Review The practitioner reviews the treatment plan and discusses, when appropriate, case circumstances and management options with the attending (or referring) physician. The reviewer consults with the requesting physician when more clarity is needed to make an informed coverage decision. The reviewer may consult with board certified physicians from appropriate specialty areas to assist in making determinations of coverage and/or appropriateness. All such consultations will be documented in the review text. If the reviewer determines that the admission, continued stay or service requested is not a covered service, a notice of non-coverage is issued. Only a physician, behavioral health practitioner (such as a psychiatrist, doctoral-level clinical psychologist, certified addiction medicine specialist), dentist or pharmacist who has the clinical expertise appropriate to the request under review with an unrestricted license may deny coverage based on medical necessity.
Log Reviews All systems processing and/or storing PHI COUNTY discloses to 11 CONTRACTOR or CONTRACTOR creates, receives, maintains, or transmits on behalf of COUNTY 12 must have a routine procedure in place to review system logs for unauthorized access.
Office of Inspector General Investigative Findings Expert Review In accordance with Senate Bill 799, Acts 2021, 87th Leg., R.S., if Texas Government Code, Section 531.102(m-1)(2) is applicable to this Contract, Contractor affirms that it possesses the necessary occupational licenses and experience.
Administrator Compliance Statement On or before ninety (90) days after the end of each fiscal year, commencing with the fiscal year ended March 31st immediately following the Closing Date, the Administrator shall deliver to the Issuer a statement of compliance addressed to the Issuer and signed by an authorized officer of the Administrator to the effect that (i) a review of the Administrator’s activities during the immediately preceding reporting year (or applicable portion thereof) and of its performance under this Agreement during such period has been made under such officer’s supervision, and (ii) to the best of such officer’s knowledge, based on such review, the Administrator has fulfilled all of its obligations under this Agreement in all material respects throughout such reporting year (or applicable portion thereof) or, if there has been a failure to fulfill any such obligation in any material respect, specifically identifying each such failure known to such officer and the nature and the status thereof. If the Administrator is the same party as the Servicer, such party’s compliance with Section 3.11(a) of the Sale and Servicing Agreement will satisfy the Administrator’s obligations set forth in this Section 1.21(b).
Literature Review A-E shall conduct a literature review to determine which species have been identified as special status by state, federal, and local resources agencies and organizations, and have a potential to occur on the project site or in the immediate vicinity. Sources to be reviewed include: (1) special status species lists from the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and California Native Plant Society (CNPS); (2) database searches of the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and the Electronic Inventory of the CNPS; (3) the most recent Federal Register listing package and critical habitat determination for each federally Endangered or Threatened species potentially occurring on the project site; (4) the CDFG Annual Report on the status of California’s listed Threatened and Endangered plants and animals; and (5) other biological studies conducted in the vicinity of the project site.
Standard of Review The Parties acknowledge and agree that the standard of review for any avoidance, breach, rejection, termination or other cessation of performance of or changes to any portion of this integrated, non-severable Agreement (as described in Section 22) over which FERC has jurisdiction, whether proposed by Seller, by Buyer, by a non-party of, by FERC acting sua sponte shall be the “public interest” standard of review set forth in United Gas Pipe Line Co. v.
Procurement Related Complaints and Administrative Review 49.1 The procedures for making a Procurement-related Complaint are as specified in the TDS. 49.2 A request for administrative review shall be made in the form provided under contract forms.
