Formal Submittals Sample Clauses

Formal Submittals. This phase of the Project will likely include two formal design submittals to the City; an ‘interim’ conceptual design submittal during the XXXX preparation process and an ‘advanced’ conceptual design
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Formal Submittals. 1. For each Port project, consideration shall be given as to whether the development standards from the 2005 XXX apply to the project. According to Section 2.2.1.5 to Exhibit A, all Port projects within the City shall comply with the pre-approved development standards that are set forth in Attachment A-4 to Exhibit A in the 2005 XXX. Therefore, the Port Project Manager shall review the standards in Attachment A-4 to see how they apply to the project. In order to aid in identifying whether XXX standards apply to a project, a checklist has been created, which is attached to the end of this Attachment to this Development Review Process procedure. Category 1 of that checklist addresses the 2005 XXX standards. That checklist shall be filled out in its entirety for each Port project by the Port Project Manager and be submitted to the ABD for review with a copy to be placed in the project file. 2. If any item is checked “yes” in Category 1 on the Attachment A-3 checklist, then it is necessary for that project to be discussed at the Port’s PDRC meeting as scheduled by the ABD. Such meetings shall be held on a regularly scheduled basis. The ABD will prepare an agenda for each PDRC meeting that lists the projects to be discussed at that meeting. The project name shall include an asterisk by it, if any item is checked “yes” in Category I on the Attachment A-3 checklist. At the bottom of the agenda, a note shall be included which states: “projects with an asterisk may involve City review under the 2005 XXX.” The Port shall provide copies of the agenda, and project drawings, for each PDRC meeting to the City Planning Director or designee, at least 48 hours in advance of the meeting, at the same time as the agenda is distributed to Port staff. The City is invited to attend a PDRC meeting. The purpose of the invitation to the City is to create a forum where the City and Port can discuss and resolve questions regarding application of XXX standards. Also, at the PDRC meeting, the City may determine that a project with an asterisk does not actually require City review for verification of 2005 XXX standards. However, unless the City explicitly determines at a PDRC meeting that City review is unnecessary, any projects with a “yes” from Category 1 on the Attachment A-3 checklist will require City review. To facilitate review at the PDRC meeting, at a minimum, a brief project description and conceptual site plan shall be prepared for each project that has items checked “yes” in...
Sample 1

Related to Formal Submittals

  • 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.

  • Office of Inspector General Investigative Findings Expert Review In accordance with Senate Bill 799, Acts 2021, 87th Leg., R.S., if Texas Government Code, Section 531.102(m-1)(2) is applicable to this Contract, Contractor affirms that it possesses the necessary occupational licenses and experience.

  • ADB’s Review of Procurement Decisions 11. All contracts procured under international competitive bidding procedures and contracts for consulting services shall be subject to prior review by ADB, unless otherwise agreed between the Borrower and ADB and set forth in the Procurement Plan.

  • Change Orders Any alteration or deviation from the Services mentioned or any other contractual specifications that result in a revision of this Agreement shall be executed and attached to this Agreement as a change order (“Change Order”).

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

  • AUDIT REVIEW PROCEDURES Any dispute concerning a question of fact arising under an interim or post audit of this AGREEMENT that is not disposed of by agreement, shall be reviewed by ALAMEDA CTC’s Deputy Executive Director of Finance and Administration. Not later than thirty (30) calendar days after issuance of the final audit report, CONSULTANT may request a review by ALAMEDA CTC’s Deputy Executive Director of Finance and Administration of unresolved audit issues. The request for review will be submitted in writing. Neither the pendency of a dispute nor its consideration by ALAMEDA CTC will excuse CONSULTANT from full and timely performance, in accordance with the terms of this AGREEMENT. CONSULTANT and subconsultants’ contracts, including cost proposals and ICRs, may be subject to audits or reviews such as, but not limited to, an AGREEMENT Audit, an Incurred Cost Audit, an ICR Audit, or a certified public accountant (“CPA”) ICR Audit Workpaper Review. If selected for audit or review, the AGREEMENT, cost proposal and ICR and related workpapers, if applicable, will be reviewed to verify compliance with 48 CFR, Chapter 1, Part 31 and other related laws and regulations. In the instances of a CPA ICR Audit Workpaper Review it is CONSULTANT’s responsibility to ensure federal, state, or local government officials are allowed full access to the CPA’s workpapers including making copies as necessary. The AGREEMENT, cost proposal, and ICR shall be adjusted by CONSULTANT and approved by ALAMEDA CTC to conform to the audit or review recommendations. CONSULTANT agrees that individual terms of costs identified in the audit report shall be incorporated into the contract by this reference if directed by ALAMEDA CTC at its sole discretion. Refusal by CONSULTANT to incorporate audit or review recommendations, or to ensure that the federal, state, or local governments have access to CPA workpapers, will be considered a breach of contract terms and cause for termination of the AGREEMENT and disallowance of prior reimbursed costs.

