EPA Review Sample Clauses

EPA Review. The intent of the EPA review is to evaluate the environmental effects of dredged material disposal and to ensure that compliance with the ocean dumping criteria at 40 CFR 220-228 has been demonstrated. EPA, Region 6 will utilize “evaluator worksheets” or checklists to assist in the review of the dredged material characterization of proposed ocean dumping projects. These worksheets, as provided in the EPA document, Guidance Manual for the Review of Permitted and Civil Works Projects for the Ocean Disposal of Dredged Material (EPA, 1992c), summarize the relevant information necessary to accurately assess the adequacy of a project’s sediment and water sampling; physical, chemical, and biological test procedures; modeling (if applicable); technical and statistical analysis; and quality assurance considerations. This will also ensure that all relevant documentation is contained in the project’s administrative record. These checklists, provided in Appendix E, are currently under revision by EPA and will be replaced when finalized. Within 15 days of receipt of the USACE dredged material evaluation, EPA may request additional information deemed appropriate or necessary to evaluate the proposed disposal [40 CFR 225.2(b)]. After receiving all information, EPA, Region 6 will make an independent review of the data to determine whether the proposed dredged material is suitable for ocean disposal [40 CFR 225.2(c)]. After EPA, Region 6 receives all information, an evaluation will be made within 15 working days. Partial approval based on incomplete or draft information will not be given except in unusual circumstances (e.g., emergencies). EPA, Region 6 will inform the USACE, New Orleans District or Galveston District in writing whether the material complies with the ocean dumping criteria and regulatory requirements and explain why it does or does not. If EPA, Region 6 determines that the material does not comply with the criteria, then the ocean disposal of that material is prohibited. The USACE, New Orleans District or Galveston District and EPA, Region 6 shall then evaluate management actions outside the scope of this RIA. In these cases, procedures for invoking economic impact [40 CFR 225.3] may be followed and the District Engineer may request that the Regional Administrator of the EPA, Region 6 grant a waiver of the criteria pursuant to 40 CFR 225.4.
Sample 1Sample 2
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to EPA Review

  • Log Reviews All systems processing and/or storing PHI COUNTY discloses to 11 CONTRACTOR or CONTRACTOR creates, receives, maintains, or transmits on behalf of COUNTY 12 must have a routine procedure in place to review system logs for unauthorized access.

  • Submittal Review 7.10.1 The A/E shall review Submittals such as Shop Drawings, Product Data, and Samples for conformity with design intent and conformity with the Contract Documents within 14 days of receiving Submittals or in accordance with the approved submittal schedule, or other period as mutually agreed by the A/E and Contractor.

  • Project Review A. Programmatic Allowances

  • Post Review With respect to each contract not governed by paragraph 2 of this Part, the procedures set forth in paragraph 4 of Appendix 1 to the Guidelines shall apply.

  • Design Review At appropriate stages of design, documented reviews of the design results shall be planned and conducted. Participants at each Design Review shall include representatives of all functions concerned with the design stage being reviewed, as well as other specialist personnel, as required. Records of such reviews shall be maintained. Any computer software used to perform alternative calculations or verify clearances through the use of scale models or computer-aided design and drafting (CADD) techniques shall be validated before the use of the application, with validation documented in accordance with Section 2.2.15. In addition, at each submittal to IFA for review, Developer shall provide hand calculations that validate any calculations performed by computer software.

  • Independent Review Contractor shall provide the Secretary of ADS/CIO an independent expert review of any Agency recommendation for any information technology activity when its total cost is $1,000,000.00 or greater or when CIO requires one. The State has identified two sub-categories for Independent Reviews, Standard and Complex. The State will identify in the SOW RFP the sub-category they are seeking. State shall not consider bids greater than the maximum value indicated below for this category. Standard Independent Review $25,000 Maximum Complex Independent Review $50,000 Maximum Per Vermont statute 3 V.S.A. 2222, The Secretary of Administration shall obtain independent expert review of any recommendation for any information technology initiated after July 1, 1996, as information technology activity is defined by subdivision (a) (10), when its total cost is $1,000,000 or greater or when required by the State Chief Information Officer. Documentation of this independent review shall be included when plans are submitted for review pursuant to subdivisions (a)(9) and (10) of this section. The independent review shall include: • An acquisition cost assessment • A technology architecture review • An implementation plan assessment • A cost analysis and model for benefit analysis • A procurement negotiation advisory services contract • An impact analysis on net operating costs for the agency carrying out the activity In addition, from time to time special reviews of the advisability and feasibility of certain types of IT strategies may be required. Following are Requirements and Capabilities for this Service: • Identify acquisition and lifecycle costs; • Assess wide area network (WAN) and/or local area network (LAN) impact; • Assess risks and/or review technical risk assessments of an IT project including security, data classification(s), subsystem designs, architectures, and computer systems in terms of their impact on costs, benefits, schedule and technical performance; • Assess, evaluate and critically review implementation plans, e.g.: • Adequacy of support for conversion and implementation activities • Adequacy of department and partner staff to provide Project Management • Adequacy of planned testing procedures • Acceptance/readiness of staff • Schedule soundness • Adequacy of training pre and post project • Assess proposed technical architecture to validate conformance to the State’s “strategic direction.” • Insure system use toolsets and strategies are consistent with State Chief Information Officer (CIO) policies, including security and digital records management; • Assess the architecture of the proposed hardware and software with regard to security and systems integration with other applications within the Department, and within the Agency, and existing or planned Enterprise Applications; • Perform cost and schedule risk assessments to support various alternatives to meet mission need, recommend alternative courses of action when one or more interdependent segment(s) or phase(s) experience a delay, and recommend opportunities for new technology insertions; • Assess the architecture of the proposed hardware and software with regard to the state of the art in this technology. • Assess a project’s backup/recovery strategy and the project’s disaster recovery plans for adequacy and conformance to State policy. • Evaluate the ability of a proposed solution to meet the needs for which the solution has been proposed, define the ability of the operational and user staff to integrate this solution into their work.

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.