Extensions of Time 34.1 If at any time during performance of the Contract, the Supplier or its subcontractors should encounter conditions impeding timely delivery of the Goods or completion of Related Services pursuant to GCC Clause 13, the Supplier shall promptly notify the Procuring Entity in writing of the delay, its likely duration, and its cause. As soon as practicable after receipt of the Supplier's notice, the Procuring Entity shall evaluate the situation and may at its discretion extend the Supplier's time for performance, in which case the extension shall be ratified by the parties by amendment of the Contract.
DELAYS AND EXTENSIONS OF TIME 8.3.1 If the Contractor is delayed at any time in the progress of the Work by any act or failure to act by the State or the Architect, or by any employee of either, or by any separate contractor employed by the State, or by changes ordered in the Work, fire, unusual delay in transportation, adverse weather conditions not reasonably anticipatable, unavoidable casualties, or any causes beyond the Contractor's control, or by delay authorized by the State pending alternative dispute resolution proceedings, or by any other cause which may justify the delay, then the Contract Time shall be extended by Change Order for such reasonable time as recommended by the Architect and approved by the State.
Extensions and Renewals All extensions or renewals of leaves shall be applied for and granted in writing.
TYPES OF CONTRACT MODIFICATIONS In order to expedite processing of a contract modification, where proposed changes involve more than one category below, each change should be submitted to OGS as a separate request.
Conclusions and Recommendations The demonstration and evaluation process provided an opportunity to test community specific tools with a range of end users from the memory institution domain and to gain greater insight into both the current and future evolution of the SHAMAN prototypes for preservation, access and re-use. Xxxx et al. (2000) in their user evaluation study of the Alexandria Digital Library which incorporated the evaluation of a Web prototype by earth scientists, information specialists and educators raised four key questions in relation to their findings that SHAMAN may be well advised to consider, they are paraphrased here with our conclusions from the investigations. What have we learned about our target organizations and potential users? Memory institutions are most definitely not a homogenised group; their needs and requirements differ greatly across the domain. Representatives of the archives community are agreed on the benefits of SHAMAN‟s authenticity validation function. The representatives of government information services remained unconvinced as to the need or benefit of grid technologies or distributed ingest while librarians saw the value of grid access as an asset of the framework. What have we learned about the evaluation approach for digital preservation? Within the limits of the exercise, in terms of time-frame and resources, the approach adopted has generated useful information for the further development of demonstrators and for the development of the SHAMAN framework overall. What have we learned about the SHAMAN ISP1 demonstrator? Respondents to the evaluation questionnaires and the focus groups indicate that, overall, the presentation of the demonstrator worked effectively and that, in general, participants in the demonstration and evaluation events were able to understand the intentions of the demonstration and to apply the ideas presented to their own context. What have we learned about the applicability of the SHAMAN framework to memory institutions? Respondents to the questionnaires and participants in the focus groups readily identified the value of the SHAMAN framework to their own operations. The majority had not yet established a long-term digital preservation policy, but recognized the need. Generally, the concepts of distributed ingest and grid operations found favour. Virtually all practitioners in the focus groups, however, drew attention to need of a lower level demonstration that would be closer to their everyday preservation troubles, especially for digital preservation to be applied to non-textual materials, such as film, photographs and sound archives. In addition to the criteria suggested by Xxxx et al., we can add a further project-related question: What have we learned that has implications for the training and dissemination phase of the Project? It was not part of the remit of the demonstration and evaluation specifically to discover information of relevance to the training and dissemination function. However, a number of factors will affect the efficacy of any training programme in particular. o First, no common understanding of digital preservation can be assumed of the potential target audiences for training. Consequently, it is likely that self-paced learning materials will be most effective in presenting the SHAMAN framework. o Secondly, the aims of SHAMAN as a project must be conveyed clearly: specifically, that it is a kind of „proof-of-concept‟ project and is not intended to deliver a package of programs capable of being implemented by institutions. o Thirdly, it needs to be emphasised that the SHAMAN framework is not limited to text documents; it can be applied to materials of all kinds. However, the demonstrations relate to bodies of material that were actually available for use. o Fourthly, the existing presentation materials are capable of being adapted for use in training activities. o Finally, the target audiences will appreciate the possibility of online access to the demonstrator, which will need to have very great ease of access in order that people with diverse backgrounds are able to use it with equal facility. We believe that, overall, WP14 has met its aims and objectives in this demonstration and evaluation of ISP1. Valuable lessons have been learnt by all parties involved, which will be transferred to the evaluation of ISP2 in the coming months.
Decisions of the Board The decision of the majority shall be the decision of the Board. Where there is no majority decision, the decision of the Chairperson shall be the decision of the Board. The decision of the Board of Arbitration shall be final and binding and enforceable on all parties, but in no event shall the Board of Arbitration have the power to change this Agreement or to alter, modify or amend any of its provisions. However, the Board shall have the power to dispose of any discharge or a discipline grievance by any arrangement which in its opinion it deems just and equitable.
CONTRACTOR’S SUBMISSION OF CONTRACT MODIFICATIONS In connection with any Contract modification, OGS reserves the right to: request additional information reject Contract modifications remove Products from Contract modification requests request additional discounts for new or existing Products
Contract Extensions This Contract may be extended on an annual basis beyond the Initial Term if the Local Board successfully meets the terms of the Contract for at least three or more years as determined by the State Board.
NOTICE, APPLICATION, AND APPROVALS 12.1 - Any notice to Lessor or Lessee required by this Lease shall be complete if submitted in writing and transmitted by personal delivery (with signed delivery receipt), or certified or registered mail return receipt request, or by a nationally recognized overnight delivery service. Unless either party notifies the other in writing of a different mailing address, notice to the Lessor and/or Lessee shall be transmitted to:
Delays and Extensions The CONSULTANT agrees that no charges or claim for damages shall be made by it for any minor delays from any cause whatsoever during the progress of any portion of the Services specified in this Contract. Such delays, if any, shall be compensated for by an extension of time for such period as may be determined by the LPA subject to the CONSULTANT's approval, it being understood, however, that permitting the CONSULTANT to proceed to complete any services, or any part of them after the date to which the time of completion may have been extended, shall in no way operate as a waiver on the part of the LPA of any of its rights herein. In the event of substantial delays or extensions, or change of any kind, not caused by the CONSULTANT, which causes a material change in scope, character or complexity of work the CONSULTANT is to perform under this Contract, the LPA at its sole discretion shall determine any adjustments in compensation and in the schedule for completion of the Services. CONSULTANT must notify the LPA in writing of a material change in the work immediately after the CONSULTANT first recognizes the material change.
