -1.503 | -1.355 | 10.9% |
| WE | -0.582 | -0.633 | -8.0% |

**Impact of Wind Direction on NEE**

## Response Parameters and Global Datasets

**Response Parameters and Global Datasets**

## “Under-represented” Climate Combinations

-     for North America and Asia

**http://www-eosdis.ornl.gov/daacpages/climate_collections.html**

## Slide 11

## Slide 12

## Slide 13

## Slide 14

## Slide 15

## Slide 16

## Slide 17

## Slide 18

## Summary of Published Results

**69 site years of CO****2**** exchange data**
**31yrs broadleaved deciduous: -70 to –739 gC m****-2**** yr****-1**
**30 yrs conifer forests: 90 to –740 gC m****-2**** yr****-1**
**1 yr tropical forests: -102 gC m****-2**** yr****-1**
**2 yrs grasslands: 0 to 41 gC m****-2**** yr****-1**** **
**2 yrs mixed forests: -157 to –460 gC m****-2**** yr****-1**
**1 yr tundra: 40 gC m****-2**** yr****-1**
**1 yr broadleaved evergreen: -660 gC m****-2**** yr****-1**

## Synthesis Papers

- Seasonal Dynamics: Munger
- Physiology/Structure Characterisation: Law/Wilson
- Overview: Baldocchi
- Water Use Efficiency: Falge
- Canopy NEE, GPP, Re=f(climate): Law
- 1998 Case Study: Davis
- Canopy response to drought: Mahli
- Energy balance closure: Wilson

## Conifers forests

## Deciduous Forests

## Crops and Grassland
# Presentation: 924904

## Under
Subpart 1

**Under**
**Subpart 1**

**Under**
**Subpart 2**

**Action**

- 2003

- 2004

- 2005

- 2007

- 2007-2008

- 2007

- 2009*

- Same

- Same

- Same

- Same

- Same

- 2007*

- 2010*

- 2013*

- 2019-2021*

- Final rule on implementation of 8-hour ozone NAAQS

- Designation of 8-hour nonattainment areas
- Reinstate the NOx SIP call with respect to the 8-hour ozone NAAQS

- Complete new modeling for additional "coarse grid" states. Make additional SIP calls as results dictate.

- 8-hour ozone NAAQS SIP attainment demonstration submission date

- Compliance with full NOx SIP call budgets for 19 States (assumes EGU at 0.15 lbs/mm BTU)
- EGU compliance for any "newly added coarse grid" States

- Assess impact of reductions from NOx SIP Call

- Part D/Subpart 2 attainment date - marginal areas (3 years after designation)**

- Part D/Subpart 1 default attainment date**

- Part D/Subpart 2 attainment date - moderate areas (6 years after designation)**

- Part D/Subpart 2 attainment date - serious areas (9 years after designation)**

- Potential 5-year attainment date extension**,***

- Part D/Subpart 2 attainment date - severe areas (15-17 years after designation)**

- 2007/2008

- 2014*

**Potential Schedule for Implementing the 8-Hour Ozone**
**NAAQS and Related Actions**

- 2/4/02 version
# Presentation: 114752

## The Problem in 5 Dimensions

- x US perspective on international, domestic
- x international perspective on  international, domestic
- x known & unknown

## Integrated Assessment:  Environmental Contribution to US Interests in Renewable Energy Internationally

- Explain Environmental Issues
- Climate Change
- Air Quality
- Other (Water, Solid Waste)
- Compare Environmental Effects under Different Scenarios
- Quantify Environmental Impacts
- Include Local Impacts
- Use Results to Influence of Environmental Effects on Market Decisions (Emissions Trading)

## Other Important Considerations for Decision-Makers

- Understand what’s needed for business infrastructure to make international deployment effective
- Information for strong arguments on US business interests in renewable technology  exports
- Information to support education & outreach

## Environmental – Issues 

- What are the full (environmental and other) benefits and costs of RE?
- Relatively well known data and methods to quantify emissions changes due to renewable electricity generation
- Less well quantified attribution of specific health effects to specific sources of emissions, and this is needed.
- What are relative environmental and other costs & benefits of overseas RE development vs. domestic RE development?
- Air quality and its effects on human health is much better quantified domestically than overseas
- European efforts quantify air quality in Europe and Asia, using fixed energy scenarios

## Environmental – Issues 

- What are the most important environmental issues that RE can help address?
- Climate Change
- Air Quality
- Other Health Effects (e.g.  RE for rural health)
- Other Environmental Issues:  Water, Ecosystems, Land Use, Noise
- How can environmental issues more effectively influence market decisions?
- Need to influence policy-makers by focussing on their priorities

## Environmental – Issues 

- Climate Change
- For what sectors and countries/regions can RE most reduce GHG emissions?
- Need mobile and electric sectors considered at least
- Developing countries will be motivated by economic development needs
- How can we better determine and capture the value of RE in reducing GHG emissions?
- Need to do scenario studies
- What will it take to achieve large scale deployment of RE needed to stabilize GHG emissions?
- Need public and policy commitment to GHG mitigation
- Need clear analysis of options to stabilize GHG

## Environmental – Issues 

- Air Quality
- For what sectors and geographic areas can RE play biggest role in air quality improvement?
- How can we better determine and capture the value of RE in reducing air quality emissions?
- What air pollution emissions reductions can be achieved from RE and what sources will they displace?
- What are the health impacts of alternative RE technologies and policies relative to other options?
# Presentation: 024480

## Pixel Frontend Electronicsin 0.25 CMOS

-  *DMILL* + Pixel design requirements  good match
- 	Considerable functionality inside of a pixel
- 	 design constrained by size (how much can you put in *n x m*2)
- 	*DMILL* simply can not support the FE-D design in production
-  Radiation-tolerant CMOS design
- 	CERN RD-49, FPIX for BTeV, ...
-  Pixel FE-I Roadmap
- 	Technology/Design developments required
- 	Test chips
- 	Design reviews
- 	Planning and status

