Design Peer Review Report Sample Clauses

Design Peer Review Report. The reviewing Architect/Engineer shall submit a report to the Director stating whether or not the design as shown in the Construction Documents conforms to the Owner’s requirements and all related codes and technical standards. 3.1.2.1 The report shall demonstrate, at a minimum, compliance with items noted in Section 1, Services in General, of this Exhibit ”A”. In addition, the report shall also include the following: 3.1.2.1.1 A list of the codes and standards used in the design of the project. 3.1.2.1.2 The basis for design criteria used that is not specified directly in applicable codes and standards. This should include reports by specialty sub-consultants. The report should confirm that Owner’s requirements and any Basis of Design have been investigated as appropriate and that the proposed design is in conformance with these requirements.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Design Peer Review Report

  • Review Report Within 5 Business Days after the end of the applicable Asset Representations Review period under Section 3.03(b), the Asset Representations Reviewer will deliver to the Issuer, the Administrator, the Servicer, the Depositor and the Indenture Trustee a report indicating for each Review Receivable whether there was a Test Pass, Test Fail or Test Complete for each related Test (a “Review Report”). For each Test Fail or Test Complete, the Review Report will indicate the related reason, including (for example) whether the Review Receivable was a Test Fail as a result of missing or incomplete Review Materials. The Review Report will contain a summary of the Asset Representations Review results to be included in the Issuer’s Form 10-D report for the Collection Period in which the Review Report is received. The Asset Representations Reviewer will ensure that the Review Report does not contain any PII. On reasonable request of the Servicer, the Asset Representations Reviewer will provide additional details on the Test results.

  • Review Reports Within five (5) days after the end of the applicable Review period under Section 3.3(b), the Asset Representations Reviewer will deliver to the Issuer, the Servicer, the Depositor, the Administrator and the Indenture Trustee a Review Report indicating for each Review Receivable whether there was a Test Pass, Test Fail or Test Complete for each related Test. For each Test Fail or Test Complete, the Review Report will indicate the related reason, including (for example) whether the Review Receivable was a Test Fail as a result of missing or incomplete Review Materials. The Review Report will contain a summary of the Review results to be included in the Issuer’s Form 10-D report for the Collection Period in which the Review Report is received. The Asset Representations Reviewer will ensure that the Review Report does not contain any PII. On reasonable request of the Servicer or the Administrator, the Asset Representations Reviewer will provide additional details on the Test results.

  • Claims Review Report The IRO shall prepare a Claims Review Report as described in this Appendix for each Claims Review performed. The following information shall be included in the Claims Review Report for each Discovery Sample and Full Sample (if applicable).

  • 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

  • Completion of Review for Certain Review Receivables Following the delivery of the list of the Review Receivables and before the delivery of the Review Report by the Asset Representations Reviewer, the Servicer may notify the Asset Representations Reviewer if a Review Receivable is paid in full by the Obligor or purchased from the Issuer in accordance with the terms of the Basic Documents. On receipt of such notice, the Asset Representations Reviewer will immediately terminate all Tests of the related Review Receivable, and the Review of such Review Receivables will be considered complete (a “Test Complete”). In this case, the related Review Report will indicate a Test Complete for such Review Receivable and the related reason.

  • Project Completion Report At the completion of construction and once a Project is placed in service, the Subrecipient must submit a Project Completion Report that includes the total number of units built and leased, affordable units built and leased, DR-MHP units built and leased, an accomplishment narrative, and the tenants names, demographics and income for each DR-MHP unit.

  • Progress Report By March 1 of each year, ***** will submit a written annual report to Stanford covering the preceding calendar year. The report will include information sufficient to enable Stanford to satisfy reporting requirements of the U.S. Government and for Stanford to ascertain progress by ***** toward meeting this Agreement’s diligence requirements. Each report will describe, where relevant: *****’s progress toward commercialization of Licensed Product, including work completed, key scientific discoveries, summary of work-in-progress, current schedule of anticipated events or milestones, market plans for introduction of Licensed Product, and significant corporate transactions involving Licensed Product. ***** will specifically describe how each Licensed Product is related to each Licensed Patent.

  • 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.

  • Evaluation Report The state must provide a narrative summary of the evaluation design, status (including evaluation activities and findings to date), and plans for evaluation activities during the extension period. The narrative is to include, but not be limited to, describing the hypotheses being tested and any results available.

  • 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!