Conclusion and Recommendations D. Evaluations for Offenders without a sex offense conviction shall answer the following additional referral questions in the evaluations:
Manufacturer's Recommendations All work or materials shall be installed in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations and requirements. The Contractor shall obtain the manufacturer’s recommendations and requirements, for its use at the Site in executing the Work, copies of bulletins, circulars, catalogues, or other publications bearing the manufacturer’s titles, numbers, editions, dates, etc. If the manufacturer’s recommendations and requirements are not available, the Contractor shall request installation instructions from the Design Professional.
Role of Experts 1. On request of a disputing Party, or on its own initiative, the Panel may seek information and technical advice from any person or body that it deems appropriate. The requirements set out in subparagraphs (b) and (c) of Article 178 (Qualifications of Panelists) shall apply to the selection of experts or groups, as appropriate. 2. Before the Panel seeks information or technical advice, appropriate procedures shall be established in consultation with the disputing Parties. The Panel shall: (a) notify the Parties, in advance, of its intention to seek information or technical advice pursuant to paragraph 1, establishing an adequate time period for the Parties to make the comments and observations that they deem convenient; and (b) provide the disputing Parties with a copy of any information or technical advice received pursuant to paragraph 1, and with a period of time for the Parties to submit its comments. 3. When the Panel takes into consideration the information or technical advice sought pursuant to paragraph 1 for the preparation of its report, it shall also take into account any comments or observations submitted by the disputing Parties with respect to such information or technical advice.
Conclusions and Recommendations The demonstration and evaluation process provided an opportunity to test community specific tools with a range of end users from the memory institution domain and to gain greater insight into both the current and future evolution of the SHAMAN prototypes for preservation, access and re-use. Xxxx et al. (2000) in their user evaluation study of the Alexandria Digital Library which incorporated the evaluation of a Web prototype by earth scientists, information specialists and educators raised four key questions in relation to their findings that SHAMAN may be well advised to consider, they are paraphrased here with our conclusions from the investigations. What have we learned about our target organizations and potential users? Memory institutions are most definitely not a homogenised group; their needs and requirements differ greatly across the domain. Representatives of the archives community are agreed on the benefits of SHAMAN‟s authenticity validation function. The representatives of government information services remained unconvinced as to the need or benefit of grid technologies or distributed ingest while librarians saw the value of grid access as an asset of the framework. What have we learned about the evaluation approach for digital preservation? Within the limits of the exercise, in terms of time-frame and resources, the approach adopted has generated useful information for the further development of demonstrators and for the development of the SHAMAN framework overall. What have we learned about the SHAMAN ISP1 demonstrator? Respondents to the evaluation questionnaires and the focus groups indicate that, overall, the presentation of the demonstrator worked effectively and that, in general, participants in the demonstration and evaluation events were able to understand the intentions of the demonstration and to apply the ideas presented to their own context. What have we learned about the applicability of the SHAMAN framework to memory institutions? Respondents to the questionnaires and participants in the focus groups readily identified the value of the SHAMAN framework to their own operations. The majority had not yet established a long-term digital preservation policy, but recognized the need. Generally, the concepts of distributed ingest and grid operations found favour. Virtually all practitioners in the focus groups, however, drew attention to need of a lower level demonstration that would be closer to their everyday preservation troubles, especially for digital preservation to be applied to non-textual materials, such as film, photographs and sound archives. In addition to the criteria suggested by Xxxx et al., we can add a further project-related question: What have we learned that has implications for the training and dissemination phase of the Project? It was not part of the remit of the demonstration and evaluation specifically to discover information of relevance to the training and dissemination function. However, a number of factors will affect the efficacy of any training programme in particular. o First, no common understanding of digital preservation can be assumed of the potential target audiences for training. Consequently, it is likely that self-paced learning materials will be most effective in presenting the SHAMAN framework. o Secondly, the aims of SHAMAN as a project must be conveyed clearly: specifically, that it is a kind of „proof-of-concept‟ project and is not intended to deliver a package of programs capable of being implemented by institutions. o Thirdly, it needs to be emphasised that the SHAMAN framework is not limited to text documents; it can be applied to materials of all kinds. However, the demonstrations relate to bodies of material that were actually available for use. o Fourthly, the existing presentation materials are capable of being adapted for use in training activities. o Finally, the target audiences will appreciate the possibility of online access to the demonstrator, which will need to have very great ease of access in order that people with diverse backgrounds are able to use it with equal facility. We believe that, overall, WP14 has met its aims and objectives in this demonstration and evaluation of ISP1. Valuable lessons have been learnt by all parties involved, which will be transferred to the evaluation of ISP2 in the coming months.
Representations and Recommendations Unless otherwise stated in writing, neither Xxxxxxxx Realty Inc, nor its brokers or licensees have made, on their own behalf, any representations or warranties, express or implied, with respect to any element of the Property including but not limited to, the legal sufficiency, legal effect, or tax consequences of this transaction. Any information furnished by either party should be independently verified before that party relies on such information. Xxxxxxxx Realty Inc. recommends that Buyer consult its attorneys and accountants before signing this Agreement regarding the terms and conditions herein and that Seller satisfy itself as to the financial ability of Buyer to perform.
JOINT SETTLEMENT RECOMMENDATION 2. Staff conducted an investigation of the Respondent’s activities. The investigation disclosed that the Respondent had engaged in activity for which the Respondent could be penalized on the exercise of the discretion of the Hearing Panel pursuant to s. 24.1 of By-law No. 1.
PURPOSE/JUSTIFICATION OF RECOMMENDED ACTION The purpose of the Agreement is to provide the City with the services for one full-time equivalent senior criminalist from the Department to perform DNA testing, analysis, and forensic-related consulting as requested by the City, effective July 1, 2016 through June 30, 2021. The City’s current agreement with the County for this position expires on June 30, 2016. This Agreement will not result in the creation of an additional senior criminalist position, as the position was created during the previous agreement.
Determinations and Actions by the Board of Directors All actions, calculations and determinations (including all omissions with respect to the foregoing) which are done or made by the Board of Directors in good faith pursuant to this Agreement, shall not subject the Board of Directors to any liability to the holders of the Rights.
Informal Resolution of Disputes 10.5.1 Upon receipt by one Party of notice of a dispute by the other Party pursuant to Section 10.3 or Section 10.4.5, each Party will appoint a knowledgeable, responsible representative to meet and negotiate in good faith to resolve any dispute arising under this Agreement. The location, form, frequency, duration, and conclusion of these discussions will be left to the discretion of the representatives. Upon agreement, the representatives may utilize other alternative Dispute Resolution procedures such as mediation to assist in the negotiations. Discussions and the correspondence among the representatives for purposes of settlement are exempt from discovery and production and will not be admissible in the arbitration described below or in any lawsuit without the concurrence of both Parties. Documents identified in or provided with such communications that were not prepared for purposes of the negotiations are not so exempted, and, if otherwise admissible, may be admitted in evidence in the arbitration or lawsuit.
Resolution of Disagreements Disputes arising under this Agreement will be resolved informally by discussions between Agency Points of Contact, or other officials designated by each agency.