## Plan as Presented in Pixel Baseline Review (11 ‘00)

- DONE

- DONE

- DONE

- DONE

- DONE

## Roadmap

-  Develop in two technologies
- 	Baseline: order via CERN frame contract, Backup: TSMC
-  Insert test chip runs to cross-check (before full wafer run)
-  Minimize layout time (Small feature size  extra space.  Use synthesis
- 	+ automated place-and-route wherever possible)
-  Maximize verification time (2 000 000 transistor, mixed-mode chip)
-  Submit 1st full-wafer run by end July ‘01

- FE-I Design team

- Mario Ackers - Bonn
- Laurent Blanquart - Marseille
- 	 now LBL (from 28 Feb. 01)
- Giacomo Comes - Bonn
- Peter Denes - LBL
- Kevin Einsweiler - LBL

- Peter Fischer - Bonn
- Ivan Perič - Bonn
- Emanuele Mandelli - LBL
- Roberto Marchesini - LBL (until 16 Jan 01)
- Gerrit Meddeler - LBL

## Technology / Design Developments

- Mixed-mode standard cell library
- (Modification of CERN / RAL
- library - Bonn)

- Implement Silicon Ensemble (to be
- able to autoroute standard cells - LBL)

*example - Pixel Logic*

## Comparative Size

- Two pixels
- (analog)
- in *DMILL*

- Two pixels
- in 0.25

- 50

- 50

## In a Pixel

- Preamp

- Discr.

- Trim
- DACs
- (Thresh)
- (Shaping)

- Pixel Control
- and
- Calibration
- (charge injection)

## Digital Test Chip

- TSMC 0.25
- Submitted 08 Jan ‘01
- Structures to test SEU
- sensitivity of storage registers
- Pixel RAM block
- Irradiate Apr ‘01

*Std.+SEU tol(1)*
*Shift Register*

*SEU tol(2)*
*Register*

*Triple Majority*
*Shift Register*

*Gate*
*Rupture*

*Diode*
*Leakage*

*LVDS Rx*
*DAC*

*OVP*

*RAM*
*Block*

## Analog Test Chip

- Submitted (CERN) 28 Feb 01
- Submitted (TSMC) 6 Mar 01
- Array of pixels along with
- other analog functions
- Preamp and discriminator
- Trim DACs
- Main DACs
- 50 output buffer
- Input capacitance test structure

*Cap*
*Array*

*Cap Load*

*Pixel*
*Matrix*

*LVDS*
*Rx+Tx*

## Status - Ready to Assemble Final Chip

- Schematic or HDL
- Layout
- In test chips

- EOC

- Pixel Column Pair

- FE-D

- D:

- A:

## Planning (1) - Design/Fabricate

**Planning (1) - Design/Fabricate**

- FE-I Design and Layout
- Some design later than foreseen
- Some layout earlier than foreseen
- On schedule to submit by end-July

## Planning (2) - Characterization

## US ATLAS E.T.C.
# Presentation: 448461

## The growing trade of sweeteners between the United States and Mexico has been complementary in recent years.

This has helped producers, sellers and  users in both countries.

- This has helped producers, sellers and  users in both countries.

- Trade Brings Mutual Benefits

## Sugar Production (In short tons raw value)

## Sweetener Trade is Becoming Market-driven

- At end of 2004/05 year:
- Surplus in Mexico, deficit in United States
- 2005/06:
- The United States imported a record 700,000 MT of sugar from Mexico
- 2006/07 Sugar:
- Mexico gave the United States 22,000 MT quota
- Mexican free-trade zone imports from the United States are estimated at over 300,000 MT
- Large U.S. beet stocks are available if U.S or Mexican markets tighten
- 2006/07 HFCS:
- Imports in 2007 are providing Mexican bottlers much needed sweetener supplies in a potentially tightening market

## U.S. Sugar Minimum Access Commitments

** **

- N/A

## Additional U.S. Sugar Access

- The Secretary of Agriculture may increase the U.S. tariff-rate quota (TRQ) to achieve adequate supply at reasonable prices.
- The U.S. Trade Representative allocates TRQs.
- Imports under the re-export program are not limited or controlled.
- Imports at the over-quota duty are not limited or controlled.
# Presentation: 514546

## Upcoming “CEO”s

- October 2007

- November 2007

- March 2008

## World’s Largest Plastics Show

- October 24—31, 2007
- Only once every 3 years
- 3,000 exhibitors from
- 50+ countries
- Over 120 U.S. firms
- 230,000 trade visitors

## World’s Largest Plastics Show

- Show sold out—but you can
- still participate through our Corporate Executive Office!
- Early bird $4,100 before May 31,
- afterwards $4,500
- Kirsten Hentschel
- kirsten.hentschel@mail.doc.gov
- +49 211 / 737 767-30

## World's Largest Medical Equipment Show

- World's Largest Medical Equipment Show

- November 14—17, 2007
- 2006: 4,252 exhibitors from 62 countries and 400 U.S. firms
- Join the 2007 “CEO”
- $4,500
- Anette Salama
- anette.salama@mail.doc.gov
- +49 211 / 737 767-60
# Presentation: 800910

## Proposed Schedule for the Start of Run-6

| Sept 2005 | Oct | Nov | Dec | Jan 2006 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
|  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |

**TOF Modules**
**at BNL**

**Module Prep**

**TOF preamps**
**available**

**TOF Final Assembly & Test**

**TOF install **
**in IR**

**PHENIX Detector Maintenance**

**East Carriage**
**Roll-in**

**EC hook-up, **
**Blue sheet**

**PHENIX Ready**

**Tests with HBD prototype**

**HBD Preamps **
**available**

**HBDp Tests in 1008**

**HBD Gas sys Commissioning**

**HBDp Install **
**in IR**

**HBDp Tests in IR**

**TOF Tests in IR**

**RHIC**
**Cryo Start**

**First Collisions**

**PHENIX Schedule for Fall 2005**
# Presentation: 095076

## Study Phase

- <date/time>

**Study Phase**

- pre-dose

- in-life (dosing)

