BRCP Application Process Sample Clauses

BRCP Application Process. As further described in BRCP Chapter 9, 9.3.2, the County and the Cities will require proponents of private projects that are subject to their land use or other regulatory authority and fall within the categories of projects and activities described in BRCP Chapter 2, Sections 2.2 and 2.3 to submit an application package as described in BRCP Chapter 8, Section 8.7.2. The County and the Cities will review the application package based on an “Evaluation Checklist” (i.e., the template referenced in Section of this Agreement) that will be prepared by the Implementing Entity. The County’s and Cities’ review of the application package will occur concurrently with the environmental review of the project pursuant to CEQA, for projects subject to CEQA. Based on its review of each application package, the applicable City or the County will prepare a written determination regarding whether the private project, as proposed in the application package, includes all applicable terms and conditions of the Permits and that take associated with the implementation of the proposed project is properly authorized through the Permits. The City or County may request the Implementing Entity to prepare this determination. If the City or County concludes that the project as proposed does not include all applicable terms and conditions, it will explain the deficiency or omission in writing to the private project proponent and will reject the application. If the City or County concludes that the project as proposed includes all applicable terms and conditions, it will prepare a written determination to that effect (a “Compliance Determination”). The Cities and the County will provide each Compliance Determination to the Implementing Entity and maintain a copy of all BRCP application packages for which they have prepared a Compliance Determination, which shall be made available to the Implementing Entity as part of annual and other reviews. Nothing in this Section shall be construed to affect the ability of the County or a City to determine that an application for a private project is incomplete or to deny a private project application for any reason unrelated to the BRCP or the Permits.
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
BRCP Application Process. As further described in BRCP Chapter 9, 9.3.1, the County and the Cities will require proponents of private projects that are subject to their land use or other regulatory authority and fall within the categories of projects and activities described in BRCP Chapter 2, Sections
Sample 1

Related to BRCP Application Process

  • Application Process The employees wishing to enter into a job share arrangement will apply in writing to the Employer and forward a copy to the Union outlining the proposed commencement date of the job share, how the hours and days of work will be shared and how communication and continuity of work will be maintained. The Employer shall communicate a decision on a job share request in writing to the applicants. Applications to Job Sharing shall not be unreasonably denied.

  • Selection Process The Mortgage Loans were selected from among the outstanding one- to four-family mortgage loans in the Seller's portfolio at the related Closing Date as to which the representations and warranties set forth in Subsection 9.02 could be made and such selection was not made in a manner so as to affect adversely the interests of the Purchaser;

  • Application Procedure 7.4.1. Application Priority........................................ 7.4.2. [Reserved].................................................. 7.4.3. Advance Payments............................................

  • Provisional Application Upon signature of this Compact, and until this Compact has entered into force in accordance with Section 7.3, the Parties will provisionally apply the terms of this Compact; provided that, no MCC Funding, other than Compact Implementation Funding, will be made available or disbursed before this Compact enters into force.

  • Review and Selection Process The Project Narratives of SAMHSA applications are peer-reviewed according to the evaluation criteria listed above. Decisions to fund a grant are based on the strengths and weaknesses of the application as identified by peer reviewers. The results of the peer review are advisory in nature. The program office and approving official make the final determination for funding based on the following: • Individual awards over $250,000 are approved by the Center for Mental Health Services National Advisory Council; • Availability of funds; • Equitable distribution of awards in terms of geography (including urban, rural, and remote settings) and balance among populations of focus and program size; • Submission of any required documentation that must be submitted prior to making an award; and • SAMHSA is required to review and consider any information about your organization that is in the Federal Award Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS). In accordance with 45 CFR 75.212, SAMHSA reserves the right not to make an award to an entity if that entity does not meet the minimum qualification standards as described in section 75.205(a)(2). If SAMHSA chooses not to award a fundable application in accordance with 45 CFR 75.205(a)(2), SAMHSA must report that determination to the designated integrity and performance system accessible through the System for Award Management (XXX) [currently, FAPIIS]. You may review and comment on any information about your organization that a federal awarding agency previously entered. XXXXXX will consider your comments, in addition to other information in FAPIIS in making a judgment about your organization’s integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under federal awards when completing the review of risk posed as described in 45 CFR 75.205 HHS Awarding Agency Review of Risk by Applicants.

  • Application Procedures a) An employee applies for a listing on the system-wide registry through the employee’s Human Resources Department by completing the form in Appendix B.

  • Negotiation Process (a) If either the Chief Executive Officer of ICANN (“CEO”) or the Chairperson of the Registry Stakeholder Group (“Chair”) desires to discuss any revision(s) to this Agreement, the CEO or Chair, as applicable, shall provide written notice to the other person, which shall set forth in reasonable detail the proposed revisions to this Agreement (a “Negotiation Notice”). Notwithstanding the foregoing, neither the CEO nor the Chair may

  • Mediation Process A. Mediation is a form of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) that may be requested by the City or the PBA. It is an alternative, not a substitute for the formal arbitration process contained in Section 19.7 above. Mediation is an informal process in which a neutral third party assists the opposing parties in reaching a voluntary, negotiated resolution of a charge of discipline. The decision to mediate is completely voluntary for the PBA and the City. Mediation gives the parties the opportunity to discuss the issues raised in the charging document, clear up misunderstandings, determine the underlying interests or concerns, find areas of agreement and, ultimately, incorporate those areas of agreement into solutions. A mediator does not resolve the charge or impose a decision on the parties. Instead, the mediator helps the parties to agree on a mutually acceptable resolution. The mediation process is strictly confidential. Information disclosed during mediation will not be revealed to anyone.

Draft better contracts in just 5 minutes Get the weekly Law Insider newsletter packed with expert videos, webinars, ebooks, and more!