Design Review Submittals Sample Clauses

Design Review Submittals. The Design Review Submittals shall be consistent with the Baseline Schedule (and updates) and Owner obligations. The design reviews shall not commence until all required Design- Builder internal design reviews have been accomplished in accordance with of the general requirements. Each Design Review Submittal package shall include Design Drawings, Project Specifications and supporting data, reports and such information as needed to advance to the next stage of design or the start of construction whichever is applicable. The Design-Builder shall use an electronic system to submit drawings/design documents for review and obtain comments from reviewers throughout the project. Review comments (internal and external) will be input to an electronic database and shall be tracked to resolution prior to final design approval. Allow thirty (30) calendar days for Owner response to any Design Review. Allow sufficient time for any required Third Party reviews. Incorporate this schedule into Design- Builder's Baseline Schedule and provide submittal dates, and report progress and updates in the Monthly Updated Schedule. The Design-Builder shall respond to all Owner and Third Party comments within fifteen (15) calendar days of receipt of written comments. The Design-Builder shall show the exact timing of reviews and resolution of comments through the Weekly Progress Meetings and in the three week Look-Ahead Schedule. 3.4.4.1 The Design-Builder Shall Maintain a Written Record of all Formal Internal Design Reviews.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Design Review Submittals

  • 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.

  • 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 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).

  • Submittals Submittals required by the Contract Documents shall be prepared specifically for the Work by the Contractor to illustrate some portion of the Work. Submittals are not Contract Documents.

  • Acceptance Tests 11.1 If the Contract provides acceptance tests for Goods and/or the result of Services after their completion and/or delivery to the Purchaser, the acceptance shall only be considered as definitive when such tests have demonstrated the compliance of the Goods and/or the result of the Services to the requirements in the Contract. 11.2 Where the Contract provides for an acceptance procedure in the presence of both parties, at the successful completion of such procedure, the Purchaser shall issue the Supplier with an acceptance certificate which shall authorise the Supplier to invoice the Purchaser for any payment due on such acceptance. 11.3 The Purchaser shall at its discretion be entitled to issue and acceptancecertificate with reserves. The Supplier shall be obliged to remedy any non-conformities within the period set out in the acceptance certificate. Any payment which would otherwise have been due on acceptance may be withheld by the Purchaser in whole or part until the non- conformities underlying the reserves have been remedied.

  • Review Protocol A narrative description of how the Claims Review was conducted and what was evaluated.

  • 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.

  • 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;

  • Acceptance Testing At the time of installation of a LIS trunk group, and at no additional charge, acceptance tests will be performed to ensure that the service is operational and meets the applicable technical parameters.

  • Project Implementation Manual The Recipient, through the PCU, shall: (i) take all action required to carry out Parts 1.1, 1.3, 1.4, 2, 3.1(b), 3.2, 3.3 and 4 (ii) of the Project in accordance with the provisions and requirements set forth or referred to in the Project Implementation Manual; (ii) submit recommendations to the Association for its consideration for changes and updates of the Project Implementation Manual as they may become necessary or advisable during Project implementation in order to achieve the objective of Parts 1.1, 1.3, 1.4, 2, 3.1(b), 3.2, 3.3 and 4(ii) of the Project; and (iii) not assign, amend, abrogate or waive the Project Implementation Manual or any of its provisions without the Association’s prior agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if any of the provisions of the Project Implementation Manual is inconsistent with the provisions of this Agreement, the provisions of this Agreement shall prevail and govern.

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