Evaluation of Value Engineering Proposal Sample Clauses

Evaluation of Value Engineering Proposal. BC Hydro will evaluate and give consideration to a Value Engineering Proposal taking into account all relevant issues, including whether: (a) a change in the Contract Price will occur; (b) a change in the overall cost to BC Hydro of the Project will occur; (c) the Value Engineering Proposal affects the quality (including the design service life, serviceability of the asset and the maintenance of the facility) or delivery of the Work; (d) the Value Engineering Proposal will interfere with the relationship of BC Hydro with any third parties; (e) the financial strength of the Contractor is sufficient to deliver the changed Work; (f) the residual value of the Project or the Work is affected; and (g) the Value Engineering Proposal materially affects the risks or costs to which BC Hydro is exposed. BC Hydro may request clarification or additional information regarding the Value Engineering Proposal, and may request modifications to the Value Engineering Proposal.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Evaluation of Value Engineering Proposal

  • Value Engineering The Supplier may prepare, at its own cost, a value engineering proposal at any time during the performance of the contract. The value engineering proposal shall, at a minimum, include the following; a) the proposed change(s), and a description of the difference to the existing contract requirements; b) a full cost/benefit analysis of the proposed change(s) including a description and estimate of costs (including life cycle costs) the Procuring Entity may incur in implementing the value engineering proposal; and c) a description of any effect(s) of the change on performance/functionality.

  • TECHNICAL EVALUATION (a) Detailed technical evaluation shall be carried out by Purchase Committee pursuant to conditions in the tender document to determine the substantial responsiveness of each tender. For this clause, the substantially responsive bid is one that conforms to all the eligibility and terms and condition of the tender without any material deviation. The Institute’s determination of bid’s responsiveness is to be based on the contents of the bid itself without recourse to extrinsic evidence. The Institute shall evaluate the technical bids also to determine whether they are complete, whether required sureties have been furnished, whether the documents have been properly signed and whether the bids are in order. (b) The technical evaluation committee may call the responsive bidders for discussion or presentation to facilitate and assess their understanding of the scope of work and its execution. However, the committee shall have sole discretion to call for discussion / presentation. (c) Financial bids of only those bidders who qualify the technical criteria will be opened provided all other requirements are fulfilled. (d) AIIMS Jodhpur shall have right to accept or reject any or all tenders without assigning any reasons thereof.

  • Geotechnical Engineer « »« » « » « » « » « »

  • Independent Development Receiving Party may currently or in the future be developing information internally, or receiving information internally, or receiving information from other parties that may be similar to the Disclosing Party's Confidential Information. Accordingly, nothing in this Agreement will be construed as a representation or inference that Receiving Party will not develop or have developed products or services, that, without violation of this Agreement, might compete with the products or systems contemplated by the Disclosing Party's Confidential Information.

  • Reverse Engineering The Customer must not reverse assemble or reverse compile or directly or indirectly allow or cause a third party to reverse assemble or reverse compile the whole or any part of the software or any products supplied as a part of the Licensed System.

  • No Reverse Engineering You may not, and you agree not to or enable others to, copy (except as expressly permitted by this License or by the Usage Rules if they are applicable to you), decompile, reverse engineer, disassemble, attempt to derive the source code of, decrypt, modify, or create derivative works of the Apple Software or any services provided by the Apple Software, or any part thereof (except as and only to the extent any foregoing restriction is prohibited by applicable law or to the extent as may be permitted by the licensing terms governing use of open-sourced components included with the Apple Software).

  • Feasibility Study A feasibility study will identify the potential costs, service quality and other benefits which would result from contracting out the work in question. The cost analysis for the feasibility study shall not include the Employer’s indirect overhead costs for existing salaries or wages and benefits for administrative staff or for rent, equipment, utilities, and materials, except to the extent that such costs are attributable solely to performing the services to be contracted out. Upon completion of the feasibility study, the Employer agrees to furnish the Union with a copy if the feasibility study, the bid from the Apparent Successful Bidder and all pertinent information upon which the Employer based its decision to contract out the work including, but not limited to, the total cost savings the Employer anticipates. The Employer shall not go forward with contracting out the work in question if more than sixty percent (60%) of any projected savings resulting from the contracting out are attributable to lower employee wage and benefit costs.

  • Annual Evaluation The Partnership will be evaluated on an annual basis through the use of the Strategic Partnership Annual Evaluation Format as specified in Appendix C of OSHA Instruction CSP 00-00-000, OSHA Strategic Partnership Program for Worker Safety and Health. The Choate Team will be responsible for gathering required participant data to evaluate and track the overall results and success of the Partnership. This data will be shared with OSHA. OSHA will be responsible for writing and submitting the annual evaluation.

  • Evaluation Cycle Goal Setting and Development of the Educator Plan A) Every Educator has an Educator Plan that includes, but is not limited to, one goal related to the improvement of practice; one goal for the improvement of student learning. The Plan also outlines actions the Educator must take to attain the goals established in the Plan and benchmarks to assess progress. Goals may be developed by individual Educators, by the Evaluator, or by teams, departments, or groups of Educators who have the similar roles and/or responsibilities. See Sections 15-19 for more on Educator Plans. B) To determine the goals to be included in the Educator Plan, the Evaluator reviews the goals the Educator has proposed in the Self-Assessment, using evidence of Educator performance and impact on student learning, growth and achievement based on the Educator’s self-assessment and other sources that Evaluator shares with the Educator. The process for determining the Educator’s impact on student learning, growth and achievement will be determined after ESE issues guidance on this matter. See #22, below. C) Educator Plan Development Meetings shall be conducted as follows: i) Educators in the same school may meet with the Evaluator in teams and/or individually at the end of the previous evaluation cycle or by October 15th of the next academic year to develop their Educator Plan. Educators shall not be expected to meet during the summer hiatus. ii) For those Educators new to the school, the meeting with the Evaluator to establish the Educator Plan must occur by October 15th or within six weeks of the start of their assignment in that school iii) The Evaluator shall meet individually with Educators with PTS and ratings of needs improvement or unsatisfactory to develop professional practice goal(s) that must address specific standards and indicators identified for improvement. In addition, the goals may address shared grade level or subject matter goals. D) The Evaluator completes the Educator Plan by November 1st. The Educator shall sign the Educator Plan within 5 school days of its receipt and may include a written response. The Educator’s signature indicates that the Educator received the plan in a timely fashion. The signature does not indicate agreement or disagreement with its contents. The Evaluator retains final authority over the content of the Educator’s Plan.

  • Design Development An interim step in the design process. Design Development documents consist of plans, elevations, and other drawings and outline specifications. These documents will fix and illustrate the size and character of the entire project in its essentials as to kinds of materials, type of structure, grade elevations, sidewalks, utilities, roads, parking areas, mechanical and electrical systems, and such other work as may be required.

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