- post-life

**clinical pathology**

**gross, **
**organ weight, **
**microscopy**

**enzyme induction**

**clinical observations**

**data evaluated**

**2 Species**
-   Rodent
-   Nonrodent
**3 Dose Groups plus Control**
**Duration**
-   2-4 weeks; 3 month; 6-9 month; 2 year (rodent only)

## Drug-Induced Liver Disease

- <date/time>

- Predictable
- Dose-related
- Unpredictable
- Not dose-related
- Immune-mediated
- Idiosyncratic

## Characterization and Classification

- <date/time>

**Clinical Pathology **

**Mechanistic Pathology **

**Morphologic Pathology **

- Appropriate
- Hepatobiliary
- Injury
- Classification

**Characterization and Classification**

## Combined Pathology Classification

- <date/time>

**Hepatotoxicity Type **
- Hepatocellular degeneration
- Hepatocellular oncotic necrosis
- Hepatocellular apoptotic necrosis
- Decreased hepatocellular mass and Cirrhosis
- Acute hepatic failure (acutely decreased functional mass)
- Specific hepatocyte dysfunction
- Hepatocyte hypertrophy (SER or peroxisome proliferation)
- Hepatocyte hypertrophy (accumulation of phospholipid)
- Hepatocyte hypertrophy (accumulation of endogenous substances)
- Hepatocyte hypertrophy (accumulation of exogenous substances)
- Hepatocyte alteration
- Hepatocyte hyperplasia/proliferation
- Hepatobiliary neoplasia (any cell type affected)
- Biliary dysfunction
- Canalicular, cholangiolar and cholangiodestructive cholestasis
- Kupffer cell hypertrophy
- Altered Kupffer cell function
- Hepatic vascular lesions
- Hepatobiliary inflammation – neutrophilic
- Hepatobiliary inflammation – granulomatous
- Hepatobiliary inflammation – lymphocytic
- Hepatobiliary inflammation – mixed cell

## Routine Hepatobiliary Parameters Implemented during Nonclinical Assessments

- <date/time>

**Routine Hepatobiliary Parameters Implemented during Nonclinical Assessments**

- *  The clinical chemistry parameters listed are relevant examples, and are not inclusive of all parameters which may be measured.

## Clinical Chemistry – Industry “Norm”

- ALT, AST, ALP, GGT, total bilirubin
- Urea nitrogen
- Glucose
- Total Protein, Albumin, Globulin, A/G ratio
- Cholesterol, Triglycerides

## Clinical Chemistry – Industry “Add-Ons”

- Sorbitol Dehydrogenase (SDH)
- Glutamate Dehydrogenase (GDH, GLDH)
- 5’-Nucleotidase (5’-N)
- Serum Bile Acids (SBA – fasted)
- Direct and Indirect Bilirubin
- ALP Isoenzymes
- Lactate Dehydrogenase (LDH)
- Alpha Glutathione S-Transferase (GST)

## Selected Hepatotoxicity Parameters Considered Adverse

- <date/time>

**Selected Hepatotoxicity Parameters Considered Adverse**

- *   Increases in clinical pathology parameters, even in the absence of histologic changes, are considered adverse, unless the pathogenesis indicates to the contrary.
- ** The occurrence of any histologic liver pathology change at or above the ‘minimal to slight’ level is considered adverse, unless the pathogenesis indicates to the contrary.
# Presentation: 161827

## Dynamic Management – NOAA Fisheries Right Whale Ship Strike Strategy

- <date/time>

**Dynamic Management** **– ****NOAA Fisheries** **Right Whale Ship Strike Strategy**

**Patricia Gerrior**
**Northeast Region**

## Dynamic Management Areas (DMAs) 1998-2002 – Retrospective Analysis

**From** ***Vessel Traffic-Management Scenarios Based on Recommended  Measures to Reduce Ship Strikes of North Atlantic Right Whales****** ******–**** *a report submitted to the NMFS Northeast Implementation Team by B. Russell, A. Knowlton & J.Beaudin Ring, December 2003
**Analysis of  sightings from 1998 –2002 ****(& previous years)**

##  Trigger Events For DMA per Russell, Knowlton & Beaudin Ring, 2003)

**Trigger Events :**
**3 or more animals**
**3 animals w/in 10 nm of each other**
**mother/calf pair w/in 15 nm of shipping lane**
**2 or more animals closer than 10 nm to each other w/in shipping lane if resident or feeding**
**1 or more animals in the Cape Cod Canal or any harbor area**

## <footer>

- <date/time>

- Russell, Knowlton& Beaudin Ring, 2003

## DMAs (Russell et al, 2003)

**Circle with 15nm radius around periphery of sightings**
**13 day duration**
**Addt’l sightings during the DMA in same area, period extended another 13 days**

## <footer>

- <date/time>

- Russell, Knowlton& Beaudin Ring, 2003

## 1998

**4 retrospective DMAs (Boston TSS, GSC/TSS & Providence)**
**Boston TSS (1)  17 Feb – 2 Mar**
**Providence  (2)  1 Apr – 4 May**
**GSC/TSS (1)  8 –21 April**

## <footer>

- <date/time>

- Russell, Knowlton& Beaudin Ring, 2003

## 1999

**2 retrospective DMAs (GSC/TSS & Portland approach)**
**GSC/TSS (1)  1 – 14 April**
**Portland approach (1)  14 Apr – 2 May**