CERTIFICATION REGARDING BOYCOTTING CERTAIN ENERGY COMPANIES (Texas law as of September 1, 2021) By submitting a proposal to this Solicitation, you certify that you agree, when it is applicable, to the following required by Texas law as of September 1, 2021: If (a) company is not a sole proprietorship; (b) company has ten (10) or more full-time employees; and (c) this contract has a value of $100,000 or more that is to be paid wholly or partly from public funds, the following certification shall apply; otherwise, this certification is not required. Pursuant to Tex. Gov’t Code Ch. 2274 of SB 13 (87th session), the company hereby certifies and verifies that the company, or any wholly owned subsidiary, majority-owned subsidiary, parent company, or affiliate of these entities or business associations, if any, does not boycott energy companies and will not boycott energy companies during the term of the contract. For purposes of this contract, the term “company” shall mean an organization, association, corporation, partnership, joint venture, limited partnership, limited liability partnership, or limited liability company, that exists to make a profit. The term “boycott energy company” shall mean “without an ordinary business purpose, refusing to deal with, terminating business activities with, or otherwise taking any action intended to penalize, inflict economic harm on, or limit commercial relations with a company because the company (a) engages in the exploration, production, utilization, transportation, sale, or manufacturing of fossil fuel-based energy and does not commit or pledge to meet environmental standards beyond applicable federal and state law, or (b) does business with a company described by paragraph (a).” See Tex. Gov’t Code § 809.001(1).
Compliance Review During the Term, Developer agrees to permit the GLO, HUD, and/or a designated representative of the GLO or HUD to access the Property for the purpose of performing Compliance-Monitoring Procedures. In accordance with GLO Compliance-Monitoring Procedures, the GLO or HUD will periodically monitor and audit Developer’s compliance with the requirements of this Agreement, the CDBG-DR Regulations, the CDBG Multifamily Rental Housing Guidelines, and any and all other Governmental Requirements during the Term. In conducting any compliance reviews, the GLO or HUD will rely primarily on information obtained from Developer’s records and reports, on-site monitoring, and audit reports. The GLO or HUD may also consider other relevant information gained from other sources, including litigation and citizen complaints. 5.04 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: INDEMNIFICATION (a) Developer agrees to the following. (i) Developer shall not receive, store, dispose, or release any Hazardous Materials on or to the Property; transport any Hazardous Materials to or from the Property; or permit the existence of any Hazardous Material contamination on the Property. (ii) Developer shall give written notice to the GLO immediately when Developer acquires knowledge of the presence of any Hazardous Material on the Property; the transport of any Hazardous Materials to or from the Property; or the existence of any Hazardous Material contamination on the Property, with a full description thereof. (iii) Developer will promptly, at Developer’s sole cost and expense, comply with any Governmental Requirements regarding the removal, treatment, or disposal of such Hazardous Materials or Hazardous Material contamination and provide the GLO with satisfactory evidence of such compliance. (iv) Developer shall provide the GLO, within thirty (30) days of demand by the GLO, financial assurance evidencing to the GLO that the necessary funds are available to pay for the cost of removing, treating, and disposing of such Hazardous Materials or Hazardous Material contamination and discharging any assessments that may be established on the Property as a result thereof. (v) Developer shall insure that all leases, licenses, and agreements of any kind (whether written or oral) now or hereafter executed that permit any party to occupy, possess, or use in any way the Property or any part thereof include an express prohibition on the disposal or discharge of any Hazardous Materials at the Property and a provision stating that failure to comply with such prohibition shall expressly constitute a default under any such agreement. (vi) Developer shall not cause or suffer any liens (including any so-called state, federal, or local “Superfund” lien relating to such matters) to be recorded against the Property as a consequence of, or in any way related to, the presence, remediation, or disposal of Hazardous Materials in or about the Property. (b) DEVELOPER SHALL, AT ALL TIMES, RETAIN ANY AND ALL LIABILITIES ARISING FROM THE