Critical Design Review (CDR Sample Clauses

Critical Design Review (CDR a. The purpose of the CDR is to demonstrate that the maturity of the design is appropriate to support proceeding with full scale fabrication, assembly, integration, and test, and that the technical effort is on track to complete the flight and ground system development and mission operations in order to meet mission performance requirements within the identified cost and schedule constraints. b. CDR occurs near the completion of the final design phase and generally before entering the fabrication, assembly, and qualification phase.
Sample 1Sample 2
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Critical Design Review (CDR. 11.3.1. After the completion of the manufacturing process and necessary tests the successful bidder shall conduct a CDR with a complete and comprehensive presentation of the entire task involved and shall formally submit the complete test results. Products, system safety, problem areas and security issues shall also be discussed during CDR. The probable venue for the CDR shall be mutually decided. 11.3.2. The CDR Committee shall be formed by Purchaser. The committee shall carry out the evaluation process and provide relevant recommendations. Completion of CDR and resolution of all action items generated by it constitutes the final implementation process for the entire project.
Sample 1
Critical Design Review (CDR. The purpose of the CDR is for the Contractor to demonstrate to the Government that the integrated baseline of the MK 48 MOD 7 APB6/TI-1 program can proceed into fabrication, demonstration, and test, and can meet stated performance requirements within cost, schedule, and risk. The Government will authorize the Contractor to produce POD units upon Government concurrence of successful completion of CDR. The Contractor shall deliver the Product Baseline TDPs (CDRL B001 through B019) to the Government at least 60 days prior to the CDR. Once all CDR requirements are met, the Contracting Officer will issue a closure letter authorizing the Contractor to assemble and deliver POD units. Upon completion of the CDR, the baseline for all TDPs and factory processes shall be considered established. The Contractor shall schedule the CDR within 10 days of being notified by the COR to proceed with the review. The Contractor shall coordinate with the Government when the review will be held. Starting at CDR, Contractor developed, Government approved System/Subsystem Specifications (SSS), Software Requirements Specifications (SRS), Interface Control Specifications (ICS) and Interface Requirements Specifications (IRS) shall be baselined by the Contractor via the Engineering Change Proposal (ECP) process. After CDR, any follow on changes to these documents shall be submitted via the ECP process. A delta CDR shall be conducted by the Contractor to obtain authorization to assemble and deliver POM units. The delta CDR shall be conducted to review all changes made to the POD baseline. The delta CDR shall be conducted per the requirements stated in this paragraph.
Sample 1
Critical Design Review (CDR. All modifications of the detailed design implemented by the Contractor shall be reviewed by the Customer and by ESS representatives at the CDR. For this review, the Contractor shall provide • Production version of the Detailed Technical Design (DTD), as specified in section 5.2. • Preliminary version of the System integration and verification plan as specified in section 5.3.
Sample 1
Critical Design Review (CDR. 10.3.1 After the completion of the manufacturing process and necessary tests the successful bidder shall conduct a CDR with a complete and comprehensive presentation of the entire task involved and shall formally submit the complete test results. Products, system safety, problem areas and security issues shall also be discussed during CDR. The probable venue for the CDR shall be mutually decided. 10.3.2 The CDR Committee shall be formed by Purchaser. The committee shall carry out the evaluation process and provide relevant recommendations. Completion of CDR and resolution of all action items generated by it constitutes the final implementation process for the entire project. 11. Test Plan & Procedures Preparation‌ 11.1. Successful bidder to prepare detailed Test Plans and Procedures for the entire project, including Test Matrix, for all levels of test and acceptance (Factory acceptance, in-plant acceptance, site acceptance tests etc.) and take approval from Purchaser. The verification test plan will be a comprehensive plan that comprises of tests for verifying overall system and individual sub-system specification, performance and requirements, including hardware and software elements, at different stages of the entire program. 11.2. The tests will be organized and conducted by the successful bidder with the participation of representatives designated by Purchaser. Arrangement of required test and measuring equipment and verification of its current calibration status shall be the responsibility of the successful bidder. The final site acceptance testing will be conducted under the supervision and guidance of a Test and Evaluation Committee appointed by Xxxxxxxxx. 11.3. The test program shall be implemented to cover full compliance to contract specifications. Each test shall provide a brief description of the method of testing and a block diagram of the intended test configuration. Test procedures shall also include the list of equipment and its current calibration status. Test results shall be documented in test data sheets. The test procedure shall be written in sufficient detail to ensure repeatability.
Sample 1
Critical Design Review (CDR. The Contractor shall host a Critical Design Review (CDR) at the Contractor’s facility using the Defense Acquisition Guidebook, Paragraph 4.
Sample 1
Critical Design Review (CDR. The purpose of a CDR is to allow INTELSAT and the parties responsible for the item under review to agree on the adequacy of the unit, subsystem, and system design, performance, and test plans. INTELSAT shall have the right to approve the review in accordance with 3.2.7 herein. CDRs shall be held for all equipment after completion of development tests, if required for that item. New unit and subsystem designs shall comply with the full requirements of a CDR. The CDR data package shall be submitted in accordance with the CDRL (Appendix 2, Section 2.3.2). A Spacecraft System Critical Design Review shall be held to address specific requirements for each additional Spacecraft, when these requirements are modified from the initial Spacecraft’s requirements. A preliminary version of the Mission Sequence of Events shall be included in the data requirements of the Spacecraft System CDR.
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Critical Design Review (CDR. The contractor shall conduct a critical design review prior to the system verification tests in accordance with SECTION H-4 (b) of this contract. Additional guidance may be provided prior to the review. At the Verification & Delivery, contractors shall deliver a prototype JTAMS that is capable of meeting the system level performance requirements as described in the final System Specification. Prototype system performance testing will be conducted at Verification as described in paragraph 4 of the DRAFT System Specification.
Sample 1
Critical Design Review (CDR. The CDR demonstrates that the detailed design meets Orbital Reef requirements with acceptable cost, schedule, and risk. The program is ready to fabricate, manufacture, code, or otherwise realize the hardware and software. Key products will be distributed for formal feedback around four weeks prior to CDR, with a minimum of two weeks allocated for review of major products. The CDR will summarize each major product and the results of each review. Within three business days after conclusion of the review, the review board will summarize review findings and determine and document any review item discrepancies (RID) or requests for action (RFA). RIDs will require disposition and closeout as approved by the review board. RFAs will be treated as suggestions by the review board that may or may not be reacted to by the program. Entrance: 1. All remaining RIDs from PDR have been resolved or are executing to a closure plan that does not impact progress of development for CDR. 2. A preliminary CDR agenda, success criteria, and instructions to the review board have been agreed to by the technical leads, program manager, and review chair prior to the CDR.
Sample 1