## <footer>

- <date/time>

- Russell, Knowlton& Beaudin Ring, 2003

## 2000

**9 retrospective DMAs (Boston TSS****,**** GSC/TSS , Portland app. & GOM)**
**Boston TSS (4)  29 Mar- 1Apr, 29Sept –6 Nov, 19 –31 Dec**
**GSC/TSS (2)  1-14 Jan , 1-19 April**
**Portland approach (1) 13 –26 Feb**
**GOM (2)  8-21 May, 20 June- 12 Jul**

## <footer>

- <date/time>

- Russell, Knowlton& Beaudin Ring, 2003

## 2001

**9 retrospective DMAs (Boston TSS, GSC/TSS, Portland & GOM)**
**Boston TSS (3) 20 Mar - 1 Apr**
**GSC/TSS (2)  11-24 April, 19 May –1 June**
**Portland approach (2)  19 Jul – 1 Aug, 15 –29 Sept**
**GOM(2)  5 Sept – 20 Oct**

## <footer>

- <date/time>

- Russell, Knowlton& Beaudin Ring, 2003

## 2002

**4 retrospective DMAs (Boston TSS &GSC/TSS)**
**Boston TSS (3) 17 Feb – 2 Mar**
**GSC/TSS (1) 5 –18 May**
**	****	**
**	****	**

## Potential DMAs for Boston Based on 1998 –2002 Analysis (Russell et al, 2003)

**Northern approach(GOM) – 16 nm for 16 days/yr**
**GSC/MA Bay approach – 27nm for 39 days/yr**
**Southern approach (to/from CCB) – none**
# Presentation: 877279

## Relations Between Hydrological Variables and Year-Class Strength of Sportfish in Four Florida Rivers

- T. F.  Bonvechio
- Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission
- 1601 Scotty’s Road, Kissimmee, Florida 34744
- M. S. Allen
- Department of Fisheries & Aquatic Sciences, University of Florida
- 7922 NW 71st Street, Gainesville, Florida 32653

## Objectives

- Assess how variation in flow influences recruitment of riverine fishes
- Survival and abundance

## Study Sites

**OchlockoneeRiver**

**Withlacoochee River North**

**Withlacoochee River South**

**Santa Fe River**

## Methods

**Boat electrofishing was conducted in 20 minute transects**
**At least five fish per centimeter group were sacrificed for aging**

## Species Collected

- <date/time>

**Species Collected**

*Micropterus notius* Suwannee Bass

*Lepomis auritus*
- Redbreast Sunfish

*Lepomis macrochirus*
- Bluegill Sunfish

*Micropterus salmoides*_* *_Largemouth Bass

## Age Determination

**Otoliths from fish were sectioned with a diamond wheel saw into 0.5 mm sections**
**Annuli were counted by two independent  readers**

## Catch- Curve

## Correlation Analysis

## Results

## Correlation Results

- Year-class strength of largemouth and Suwannee bass* *was negatively related to flow in rivers
- Year-class strength of bluegill and redbreast sunfish* *was positively related to flow in rivers

## Regression Graphs

## Regression Graphs

## Management Implications

**Species examined responded differently to flow and levels **
**	****	****sunfish +**
**	****	****Black bass –**
**Longevity of the species may be a integral part in setting MFL’s**
**	****	****sunfish - short lived**
**	****	****Black bass - longer lifespan**

## Management Implications

**High flows at least once every three years in fall may allow inundation of floodplain habitat, thus favorable conditions for *****sunfish***** in rivers.  **
**low flows for three or more consecutive years should be prevented, and thus MFL’s should consider biological impacts to short-lived species such as *****sunfishes.***

## Acknowledgements

**Special thanks to Charles Cichra, James Estes, Jerry Krummrich, Debra Murie, and Jeff Hill**
**	****	****    **
**Funding provided by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission**
# Presentation: 769184

## MLS COMPARISON WITH ELECTROCHEMICAL

**MLS COMPARISON WITH ELECTROCHEMICAL**
** ****CONCENTRATION CELL OZONESONDE**
- F. J. Schmidlin, E. T. Northam, B. Morrison, G. Brothers
- NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center
- Wallops Flight Facility
- Code 614.6
- Tel: 757 824 1618
- E-mail: fjs@osb.wff.nasa.gov

## Ozonesonde Procedures at all Sites 

- Preparation of ECC begins three weeks prior to observation
- Schedules for Wallops, Natal, and Ascension Island updated monthly using latest AURA ephemeredes information
- Actual ECC scheduled release time is from 45 to 60 minutes prior to  AURA overpass
- Data from all sites are processed at Wallops – usually within 24 hours of flight
- Archiving formats of the data, in addition to Wallops internal file, are prepared separately for  WOUDC and AVDC

## Slide 3

## Comparison profiles between ECC and AURA are given below for:

- Wallops
- Natal
- Ascension Island

## Slide 5

## Slide 6

## Slide 7

## Slide 8

## Slide 9

## Slide 10

## Slide 11
# Presentation: 667098

## 200GeV CuCu Integrated Luminosity

**200GeV CuCu Integrated Luminosity**

**4.40 nb****-1 ****live ZDCNS (********=2.6 b)**

**PHENIX Goal 2.9 nb****-1 ****live BBCLL1**

**7.9 B BBCLL1 events **_**sampled**_
**1.05 B BBCLL1 events **_**recorded**_

**(As of 3/2/2005)**

**2.78 nb****-1 ****live BBCLL1 (********=2.91 b)**

**(2.56 nb****-1 ****with MuID North/South)**

- J. Lajoie - RHIC Machine/Expt. Meeting

## PHENIX DAQ Hours

**PHENIX DAQ Hours**

**52.5 hours in the previous week**
**(87 hours RHIC physics)**
**52.5/(87-23*0.5) = 0.69**

- Avg. 6.5 hours/day

- J. Lajoie - RHIC Machine/Expt. Meeting

## J/’e+e- in CuCu 200 GeV

- J/ in central arm data:

