Comparison of Alternatives Sample Clauses

Comparison of Alternatives. Compare the alternative solutions to treat plastic waste with PlastiCircle, illustrating with tables and graphs so as to facilitate the decision-making process. When the costs and benefits for each competing alternative have been discounted, compare and rank the discounted net value (discounted benefit minus discounted cost) of the competing alternatives. The option with the lowest costs and highest benefits is clearly the best alternative.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Comparison of Alternatives. ENGINEER will compare the alternatives considered using evaluation criteria determined in TM#3. The WEAP model will be used to better compare impacts, costs and benefits of each alternative.
Comparison of Alternatives. Table 2.4 provides a summary of the environmental consequences to all resources associated with implementing those alternatives carried forward for detailed analysis and indicates that only the Proposed Action would meet the established purpose and need for the Proposed Action. As demonstrated in Table 2.4, none of the alternatives carried forward for detailed analysis is expected to result in major impacts to the environment.
Comparison of Alternatives. Footprint Acreages. Table 1 quantifies (in terms of footprint acres) the anticipated impacts of each alternative on the different wetland types. These calculations were obtained by overlaying the footprint of each alternative on the wetland mapping using GIS analysis functions. The values are shown as acreage comparisons only. TABLE 1 IMPACTS ON WETLANDS, PONDS, AND UPLANDS (ACRES) No Action Alternative Bridge Alternatives1 Ferry Alternatives2 Wetland Type3 No Action C3(a) C3(b) C4 D1 F1 F3 G2 G3 G4 Forested Wetlands 0.0 15.6 14.2 10.6 8.0 24.5 13.0 14.2 10.0 7.7 Shrub/Scrub Wetlands 0.0 3.1 3.0 3.1 3.0 17.9 14.4 2.9 6.5 2.9 Muskegs 0.0 25.3 25.1 25.1 25.1 60.9 57.7 25.3 29.4 24.8 Intertidal Marshes and 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.7 0.1 Total Wetland Impacts 0.0 44.1 42.4 39.0 36.3 103.3 85.2 42.5 47.5 35.4 Ponds 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 Uplands (Nonwetlands) 0.0 5.1 9.1 10.4 8.6 10.7 4.8 7.6 7.0 4.7 Xxxxxxx
Comparison of Alternatives. CONSULTANT shall prepare a summary analysis of the four alignment alternatives. The analysis shall summarize the analyses described in Subtasks 3.A through 3.E and also address the constructability, availability of right-of-way (ROW), the environmental, and the traffic impact of each. CONSULTANT shall conduct a workshop for the selection of the best alternative and prepare exhibits for and present the selected project to CITY management and/or the public.

Related to Comparison of Alternatives

  • Performance Expectations The Charter School’s performance in relation to the indicators, measures, metrics and targets set forth in the CPF shall provide the basis upon which the SCSC will decide whether to renew the Charter School’s Charter Contract at the end of the charter term. This section shall not preclude the SCSC from considering other relevant factors in making renewal decisions.

  • Completion of Evaluation Cycle 1. The summative evaluation rating shall be based upon a preponderance of the evidence, assessed in a holistic manner, that is aligned to the Ohio Educator Standards. Only evidence gathered during the walkthroughs and formal observations that are conducted for the current school year may be used.

  • Performance Standard Contractor shall perform all work hereunder in a manner consistent with the level of competency and standard of care normally observed by a person practicing in Contractor's profession. County has relied upon the professional ability and training of Contractor as a material inducement to enter into this Agreement. Contractor hereby agrees to provide all services under this Agreement in accordance with generally accepted professional practices and standards of care, as well as the requirements of applicable federal, state and local laws, it being understood that acceptance of Contractor’s work by County shall not operate as a waiver or release. If County determines that any of Contractor's work is not in accordance with such level of competency and standard of care, County, in its sole discretion, shall have the right to do any or all of the following: (a) require Contractor to meet with County to review the quality of the work and resolve matters of concern; (b) require Contractor to repeat the work at no additional charge until it is satisfactory; (c) terminate this Agreement pursuant to the provisions of Article 4; or (d) pursue any and all other remedies at law or in equity.

  • Performance Factors (a) Each party will notify the other party of the existence of a Performance Factor, as soon as reasonably possible after the party becomes aware of the Performance Factor. The Notice will:

  • PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENTS Upon a particular Commission’s issuance of an Order pertaining to Performance Measurements in a proceeding expressly applicable to all CLECs generally, BellSouth shall implement in that state such Performance Measurements as of the date specified by the Commission. Performance Measurements that have been Ordered in a particular state can currently be accessed via the internet at xxxx://xxxx.xxxxxxxxx.xxx. The following Service Quality Measurements (SQM) plan as it presently exists and as it may be modified in the future, is being included as the performance measurements currently in place for the state of Tennessee. At such time that the TRA issues a subsequent Order pertaining to Performance Measurements, such Performance Measurements shall supersede the SQM contained in the Agreement. BellSouth Service Quality Measurement Plan‌ (SQM) Tennessee Performance Metrics Measurement Descriptions Version 2.00 Issue Date: July 1, 2003 Introduction

  • Performance Indicators The HSP’s delivery of the Services will be measured by the following Indicators, Targets and where applicable Performance Standards. In the following table: n/a meanç ‘not-appIicabIe’, that there iç no defined Performance Standard for the indicator for the applicable year. tbd means a Target, and a Performance Standard, if applicable, will be determined during the applicable year. INDICATOR CATEGORY INDICATOR P = Performance Indicator E = Explanatory Indicator M = Monitoring Indicator 2019/20 PERFORMANCE TARGET STANDARD Organizational Health and Financial Indicators Debt Service Coverage Ratio (P) 1 c1 Total Margin (P) 0 cO Coordination and Access Indicators Percent Resident Days – Long Stay (E) n/a n/a Wait Time from LHIN Determination of Eligibility to LTC Home Response (M) n/a n/a Long-Term Care Home Refusal Rate (E) n/a n/a SCHEDULE D — PERFORMANCE 2/3 INDICATOR CATEGORY Quality and Resident Safety Indicators INDICATOR P = Performance Indicator E = Explanatory Indicator M = Monitoring Indicator Percentage of Residents Who Fell in the Last 30 days (M) 2019/20 PERFORMANCE TARGET STANDARD n/a n/a Percentage of Residents Whose Pressure Ulcer Worsened (M) n/a n/a Percentage of Residents on Antipsychotics Without a Diagnosis of Psychosis (M) n/a n/a Percentage of Residents in Daily Physical Restraints (M) n/a n/a SCHEDULE D — PERFORMANCE 2.0 LHIN-Specific Performance Obligations 3/3

  • Performance Criteria The Performance Criteria are set forth in Exhibit A to this Agreement.

  • Performance Measures and Metrics This section outlines the performance measures and metrics upon which service under this SLA will be assessed. Shared Service Centers and Customers will negotiate the performance metric, frequency, customer and provider service responsibilities associated with each performance measure. Measurements of the Port of Seattle activities are critical to improving services and are the basis for cost recovery for services provided. The Port of Seattle and The Northwest Seaport Alliance have identified activities critical to meeting The NWSA’s business requirements and have agreed upon how these activities will be assessed.

  • PERFORMANCE OUTCOMES 8 A. CONTRACTOR shall achieve performance objectives, tracking and reporting Performance 9 Outcome Objective statistics in monthly programmatic reports, as appropriate. ADMINISTRATOR 10 recognizes that alterations may be necessary to the following services to meet the objectives, and,

  • Performance Measurement Satisfactory performance of this Contract will be measured by:

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