PRESENCE, HANDLING, TREATMENT, STORAGE, TRANSPORTATION, REMOVAL, OR DISPOSAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ON THE PROPERTY. REGARDLESS OF WHETHER ANY EVENT OF DEFAULT OCCURS OR CONTINUES, WHETHER THE GLO EXERCISES ANY REMEDIES IN RESPECT TO THE PROPERTY, OR SUCH SITUATION RELATED TO HAZARDOUS MATERIALS WAS CAUSED BY OR WITHIN THE CONTROL OF DEVELOPER OR THE GLO, DEVELOPER SHALL DEFEND, INDEMNIFY, AND HOLD HARMLESS THE GLO AND ITS OFFICERS, AGENTS, AND EMPLOYEES FROM AND AGAINST ANY AND ALL LIABILITIES, SUITS, ACTIONS, CLAIMS, DEMANDS, PENALTIES, DAMAGES (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, LOST PROFITS, CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, INTEREST, PENALTIES, FINES, AND MONETARY SANCTIONS), LOSSES, COSTS, AND EXPENSES (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, REASONABLE ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS) THAT MAY: (i) NOW OR IN THE FUTURE (WHETHER BEFORE OR AFTER THE CULMINATION OF THE TRANSACTIONS CONTEMPLATED BY THIS AGREEMENT) BE INCURRED OR SUFFERED BY THE GLO BY REASON OF, RESULTING FROM, IN CONNECTION WITH, OR ARISING IN ANY MANNER WHATSOEVER FROM THE BREACH OF ANY WARRANTY OR COVENANT IN THIS SECTION OR THE INACCURACY OF ANY REPRESENTATION OF DEVELOPER IN RELATION TO THIS AGREEMENT;
Independent Review Contractor shall provide the Secretary of ADS/CIO an independent expert review of any Agency recommendation for any information technology activity when its total cost is $1,000,000.00 or greater or when CIO requires one. The State has identified two sub-categories for Independent Reviews, Standard and Complex. The State will identify in the SOW RFP the sub-category they are seeking. State shall not consider bids greater than the maximum value indicated below for this category. Standard Independent Review $25,000 Maximum Complex Independent Review $50,000 Maximum Per Vermont statute 3 V.S.A. 2222, The Secretary of Administration shall obtain independent expert review of any recommendation for any information technology initiated after July 1, 1996, as information technology activity is defined by subdivision (a) (10), when its total cost is $1,000,000 or greater or when required by the State Chief Information Officer. Documentation of this independent review shall be included when plans are submitted for review pursuant to subdivisions (a)(9) and (10) of this section. The independent review shall include: • An acquisition cost assessment • A technology architecture review • An implementation plan assessment • A cost analysis and model for benefit analysis • A procurement negotiation advisory services contract • An impact analysis on net operating costs for the agency carrying out the activity In addition, from time to time special reviews of the advisability and feasibility of certain types of IT strategies may be required. Following are Requirements and Capabilities for this Service: • Identify acquisition and lifecycle costs; • Assess wide area network (WAN) and/or local area network (LAN) impact; • Assess risks and/or review technical risk assessments of an IT project including security, data classification(s), subsystem designs, architectures, and computer systems in terms of their impact on costs, benefits, schedule and technical performance; • Assess, evaluate and critically review implementation plans, e.g.: • Adequacy of support for conversion and implementation activities • Adequacy of department and partner staff to provide Project Management • Adequacy of planned testing procedures • Acceptance/readiness of staff • Schedule soundness • Adequacy of training pre and post project • Assess proposed technical architecture to validate conformance to the State’s “strategic direction.” • Insure system use toolsets and strategies are consistent with State Chief Information Officer (CIO) policies, including security and digital records management; • Assess the architecture of the proposed hardware and software with regard to security and systems integration with other applications within the Department, and within the Agency, and existing or planned Enterprise Applications; • Perform cost and schedule risk assessments to support various alternatives to meet mission need, recommend alternative courses of action when one or more interdependent segment(s) or phase(s) experience a delay, and recommend opportunities for new technology insertions; • Assess the architecture of the proposed hardware and software with regard to the state of the art in this technology. • Assess a project’s backup/recovery strategy and the project’s disaster recovery plans for adequacy and conformance to State policy. • Evaluate the ability of a proposed solution to meet the needs for which the solution has been proposed, define the ability of the operational and user staff to integrate this solution into their work.
