Shift Change Where employees are assigned mid-week to work a non-day shift (whether due to emergencies or a shift change) and as a result lose a shift in the regular work week, such employees will be paid six (6) hours for such loss of earnings.
Room Change Residents may submit requests for housing assignment changes. Students are not permitted to move or trade spaces without administrative approval. Once a housing assignment change has been approved, the resident must move in accordance with prescribed timeframe and abide by all appropriate key policies. Failure to comply may result in disciplinary action and fees associated. Students are financially responsible for rate differential if applicable.
Significant Non-Compliance a) A Competent Authority shall notify the Competent Authority of the other Party when the first-mentioned Competent Authority has determined that there is significant non-compliance with the obligations under this Agreement with respect to a Reporting Financial Institution in the other jurisdiction. The Competent Authority of such other Party shall apply its domestic law (including applicable penalties) to address the significant non-compliance described in the notice.
Significant deficiencies (1) The Contracting Officer will provide an initial determination to the Contractor, in writing, of any significant deficiencies. The initial determination will describe the deficiency in sufficient detail to allow the Contractor to understand the deficiency.
Teaching Staff Assigned to More Than One Building Each Educator who is assigned to more than one building will be evaluated by the appropriate administrator where the individual is assigned most of the time. The principal of each building in which the Educator serves must review and sign the evaluation, and may add written comments. In cases where there is no predominate assignment, the superintendent will determine who the primary evaluator will be.
Major Change (2) For a major change referred to in paragraph (1)(a):
Undue Burden and Fundamental Alteration For any technology-related requirement in this Agreement for which the Recipient asserts an undue burden or fundamental alteration defense, such assertion may only be made by the Superintendent or by an individual designated by the Superintendent and who has budgetary authority after considering all resources available for use in the funding and operation of the service, program, or activity, and must be accompanied by a written statement of the reasons for reaching that conclusion, including the cost of meeting the requirement and the available funding and other resources. The written statement will be certified by the determining official. If such a determination is made, the certifying official will describe in the written statement how it will provide equally effective alternate access, i.e., other action that would not result in such an alteration or such burdens but would nevertheless ensure that, to the maximum extent possible, individuals with disabilities receive the same benefits or services provided by the Recipient as their nondisabled peers.
Complete Destruction In the event the Premises are completely destroyed by fire, explosion, the elements, a public enemy, Act of God, or other casualty or are so damaged as to render the entire Premises untenable, and the Premises cannot be repaired within 120 days, Company will give Authority immediate notice thereof, and Authority will be under no obligation to repair, replace, and reconstruct said Premises. In the event Authority elects not to repair, replace, and reconstruct said Premises, Authority will not be required to grant alternative premises and this Agreement and the obligations of the Parties hereunder will terminate.
Status Substantial Compliance Analysis The Compliance Officer found that PPB is in substantial compliance with Paragraph 80. See Sections IV and VII Report, p. 17. COCL carefully outlines the steps PPB has taken—and we, too, have observed—to do so. Id. We agree with the Compliance Officer’s assessment. In 2018, the Training Division provided an extensive, separate analysis of data concerning ECIT training. See Evaluation Report: 2018 Enhanced Crisis Intervention Training, Training usefulness, on-the-job applications, and reinforcing training objectives, February 2019. The Training Division assessed survey data showing broad officer support for the 2018 ECIT training. The survey data also showed a dramatic increase in the proportion of officers who strongly agree that their supervisors are very supportive of the ECIT program, reaching 64.3% in 2018, compared to only 14.3% in 2015: The Training Division analyzed the survey results of the police vehicle operator training and supervisory in-service training, as well. These analyses were helpful in understanding attendees’ impressions of training and its application to their jobs, though the analyses did not reach as far as the ECIT’s analysis of post-training on- the-job assessment. In all three training analyses, Training Division applied a feedback model to shape future training. This feedback loop was the intended purpose of Paragraph 80. PPB’s utilization of feedback shows PPB’s internalization of the remedy. We reviewed surveys of Advanced Academy attendees, as well. Attendees were overwhelmingly positive in response to the content of most classes. Though most respondents agreed on the positive aspects of keeping the selected course in the curriculum, a handful of attendees chose options like “redundant” and “slightly disagree,” indicating that the survey tools could be used for critical assessment and not merely PPB self-validation. We directly observed PPB training and evaluations since our last report. PPB provided training materials to the Compliance Officer and DOJ in advance of training. Where either identified issues, PPB worked through those issues and honed its materials. As Paragraph 80 requires, PPB’s training included competency-based evaluations, namely: knowledge checks (i.e., quizzes on directives), in-class responsive quizzes (using clickers to respond to questions presented to the group); knowledge tests (examinations via links PPB sent to each student’s Bureau-issued iPhone); demonstrated skills and oral examination (officers had to show proficiency in first aid skills, weapons use, and defensive tactics); and scenario evaluations (officers had to explain their reasoning for choices after acting through scenarios). These were the same sort of competency-based evaluations we commended in our last report. In this monitoring period, PPB applied the same type of evaluations to supervisory-level training as well as in-service training for all sworn members. PPB successfully has used the surveys, testing, and the training audit.
252 Physical Change (a) Forest Service shall adjust the Specified Road construction cost if, prior to acceptance under B6.36, a physical change, caused by a single event and not due to negligence of Purchaser, results in an increase or decrease in work and/or materials furnished by Purchaser involving additional estimated cost of:
