Construction Document Review Procedures Sample Clauses

Construction Document Review Procedures 
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Construction Document Review Procedures

  • Construction Document Phase 1.4.1 Based on the approved Design Development Documents, Guaranteed Maximum Price, coordinated models and any further adjustments in the scope or quality of the Project or in the Amount Available for the Construction Contract authorized by the Owner, the Architect/Engineer shall prepare, for approval by the Owner and review by the Construction Manager, Construction Documents consisting of Drawings, Schedules and Specifications derived from the model(s) in accordance with Owner’s written requirements setting forth in detail the requirements for construction of the Project, including, without limitation, the BIM Execution Plan and “Facility Design Guidelines”. The Plans, Drawings and Specifications for the entire Project shall be so prepared that same will call for the construction of the building and related facilities, together with its built-in permanent fixtures and equipment which will cost not more than the Guaranteed Maximum Price accepted by Owner, or the Amount Available for the Construction Contract established by Owner if no Guaranteed Maximum Price proposal has been accepted by Owner. The Architect/Engineer will be responsible for managing the design to stay within such Guaranteed Maximum Price proposal or Amount Available for the Construction Contract. The Architect/Engineer shall review the Construction Documents as they are being prepared at intervals appropriate to the progress of the Project with the Owner and Construction Manager at the Project site or other location specified by Owner in the State of Texas. The Architect/Engineer shall utilize the model(s) to support the review process during Construction Documents. The Architect/Engineer shall provide the Construction Manager with a compact disc containing documents and data files derived from the model to assist the Construction Manager in fulfilling its responsibilities to the Owner. 1.4.2 As a part of Construction Documents Phase, Architect/Engineer shall accomplish model coordination, aggregation and “clash detection” to remove conflicts in design between systems, structures and components. Architect/Engineer shall demonstrate and provide written assurance to Owner that all conflicts/collisions between models have been resolved. 1.4.3 The Architect/Engineer shall consult with the Owner and Construction Manager on matters such as construction phasing and scheduling, bid or proposal alternates, liquidated damages, the construction contract time period, and other construction issues appropriate for the Project. The Architect/Engineer shall assist the Owner and Construction Manager in the preparation of the necessary bidding information, bidding forms, RFP information, and RFP forms, and the Conditions of the Contract. 1.4.4 The Architect/Engineer shall assist the Owner in connection with the Owner’s responsibility and procedures for obtaining approval of all building and accessibility authorities having jurisdiction over the Project. 1.4.5 The Architect/Engineer shall provide coordination and inclusion of sequence of operations for all operable systems in the facility as defined by Owner during Design Development. 1.4.6 The Architect/Engineer shall review the Estimated Construction Cost prepared by the Construction Manager, and shall provide written comments. 1.4.7 The Architect/Engineer shall participate in a final review of the Construction Documents and model(s) with the Owner and Construction Manager at the Project location or other location specified by Owner in the State of Texas. Prior to the Owner’s approval of the Construction Documents, the Architect/Engineer shall incorporate such changes as are necessary to satisfy the Owner’s review comments. 1.4.8 Before proceeding into the Bidding and Proposal Phase, the Architect/Engineer shall obtain Owner’s written acceptance of the Construction Documents and approval of the Final Amount Available for the Construction Contract as approved by the Board of Regents.

  • REVIEW OF CONTRACT DOCUMENTS 4.2.1 The Contractor shall carefully study and compare the Contract Documents and shall immediately report in writing to the Architect and the State any error, inconsistency or omission he may discover. The Contractor shall not be liable to the State or the Architect for any damage resulting from any such errors, inconsistencies or omissions in the Contract Documents. The

  • Construction Documents Phase Bidding or Negotiation Phase:

  • Construction Documents The architectural and engineering documents setting forth the design for the Project prepared by the Design Professional. Construction Documents include, but are not limited to, the Specifications, the Drawings, the Supplementary Conditions, the General Conditions, and all Addenda.

  • AUDIT REVIEW PROCEDURES Any dispute concerning a question of fact arising under an interim or post audit of this AGREEMENT that is not disposed of by agreement, shall be reviewed by ALAMEDA CTC’s Deputy Executive Director of Finance and Administration. Not later than thirty (30) calendar days after issuance of the final audit report, CONSULTANT may request a review by ALAMEDA CTC’s Deputy Executive Director of Finance and Administration of unresolved audit issues. The request for review will be submitted in writing. Neither the pendency of a dispute nor its consideration by ALAMEDA CTC will excuse CONSULTANT from full and timely performance, in accordance with the terms of this AGREEMENT. CONSULTANT and subconsultants’ contracts, including cost proposals and ICRs, may be subject to audits or reviews such as, but not limited to, an AGREEMENT Audit, an Incurred Cost Audit, an ICR Audit, or a certified public accountant (“CPA”) ICR Audit Workpaper Review. If selected for audit or review, the AGREEMENT, cost proposal and ICR and related workpapers, if applicable, will be reviewed to verify compliance with 48 CFR, Chapter 1, Part 31 and other related laws and regulations. In the instances of a CPA ICR Audit Workpaper Review it is CONSULTANT’s responsibility to ensure federal, state, or local government officials are allowed full access to the CPA’s workpapers including making copies as necessary. The AGREEMENT, cost proposal, and ICR shall be adjusted by CONSULTANT and approved by ALAMEDA CTC to conform to the audit or review recommendations. CONSULTANT agrees that individual terms of costs identified in the audit report shall be incorporated into the contract by this reference if directed by ALAMEDA CTC at its sole discretion. Refusal by CONSULTANT to incorporate audit or review recommendations, or to ensure that the federal, state, or local governments have access to CPA workpapers, will be considered a breach of contract terms and cause for termination of the AGREEMENT and disallowance of prior reimbursed costs.

  • Review Procedures a. In consultation with the Illinois SHPO, NRCS shall identify those undertakings with little to no potential to affect historic properties and list those undertakings in Appendix A. Upon the determination by the CRS that a proposed undertaking is included in Appendix A, the NRCS is not required to consult further with the SHPO for that undertaking. A list of undertakings with the potential to affect historic properties comprises Appendix B. b. The lists of undertakings provided in Appendices A and B may be modified through consultation and written agreement between the NRCS State Conservationist and the SHPO without requiring an amendment to this Illinois Prototype Agreement. The NRCS State Office will maintain the master list and will provide an updated list to all consulting parties with an explanation of the rationale for classifying the practices accordingly. c. Undertakings identified in Appendix B shall require further review as outlined in Stipulation V. a. The NRCS shall consult with the SHPO to define the undertaking’s APE, identify and evaluate historic properties that may be affected by the undertaking, assess potential effects, and identify strategies for resolving adverse effects prior to implementing the undertaking. 1) NRCS may provide its proposed APE, identification of historic properties and/or scope of identification efforts, and assessment of effects in a single transmittal to the SHPO, provided this documentation meets the substantive standards in 36 CFR Part 800.4-5 and 800.11. 2) The NRCS shall attempt to avoid adverse effects to historic properties whenever possible; where historic properties are located in the APE, NRCS shall describe how it proposes to modify, buffer, or move the undertaking to avoid adverse effects to historic properties. 3) Where the NRCS proposes a finding of "no historic properties affected" or "no adverse effect" to historic properties, the SHPO shall have 30 calendar days from receipt of this documented description and information to review it and provide comments. The NRCS shall take into account all timely comments. i. If the SHPO, or another consulting party, disagrees with NRCS' findings and/or determination, it shall notify the NRCS within the thirty (30) calendar daytime period. The NRCS shall consult with the SHPO or other consulting party to attempt to resolve the disagreement. If the disagreement cannot be resolved through this consultation, NRCS shall follow the dispute resolution process in Stipulation VIII below. ii. If the SHPO does not respond to the NRCS within the thirty (30) calendar day period and/or the NRCS receives no objections from other consulting parties, or if the SHPO concurs with the NRCS' determination and proposed actions to avoid adverse effects, the NRCS shall document the concurrence/lack of response within the review time noted above and may move forward with the undertaking. 4) Where a proposed undertaking may adversely affect historic properties, NRCS shall describe proposed measures to minimize or mitigate the adverse effects, and follow the process in 36 CFR Part 800.6, including consultation with other consulting patties and notification to the ACHP, to develop a Memorandum of Agreement to resolve the adverse effects. Should the proposed undertaking have the potential to adversely affect a known NHL, the NRCS shall, to the maximum extent possible, undertake such planning and actions that may be necessary to minimize harm to the NHL in accordance with 54 U.S.C. § 306107 of the NHPA and 36 CFR Part 800.6 and 800.10, including consultation with the ACHP and respective National Park Service, Regional National Historic Landmark Program Coordinator, to develop a Memorandum of Agreement. d. NRCS will conduct archaeological surveys and will submit reports and other documentation to SHPO for review and comment. When no archaeological sites have been located by the archaeological survey, NRCS may proceed with the proposed undertaking. Reports for negative surveys must be submitted to SHPO on a quarterly basis. All positive and negative reports submitted to SHPO will be sent digitally for submission to the Inventory of Illinois Archaeological Sites (IAS) data file maintained by staff at the Illinois State Museum (ISM) housed under the Illinois Department of Natural Resources (IDNR). The NRCS further agrees that access to specific site location data will be restricted to the CRS, the NRCS field personnel installing conservation practices adjacent to the cultural resource, and the landowner. Specific site location information for individual projects will be maintained in a secure cultural resources file kept in the field offices and will not be available to the public. e. Curation: NRCS personnel will not collect artifactual material during routine field inspections. However, if a professional survey, evaluation testing, or mitigation is required, NRCS shall ensure that all materials and records resulting from cultural resources surveys or data recovery activities on federal or state property are curated by the Illinois State Museum. The NRCS shall ensure that all records resulting from cultural resource surveys or data recovery activities on private property are curated by the Illinois State Museum or an equivalent curation facility in accordance with 36 CFR Part 79. Subject to the landowner's permission, all objects resulting from cultural resources surveys or data recovery activities are maintained by the Illinois State Museum or equivalent research institution until their analysis is complete and they are returned to their owner(s). Although landowners will be encouraged to donate artifactual material, it is understood that objects collected on private land remain the property of the landowner(s) unless the landowner(s) donates the material to the Illinois State Museum or equivalent research institution. This excludes burial goods, as stipulated by XXXXXX.

  • Agreement Review If, pursuant to section 25.10 (Review of Agreement) of the Bilateral Agreement, the Bilateral Agreement is reviewed after three or five years, or both, of the effective date of the Bilateral Agreement, and any changes to the Bilateral Agreement are required as a result, the Parties agree to amend the Agreement as necessary and in a manner that is consistent with such changes.

  • Project Review A. Programmatic Allowances 1. If FEMA determines that the entire scope of an Undertaking conforms to one or more allowances in Appendix B of this Agreement, with determinations for Tier II Allowances being made by SOI-qualified staff, FEMA shall complete the Section 106 review process by documenting this determination in the project file, without SHPO review or notification. 2. If the Undertaking involves a National Historic Landmark (NHL), FEMA shall notify the SHPO, participating Tribe(s), and the NPS NHL Program Manager of the NPS Midwest Regional Office that the Undertaking conforms to one or more allowances. FEMA shall provide information about the proposed scope of work for the Undertaking and the allowance(s) enabling FEMA’s determination. 3. If FEMA determines any portion of an Undertaking’s scope of work does not conform to one or more allowances listed in Appendix B, FEMA shall conduct expedited or standard Section 106 review, as appropriate, for the entire Undertaking in accordance with Stipulation II.B, Expedited Review for Emergency Undertakings, or Stipulation II.C, Standard Project Review. 4. Allowances may be revised and new allowances may be added to this Agreement in accordance with Stipulation IV.A.3, Amendments. B. Expedited Review for Emergency Undertakings

  • ADB’s Review of Procurement Decisions 11. All contracts procured under international competitive bidding procedures and contracts for consulting services shall be subject to prior review by ADB, unless otherwise agreed between the Borrower and ADB and set forth in the Procurement Plan.

  • Construction Schedule The progress schedule of construction of the Project as provided by Developer and approved by District.

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