**(~2.4 nb****-1**** processed through LVL2 and reconstruction)**

**991+/-55 J/******
******22+/-18********’ (2%)**

- Handful of counts in upsilon mass region

- J. Lajoie - RHIC Machine/Expt. Meeting

## J/’ in CuCu 200 GeV

**J/********’******************** in CuCu 200 GeV**

- J/ in LVL2 filtered events:

**North Muon Arm**

**South Muon Arm**

**(~2.2 nb****-1**** processed through LVL2 and reconstruction)**

**3571+/-145 J/******
**81+/-59********’ (2%)**

**5199+/-178 J/******
**283+/-74********’ (5%)**

- J. Lajoie - RHIC Machine/Expt. Meeting

## J/’ in CuCu 200 GeV

- Counts in upsilon mass region, background
- Cuts optimized for J/, needs more work

**North Muon Arm**

**South Muon Arm**

- J. Lajoie - RHIC Machine/Expt. Meeting

## 62.4 GeV CuCu Goals

- PHENIX goals based on comparable “pp equivalent” luminosity:
- AuAu pp equivalent luminosity at 62 GeV was 0.36 pb-1
- Assuming _current_ CuCu 200 GeV luminosity (~450 b-1/week):
- Drop a factor of ~10 for lower energy (45.0 b-1/week)
- “pp equivalent” = 63 x 63 x 45.0 = 0.179 pb-1 /week
- Need roughly two weeks of running plus three days setup time
- PHENIX Goal is _91 ____b__-1__ CuCu at 62.4 GeV_
- 0.36 pb-1/(63 x 63) = 90.7 b-1

- J. Lajoie - RHIC Machine/Expt. Meeting
# Presentation: 024850

## Support Organizations Reporting 
to the Director’s Office

EMS 14001 (Environmental)
OHSAS 18001 (Safety & Health)

September 22, 2006

- to the Director’s Office
- EMS 14001 (Environmental)
- OHSAS 18001 (Safety & Health)
- September 22, 2006

**Management Review**

## Director

- Info Technology

- Info Services

- Science &Tech

- Operations

- HR OMC

- IA&O

- Diversity

- F&O

- Legal

- Policy &SP

**ER**

- ESH&Q

- Plant Eng

- QM office

- SHSD

- RCD

- EWMSD

- CIO

- PPM

- BSD

**CEGPA**

- FSD

**Finance**

- Budget

- Comm Rel

- Media&Com

- Educ Prog

- PGA

- HENP

- BES

- Light Sou

- Life Sci

- EENS

- Physics

- CAD

- SCMagnet

- Instrument

- CF Nano

- Chemistry

- Material Sci

- NSLS

- Medical

- Biology

- NNSD

- ESTD

- Enviro Sci

- Phase 3

- Phase 2

- Phase 1

- OHSAS 18001 Registration
- All Phases  Project Participation

- Color Code

- Staff Srv

- Emerg Srv

- Cent Fab

- Safeguard

**Support Organizations Reporting to the Director's Office**

## Support Organizations Reporting to the Director’s Office

- ESH Coordinator(s)
**EMS Representative-** Debbie Bauer (EWMSD)
- Environmental Compliance Representative [ECR]
**OSH Representative-** Nicole Bernholc (SHSD)
- Safety & Health Representative
**OSH Points of Contact  **(each SORD Division/office has at least one)

## Support Organizations Reporting to the Director’s Office

**OSH Points of Contact**

| CEGPA | Scott Bronson, Rick Backofen  |
| --- | --- |
| Counter Intelligence Office | Helen Todosow  |
| Directors Office | Doug Ports  |
| Diversity, HR/OMC | Donna Dowling, Terry Maugeri  |
| Finance  | April Gray  |
| Internal Assessment& Oversight | Peggy Sparrow  |
| Information Services | Madeline Windsor  |
| Information Technology/ Computational Science | Mary Lynn Heinrich  |
| Legal | Doug Ports  |
| Policy & Strategic Planning | Doug Ports |

## What it takes to be EMS and/or OSH Registered

- ESSH Policy
- ESH Program at the Corporate Level (SBMS)
- ESH Program at the organization level
- Internal Audit of the ESH program
- Management Review of the ESH program
- Planning & Controls:
- Health/Safety Risk Assessments (JRA/ FRA) & Environmental Evaluations
- ESH Document Control & Record Management
- Performance Measure (Goals = “Objectives”)
- Others: Training, R2A2, Emergency Response, Communications

**Site Level**
**SORD**
**Line Organization**

## Track to OSH Registration (Timeline)

- Building the OSH Program at the organization level-       Bi-weekly meetings of POCs since January
- Desk Audit- June
- Internal Audit- August
- Management Review- Today
- Onsite Readiness Review [Oct 12-13]
- Registration Audit [December 4-6]

## Management Review

- Look at the status of the OSH/EMS programs
- Facts, figures, statistics, accomplishments, events
- Open Two-way Discussion: presenter, managers, other attendees
- Evaluation of strengths and weakness
- Outcome: Senior Management is informed of the programs & gives stamp of approval or sets the corrective actions
# Presentation: 410017

## MAIL BOMB RECOGNITION

- Carroll R. Ward
- Regional Security Officer
- (757) 441-3431

## COMMON CHARACTERISTICS OF LETTER & PARCEL BOMBS

- TYPE OF MAIL:
- FOREIGN, PRIOROTIY, SPECIAL DELIVERY
- RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS:
- CONFIDENTIAL, PERSONAL, TO BE OPENED BY ADDRESSEE ONLY

## COMMON CHARACTERISTICS

- VISUAL DISTRACTION: FRAGILE, RUSH, HANDLE WITH CARE
- EXECESSIVE POSTAGE (USUALLY POSTAGE STAMPS)

