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
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.
Due Diligence Review Prior to the filing of the Registration Statement the Company shall make available for inspection and review by the Investor, advisors to and representatives of the Investor, any underwriter participating in any disposition of the Registrable Securities on behalf of the Investor pursuant to the Registration Statement, any such registration statement or amendment or supplement thereto or any blue sky, NASD or other filing, all financial and other records, all SEC Documents and other filings with the SEC, and all other corporate documents and properties of the Company as may be reasonably necessary for the purpose of such review, and cause the Company's officers, directors and employees to supply all such information reasonably requested by the Investor or any such representative, advisor or underwriter in connection with such Registration Statement (including, without limitation, in response to all questions and other inquiries reasonably made or submitted by any of them), prior to and from time to time after the filing and effectiveness of the Registration Statement for the sole purpose of enabling the Investor and such representatives, advisors and underwriters and their respective accountants and attorneys to conduct initial and ongoing due diligence with respect to the Company and the accuracy of the Registration Statement.
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.
Due Diligence Review; Information The Company shall make available, during normal business hours, for inspection and review by the Investors, advisors to and representatives of the Investors (who may or may not be affiliated with the Investors and who are reasonably acceptable to the Company), all financial and other records, all SEC Filings (as defined in the Purchase Agreement) and other filings with the SEC, and all other corporate documents and properties of the Company as may be reasonably necessary for the purpose of such review, and cause the Company’s officers, directors and employees, within a reasonable time period, to supply all such information reasonably requested by the Investors or any such representative, advisor or underwriter in connection with such Registration Statement (including, without limitation, in response to all questions and other inquiries reasonably made or submitted by any of them), prior to and from time to time after the filing and effectiveness of the Registration Statement for the sole purpose of enabling the Investors and such representatives, advisors and underwriters and their respective accountants and attorneys to conduct initial and ongoing due diligence with respect to the Company and the accuracy of such Registration Statement. The Company shall not disclose material nonpublic information to the Investors, or to advisors to or representatives of the Investors, unless prior to disclosure of such information the Company identifies such information as being material nonpublic information and provides the Investors, such advisors and representatives with the opportunity to accept or refuse to accept such material nonpublic information for review and any Investor wishing to obtain such information enters into an appropriate confidentiality agreement with the Company with respect thereto.
Inspection/Testing In order to assess Supplier’s work quality and/or compliance with this Order, upon reasonable notice by Buyer: (a) all goods, materials and services related to the items purchased hereunder, including, raw materials, components, assemblies, work in process, tools and end products shall be subject to inspection and testing by Buyer, its customer, representative or regulatory authorities at all places, including sites where the goods are made or located or the services are performed, whether at Supplier’s premises or elsewhere; and (b) all of Supplier’s facilities, books and records relating to this Order shall be subject to inspection by Buyer or its designee. If specific Buyer and/or Buyer’s customer tests, inspection and/or witness points are included in this Order, the goods shall not be shipped without an inspector’s release or a written waiver of test/inspection/witness with respect to each such point; however, Buyer shall not be permitted to unreasonably delay shipment; and Supplier shall notify Buyer in writing at least twenty (20) days prior to each of Supplier’s scheduled final and, if applicable, intermediate test/inspection/witness points. Supplier agrees to cooperate with such/audit inspection including, completing and returning questionnaires and making available its knowledgeable representatives. Buyer’s failure to inspect or test goods, materials or services or Buyer’s failure to reject or detect defects by inspection or testing shall not relieve Supplier from its warranty obligations or any of its other obligations or responsibilities under this Order. Supplier agrees to provide small business as well as minority and/or women owned business utilization and demographic data upon request.
Search, Enquiry, Investigation, Examination And Verification a. The Property is sold on an “as is where is basis” subject to all the necessary inspection, search (including but not limited to the status of title), enquiry (including but not limited to the terms of consent to transfer and/or assignment and outstanding charges), investigation, examination and verification of which the Purchaser is already advised to conduct prior to the auction and which the Purchaser warrants to the Assignee has been conducted by the Purchaser’s independent legal advisors at the time of execution of the Memorandum. b. The intending bidder or the Purchaser is responsible at own costs and expenses to make and shall be deemed to have carried out own search, enquiry, investigation, examination and verification on all liabilities and encumbrances affecting the Property, the title particulars as well as the accuracy and correctness of the particulars and information provided. c. The Purchaser shall be deemed to purchase the Property in all respects subject thereto and shall also be deemed to have full knowledge of the state and condition of the Property regardless of whether or not the said search, enquiry, investigation, examination and verification have been conducted. d. The Purchaser shall be deemed to have read, understood and accepted these Conditions of Sale prior to the auction and to have knowledge of all matters which would have been disclosed thereby and the Purchaser expressly warrants to the Assignee that the Purchaser has sought independent legal advice on all matters pertaining to this sale and has been advised by his/her/its independent legal advisor of the effect of all the Conditions of Sale. e. Neither the Assignee nor the Auctioneer shall be required or bound to inform the Purchaser of any such matters whether known to them or not and the Purchaser shall raise no enquiry, requisition or objection thereon or thereto.
Geotechnical Investigation Perform in accordance with the City Design Manual and other City requirements as designated in writing by the Director.
Exclusion Review Notwithstanding any provision of Title 42 of the United States Code or Title 42 of the Code of Federal Regulations, the only issues in a proceeding for exclusion based on a material breach of this CIA shall be whether Good Shepherd was in material breach of this CIA and, if so, whether: a. Good Shepherd cured such breach within 30 days of its receipt of the Notice of Material Breach; or b. the alleged material breach could not have been cured within the 30-day period, but that, during the 30-day period following Good Shepherd’s receipt of the Notice of Material Breach: (i) Good Shepherd had begun to take action to cure the material breach; (ii) Good Shepherd pursued such action with due diligence; and (iii) Good Shepherd provided to OIG a reasonable timetable for curing the material breach. For purposes of the exclusion herein, exclusion shall take effect only after an ALJ decision favorable to OIG, or, if the ALJ rules for Good Shepherd, only after a DAB decision in favor of OIG. Good Shepherd’s election of its contractual right to appeal to the DAB shall not abrogate OIG’s authority to exclude Good Shepherd upon the issuance of an ALJ’s decision in favor of OIG. If the ALJ sustains the determination of OIG and determines that exclusion is authorized, such exclusion shall take effect 20 days after the ALJ issues such a decision, notwithstanding that Good Shepherd may request review of the ALJ decision by the DAB. If the DAB finds in favor of OIG after an ALJ decision adverse to OIG, the exclusion shall take effect 20 days after the DAB decision. Good Shepherd shall waive its right to any notice of such an exclusion if a decision upholding the exclusion is rendered by the ALJ or DAB. If the DAB finds in favor of Good Shepherd, Good Shepherd shall be reinstated effective on the date of the original exclusion.
Geotechnical Engineer « »« » « » « » « » « »