  • Timeliness of Submitting Orders You are obliged to date and indicate the time of receipt of all orders you receive from your customers and to transmit promptly all orders to us in time to provide for processing at the price next determined after receipt by you, in accordance with the Prospectuses. You are not to withhold placing with us orders received from any customers for the purchase of shares. You shall not purchase shares through us except for the purpose of covering purchase orders already received by you, or for your bona fide investment.

  • Deadline for Submission of Bids 19.1 Bids must be received by the Purchaser at the address specified under ITB Clause 18.2 no later than the time and date specified in the Bid Data Sheet.

  • Classification Review Grand Valley State University and APSS shall jointly determine the review assessment survey instrument to be used at Grand Valley State University. The parties shall maintain a Joint Review Committee, composed of three members appointed by the Human Resources Office and three members appointed by the Alliance. Bargaining unit members questioning the assigned classification of their position may do so by using the following procedure: A. Meet with the Employment Manager in the Human Resources Office to discuss the review process, changes in their job responsibilities, duties and any other process questions they may have. B. PSS member will fill out the assessment survey and email to the Employment Manager along with any other documentation that supports the request. The survey instrument will be jointly administered/reviewed by the Assessment Team (consisting of the Employment Manager and an Alliance member of the Joint Review Committee). A meeting with the PSS is scheduled for a verbal review of the documentation and to answer any questions the Assessment Team may have. The supervisor or appointing officer is encouraged to attend. If the Assessment Team believes a job site visit is warranted as a result of the survey information, they will schedule a time for a joint visit. C. The completed survey instrument shall be coded. The survey results, as determined by the Assessment Team, shall be shared with the survey participant. D. After receiving the survey results, the survey participant, if they so choose shall have the opportunity to meet with the Joint Review Committee for additional input and appeal. Any additional information shall be reviewed by the Committee, and where the Committee feels it is necessary, the survey will be recoded, in a manner mutually agreeable. E. The Joint Review Committee shall then deliberate as to the merit of the upgrade requested by the participant. If the Committee is not able to reach a consensus, the University will decide on the classification. The Alliance may appeal that decision through the arbitration procedure of the collective bargaining agreement. Professional Support Staff members may engage in the review process no more than once per year. Supervisors questioning the assigned classification of a staff member’s position shall provide supporting rationale, complete an assessment survey instrument and discuss with Manager of Employment. The Manager of Employment shall notify an Alliance Representative that a Supervisor is reviewing a staff member’s classification. The review and outcome shall be completed within 45 working days unless the Alliance Representative and Manager of Employment mutually agreed to an extension. The Alliance will be provided with the scored instrument and any supporting rationale.

  • Conformity Assessment Procedures 1. Each Party shall give positive consideration to accepting the results of conformity assessment procedures of other Parties, even where those procedures differ from its own, provided it is satisfied that those procedures offer an assurance of conformity with applicable technical regulations or standards equivalent to its own procedures. 2. Each Party shall seek to enhance the acceptance of the results of conformity assessment procedures conducted in the territories of other Parties with a view to increasing efficiency, avoiding duplication and ensuring cost effectiveness of the conformity assessments. In this regard, each Party may choose, depending on the situation of the Party and the specific sectors involved, a broad range of approaches. These may include but are not limited to: (a) recognition by a Party of the results of conformity assessments performed in the territory of another Party; (b) recognition of co-operative arrangements between accreditation bodies in the territories of the Parties; (c) mutual recognition of conformity assessment procedures conducted by bodies located in the territory of each Party; (d) accreditation of conformity assessment bodies in the territory of another Party; (e) use of existing regional and international multilateral recognition agreements and arrangements; (f) designating conformity assessment bodies located in the territory of another Party to perform conformity assessment; and (g) suppliers’ declaration of conformity. 3. Each Party shall exchange information with other Parties on its experience in the development and application of the approaches in Paragraph 2(a) to (g) and other appropriate approaches with a view to facilitating the acceptance of the results of conformity assessment procedures. 4. A Party shall, upon request of another Party, explain its reasons for not accepting the results of any conformity assessment procedure performed in the territory of that other Party.

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