## COMMON CHARACTERISITICS

- FICTICIOUS OR NO RETURN ADDRESS
- POORLY TYPED OR HANDWRITTEN ADDRESS
- INCORRECT TITLES

## COMMON CHARACTERISTICS

- TITLES BUT NO NAMES
- MISSPELLINGS OF COMMON WORDS
- OILY STAINS OR DISCOLORATIONS

## COMMON CHARACTERISTICS

- EXCESSIVE OR UNEVEN WEIGHT DISTRIBUTION
- EXECESSIVE BINDING MATERIAL:
- MASKING, ELECTRIC OR STRAPPING TAPE, STRING, TWINE

## COMMON CHARACTERISTICS

- RIGID, LOPSIDED OR UNEVEN ENVELOPE
- PROTRUDING WIRES, SCREWS OR OTHER METAL PARTS
- POSTMARK DIFFERENT FROM RETUN ADRESS

## PROPER ACTIONS

- DO NOT ATTEMPT TO OPEN PACKAGE
- CALL 911
- CALL REGIONAL SECURITY OFFICE

## PROPER ACTIONS

- ISOLATE THE PACKAGE
- EVACUATE THE IMMEDIATE AREA

## SUMMARY

- LOOK FOR THE UNUSUAL
- ALWAYS ERR ON THE SIDE OF YOUR SAFETY

## DOC/OSY Eastern Regional Security Office Staff

- Carroll Ward, - Security Officer			(757) 441-3431
- Pam Ruhlen - Asst. Security Officer		(757) 441-3415
- Trish Neunz - Security Assistant			(757) 441-3620														Fax (757) 441-3422
# Presentation: 867769

## Quality Assurance:  Financial Management Matrix

**Quality Assurance:  Financial Management Matrix**
**Suspense, IPAC, Property and **
**Depreciation Reconciliation              **

-              Charles Burns
- May 24, 2004

## SUSPENSE TREASURY SYMBOLSWhy are we reviewing this topic?

- 	_A “Reportable Condition” in 2003 Audit Report:_
- Corrective action could not be effected to Y/E balances
- Lacked specific procedures for reconciling.
- Until cleared, balances meant potentially incorrect accounting records.
- Balances not supportable would need to be adjusted and/or written off.

## SUSPENSE TREASURY SYMBOLS 

- _Background_
- Major classification of General Funds “3800” series.
- Should reflect monies belonging to the Federal Government:
- Transactions from public – 12F3875
- Transactions between agencies (IPAC) – 12F3885
- Proceeds from asset sales – 12F3885
- These are unappropriated funds.
- 	Must be cleared within 60 days to be deemed “current”.
- 	“Delinquent” after 60 days.
- Only a temporary account housing transactions awaiting additional information for further processing.
- Source: Treasury Financial Manual: “Part 2, Chapter 1500, Section 1520.25-Clearing Accounts”

## SUSPENSE TREASURY SYMBOLS

- 12F3885 – Intra-governmental or IPAC
- Automated matching, aging and reporting process has been in place since 2003 and administered by COD.
- Activity is mostly current except for recent issue regarding lack of obligation reference data (discussed in another presentation).
- Reports available at the NFC Reporting Center website.
- 12F3845 – Asset Proceeds
- Agency responsible for tracking redeployment of funds used for vehicle replenishment

## SUSPENSE TREASURY SYMBOLSUsage of 12F3875

- Some usage still not in accordance with Treasury guidelines evidenced by G/L account postings outside of Cash & Liabilities.  Need to correct posting models, business practices.
- Improvement noted in aging of items, however additional work is needed.

## SUSPENSE TREASURY SYMBOLS

- _What’s Available for 12F3875?_
- Created a database at COD of suspense transactions posted to the general ledger.
- Automated matching of initial entries to the clearing entries.
- Remaining unmatched items are aged and reported to agency POC’s in sufficient detail to research and clear.
- Ability in system to mark items that are “partially matched”.

## SUSPENSE TREASURY SYMBOLSExample Report
# Presentation: 007171

## FY 05 2nd Quarter Review NOAA Safety Report

## Safety Metrics2nd Quarter  FY‘05

**Nature of Injuries**
**Strain/Sprain/Swell.****	****37%**
**Contusions****	****29%**
**Fract/Lacer/Punct/****	****23%**
**Misc/Chem/Infect****	****11%**
**Injuries by Body Part**
**Arms/Elbow/Hands****	****36%**
**Trunk/Back****	****24% **
**Legs/Hips/Feet****	****19%**
**Face/Eyes/Head****	****14%**
**Multiple Injuries/Misc****	****  7%**

**Injuries by Causes**
**Material Handling****	****46%**
**Falls/Slips/Trips****	****31% ****	**
**IndAirQuality/Chem****	****12%**
**Mscl/Burns/Vehicle****	****  7%**
**Stricking/Struck/Stung      4%**
**Injuries by Case Type**
**Minor****	****15%**
**First Aid****	****27%**
**Reportable****	****31%**
**Reportable Light Duty****	****  0%**
**Reportable Lost Time****	**** 27%**

**Notes:**
53 incidences analyzed by 
Nature of Injuries
Injuries by Body Part
Injuries by Causes
Case Type
Continuing to experience a high percentage of incidents that include 
Material handling accidents
Falls and slips that result in back injuries
Cuts while using tools
Indoor Air Quality now significant – 15% of the causes
# Presentation: 156351

## Innovation Corridor: Nanotechnology 

- Innovation Corridor: Nanotechnology
- Tuesday, April 11, 9:00 AM - 12:00 PM

- Micron and nanosized magnetic particles coated with biochemical surfactants have emerged recently as an important component for enabling many biological and medical applications. Among these biomagnetic sensors have received a lot of attention lately, due to their potential advantages of simplicity and rapidity. The most common approach to biomagnetic sensors utilizes magnetic beads, whose magnetic moment is detected by a magnetic field sensor, such as a giant magnetoresistive spin valve. In contrast we demonstrated a new substrate-free approach to biomagnetic sensing which uses the magnetic ac-susceptibility of ferromagnetic nanoparticles suspended in a liquid for the signal transduction. For the application of this ac-susceptibility sensing scheme we are currently developing “magnetic viruses”, which give us a well-defined mono-disperse size distribution of the ferromagnetic particles together with an easy possibility to engineer the desired biological recognition functionality. We create the “magnetic viruses” by utilizing native protein capsid shells derived in high yield from T7 bacteriophage viruses. Using these capsids as templates for growing magnetic nanoparticles in their inside has the advantage that the capsids retain their original chemical recognition properties, which can be tailored via phage display libraries to display virtually any affinity reagent specific to any target.