Related to Critical Design Review (CDR

  • Design Review ‌ (a) Where so specified in Schedule A (Scope of Goods and Services) or as otherwise instructed by the City, the Supplier shall submit design-related Documentation for review by the City, and shall not proceed with work on the basis of such design Documentation until the City’s approval of such Documentation has been received in writing. (b) None of: (i) the submission of Documentation to the City by the Supplier; (ii) its examination by or on behalf of the City; or (iii) the making of any comment thereon (including any approval thereof) shall in any way relieve the Supplier of any of its obligations under this Agreement or of its duty to take reasonable steps to ensure the accuracy and correctness of such Documentation, and its suitability to the matter to which it relates.

  • Synchronization, Commissioning and Commercial Operation 4.1.1 The Power Producer shall give at least fifteen (15) days written notice to the SLDC / ALDC / DISCOM as the case may be, of the date on which it intends to synchronize the Power Project to the Grid System. 4.1.2 Subject to Article 4.1.1, the Power Project may be synchronized by the Power Producer to the Grid System when it meets all the connection conditions prescribed in the Grid Code and otherwise meets all other Indian legal requirements for synchronization to the Grid System. 4.1.3 The synchronization equipment and all necessary arrangements / equipment including Remote Terminal Unit (RTU) for scheduling of power generated from the Project and transmission of data to the concerned authority as per applicable regulation shall be installed by the Power Producer at its generation facility of the Power Project at its own cost. The Power Producer shall synchronize its system with the Grid System only after the approval of GETCO / SLDC / ALDC and GEDA. 4.1.4 The Power Producer shall immediately after each synchronization / tripping of generator, inform the sub-station of the Grid System to which the Power Project is electrically connected in accordance with applicable Grid Code. 4.1.5 The Power Producer shall commission the Project within SCOD. 4.1.6 The Power Producer shall be required to obtain Developer and/ or Transfer Permission, Key Plan drawing etc, if required, from GEDA. In cases of conversion of land from Agricultural to Non-Agriculture, the commissioning shall be taken up by GEDA only upon submission of N.A. permission by the Power Producer. 4.1.7 The Power Producer shall be required to follow the Forecasting and Scheduling procedures as per the Regulations issued by Hon’ble GERC from time to time. It is to clarify that in terms of GERC (Forecasting, Scheduling, Deviation Settlement and Related Matters of Solar and Wind Generation Sources) Regulations, 2019 the procedures for Forecasting, Scheduling & Deviation Settlment are applicable to all solar generators having combined installed capacity above 1 MW connected to the State Grid / Substation including those connected via pooling stations.

  • REVIEW OF WORK The Consultant shall permit the City, its agents and/or employees to review, at any time, all work performed pursuant to the terms of this Agreement at any stage of the work;

  • Quality Improvement VRC shall develop programs designed to improve the quality of care provided by the Radiologists and encourage identification and adoption of best demonstrated processes. Practice and VRC acknowledge that, in connection with such quality improvement activities, it may be necessary to provide VRC with Protected Health Information and Practice and VRC agree to treat such information in accordance with Article 9;

  • 000 SCOPE OF WORK 5. 100 The scope of this Agreement covers all work of a maintenance, repair and renovation nature, assigned by the Owner to the Company and performed by the employees of the Company covered by this Agreement, within the limits of the Owner's plant site.

  • Scope of Work For the 2022/2023 Grant Period, the Provider will maintain a victim services program that will be available to provide direct services to victims of crime who are identified by the Provider or are presented to the Provider, as specified in the Provider’s 2022/2023 Grant Application as approved by the OAG and incorporated herein by reference.

  • 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

  • Review Systems The Asset Representations Reviewer will maintain and utilize an electronic case management system to manage the Tests and provide systematic control over each step in the Review process and ensure consistency and repeatability among the Tests.

  • General Scope of Work The Scope of Work and projected level of effort required for these SERVICES is described in Exhibit “A” attached hereto and by this reference made a part of this AGREEMENT. The General Scope of Work was developed utilizing performance based contracting methodologies.

  • Review Scope The parties confirm that the Asset Representations Review is not responsible for (a) reviewing the Receivables for compliance with the representations and warranties under the Transaction Documents, except as described in this Agreement or (b) determining whether noncompliance with the representations and warranties constitutes a breach of the Eligibility Representations. For the avoidance of doubt, the parties confirm that the review is not designed to determine why an Obligor is delinquent or the creditworthiness of the Obligor, either at the time of any Asset Review or at the time of origination of the related Receivable. Further, the Asset Review is not designed to establish cause, materiality or recourse for any Test Fail (as defined in Section 3.05).

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