- Axel Hoffmann, Seok-Hwan Chung, Sam Bader, Chin-Mei Liu, Brian Kay, Lee Makowski, Liaohai Chen

- 
- 

- Avidin-coated magnetite

- Biotinylated T7 bacteriophage

-  T7 bacteriophage

- This fabrication of “magnetic viruses” is in contrast to the traditional fabrication of bio-functionalized magnetic nanoparticles, where the particles are typically functionalized after the preparation of the magnetic particles. This work was supported by Department of Energy, Basic Energy Science under contract W-31-109-ENG-38 and DARPA under contract 8C67400.
# Presentation: 514697

## Department of Justice and Federal Trade CommissionSingle Firm Conduct: Predatory Buying Panel 

-                Tim Brennan
- 2006: T.D. MacDonald Chair in Industrial EconomicsCompetition Bureau, Industry Canada
- Permanent:  Professor, Public Policy and EconomicsUniversity of Maryland, Baltimore County
- Senior Fellow, Resources for the Future, Washington, DC
- _[brennan.tim@cb-bc.gc.ca](mailto:Brennan.tim@cb-bc.gc.ca)__, brennan@umbc.edu_
- FTC HeadquartersWashington, DC
- June 22, 2006

## Recommendations

**Predation or Exclusion?  Pick one or the other.**
**Validate necessary assumptions in those rare predatory buying cases.**
**For exclusion, first delineate complement market, using HMGs.**
**Then, establish price effect from complementary market monopolization (CMM).**
**Test discounts by effect on complement price, not comparison to cost.**
**Predation screens—profit sacrifice, equally efficient competitor, even prior dominance—do not belong in exclusion cases.**
**Consider share-based rather than all-or-nothing remedies.**
**Focus on creation of new monopolies, not maintenance of old ones.**
# Presentation: 546484

## Quantifying the Mechanisms Governing Interannual Variability in Air-sea CO2 Flux

**S. Doney & Ivan Lima (WHOI), K. Lindsay & N. Mahowald (NCAR), K. Moore (UCI) & Matt Maltrud (LANL)**

_**Global Ocean Hindcast Simulations (1958-2004)**_
- -Upper ocean multi-functional group, multi-nutrient ecosystem model (Moore et al., 2004)
- -Coupled to full-depth ocean BGC model (CCSM-POP)
- -Surface forcing (1957-2004) from NCEP reanalysis and satellite products
- -Fixed pre-industrial atmospheric CO2 (~280 ppm) & transient anthropogenic CO2 simulations

## Physical & Biological Controls

- pCO2 = f(Temp., Salinity, DIC, Alkalinity)
-                    **+**         (**+**)        **+**          **-**

- Biology only one factor on surface pCO2 & air-sea CO2 flux;

## Slide 3

## Ocean Model Hindcast (1957-2004)

_**Ocean Model Hindcast (1957-2004)**_

## Factors driving interannual pCO2 anomalies: Wind Speed

## W. Eq. Pacific

- Alk

- Temp

- nDIC

- Freshwater

- 1:1

## Regression of surface pCO2 anomalies on forcing terms

- Regression of surface pCO2 anomalies on forcing terms
- ~1 driving term
-   0 minor term
- <0 compensating             term
- Masked in areas of low pCO2’ and low correlation

- Dissolved Inorganic Carbon

- Temperature

## Alkalinity

- Freshwater

- Regression of surface pCO2 anomalies on forcing terms
- ~1 driving term
-   0 minor term
- <0 compensating             term
- Masked in areas of low pCO2’ and low correlation

## Q’

- I

- A’

- V’

- E’

- 0

- 100

- Annual inventory change & flux anomalies X’:
- I/t = Q’  srf. flux
-          + A’  horz. advection
-          + E’  eddies
-          + V’  vert. adv.
-          + P’  net comm. prod.
-          + other

- P’

## Dust Only

- Physics Only

- Physics Only

## Dust & Physics

- r=0.48

- SeaWiFS

- Physics
- r=0.11

- Dust
- r=0.82

- Smoothed w/
- annual filter

## Monthly

- Annual

## -Models as tools for identifying ocean biogeochemical mechanisms

- -Regional partitioning of factors driving air-sea CO2 flux
- Southern Ocean wind speed variability
- Subtropics thermal
- Tropics/high latitude biology and circulation on nDIC
- Tropical Indo-Pacific freshwater
- -Non-linear interactions of dust and climate variability

## Slide 14

## Is low dust deposition downwind of Australia in 1997/1998 realistic? Tentative answer: yes

_**Is low dust deposition downwind of Australia in 1997/1998 realistic?**__** Tentative answer: yes**_

- Chen et al. precip slightly above average for 1997 and 1998

- All values are anomalies from climatological mean (1979-2004): black monthly: Yellow line: 0: blue line: annual mean

- Two met stations close to source area: 946720 and 944820 have fewer dust events than average in 1997 and 1998

- Low dep due to low source

- Low dep due to high precip

- Model

- Obs

**Notes:**
For source, precip averages are over region: -35 to -25N, 137 to 142 E
For deposition, averages are over region: -60 to -35N, 130 to 180E

## Slide 17

## Slide 18
# Presentation: 522633

## Module 9

**Substance-Induced Disorders **

## Chapter 8

- Module 8A
- Cross-Cutting Issues: Suicidality, Nicotine Dependence
- Personality Disorders
- Module 8B
- Mood and Anxiety Disorders
- Schizophrenia and Other Psychotic Disorders

- Module 8C
- Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (AD/HD)
- Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)
- Eating Disorders
- Pathological Gambling
- Appendix D

## What Every Counselor Should Know 

*Types of medications:*
- Antipsychotics
- Antimanic
- Antidepressants
- Antianxiety
- Stimulants
- Narcotics
- Antiparkinsonian
- Hypnotics
- Addiction treatment

**Free download at **_[www.mattc.org](http://www.mattc.org/)_

## In This Module . . .

- Substance-Induced Disorders
- Description
- Alcohol
- Caffeine
- Cocaine and Amphetamines
- Hallucinogens
- Nicotine
- Opioids
- Sedatives
- Diagnostic Considerations
- Case Studies
- Appendix F

## TIP Exercise—Substance-Induced Disorders

*With your group:*
- Review the text’s sections on the assigned substance.
- Use your handout to create a brief case study.
*(15 minutes**)*
# Presentation: 728312

## Leveraging Resources for HDSP Legislative Change

- How to Succeed in Policy Change Without Really Trying

## Montana Policy Successes

- Pre-hospital stroke protocol
- Tobacco funds for chronic disease
- Funding for E-911
- EMS interim legislative task force

- Modification of AED Administrative Rule
- Tobacco tax increase/clean indoor air bill
- Breastfeeding friendly worksites

## Guiding Principles – CVH Program Role

## Plan early and stay flexible

## Identify policy-related HDSP state plan strategies

## Determine if legislation is the answer

## Dovetail policy goals of partners and HDSP

- EMS Section
- State dietetic association
- 911 State Program
- State Auditor’s Office
- AHA
- State Health Alliance advocates

## Recruit “master” advocates

## Take advantage of authorized State lobbyists

## Identify policy/legislative templates from other states

## Create a 30-second elevator speech

## Prehospital stroke protocol example

- CVH Program role:
- proposed statewide protocol
- approached EMS member of Board of Medical Examiners (BOME)
- no response so pursued BOME ED physician
- Stroke neurologists/paramedic developed draft protocol
- CVH “defended” protocol to BOME
- Result: protocol approved, no legislation needed

## Master Settlement Agreement funds for stroke

- Bureau Chief submitted chronic disease proposals to Division Administrator/Dept Director
- Modified MSA statute language to allow chronic disease programs to receive funds
- Legislative sub-committee on health allocated more funds than requested
- Result: $4.4 million per biennium for chronic disease including $625,000 per year for CVH Program
- Success factors: supportive subcommittee, division track record

## Advocates’ Role

## Use “The Art of War” as reference for overall strategy

- Identify opponents
- Develop counter arguments
- Gather “weapons”
- Fact sheets with costs/benefits
- Capitol Day to raise awareness
- Local data

## Get legislators’ emotional reaction(breastmilk pumping locations of working Montana moms)

## Legislative Strategies

- Mobilize grassroots network
- Work with both political parties
- Know when to find an alternate path

## If needed, aim for “small win”

- Phased implementation of clean indoor air policy

## Lessons Learned

- Need fiscal note to enforce bill
- Advocacy process is the same
- 	- topic and players vary
- Success breeds success
- Timing IS everything

## Next steps

- 2009 legislative push
- Telestroke consult coverage by private insurers
- Enhance insurance coverage of HDSP preventive services
- Assess whether EMS using stroke protocol

## Questions??

- Crystelle Fogle, Program Manager
- Montana Cardiovascular Health Program
- cfogle@mt.gov
# Presentation: 425540

## Field Budget Submission System FBSs

- Bridget Haverty
- August 18th 2005

## Status:

**We are currently entering all off cycle proposals into FBSs and transmitting to ePME as part of a production test to ensure that all processes are running smoothly before the FY06 mandate goes into place**
**This is in addition to the hard copy or emailed submission you would normally send to your program manager, but replaces the copies for Budget Office distribution**
**Hard copy or emailed submission to your program managers should no longer be required after 10/01/05**

**Status:**

## Training:

**A new web page for Proposal Development and Submission is available at the Budget Office web site**
**This site includes links to FBSs, the FBSs Training Manual and Budget Formulation support materials**
**We will be scheduling formal Labwide training to coincide with the FY08 Unicall**
**For off cycle proposals we’ve been meeting individually with resource analysts and we’ll continue to do so**

**Training:**

## Process Changes:

**Historically, with hard copy and email submission, proposals were worked on right up to the last possible minute before submission**
**The new FY06 process will require a little more lead time and planning with your investigators**
**Once all the information is entered into FBSs, the Budget Office will need a 24 hour window to review and transfer the information to ePME**
**Also, ePME submission is now routed through our Site Office for review before being sent on to your program manager **
**PLEASE**** Have your proposals in approved status in FBSs 3 to 4 days prior to your HQ deadline**

**Process Changes:**

## FBSs Access:

**We are in the process of fully integrating FBSs and FMS now that the 8.8 upgrade is complete.  This should be finished before the end of the month**
**When the integration is complete FBSs will be accessed under a single FMS log in through your FMS production environment as a menu option **
**In the interim it is located at the following address:**
- _[https://fmssrv2.lbl.gov:8201/psp/fbssprd/?cmd=login](https://fmssrv2.lbl.gov:8201/psp/fbssprd/?cmd=login)_
**Or the shortcut**
_**fms/fbssprd**_

**FBSs Access:**